Normally I wouldn’t comment on a review of my books, but in this case I’ll make an exception. Looks like *someone* read the book, or at least skimmed it, since that bit about “Natch plead[ing] with the Melbourne legislature to no avail” isn’t in the back cover copy. (But to reinforce your point, Ghost of M, she does get that plot point wrong. It’s not Natch, but his mentor Serr Vigal, who pleads before the Melbourne legislature.)

Hard for an author to complain about a 5-star review, though, especially when it’s the only reader review currently up on Amazon…

The discussion continues on from there, and it’s still ongoing.

So now I’ve been inspired to write a little piece here answering the question: what do authors want from reviews of their work anyway? I can’t speak for anybody other than myself on this one, but what I want is very simple:

1. Opinion. Have one. Better yet: have several.
2. Honesty. Love it? Hate it? Moved? Unimpressed? Offended? Enraptured? All I want is your honest opinion, whether it’s favorable to me or not. Don’t worry about the politics, don’t worry about the personalities, don’t worry about what’s popular or unpopular in the stores or what other critics are saying. What do you think?
3. Insight. I want to know that you engaged with my work. Whether you loved it or hated it is not always the point; I want to know that you thought about it. And if my book left you with a soul-crushing emptiness that sucks light out of the universe? That’s fine too, as long as you gave the book a fair shot. Skimmers and summarizers don’t impress me.
4. Elaboration. I can handle the fact that you found the book far-fetched. But I want to know how and where. Specific examples help. Better yet, specific quotations that you took the time to type verbatim from the text.
5. Disclosure. Are you and I up for the same award? Are you the brother of the guy I dissed in an article on my blog? Are you a specialist in the field that I’m writing about? Are you my uncle? None of these things disqualifies you from writing a useful review of my books. I just want to know.
6. No anonymity. There’s a reason Slashdot’s default label for commenters who don’t leave their names is “Anonymous Coward.” Give your review a byline. It doesn’t necessarily have to be your full name or your real name; just don’t say something provocative and then duck behind the shield of anonymity. I want to know something about you; I want to be able to put your opinions about my work in some kind of context.
7. Originality. Anyone can find a detailed summary of MultiReal on the website, or on Amazon, or in other reviews for that matter. Anybody can toss around the phrases “high octane,” “edge of your seat,” and “page turner.” Feel free to confirm impressions that other readers have had, but I’m much more impressed when I see some positive or negative tidbit that I haven’t seen before.
8. Accuracy. Probably not the most important point, but important nonetheless. I can forgive misspellings of minor characters’ names; I can forgive that you said the assassination by beer bottle bludgeoning took place in Barcelona instead of Madrid. But when you completely mangle entire plot threads because you weren’t paying attention, you’re just wasting my time.
9. No pandering. It’s nice to be quotable, and yes, quotable blurbs can often find their way into the front matter of the next book. But please, don’t say pithy things just for the sake of trying to get on the book jacket or the website.
10. No spoilers. It’s not for my sake that you should avoid spoilers; it’s for the sake of my (potential) readers. When a review blithely spoils a suspenseful plot element a third of the way into the novel — like this review of MultiReal from SFRevu does — well, it’s irritating.

By the standards listed above, I’d have to say that the most interesting and plain useful reviews I’ve read of my books are probably Paul Kincaid’s take on Infoquake for the New York Review of Science Fiction, Norman Spinrad’s discussion about Infoquake in Asimov’s, and Jason Pettus’ detailed review of Infoquake on the Chicago Center for Literature and Photography.

Mostly positive reviews, true, but not wholly positive reviews. Paul Kincaid calls Infoquake “a brisk, well-told science fiction adventure set in the normally unadventurous world of business”; but he also takes me to task for the silly character names, the preponderance of appendices, and the backwards-looking historical quotations. He complains about the science. But Kincaid’s review did something that other wholly uncritical five-star reviews did not: it had an impact on the writing of books 2 and 3. Specifically, his point about the improbability of a multi-generational dynasty like the Surinas caused me to rethink certain background elements of the plot that will come to the forefront in Geosynchron. It cast a light on some ideas about the Surinas that I had been toying with beforehand but never quite parsed out.

