I wouldn't read a bad book so I could blog about it, but I must admit that the last time I took books to a used bookstore (in an unrealistic attempt to get rid of them in a socially productive way--they only took about 3 out of almost 20--I had to leave the others in a pile on top of a trashcan outside the library in hopes that someone would take them!) and got an unrealistically modest amount of store credit, enough only to buy a remaindered book, I chose the collected lyrics of Lou Reed because I thought it would make a funny blog entry if I ever got around to reading it! (However I had buyer's remorse & wished I had instead purchased Helen DeWitt's amazing novel THE LAST SAMURAI, which I love but have given away every copy I've owned....)

You have to resist Jenny! ha! I have held on to books for far too long thinking it would cool to write about them...someday. Hopefully I'm getting over that though (it smacks of keeping wrong sized clothes for too long in the misguided hopes that someday you will wear them again.)

Colleen,

I appreciate your post above. You more than anyone should know not to believe what you read. First, I did not get my book deal because of my blog. Second, My first book has nothing to do with my blog. Third, my blog is my "throat clearing", not a book.

In actuality, The book is about life's whiplash, when things are going along as expected, then BOOM, something happens that changes it all. It's about how to handle change, the good and the bad, that comes into life, without pulling a "why me?" It's about taking it on with humor and fortitude, a theme Universal.

As for the Elle article, the misconceptions/misstatements you illuminate as facts are too many to mention. It would be exhausting and futile to point by point refute. Media attempts to pidgeonhole and you have fed into it. Just easier to label any woman's writing as "chick lit" and diminish its quality, insight and literary standing.

You charge you are looking for something more. I welcome your honest opinion on STRAIGHT UP & DIRTY. If I could be more honest, more self critical, more introspective, more of a storyteller, more of a writer.

Again, thank you for your post.

Ouch!

I'm surprised you even found me Stephanie, but that's the internet for you - easy to find everything everywhere these days for all of us.

The problem here, the tiny little problem, is that there was an interview in a major magazine. And if you read that interview then it does give a reader (like me) reason to question a lot of things about your book. Maybe you didn't mean to present it that way, maybe you didn't mean to answer the questions that way and maybe the interviewer had it in for you, but when it's out there for the country to read then don't we have to assume that some or part of it is true? It was an interview after all - you could have said things differently if you chose to.

Again, I wish you the best of luck and the reason I'm not reviewing your book has nothing to do with the Elle article and everything to do with the kind of books I do review - we just don't mesh and your book would be better served by folks who read titles about relationships and the single life.

A bit of advice though - if your book has nothing (or little) to do with your blog you should point that out more in your interviews. It would save us all from an inappropriate comparison and save you from having to respond to a ton of blog posts that refer to your book in a manner that you do not like.

I have seen on her blog that a certain post (or posts) had been removed and it said, please read my book to see what happens next. The blog has EVERYTHING to do with the book. The same subject mattter is in both and clearly some posts ,at least the one I saw, were removed form the blog to go into the book.

Additionally, every single negative review or comment I've seen online about SK, have been followed by either Stephanie Klein or her boyfriend writing in to confront the reviewer. They scour the internet it seems to confront every person who criticizes her or does not appreciate her writing (and I know I cetailny appreciate neither the writing style nor the actual content). I think the lady does protest too much, if you know what I mean.

Like you, I won't be reading her book (or her blog beyond what I read to make my assessment that her writing has nothing of value to offer). Thank you for your thoughtful and honest write-up, and for caring about substance, rather than fluff. I also admire your standing your ground despite the attempt on the part oF SK to refute your thoughtful conclusions.

Well. I happened upon this post a bit late, but I'm here to tell you that I have read Stephanie Klein's book and it is absolutely awful. AWFUL.

The narrative is disjointed, confusing and annoying. Her tone is arrogant and entitled. And her observations (such as they are) are laughably narrow-minded and demonstrate an utter lack of awareness of the world outside of her own bubble. Not to mention her abuse of metaphors which is painful. Oh. And the new "slang" she's coined? Embarassing.

I wanted to give her the benefit of the doubt, because I think it would be unfair to judge her writing through the lens of her public persona but there really is no defense for this mess. A friend of mine knows her editor at Regan Books and apparently the directive going forward is "push the image, the writing doesn't matter". And it shows.

Sorry, Stephanie, but your book sucks.

That Greek Tragedy thing is a trainwreck. But it is smart marketing for her book. For instance, she recently posted about planning her wedding (to that guy who seems like a total tool she lives with) and mentioned planning two other weddings. Of course, her readers want to know about that. She responds..."read my book." A friend of mine got it from a friend of hers. She says it's dull.

