Goodreads Authors/Readers discussion
II. Publishing & Marketing Tips
>
A Few Questions for Fellow Authors
I know how you feel - drives you crazy to be SO careful and get others to help read/edit and still find a few small things. It happens all the time. I'd say since it's just a few small things, don't change the edition. I have to guess it's an ebook. Just update it and leave it at that.
Whenever I've done this, I've simply added 'Second Edition' at the very start of the book underneath the title.No need to change anything on the cover or anything like that.
I made a few changes to mine and didn't say anything. You probably shouldn't bother unless people had been complaining about mistakes in reviews, in which case you might want to advertise the update.
Well, I made the newbie mistake of letting other reviewers read the book but I accidentally sent them an unedited copy. So it was kinda like, "Here's my almost finished product." And the reviewers have to base their reviews on said product, so I'm not blaming them for that at all. But I did notify the reviewers that they received an unedited copy and they were very gracious about it, which was made it much easier for me to breathe.So adding 'second edition' isn't necessary? I'm leaning towards not doing it but I want to put the best product forward :)
Have you had an impartial third party edit it? This helps a lot
There is a process on Amazon for sending out edition updates to your prior readers, if that's what you're talking about. But any time you make major changes (not just typographical) you should state it's a new edition. Even typos, if there are enough, can be a reason, particularly if an earlier reader liked your writing and stated as such but then reviewed the book badly due to formatting or typos.
I'm actually having a similiar issue. I am re-releasing my first book but only because I got the rights back to it late last year. I have a new cover done and other then a ton of corrections all content in the book is the same. I don't consider it a 2nd edition but rather re-done, I would consider anyone who has the awful original cover to having a 1st edition but all the same.
Arabella-- I've never had a 3rd party but I'm thinking that's a good way to go for my second book installment. It's not that my book was badly edited, it just wasn't as squeaky clean.LH-- I actually haven't posted my book on any online Amazon distributions. I'm happy for that now, actually. Maybe I will need to state it's a new edition. Does that matter much to a reader?
Justin-- Good luck, man. I guess I'd consider it a re-done version as well. Whatever avoids confusion I guess. That's what I'm trying to do, avoid confusion here XD
Remember that the FIRST appearance of a book has value. Like virginity. Once you lose that cherry, you can never go back. ALWAYS make the work as good as you can before you publish. If I bought a first draft, believing it was a finished work, I would be pissed. And guess whose work I would never spend a cent on again?
If your wish is simply to get the work out, OK. If your plan is repeat customers, think again.
I've done typo corrections, even new covers, to my books before and not called it a new edition. Both Smashwords and Amazon allow you to do this with their edit/ republish options. Any readers who have the existing edition can then download the new one for free.Both sites state that they prefer you to do revisions this way rather than publishing the book as if new (which they consider to be an attempt to game their "new on..." lists).
L., usually a book is a second edition because the isbn number (the bar code on the back of the book that allows the retailers to scan for sale, for those who may not know) HAS to be changed. If the isbn number hasn't changed, then technically, the edition hasn't changed.For example, when Justin (comment #8) republishes his book now that he has the rights back, it will have to be a second edition because he cannot use the same isbn number (that is assuming that another publisher has already published the book, hence having the rights revertied back to him). In said case, the original publisher holds the rights to the isbn number, and thus, continues to hold the rights to the "1st edition".
I know because I had to do the same with my book, Jaxxa Rakala: The Search. Another company published the first edition, so when I got my rights back I had to change the isbn number in order to legally sell it. In so doing, I had to make it a 2nd edition. But I took that opportunity to not only fix the text, but to create a new cover and blurb to differentiate it from the 1st edition.
To sum up, if the isbn hasn't changed, the edition number doesn't change either (even if the cover/text has been updated... though, I wouldn't change the cover unless I changed the edition...)
Hope that helps.
Coming out with a new edition, unless it is a completely new book, is bad for most authors. When you do a new edition you lose all your ratings, reviews, and everything. You might also annoy the people who already bought the book.So don't do a new edition. New editions are best left to text books.
