News Ticker

Klausner Gives Book Only 3 Stars!

I finally figured out how to read my sf signal mail. Apologies to all the spammers whose promises of huge genitalia fell on deaf ears.

Anyway, there was an awesome email from Human Oddities and Mishaps blog author Amanda who also shares my…let’s say “less-than-healthy viewpoint”…on Harriet Klausner. It’s nice to have someone with whom I can commiserate, as Amanda puts it. Check out Amanda’s Klausner observations (search each archive page for “Klausner” to see the multiple mentions). Amanda has even found something more scarce than girls at a Star Trek convention – she found a 3 star review by Klausner! How much must that book suck to get only 3 stars by Klausner? Or maybe, as Amanda suggests, Klausner accidentally clicked the wrong radio button (assuming that, by now, Klausner does not have a computer application that generates here generic-adjective-laden reviews).

About John DeNardo (13012 Articles)
John DeNardo is the Managing Editor at SF Signal and a columnist at Kirkus Reviews. He also likes bagels. So there.

8 Comments on Klausner Gives Book Only 3 Stars!

  1. Too funny! I’ve also mentioned Harriet in my “Cast” list in the left sidebar on my blog.

  2. Heh. I missed the cast list reference. BTW, you may want to point your permanently-ailing friend Munchausen Michelle to Chapter 1 of Three Men in a Boat (to Say Nothing of the Dog), in which the narrator chronicles his role as victim to one hundred and seven fatal maladies. Funny stuff.

  3. I too am a member of the ‘he-man harriet klausner-haters club’ because she’s obviously a shill for somebody (either book publishers or amazon.)

    We determined there isn’t enough time to turn the pages if she reads as fast as is claimed. She’s litterly have to flip through the book. Oh wait – that IS what she did, isn’t it? The fact that she gets the plots wrong would seem to indicate that reading a bad synopsis is all she’s capable of.

    Worse, she can post about books that aren’t published yet – indicating that she is getting them in advance. And, she can post reviews into Amazon on them in advance – something I clearly can’t do!

    Caveat Emptor always applies, but Klausner just drives it home that people can and will game the system.

  4. Simple solution: As with all reviews on Amazon, we have the option to decide if it was helpful. Given the universally held opinion that HK’s reviews tend to be useless or plain inaccurate, I say we encourage, no, we command, our army of blog readers to go to and simple click “no” on the “Was this review helpful to you?” question for her reviews.

    I’ll willing to bet that we can click “no” faster than “she” can review books. Just as her reviews can askew the perception of a book, our collective feedback can unaskew it. If I see a review where the comment is that “0 out of 15” found the review helpful, I would be less inclined to believe it…

    Just my 2 cents.

  5. “Army of blog readers…?”

  6. Legions?

  7. Having met Harriet in person several times at various conferences, I’m astounded that some of you think she doesn’t actually exist. Do you even have any clue how the reviewing process works? Of course publishers and authors send reviewers galleys months prior to the release date. It hardly benefits either publishers or authors to have a book reviewed long after it’s on the shelves, possibly languishing from lack of attention. Although I’m not a personal friend of Harriet’s, I found her to be an ethical woman with an impressive intellect and an astounding memory. She recalled characters from books I had written years earlier. Just because we can’t all be speed readers doesn’t mean the ability doesn’t exist. I can’t design a shuttle craft to the moon but I do acknowledge that someone else can. Referring to my earlier comment: The review process begins early — often when the book’s still in line edits in order to have enough time to read it — this is months before the release date. So just because Harriet posts several reviews on one day, that doesn’t necessarily mean she read them all that day, rather that’s when they’re posted. I’m sensing some really bad cases of sour grapes. Harriet is gracious, generous and genuine. While the internet can be wonderful in some ways, it’s also a vast playground for small-minded people who don’t know, or bother to investigate, the facts. Grow up. Accept bad reviews — Harriet’s given numerous one and two star reviews to clunkers. She doesn’t choose to chew up and spit out authors in the process. And this makes her bad — why? If you’re writers, I suggest you concentrate on your product. If you’re readers, I suggest you enjoy reading the books you love and leave the professional portion of the industry to the professionals.

  8. ohyeahsure // February 26, 2008 at 6:32 pm //

    And pigs can fly, Teresa. Or should I have said ‘Harriet’? :-O

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: