Silverfish bashing has become an annual sport. I thought this year's season was over. But looks like I was wrong, judging from a book review in the Sunday pullout of a major daily. (The fact that a major English newspaper actually allowed someone to use its pages for a blatant personal attack raises many other questions. Did they not read it? I have written to them but have not received a reply.)
The questions I have had to field over the last week have been the obvious ones. Who is Amy de Kanter? Do you know her? Why is she attacking you like that? Outraged as my friends are, I am actually quite amused. She probably popped a couple of blood vessels writing that. First, I was taken aback. Then I got a little annoyed. Then, when I came to the faulty microphone part, I laughed out loud. I couldn't help it. It was so lame. Dear Amy, you are one unhappy bunny.
As for the first question, my answer is, "I don't know who she is," which also answers the second. As for why she is attacking Silverfish Books and me, I can only speculate. She says that our editing is so bad and compares it to a singer using a bad microphone, or a dancer on a wobbly stage! How poetic. Ironically, on the next page of the same magazine section was a story of another Silverfish title vying for the Frank O'Connor International Short Story Award, the richest of its kind in the world!
Actually, the book she 'reviewed' was released eight months ago and has been read by thousands of people, and is very popular. Silverfish Books has published over 30 titles so far, sold over 100,000 books some of which are used as college text in over 20 local and overseas universities (including the University of California in Berkeley). And, now, Amy de Kanter compares the standard of our editing to a faulty microphone, or a wobbly stage. Oh, she wounds me, I fail, I fall, I die! (Sorry, Tash Aw.)
So what does she have against me? First of all, I am not even sure this is a real person. Or one person. It could be a pseudonym. She has neither an email contact, nor a bio in her story. Maybe, she does not want her boss in her own newspaper to know that she is moonlighting with another. It happens. Or, she is one of those who prefer to hide their hands after throwing stones. She could be reacting to a perceived or imaginary slight, or she could be carrying a torch for someone else, or sucking up to them, or she simply wants to teach this 'uppity native' a lesson.
There are several reasons for hating Silverfish Books. Firstly, we are publishers and we reject manuscripts. We have, on several occasions, had friends coming in asking why so-and-so is saying (or writing) this about you. All I have to do is, go into my room and pick out a manuscript and ask, "Is this the person?" I have been right many times. There are also those who post comments anonymously, but one can, sort of, guess what their problem is from the tone of the comment. I have even had nasty emails from people who have not had their one short story selected for an anthology. But these are the tiny minority, the loony fringe. (Thank God for the delete key!) Most people send me a 'thank you' note.
Then there are those who want to self-publish, and are quite willing to pay (until they know how much). (Is this a norm in Malaysia?) They ask to use the Silverfish imprint. I say we can't do that unless it satisfies our criteria, in which case we will not charge them. But, we could help them self-publish under their own names, I say. They insist on the Silverfish imprint. I resist. They are surprised that I prefer not to take their money. They get angry and leave in a huff, sometimes with expletives trailing. Difficult.
Virulent strains of the 'basher' virus include envy and inferiority complex. Some people just can't come to terms with this 'uppity native' being able to do things they dare not even dream about. On one hand they hate this native. Yet, on the other, they want to be part of the trip. It is a real dilemma. So in between, they bash.
Let me tell you a fairy tale. Once upon a time, in a land far away, a man was working on a rather large project, he was organising a festival so grand the likes of which had never been done in the land, for he wanted the people to rejoice. He had a small dedicated team. This lady would to hang around and watch them with a hangdog expression obviously wanting to be a part of it. He was reluctant to rope her in because he knew she was panic prone. But he relented eventually. He felt sorry for her, found the simplest task and asked her if she could 'help' them. He though she couldn't possibly mess it up. He also offered to pay her a 1000 smackaroos a month, a sum he could ill afford, and which he should have given to another member of the team who was doing amazing work. Anyway, two months later when he asked her about it, she had done nothing! It was a simple job, but she couldn't handle it. She had panicked. She had icicles on her feet. The event was only three weeks away, and they needed to go to the printer immediately. They were desperate.
The man lost his head and hollered at her, took the job back, and worked on it himself through the night with a hundred other things to do. She was upset. He pacified her and gave her even simpler jobs to do he while still paid her. He soon forgave her for the incident, for he was not one to hold a grudge for long. After a successful festival, that saw poets and writers from the world over converge to the land, that saw people rejoicing with much merriment, he returned to his castle. That's when he noticed that many of his wells had been poisoned. He was confused. He couldn't understand who would do that. Why, he asked? This went on and on for years, this poisoning. He still couldn't understand it. In the meantime, she went around telling everyone how ungrateful he was for not thanking her for her help. For what, he retorted, when people told him, and dismissed it.
Then she changed. But he was too buried in his work to notice. She transformed into a Cik Zahirah of Shih-Li Kow's story. She lost her face. Or rather, acquired the ability to choose any face she wanted at will. She mastered the art of huggy-wuggying and kissy-wissying the man in public, and then badmouthing him the moment his back was turned, in the same breath too. She was good. Nay, she was brilliant. She could praise a book (or people) in one breath, and rubbish it (or them) in the next. Once, she sat in his castle and rubbished a book (and its editor) by another publisher. He wondered what that was all about. Then he found out. Not much later, she picked up something else totally unrelated that he had written, completely distorted and misinterpreted it, and led a hysterical knotted-knicker frenzy (don't try to imagine that) making him the villian, creating a crisis with the other publisher. Soon, everyone joined in the bashing. The evil mist spread ...
The land became divided. Sometimes, he would laugh at her clumsy antics. Mostly, he was sad. The people were split into two: winners or whiners. Those who could, did; those who couldn't, whined. And that continues to this day.
Monday, June 01, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Well, having been slightly shadow blessed I am now totally in the dark.
ReplyDeleteFirstly which newspaper, which review and what did they say?
Sorry Raman but I don't usually buy newspapers here unless it has a) my work in it, or b) a mention about me or my work, so please don't play at wayang kulit and spill the proverbial Heinz man.
The review in question appeared in The Sunday Star on the 24th May.
ReplyDeleteI had a look at the review and, as a neutral observer, I actually found it quite balanced. It does say complimentary things about the book, e.g.
ReplyDelete"Some of the stories, like The Kite Fight, are very good. The best are the ones that read like memoirs. The first parts of Mother and My Neighbourhood Revisited are as charming as they are engaging."
There's no evidence of a personal attack on Silverfish. And it supports its point about the editing lapses with concrete examples from the book. It doesn't strike me as a case of Silverfish-bashing at all.
I don't know who the reviewer, Amy de Kanter, is either. But I don't detect any venom in her pen.
Tut tut Raman. You're being vague, not to say downright bitchy, once again.
ReplyDeleteIsn't this whining???
ReplyDeleteSC
Interestingly, only Yusuf Martin has not posted his comments anonymously.
ReplyDeleteHe is the only one maybe who has a blog?
ReplyDeleteAmy de Kanter writes fan fiction.
Steven Chang
Amy de Kanter is a writer for The Star. She reviews lots of books. I thought the review was well balanced. I think your reaction is extreme and rather childish.
ReplyDeleteAs for the Silverfish bashing... Amy didn't even mention Silverfish. In fact, most people haven't heard of Silverfish. But if they see this nasty little online tantrum, they're not going to think a lot of you, or of your company.
I certainly won't be visiting you again.
Honestly, I think Raman & Amy de Kanter should just trash this matter between the 2 of them. And I don't see why someone else has to drag himself/herself into it and whine about it to the whole world too.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, hurt and whining aside, actually I'm curious about this Amy de Kanter person. I've gone through The Star's archieve and read her book reviews consecutively. Two things struck me:
1) The huge variety in her writing style. Some are rational and beautifully written, whereelse others are very emotionally driven, especially on degradation of women. I think the writing for Tales from the Court's review is the worst I've seen of hers, it could just be a rush job. It is not her most negative review though.
2) The difference levels in her command of the English language between one article and the next.
So, are Amy de Kanter's articles written by a few different persons? She does read many books in a short period of time. Or, it could just be that she copied and pasted other people's online reviews, so there's nothing mysterious about it after all.