Hi L: What kind of book is this? My first teen novel (published by HarperCollins) had a big boo-boo in it. One of the headings was wrong. Ch. 16, 17, 18, 11. Oh no! I first heard about it from a kid. NO ONE had caught it. I was mortified at first. Then I decided to make lemonade. I had contests (free book for the first teen to find the mistake), I talked about it at book events. Since then, I've noticed mistakes in several books I read. So, for you, my advice would be to TALK about it, blog about it, use it to publicize your book. "Writer Blindness...Worse Than Writer's Block?" Make lemonade!!
L.L. wrote:(which they consider to be an attempt to game their "new on..." lists). They don't police this. In fact, they encourage gaming the "new and hot" list by using "publishing date" as the reference for when the book came out, not the actual first date of publication. If you change your pub date to something recent and your book sells even reasonably well, there is a good chance you'll be on the "new and hot" list (as my stuff has been).
Chrissy I did a new edition and changed the cover of my book and I kept all my info and book reviews. All you have to do is link it with the old edition.
Kevin wrote: "Chrissy I did a new edition and changed the cover of my book and I kept all my info and book reviews. All you have to do is link it with the old edition."I was about to say the same. When I republished the new edition of Jaxxa Rakala, I linked it with the 1st edition and the review I had for that edition came along and attached itself to the new edition.
Hey guys! I'm sorry it's been so long since I've gotten back to you. Anyway, I've read through all these comments and they've really helped me. I don't feel so unprofessional anymore, heh. I think I'll be able to get by with keeping the same edition :) I'll see what CreateSpace says. Thank you everyone!!!
I've just published my first paperback through Createspace and they seem to be a little less forgiving on corrections than KDP, Smashwords, etc. Which is a shame as I've found a few little gripes I'd love to change... would love to know how you get on L!
Andrew wrote: "I've just published my first paperback through Createspace and they seem to be a little less forgiving on corrections than KDP, Smashwords, etc. Which is a shame as I've found a few little gripes I..."You could wait to release your paperback edition until after the eBook edition's been out for a little bit. That way any minor things that are caught by yourself or your first batch of readers can be corrected for the paperback edition. I just consider the paperback edition set in stone for the most part after it's out there.
*Talking typos that slipped through beta-readers, editors, proofreaders, etc.
Andrew, If you already published it, then you have to go back and republish it with all the changes you want to make. I usually label it edition 2 so the readers will know it is your latest and hopefully all the corrections are caught, then after approval any one purchasing the book from that point on will have the corrected version. A.G.
Thanks guys - the things I want to change are largely the nitpicking quibbles of a perfectionist, and it's probably good that the paperback is set in stone for the time being. I'll bring out a second edition in the fullness of time, but for the moment I think the finished book is a pretty good reflection of the effort I put into it.
It really is worth having a proof read before any publisher gets your book.
Rosalind wrote: "It really is worth having a proof read before any publisher gets your book."It's always good to have a pair of disinterested eyes read your book for mistakes. One of my beta-readers is blind, he converts the ePub to mp3 and has my book read to him by a speech program. He finds typos more than twenty people haven't found.
Interesting technique. Reading stuff aloud is one of the most useful ways I've found to pick up bits that need changing during the drafting process.
I just reissued my Parallel series which was originally published by Penguin, but spent a long time going back in and enhancing and developing certain scenes. As hard as I worked on those books--and as well-edited as they were--I still wanted to make the books better. It's actually a nice sales point, too, for original fans that they'll get something "more" in the reissue. I also included deleted scenes and reader questions. I think readers these days appreciate expanded or revised material, and Amazon picks up the original reviews on a reissue. If it's more a matter of just a few typos or such, that's a different situation. And, Mary, it's amazing how many errors creep through with major publishers! One of my Penguin books has a horrible mistake in the digital edition (it was something that happened in the upload, apparently, and still can't get it fixed.) It's so embarrassing, especially as it's not something any of us missed!
