Awkward

[liv]

I had Jo Walton's Tooth and Claw on my to-read list, but it wasn't available when I was shopping on Amazon. I happened to mention this on LJ, and rysmiel saw and decided to get me a copy for my birthday, and got papersky to sign it. So now I am really embarrassed, because the whole thing with wanting to read a book by someone you're sort of slightly connected to is that you have an extra incentive to support them.

I'm also embarrassed about reviewing the book. If I actually knew papersky rather than just reading her journal and occasionally making comments (which usually seem to annoy her) it would be much easier, because I could just ask if she wanted me to review it or not. But talking about someone that I sort of know only not actually feels really odd. And it's worse when the book was a present. I think my problem is that I haven't really got over the idea that being dead is a necessary qualification for being an author.

Anyway, because I am a completist, I decided to publish my review in spite of being all awkward and not knowing what the polite answer is. At least I have mainly good things to say, because otherwise I'd feel really embarrassed.

Comments

[redbird]

I suspect that you supported her to the same extent as if you'd gone out and bought the book yourself--that is, that rysmiel bought the copy at Indigo or such, and it counts just like any other retail sale toward royalties, pleasing the publisher, etc.

[liv]

Yebbut, that seems really twisted. If anyone else but rysmiel had given me the book, I wouldn't have felt so weird about it. I would still have been a little embarrassed, because if I post saying "oh, I wanted this book but I couldn't find it" I most certainly don't mean "GIMME!" But ok, sometimes people decide to be generous and give me presents, and that helps the author just as much as if I buy the book for myself. But when it's someone who's directly connected to the author, I feel like I'm accidentally acting like one of those annoying fans who feel entitled to favours from famous people because of some indirect connection.

[papersky.livejournal.com]

Your comments don't annoy me. I mean, any individual comment might annoy me, but my general impression of your comments is not of them being annoying.

It was actually one of my free copies. But since rysmiel was going to send you something for your birthday anyway, then we saved the money that didn't get spent on the other thing, which is more than the royalty would have been. Don't worry about it.

Generally, I'd much rather people reviewed things and didn't worry about my feelings.

Also, I feel less forgiving of Trollope since I've discovered George Eliot.

[liv]

Thank you, it was super nice of you to find this post and come and reassure me. I expect you'd probably rather I didn't go all to pieces over a famous person talking to me, wouldn't you? Actually, it's not so much that you're famous, it's that I want to make a good impression on you so that lethargic_man, darcydodo and rysmiel won't be annoyed with me. My usual paradigm of: ooh, we know people in common, let's be pals! is clashing with the paradigm of: don't impose on famous people just because they're famous and you can claim an indirect connection.

I know from reading your journal that you're not a prima donna about negative reviews. What I'm worried about is that from the outside, it could look as if I took advantage of a slight personal connection to badger you for a present, and then rudely said, well, not negative things, but anything less than "I'm so grateful for this lovely present" would be rude in the circumstances. It's silly to worry about that, because I know it's not what actually happened. I'm sorry, I'll get some better manners and not angst at you.

Interesting about Eliot. I sort of assumed you would have read her long ago, because you're generally well read. But you'd probably gone over into SF before you were old enough to really appreciate the major Victorians. (Not that I can talk, my knowledge of the nineteenth century canon is pretty patchy anyway.)

[papersky.livejournal.com]

George Eliot suffered from looking boring, and coming alphabetically on my grandmother's shelves between Dickens (boring) and Hardy (depressing). This was my loss and my foolishness -- though my grandmother's loss in not having any Gaskell, and I have no idea why she didn't. She'd have loved Cranford.

And I find it very odd to think that anyone could think I was famous.

[liv]

It's just occurred to me that almost all the unquestioned best writers of the nineteenth century were women, but I am sure everyone else already knew that.

I was lucky that I got into Dickens at just the right age, old enough to have the reading stamina to plough through all the excessive verbiage, but young enough to take his emotional reality seriously. But in terms of actual ability he doesn't compare to any of the major writers he usually gets bracketed with. I like Hardy more that a lot of people seem to, as well, though I've not read the most depressing ones yet.

Thanks for the link, by the way.

[oxfordgirl.livejournal.com]

Hello there.

Thank you - so much - for the thoughtful and useful comment on my recent emopost. It helped, a lot.

Though I have only met you the once, you struck me immediately as someone I'd like to get to know better, outside the pressure of larger social situations. And I do hope that some day, when my life calms down, I will. In the meantime, I'm delighted to keep in your orbit (even on something as distant as LJ!) and remind me that there are fascinating people like you in the world.

[liv]

What a touching comment, thank you! I know when I do "please validate me" posts I often don't get round to thanking people individually for the nice things they say, though I know I should. And I'm incredibly pleased to know that I made a positive impression on you. LJ is a great way to be reminded of the existence of nifty people until it can be arranged to actually spend time together, which I'd like to do at some point.