erastes

It’s difficult being an author and a reviewer, I know I’m not the only one in this position but I have to admit, it’s not easy. If I don’t like a book – and some writers seem to forget that a review is only one person’s opinion – then I’m accused of bashing the competition, and if my own books are reviewed well, then I leave myself open to cries of nepotism and the fact that the reviewers on Speak Its Name are biased and afraid to speak their mind.

It’s not true, of course. I like a great many gay historical novels, as is evidenced by my reviews on Speak Its Name. But the main point of that review site, the ONLY place on the planet that I’m aware of that specialises in reviews and news about gay historicals, is that we aren’t just reviewing the writing, we are reviewing the historical aspect too. This isn’t to say that any of the reviewers claim to be a know-it-all about all history, but we do know roughly when tea was introduced and that kind of thing. We can tell when an author has really really tried and made a couple of errors (who doesn’t?) and when they really haven’t bothered at all.

So when my own books are up for review on the site, I’m hugely careful as to whom I give that responsibility to. I won’t give it to someone who hasn’t got the balls to say “this sucks because” and I insist that the reviewer is as rough on me as they would be on anyone else.

So when I handed Transgressions to Hayden Thorne, I knew that she wasn’t going to go easy on me. She’s a great reviewer, and hasn’t hesitated to trample over such luminaries as Waugh and Gatiss. She did like Transgressions, with reservations – and gave it a thorough, thoughtful, but not gushy review.