Triggers.
Since when did authors become responsible for the “sensibilities” of readers? Why are reviewers crucifying authors for not putting warning labels above and beyond “adult content, language, themes”?
Why are authors frequently constrained to put extensive caveats about a book’s content on the product description page to warn off anyone who might become the slightest bit discomfited by a theme, a scene, a character?
Why have innocuous terms (like “bio-break”) suddenly become hot topic bullet points around which to malign a book? {Used *once* as a colloquialism in a 71K word manuscript}
Since when does an author’s character have to conform to “mental health standards” as described and adhered to by a reviewer? Mind, this has nothing to do with the credibility or motivation of said character, but everything to do with that reviewer’s world view and the expectations that under condition X, all characters *should* behave like XYZ. To wit:
“If you believe communication is important, then (insert character name) should have…”
“No character should make that same mistake twice…”
Triggers. Is this the newest form of censorship?
One wonders what the puzzling review said, but then, on the other hand, I’m not sure I want to know/I bet I know most of it, just by reading this post. I don’t understand it, either. What happened to a time when people just thought, “ooh, this book isn’t for me” and simply said, “hey, it was well written, but it really wasn’t for me. But fans of “XYZ” will probably really like it.” Or, even better (since it stops the possibility of one or two star reviews writing like yours doesn’t ever deserve), whatever happened to just closing the book and reading another? Oh, because it was a purchase? So what? I can’t tell you how many books I’ve bought over the years, as recommended by others, that I hated. Whoops, guess it goes to Goodwill. It’s a few dollars; it didn’t break me. Jeeez. *hugs, tea and cookies*
LikeLike