I am amused that the possibility the author never, ever considers is that the reviewers are right and the book deserves the reviews it received. When your memoir only makes sense if the reader has already read your mother's letters, perhaps you have not written a good memoir.
Actually, if you read further down, she actually starts arguing with her critics in the comments, and there's an interesting exchange where she says, "anyone who criticises me is clearly just a dummy who signed up to Vine to get free shit and doesn't have the CREDENTIALS to be a REAL book reviewer," and someone calls her on that by linking to a review of a professional book reviewer who also hated the book, and she says "fine, I'll accept that, because *that* person is a REAL critic." So apparently she *does* have the ability to accept criticism... just not from ordinary members of the public. Only official, credentialed arbiters of taste have the right to criticise her book.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
no subject
Actually, if you read further down, she actually starts arguing with her critics in the comments, and there's an interesting exchange where she says, "anyone who criticises me is clearly just a dummy who signed up to Vine to get free shit and doesn't have the CREDENTIALS to be a REAL book reviewer," and someone calls her on that by linking to a review of a professional book reviewer who also hated the book, and she says "fine, I'll accept that, because *that* person is a REAL critic." So apparently she *does* have the ability to accept criticism... just not from ordinary members of the public. Only official, credentialed arbiters of taste have the right to criticise her book.