I don’t know about you, but that’s the kind of impact I want to have on the authors I review.

MultiReal seems unreal as a mind-altering reality-changing technology. The tool merges biology with the infinitive of quantum physics in a way that no one ever dreamed of before…

Except for Natch, the cast (including his assistant, Jara, and even Lee) seems two-dimensional, yet no one will care as MultiReal continues the fascinating look at the future possibilities of nanotechnological human bio/logics. Natch is still the same ambitious rogue he was in Infoquake, as he will try anything and risk everything to be number one in his field. Other just as unethical executives act likewise as business and political values are actually singular: the end of being numero uno justifies any means, especially if the cost is paid by others.

I haven’t seen it crop up on Amazon yet, but I’m sure it’s only a matter of time.

Of course, if you know anything about Harriet Klausner, you’ll take her word with a 2001 monolith-sized chunk of salt. The woman has published over 16,600 reviews on Amazon at an average of 5.56 reviews per day (according to this Wikipedia article about her). She’s also known for frequently spoiling major plot points and getting major plot details wrong. And, pardon my French, but she can’t write for shit. (I’ve cleaned up the citation above slightly for grammar and style.)

In her review of MultiReal, there are no plot spoilers, thankfully. But Lieutenant Magan Kai Lee has mysteriously changed gender and become a woman. (I suspect she’s confused Lee with his right-hand woman, Rey Gonerev.) She also says that “Natch pleads with the Melbourne legislature to no avail,” which is not quite accurate — though it’s an element of the plot that’s not actually on the back cover, so I’d score that as evidence that she’s actually read the book.

Whatever. A review’s a review, and praise is praise, right?

• B&N Rave Review and Interview Now Online. Paul Goat Allen’s rave review of Infoquake (where he calls the book “one of the most impressive SF debuts to come along in years” and the author “the love child of Donald Trump and Vernor Vinge”) is now online at Barnes & Noble Explorations. Paul also conducted an in-depth interview with me about the relationship between fiefcorps and dot-coms, whether Infoquake is a cautionary tale, and what’s at stake in the next two books in the Jump 225 Trilogy. My favorite quote from the interview: “There’s a part of Infoquake that’s a cautionary tale, but I’ve been very careful not to go too far down that road. The book isn’t a polemic. Like with the character of Natch, there are things to both admire and fear about the future I’ve come up with.”
• Infoquake Discussion Forums Now Open on Yahoo! Groups. Online discussion forums for Infoquake (and anything else I’ve written) are now open on Yahoo! Groups. Post questions for the author, discuss Infoquake, or just talk amongst yourselves. The group is moderated by the author, but there’s no filter; as long as you’re not trying to pitch Cialis tablets or online gambling, your views (critical or otherwise) are welcome!
• Rave Review for Infoquake by Amazon’s #1 Reviewer. Harriet Klausner, Amazon’s #1 ranked customer reviewer, gave a rave 5-star review to Infoquake. “The reason this futuristic science fiction seems plausible is the depth of detail interwoven into the cat-and-mouse story line, so much so that the audience will accept nano-technology bio/logics as happening today…. In the first Jump 225 tale, David Louis Edelman writes an exciting thriller that grips the audience.” (Harriet’s reviews appear all over the web, including Amazon, Barnes & Noble, and Alternative Worlds.)
• Appearances and Readings Scheduled. I’m starting to book in-person readings and appearances to promote Infoquake. Here are a few places you’ll be able to find me:
  • August 23-27: WorldCon in Anaheim, CA
  • September 1-4: Dragon-Con in Atlanta, GA
  • September 5: Reading and signing at Barnes & Noble in Baltimore, MD (time TBD)
  • September 7: Reading and signing at Barnes & Noble in Reston, VA at 7:30 P.M.
  • October 20-22: CapClave in Silver Spring, MD

Coming soon: another in-depth interview on LiveJournal, more appearances, and more online content.

Meanwhile, have you reviewed Infoquake on Amazon.com yet? Well, why not? (Okay, I’m not going to be that much of a self-publicity fiend to give you guilt trips for not posting online reviews.) (But seriously, why not?)