I too was interviewed by Sara Wildman on the phone and via email. I never saw the piece written in ELLE but for what it is worth I did get the sense that she was actually trying to write a story which was fair and balanced. Most of what has landed in the Press on Stephanie Klein reads like soundbytes crafted by one of Judith Regan publicists. Anyone who's intellect and perspective falls on the right side of the bell curve has been able to see Ms. Klein's work for what it is. CRAP Fortunately for book publishers and cliched marketers like Klein, there are many more women who find empathy with the drivel that passes for a literary art form.

Well, we shall see what happens to the book's sales. It seems to be very very quiet out there in the lit blogosphere on this title....it just might go away on its own and this will no longer be an issue. (Remember all the pr about the Wonkette book? And then....it was gone.)

Just wanted to point out a few things about SK. In a recent village voice interview she claims she has few detractors, and that she never responds anyway to those who do exist.

Funny how right on this site (and all the other ones I've read where she or her writing has been critiqued) she is one of the first to write in to respond to the critique. Amazing that she has the nerve to say, in print at that, that she never responds to her FEW detractors. Has she forgotten a whole site was created just to parody her writing, and that it was quite popular, too.

Other lies repeatedly told in print by SK include:

*My blog is just my "throat clearing" (another term she thinks is so clever that she uses it every chance she gets) and my book writing will be much different/better (as she claims in this site and many others, including her own). Yet, she uses passages--verbatim--from her blog in her book, and the writing style is exactly the same in both blog and book (read the excerpt from the publisher as well as book reviews).

*My blog has nothing to do with my book (as she again states on her comment in this site). Yet she includes articles and interviews about her book in many of her blog posts and her blog displays obtrusive press clippings, quotes, photos, etc about her book. It includes categories called "book," "book clubs," "press" and "subscribe," all of which relate to her book--she's willing to speak to your book club or send you a newsletter about...her book, of course.

It's clear to most that the blog is just a marketing machine designed to promote her book and her "brand."

Even if her writing style were to improve, and that's hard to imagine possible, I could never like her writing, as the content could never rise above the vacuous, shallow, vapid, person writing it.

Additionally, even if brilliant prose flowed from her pen, I would still never buy or read her stuff (I'm not reading anymore...when I did it was to marvel at the ingenuity of her marketing masterpiece) because I find SK to be an elitist, classist, racist, shallow human being (based on what I've read by her in her blog).

Try reading posts where she stereotypes massage therapists who provide sexual favors to customers as being Asian, calls all cab drivers Mohammad, makes fun of foreign accents and service workers to see what I mean. The shallow, vauous part should be evident in all posts, the other stuff you might have to dig a bit deeper.

And why does the woman always have to wear a top revealing all of her cleavage, including in her photo shoots--and then post a million pics of it all over her blog.

Had to get it off my chest, thanks for the opportunity, and your great site. (I may post this on my own blog too, with a few modifications.)

S.K. and her ersatz fiance both look up her name in Technorati and Google daily.
I am not sure which is more odious- J. Regan's planting of obseqious clips/praise of the book or S.K. trying to create memes, making up new words as well.'Oh! Just like Sex and the City!' Are we tired of that regurgitated comparison yet? Thought so..

I read referral to her word 'wasband' in a review. It is cute to make up words when you are five, it is contrived when you are a 'professional' writer.

Other bon mots in her 'work' include 'retarded' and 'like ass'. Rather than make the writing charming (she DOES seem to have a core following, some embarrasingly fawning over her in comments- the negative comments all mysteriously disappear), these awkward, sloppy turns of phrase do just the opposite. It is like seeing a 40 plus woman running around in pigtails and tube tops- it is just inappropriate and uncomfortable to witness.

Someone mentions the photos she has of herself posted all over, cleavage shots.
While it can be said that 'sex sells' it is a hamfisted approach that Regan and her crew have fashioned. I feel it shall wear thin, and fast.

I will indulge these Sex and The City comparisons- to make a point. Earlier a poster said that show is about more than just sex. And even Carrie had her entourage, supporting cast to make things interesting. This is just...S.K. and her alarming food obessesion and paranoia and way-too-old for that cloying thing.

Sorry I am glad you opted out of reviewing that tripe. I am waiting for the fascination with crude personal details to end. I rue the day when playing to the sympathies of total strangers, divulging personal episodes earned a virtual badge of honor for their 'bravery' and being so 'honest'.
I suspect the readers come for the high profile name and stay for the sheer voyeurism, not literary titillation.