to review or not...

Is it really necessary to get reviews, elicit reviews, pay for reviews or beg for them?

Writing the book is the fun part, but the advertising of the thing is a drag. There is no magic wand these days that lets the world know of the next masterpiece. It is all up to a few good souls to spread the word.
So who are those that care? If you have a BIG publishing house then they have a section for just the type of hype you need. If you have a small publishing house (or flat/unit/loft) then all the publicity is taken care of by one or two people. If you do it alone then ...guess who?
Reviews of your book are seen as a necessary thing. The recommendation of someone anonymous seems to carry weight. To elicit reviews in the hope of sales is a lottery at best.
Are the reading public like sheep.
Are we so swayed by what others think that as readers we wont take a punt on something, go for broke on a new idea, have a bash at a book that has a good cover. I think the reader can make up their own mind.
 WHAT!
Is it a new thought that you don't need a review to tell others what they should read. Sure word of mouth is the best advertising there is. The ad men tell us so. But that may work fine for a washing machine. Books are so personal. Do you like murder. Do you crave romance. Hot sex. African tribal tattoos and cute animals. We all have a different idea on how a book affects us and effects us. Reading a review is just an opinion.
Necessary?
Not really necessary.
Matt Haig said that he had a big machine doing all the right things to get his new book out there, but it was a tweet from Stephen Fry that sent it through the roof. Of course this flies in the face of what I have just said.
But Stephen OMG Fry. Celebrity status carries weight. Celebrity culture makes us believe that we actually know the person. We live vicariously. So if they like it and we like them and know them so well, ergo we will like it too. It is a persuasive argument for the sheeple of the world.
But the other 60 % who don't follow Stephen Fry will be individual in their reading habits. They will buy on the synopsis, the cover, the authors name or just take a punt. They won't be swayed by what others have read. What others say is good, bad, indifferent. They are the readers that make up their own mind.
So should authors rely on reviews to get them over the tax threshold?
I'd say they are nice, ego boosting (most of the time) little pats on the back. But selling points? No.
Some authors don't even read their reviews.
So don't sweat the reviews. If you have a good product it will sell, be read, enjoyed and passed around.

And readers...if you read anything you like don't leave a review, send a letter to the author and tell them. A fan letter is worth a hundred reviews.

cherry picking a review.

The question I pose is this;
Is it fair to cherry pick the best bits from a review.
By cherry pick I mean take out what you don't like and just edit the review to make it sound great.

The moral dilemma is that the review is someone else's work. They worked hard at the review to give an honest, unbiased opinion, (we hope) and just because you don't like what they have to say is it right to edit someone's work to suit your purpose.

It starts with taking small bytes of the review for teasers. This seems to be the norm for front and back covers...
Brilliant...New yorker.     A must read....London Review of Books and so it goes on. But what if the next line was Brilliant writing, but dull at the end.   A must read for anyone who wants to get to sleep.
You can see it might be seen to be misleading.

As an author must we just tough it out? Stiff upper lip chaps. There are going to be times when someone doesn't like what you have written. You can't please all the people all the time. So should you put the review up on your site at all?

The public make up their mind by recommendations. Who has the time to trawl through the lists of books on offer. If you see a five star that should be enough to ring some bells. So ego...if you see a bad review are you going to test the waters? I doubt it.

So the author to maximise his or her potential earnings would be a fool to spruik the review that had over 50% bad or mediocre things to say. It is economic sense and yet it seems like cheating and cheapening the whole deal about writing.
Learn by the review. Take on board what it has to say, but realise it isn't personal.

Advertisers cherry pick all the time..
wrinkle free...? what about the cost, the side effects etc.
Only 7 easy payments. Easy for who? What about the interest after the interest free term is up.
No warranty after you leave the shop. They don't explain that one at all.

So as authors do we just take the 'nice' bits of the review and forget the rest?
It is a question of how tough do you think you are. Can you stand it? Can you brace yourself and get on with your life.
Eh! so what. So they thought the plot was thin, the characters wooden and the ending trite. That is just one person's opinion.
The next book will be better.

Perhaps we authors should embrace the bad review. Winners are grinners and second sucks, but just think of the material your biographer will have when you are a star and they trot out that review in later years.  My word, hasn't she done well from a mediocre start.

And you could always use the mistakes, typos, and continuity schisms as a promotional tool
Spot the typo and win a prize.

It could catch on..