Thread by @SFF180, Also, in further follow-up to the drama surrounding "worst of" lists and [...]

Also, in further follow-up to the drama surrounding "worst of" lists and @TheGavGav7, I've heard a lot of smarm on Twitter that I feel needs SPECIFIC rebuttal: specifically, the whole "What's the POINT of bad reviews?" line that is getting traction. Thread time! /1 https://twitter.com/SFF180/status/1340673676853862400

https://twitter.com/SFF180/status/1340673676853862400

Here are two examples of the smarm to which I refer. Pay particular attention to these two specific lines of sage advice:

"If you don't like someone's book, just WALK ON BY. Be kind."
"You don't need to warn people away from it."

Hmm. Is that so? Well... /2

Take a look at this hideously ugly book cover right here. Yes, this is a real book cover for a real book.

Watch on the Rhine is a 2005 military SF novel from one of the fields biggest trad imprints, from a bestselling author.

It is openly, unabashedly pro-Nazi. /3

I won't get into the details of how I crossed paths with this book in my travels, but it led to one of the most highly-trafficked reviews in my old website's history. Wanna read it?

It's right here. I'd never before been so ranty. http://sff180.com/reviews/r/ringo/watch_on_the_rhine.html /4

The book's premise involves a ruthless alien invasion of Earth. It is decided that the only way to beat the aliens is to rejuvenate a group of geriatric former Waffen-SS soldiers, because only they embody the discipline and military bearing to defeat such a vicious enemy. /5

I suppose the fact the Nazis actually lost IRL is something we're meant to ignore. (That's something about the far right, they love valorizing the losing team and flying their flags.) As for the Nazis' history of, you know, genocide and stuff? Welll, you know... /6

The book takes the "just following orders" line. Most Nazis, we're assured, were men of honor and integrity, secretly appalled by the inhumane policies of the higher-ups (policies they enthusiastically acted upon anyway). This is so ahistorical it's jaw-dropping. /7

The Waffen-SS were the most hardcore racial purity ideologues in the whole Nazi party. That's why they got to be Waffen-SS. They RAN the fucking death camps. /8

So, to get back to the tweets up above...

...when I encounter a novel with the goal of valorizing these monsters, making them heroes, seeking their redemption...what is my role as a reviewer here? What is my responsibility to my audience?

"Walk on by"?
"Be kind"?

/9

How stupid do you sound now?

"You don't need to warn people away."

How stupid do you sound now?
How fucking stupid do you sound?

/10

Now, you could say this book is an extreme example, and that's fair. But do you really think there isn't a ton of bigoted, problematic work in publishing even now?

One of the most hyped bestsellers of 2020 was the blatantly racist AMERICAN DIRT. Remember it? /11

But people saw the harm that book could cause, and I promise you, they didn't "walk on by." As a critic, to "walk on by" when books that are not merely bad storytelling but deeply toxic are climbing the bestseller lists would be malpractice. /12

So to sum up: bad reviews are valuable & necessary. (But do NOT tag the authors.) Whether a book just didn't work for you, or whether it went beyond bad to "Dear God this is legit EVIL!", you are performing a vital service using your reviewing platform for honest criticism. /end

Latest Threads Unrolled: