An interesting bad review...
Green Man Review didn't care for my little book.
Naturally, that's fine. It's not for everyone, like the reviewers say, and it didn't work for them. No book is for everyone. Writing unconventional stuff means you're going to displease lots and lots of people.
I do appreciate them taking the time to give it a go, and mentioning it at all. So, thanks for reviewing my little book, and for giving it your best shot.
I did want to take a moment to point out how the reviewer takes umbrage with my usage of the word "golem" instead of "zombie".
Now, I've got some mighty smart readers, many of whom liked the book. Why do you guys think I used one term instead of the other, believing golem to be more accurate?
Serious and non-serious answers are welcome, and encouraged.
![](http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1597802158?ie=UTF8&tag=httpjmmcdtrip-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=1597802158"><img border="0" src="61QLxt9GgCL._SL160_.jpg"></a><img src="http://www.assoc-amazon.com/e/ir?t=httpjmmcdtrip-20&l=as2&o=1&a=1597802158)
5 comments:
Jeez, that's an easy one. In a secondary world without shotguns you can't have zombies. Gawd, everyone knows that.
Because you didn't have a zombie. It was a golem.
Does a few paltry, not at all descriptive, disjointed lines really qualify for being called a review? Certainly people are entitled to not like your book, but they could at least take the time to write a solid thrashing rather than a few acerbic comments, a mediocre shot at a plot summary, and one or two fierce knit-picks. Piffle!
Anyway, the golem vs zombie debate seems a little silly... while I don't know that golem is the ideal term, zombie is significantly less applicable, largely because zombies are ubiquitously mindless. They don't have thoughts or goals or hates (unlike golems, which can arguably have their own will or the will of their creator).
Not to mention everyone knows zombies can only wander around moaning "BRAAAAINS."
Hmm - as an after thought, if you wanted to get into the Laurel K. Hamilton definition of zombies (loath though I am to reference her in any respectable debate) then the waters get a little more murky. Still, for all purposes related to popular culture, zombie is not at all an applicable term for your character.
Oh dear, I ramble...
Well, first off the character in question simply was NOT a zombie. A zombie is some form of shambling (un)dead thing that has been brought back to life unintentionally by a virus or something. I don't know the specifics but isn't a golem something from Jewish mythology? A clay statue brought to life by magic or some such thing? That makes more sense for the character in question because he was intentionally reanimated and seemed to retain his cognitive and physical abilities for the most part, unlike a zombie. Is that good enough?
See, I knew I had the right word.
LisaBit, I don't think it's useful to review my own reviewers, but if you want to I won't censor you.
I'm happy they took time to mention the book, spelled the name of the book and my name correctly, and pointed people who might be curious to learn more in the right direction.
Post a Comment