Anyway, check out the examples below & let me know what you think.
1) http://thestar.com.my/lifestyle/story.asp?file=/2008/9/26/lifebookshelf/1930825&sec=lifebookshelf&sec=lifebookshelf
2) http://thestar.com.my/lifestyle/story.asp?file=/2009/5/29/lifebookshelf/3297100&sec=lifebookshelf
3) http://thestar.com.my/lifestyle/story.asp?file=/2008/10/10/lifebookshelf/1850460&sec=lifebookshelf
4) http://thestar.com.my/lifestyle/story.asp?file=/2009/5/31/lifebookshelf/3688430&sec=lifebookshelf
Anagram fun. AMY DE KANTER also spells TAKEN MY READ. Amy, show thyself.
ReplyDeleteOnly read one story in the book (Musso the Exorcist) but I agree that the author really needs an editor. Here is a selection from a random page (pg 81) in the story:
ReplyDeletea) "...an European family..." (Should be 'a'.)
b) "A female child and a boy..." (Why not 'A girl and a boy'? Is there something about the boy that renders him not a child? Maybe it's a stylistic choice. But then we come to...)
c) "The boy looked older than the girl and was a dark-skinned Indian while, the girl was Eurasian." (What is the comma doing there?)
d) "Abdul Rahman was engrossed in looking at the picture that he did not notice..." (Should be 'so engrossed')
e) "The manager's house had three separate rooms; two of them on the right side as one faced the main hall from the entrance of the house, and the master bedroom lay on the left and in between, in the centre was the dining hall." (Hang on. Is the master bedroom on the left and *also* in between? Or should there be a comma after 'centre'?)
f) "In the dining hall was an old gramophone with black flat circular records..." (As opposed to all those square records that gramophones used to play?)
So even though I did not finish the book (I kept thinking of square records!) Amy's review seems fair enough.
Shih-Li's book is a whole different story!
Amir - Shih-li's book, which I did read, also had a number of errors, I noticed. Maybe you can ask someone to proofread for you, Raman? There are enough native speakers around who know English better.
ReplyDeleteif you like I can list down some of them. So maybe Amy de Kanter was right and the feedback is good?
I don't know what it's all about in this post but Fred D can't count when he says only the 2 of them and I think Raman has been enjoying sharpening his knives so someone bound to have hurt feelings.
Wah drama minggu ini just when we think literature so boring!
Steven
Yes, I am a real person living mostly in the real world and occasionally even on facebook.
ReplyDeleteI don't know who Raman is but I've been a fan of Silverfish for ages. Whenever possible I pick up books by local authors to review because I'm very excited about the writing scene in Malaysia Today. It is still young, but mature enough not to be patronised.
Guys, for those of you who took the time to actually read the review, thank you so much for your comments.
Yes, I read a lot, yes, sometimes writing style changes with my mood or topic, but yes, the articles and reviews are all mine.
Cheers,
Amy de Kanter
So now Raman going to apologise for saying Amy is a made-up person or that someone else he is throwing tantrum about for some reason?
ReplyDeleteYo, the MPH urban stories anthology has a grammatical error in the very first line of the very first story! How come that wasn't picked up? Honestly, though, if we're going to talk about 'sloppy' editing in local books, pick one up and tell me which one is clean, please?
ReplyDeleteSeems to me to be a non-issue -- perhaps the real issue was that the book was actually quite boring, so the reviewer had to find something to spice things up? JK, Raman.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteEither it is a non-issue, or every review of local books would need to have a special section dedicated to the editing (or lack thereof). Not just for locally published books, either -- in one book by a Malaysian writer published overseas, you could have chopped off the first five pages and no one would be any the wiser.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWell touche, Raman. Yesterday was an extremely nasty personal attack which I'm glad to see you have watered down today. (It upset me badly which was of course the aim.)
ReplyDeleteI have no idea what brought the hissy-fit on, except that for some reason you thought I was Amy de Kanter and gave you a bad review. Well we all make mistakes and get things wrong in our blogs from time to time. I certainly did and I apologise for the misunderstanding. I would have apologised the day I came in to pay for some books, but you delivered such an angry tirade that I had to beat a hasty retreat. Sometimes sitting down with people and calmly talking things through is a good idea.
