Despite what my critics say, I am not naive or egotistical enough to think that everyone will love my writing. Everyone's tastes vary. Recently I got my first bad review (that I know of). Since I've posted all my good ones, I think it's only fair that I post those that are not so complimentary.
The review is of "Last Flight of the Bismarck"from Machina Mortis: Steampunk'd Tales of Terror. The reviewer, Bufton's Blog, said:
"The first story, ‘Last Flight of the Bismarck’ by Scott Baker, didn’t
really do it for me. In many ways, despite the inclusion of a zombie
menace, this was the closest to a pure steampunk tale (whatever that is)
in the collection, but I was left feeling distinctly underwhelmed.
Again, I not sure if I was expecting something else, but it seemed like
Baker had thrown in half a dozen steampunk standards, added a liberal
dash of the undead, and unleashed the resulting concotion onto the page.
Whilst it was hardly a bad tale, it failed to hit my buttons in any
meaningful way."
Obviously, as editor, I disagree with that review. Not only did I very much enjoy your story but I chose it to begin the collection for the express purpose that it was the closest to a 'traditional' steampunk story. This, to my mind, would open the reader's mind to the different concepts to come. However, keep in mind that this reviewer was not very versed in steampunk so I wouldn't take this criticism too seriously. And, should a second volume of MACHINA MORTIS ever come to pass, I would love to consider another story with these same characters!
ReplyDelete