Robert Stanek shat directly into my soul.

[Myshkin]

If you have a problem with Stanek's tactics on Amazon - and I agree that there are plenty of grounds to do so - complain about them to Amazon. That's fair enough. People should be warned about his phony reviews, etc.

I complained to Amazon, and the banned me from their "community" (though they would still like it if I bought my books from them).

But an anti-Stanek FB group, specifically, would just validate his excuses about 'being persecuted'. I'm not concerned about his life, in fact: I'm concerned that the more attention you pay to a crackpot, the more publicity you give them, the more people hear of him, and the more might decide to give his books a try. There's good evidence, for example, that the high-profile exposure of crop circles as fraudulent, while convincing thousands of readers that there was nothing to it, actually increased the number of believers by raising the profile of the phenomenon. So with Stanek: the more you talk about what a fraud he is, the more people hear of him, and the more who might decide to buy his books.

Obscurity is what Stanek deserves. Give him it.

While I agree that an anti-Stanek FB group would semi validate his claims of persecution, I do not buy into the thought that no publicity is bad publicity. I don't think anyone reading this thread for example has been overwhelmed with an honest desire to give Stanek a try.

[alguien]

While I agree that an anti-Stanek FB group would semi validate his claims of persecution, I do not buy into the thought that no publicity is bad publicity. I don't think anyone reading this thread for example has been overwhelmed with an honest desire to give Stanek a try.

Out of curiostiy, I did use Amazon to take a look at a sample page from one of his books.

Wow. :shocked: :stunned:

It is excretable. :ack: I know fourth graders who write better than this.

[Shryke]

While I agree that an anti-Stanek FB group would semi validate his claims of persecution, I do not buy into the thought that no publicity is bad publicity. I don't think anyone reading this thread for example has been overwhelmed with an honest desire to give Stanek a try.

Aye. In fact, as pointed out by HE, Stanek THRIVES on lack of publicity.

His schtick only works because there's no easy to find sources pointing out how full of shit he is.

It doesn't matter how persecuted he feels because him feeling persecuted is not gonna sell more of hi crap. Readers hitting up Amazon reviews without being able to find contradictory sources, on the other hand, is EXACTLY what's gonna sell more of his crap.

[mormont]

Stanek 'thrives on lack of publicity'? Logically, therefore, he should stop reviewing his own books, as that's publicity, right? ;)

What you mean is that Stanek thrives when people don't know about his scams. But even so, I would suggest that to use the word 'thrive' for books sales that (according to the link above) probably total a couple of thousand copies is a misnomer. Which is one of the things I'm saying: no point using a sledgehammer to crack a nut. (And yes, I did just call Stanek a nut. I'm not referring to his mental state though :P)

There's nothing wrong with refuting Stanek's BS claims and pointing out his tricks wherever you see him trying them. But let's face it: you cannot raise awareness of these things to the point where nobody will ever buy one of his books again, and you cannot make enough of a fuss to make him go away. Where I personally draw the line with this sort of thing - whether it's Goodkind or Stanek or Newcombe or whatever - is at the point where I'm actually bringing the topic up, initiating the discussion, giving it legs it would not otherwise have had. Pointing out lies where you see them is one thing, crusading for the truth is another: save that latter for the things that really matter, is my advice. :)

[Acid Rainbow]

Hahaha, I wasn't really serious about making an anti-Stanek group on Facebook. I too have more important things to do than bash an "author" who nobody has heard about. It just seemed funny that a page like that would be more popular than the actual Stanek page.

Putting an effort into attacking Robert Stanek would be an overkill, like hunting a duck with a rocket launcher.

[Morcant]

Okay, I used to look at this Stanek thing with a kind of detached amusement. However, after going to his website and reading an interview (Under the "interviews" tab on robertstanek.com) where Stanek is called "the Tolkien for the new Millennium" I am starting to take this shit personally. I love the work of Tolkien. I have written term papers about Tolkien. I once gave a speech in College about Tolkien. Tolkien's writings have influenced to a certain extent my views of life, love, nature, and spirituality. Robert Stanek, you are not J.R.R. Tolkien. The lowlight of Stanek's "interview":

The interviewer ("D. Brubaker" AKA Stanek or some kind of cronie of Stanek's)

You were a linguist. Tolkien was a linguist. You are a combat veteran, a very distinguished one. Tolkien's writing was shaped by his love of language and his experiences during World War II.

Wrong war, fucktard. Tolkien served in the first World War. Furthermore, where does this "interviewer" (probably Stanek himself) get off comparing Stanek to Tolkien? Tolkien wrote a contemporary classic, a veritable masterpiece. It is beloved by millions of people. Stanek spends most of his time talking to himself on the internet, pretending to be friends with better authors, and speaking out against the grand conspiracy of GRRM's fans to defame him.

Of course, in the interview, Stanek plays the part of the humble author as the "interviewer" (again, probably Stanek himself) lists all of Stanek's amazing accolades. Very clever, RobStan. You are a folk hero. A true humanitarian. The "Tolkien for the new Millennium". After all, if "[a recent magazine article]" says it, it must be true!

[Tormund Ukrainesbane]

Well the dude I thought was stanek showed up to my bar again. I was bold and showed him a picture and he agreed he looks a lot like him but it isn't him. Shit. I was going to fight him.

[TheKassi]

Making a big deal out of this guy is a really bad way to keep people from buying his books. Lots of people get morbidly curious when many people rant ad nauseam. (See the Goodkind threads)

I mean lets say one in one thousand people you warn buy the book either to simply be contrarian, to play pranks on their friends (You got to read this book, it changed my life) or because they are curiosity addicts.

Let us also say you warn two thousand people a month on average.

Well congratulations, you have just doubled his book sale rate on Amazon.

[Ran]

That conjugalfelicity site is pretty eye-opening. I vaguely recalled Stanek's sinister implications that GRRM was spearheading a conspiracy against him, but it was pretty funny to re-read the details. Whether Stanek is an extremely cynical scammer or actually mentally ill, I do not know, and I can't say it matters very much as the end results for consumers are the same.

Whether simply completely ignoring him or not is the best way to prevent his scams from working, I'm not sure. I do think that if people want to buy the material for a laugh, knowing what they're getting into, well then, that's all right. Trash culture is still culture. ;) Still, it's true, it's weird to think that by noting just how terrible his books are, it's entirely possible he'll have more sales rather than less. But knowing sales rather than sales out of ignorance seem more acceptable to me.

[BigFatCoward]

I do think that if people want to buy the material for a laugh, knowing what they're getting into, well then, that's all right. Trash culture is still culture.

you beat me too it, i am convinced, i'm ordering on amazon as soon as i've finished typing this. i hope its so bad i have to shower with a wire brush after.

[Xalinor]

Okay, I used to look at this Stanek thing with a kind of detached amusement. However, after going to his website and reading an interview (Under the "interviews" tab on robertstanek.com) where Stanek is called "the Tolkien for the new Millennium" I am starting to take this shit personally. I love the work of Tolkien. I have written term papers about Tolkien. I once gave a speech in College about Tolkien. Tolkien's writings have influenced to a certain extent my views of life, love, nature, and spirituality. Robert Stanek, you are not J.R.R. Tolkien. The lowlight of Stanek's "interview":

The interviewer ("D. Brubaker" AKA Stanek or some kind of cronie of Stanek's)

Wrong war, fucktard. Tolkien served in the first World War. Furthermore, where does this "interviewer" (probably Stanek himself) get off comparing Stanek to Tolkien? Tolkien wrote a contemporary classic, a veritable masterpiece. It is beloved by millions of people. Stanek spends most of his time talking to himself on the internet, pretending to be friends with better authors, and speaking out against the grand conspiracy of GRRM's fans to defame him.

Of course, in the interview, Stanek plays the part of the humble author as the "interviewer" (again, probably Stanek himself) lists all of Stanek's amazing accolades. Very clever, RobStan. You are a folk hero. A true humanitarian. The "Tolkien for the new Millennium". After all, if "[a recent magazine article]" says it, it must be true!

This is just sad. It opens with a small intro paragraph which, of course, is fellating Stanek.

Best quote:

Stanek: "I don't know enough about Tolkien the man to answer that." (When the Tolkien comparison is mentioned for the first time)

(A little down the page)

Stanek: "Tolkien knew Middle English, Latin, Finnish and a half dozen other languages."

These other interviews are sad. One isn't even up yet, allegedly done in 2008. The other makes two more comparisons to real writers: that Stanek is the next Dashiel Hammett, and that Stanek is the next Joseph Heller.

[Liadin]

you beat me too it, i am convinced, i'm ordering on amazon as soon as i've finished typing this. i hope its so bad i have to shower with a wire brush after.

At least buy it used. Don't encourage the man!

[Acid Rainbow]

Don't feed the Stanek. (We have to come up with something like "don't feed the yeard" but for Stanek).

[Xray the Enforcer]

[mod] Please do not use this site as some kind of organizing nexus for anti-St*nek action. Thank you. [/mod]

[BookWyrm]

[mod] Please do not use this site as some kind of organizing nexus for anti-St*nek action. Thank you. [/mod]

Sorry I guess the post was out of line.

HE I hope it was taken in jest, but posting the idea in the first place was just plain dumb.

[Myshkin]

Making a big deal out of this guy is a really bad way to keep people from buying his books. Lots of people get morbidly curious when many people rant ad nauseam. (See the Goodkind threads)

I mean lets say one in one thousand people you warn buy the book either to simply be contrarian, to play pranks on their friends (You got to read this book, it changed my life) or because they are curiosity addicts.

Let us also say you warn two thousand people a month on average.

Well congratulations, you have just doubled his book sale rate on Amazon.

If people want to buy his books as a joke or out of morbid curiosity, good for them. The point is not to get people to stop buying Stanek's books; the point is to try to let people know what they are buying.

[Liadin]

If people want to buy his books as a joke or out of morbid curiosity, good for them. The point is not to get people to stop buying Stanek's books; the point is to try to let people know what they are buying.

One could argue that anyone who gets on Amazon and sees the first sentence of the first "book" ("Sunrise loomed across the horizon, pale as jasmine and mostly obscured by dark, feral clouds.") prominently displayed knows what they are buying.

[Alaerien]

Feral clouds? :lol:

[BookWyrm]

One could argue that anyone who gets on Amazon and sees the first sentence of the first "book" ("Sunrise loomed across the horizon, pale as jasmine and mostly obscured by dark, feral clouds.") prominently displayed knows what they are buying.

I don't think that's too realistic, as is clear from the OP's problem. When there are hundreds of 5 star reviews on Amazon and about three or four other-star reviews, it can be pretty affective in masking the books hilariously shitty diction.

I'm actually going to email Amazon about this and see what they say. With Fantasy Literature affectively boycotting him and Wikipedia as well, I'm curious to see if they are even looking into this.

Aren't there some sort of legal problems Stanek could get raised against him? I mean is he completely in the legal clear?

I would have thought the Flying Cross Society would have demanded he take his DFC Award claims out of his biographies due to fraud or something if they weren't true.

[Myshkin]

I would have thought the Flying Cross Society would have demanded he take his DFC Award claims out of his biographies due to fraud or something if they weren't true.

To be fair to the man (and I know I'm the one who brought it up in the first place) he may actually have been awarded the DFC. I believe I read somewhere that the Flying Cross Society only lists your name if you pay annual dues to them.

ETA: But this just goes to show that if you become known as a liar and a fraud even your true claims will be doubted until you can show hard proof.