For the record, I have never had anything against Silverfish. I only wish you and your writers well. I have been a good customer, supported your events on my blog, sent students to your classes. Occasionally, yes, i have been critical of things you have said. I really don't always agree with you. I think you are unnecessarily negative much of the time and I have told you that. But disagreement is part of the whole thing of engaging in discussion.
As for the litfest programme thing - well I have been reading through my journal and the way I saw the event over the programme, it was not in our original agreement. You tried to do too much with too few people. I had plenty on my plate and knew I couldn't take on one more thing and make a good job of it. I am used to being in work situations where there is dialogue (and indeed a proper project plan in place). I did find someone else who was happy to put the programme together, and had a meeting to tell her what needed doing but you did not even want to talk to her.
Yes, the festival was in the end a big success despite a few rough edges. The second, though scaled down, was even better.
You've done a great deal to make things happen in the literary community, I owe you for that a personal debt of gratitude, and anyone will tell you that I'm the first to say that your heart is in the right place, even if I can't actually get along with you.
I think you should stop taking everything so personally. Take up meditation or something and find some inner peace. That way you are less likely to hurt yourself and others in the future.
No, Sharon, I didn't think you wrote the review, your style is quite different.
ReplyDeleteAmy de Kanter's review was fair and quite generous. I didn't think she was bashing anyone, least of all, Silverfish or you, Raman. What she did say was valid - the writing could have benefited from an editor's stern red pen. I completely agree with her - and if you go through the book carefully and dispassionately, you will see what she means. No, for the record, I don't know Amy at all. Your diatribe against her and Sharon was uncalled for and sorry - it was quite venomous.
ReplyDeletesaraswathy manickam
I'm confused, Mr. Raman -- if you didn't think Amy de Kanter was Sharon Bakar, what exactly is the connection between the two of them? Why are they both in the same blog post? Is it because they both -- according to you -- think of you as an "uppity native"? If so, I think that's a terribly unfair and unprofessional accusation to make. Not everyone who disagrees with you, or finds fault with your work, is a closet racist. Sometimes the criticism is warranted even if it hurts. Judging from the many examples of bad editing that Amir has dredged up for us, it seems to have been warranted here.
ReplyDeleteAll the same, if you're looking for people to accuse of imperialist hangups, why not start with this commenter Steven above? I quote:
"Maybe you can ask someone to proofread for you, Raman? There are enough native speakers around who know English better."
Why, Steven, because brown people cannot proofread? Pray tell, what constitutes a "native speaker"?
-- Preeta Samarasan
Ms Preeta:
ReplyDeleteread the title. It's a guide to bashing Silverfish. Evidently the connection between the two is that Raman thinks they are examples of Silverfish bashings that would-be bashers could emulate.
I read the review. Where in it did you find anything personal, silverfishwriters? More like if the shoe fits...
ReplyDeleteIf you were the editor for the book, man up. You failed your author by letting the book go to print with so many errors.
You did not read the review carefully either, because it lead you to a response that was very off target.
If you personally were the editor,you could consider that maybe Amy de Kanter has a point & she has done you and Silverfish. Learn and move on.
Ella Rahman
Last part of my posting should have read "done you and Silverfish a favour."
ReplyDeleteSee? It is possible to admit mistakes and try to make up for them.
It would do you more good than anyone to see that where you see enemies, in actuality Silverfish books has lots of friends.
Ella
Like Ruhayat said, the fact is Malaysian published books are filled with typos.
ReplyDeleteTypos aside, we won't enjoy an overly edited book either, one would sound the same as the other. I think Matthew (author of Tales from the Court) has a unique writer's voice, one where some readers cannot accept/relate to.
Raman, why don't you write an article on 'preserving the writer's voice'? An educational piece would benefit all, rather than an instigating one which shook up the whole circle & made people jump all over the place.
BTW, I heard that the 2nd lit fest was managed by only 2 persons? Better to rope in a few competent people rather than work with a big group who needs guiding/clear cut action plan in black & white. Lesson to learn, Raman?