My idea is to let go. After 2, 3, ..., n revisions there is a limit that maybe is inherent in the plot, author's style or lack thereof. I write fast, and correct the plot very little. My main worry is consistency. Dates, color of the eyes, sequence and credibility. I write what I call possible future scenarios.
I don't crave for perfection. I just want to create an easy to read and dynamic story.
Interesting. Revisions and proof reading are a requirement for a good book, plus other sets of eyes 'cause you (the author) will never catch them all. You can always correct errors with Create Space, but it takes a bit of time to revise your .pdf file and upload, then wait for them to get back. Humberto is right, though, there comes a point where you just have to let it go and move on. It will never be perfect...
L. wrote: "Happy second day of 2014! :) I'll get right into the question that I've got on my mind. I published my book and it's been out for some time. I've edited the book (even though it's already been pu..."
No, you only to release a new edition if you make substantial changes to plotlines or remove characters/story arcs. Updating the manuscript is the way to go. There's no need to go through that long process of releasing a new book when all you did was clean up some grammar/punctuation.
Kyoko-But be aware, from the time you submit your changes, to the time the changes go into production, your book will not be offered for sale.
My eBook of The Lord of the Rings is based on the reset edition of 2004 that was a revision of the reset edition of 1994, yet the book officially has two editions 1954/1955 and 1966. Calling something a second edition is a big step. Note that the 2004 reset edition made over 400 emendations so the notion that you must send out a perfect text from first publication is contrary to publishing history.
J.M. wrote: "Kyoko-But be aware, from the time you submit your changes, to the time the changes go into production, your book will not be offered for sale."
That's not true. If you upload a new updated version through KDP, the old version will remain for sale until the new version replaces it. There's no gap.
Mercia wrote: "...so the notion that you must send out a perfect text from first publication is contrary to publishing history."I don't think that's the conclusion you should draw. One should strive for error-free and not hurry through the editing process in order to publish a manuscript that contains errors.
If you publish a polished and edited book, and someone still finds typos that eluded the author, beta-readers and proofreaders, then you can upload an updated version, but that's not a 'second edition'.
Perfect is something we strive for but rarely achieve, that is human nature but all efforts must be done to find perfection in our works. A.G.
Martyn the only people who try to send out an error-free text are writers who never read others' books. I find errors on a regular basis in publications from Big Bird (aka the Random Penguin). If Penguin as the biggest publisher in the world cannot get its texts perfect and Lord of the Rings was still being corrected after 50 years as one of the all-time bestsellers, then this error-free mantra needs to end. It keeps people from handing work over to an editor because they need one more pass at it themselves in case they are embarrassed. Or they doubt their editor and hire another one and another one. Sooner or later someone has to make a decision that it is good enough to publish. Whether that is a trade editor or a self-publisher. Good enough does not equal perfectly error free, because that seldom happens in a novel length text.
Mercia wrote: "Martyn the only people who try to send out an error-free text are writers who never read others' books."What is currently happening is that people publish rough unpolished unedited drafts and leave pointing out the massive errors, plot holes, and multiple typos to customers instead of beta-readers and proofreaders.
Readers who download a book from an e-book retailer like Amazon/Kobo/iTunes should be able to expect a polished and edited piece of work. Which means that an author should not hurry through their work in order to publish it as quickly as they can, but care about meeting reader expectations.
Just because you can also find typos in trade published books, doesn't mean that you shouldn't strife to have as few typos as possible.
Striving for error-free is not the same as hiring fifty editors to go over a text until there's absolutely no error left. It's just putting in an effort to polish before you publish. It's better to strive for excellence and fail, than to not strive at all.
Mercia wrote: "It keeps people from handing work over to an editor because they need one more pass at it themselves in case they are embarrassed. Or they doubt their editor and hire another one and another one."
I have to meet the first author who does either of these things. Sad to say, most authors are unable to self-edit their work and try to offload the expenses of hiring an editor by treating their customers as beta-readers. Why else are so many readers so disappointed in self-published books? Because the work is substandard in quality control.
While agree that a book should be well edited and before it is published, unfortunately it does happen. Is it a good idea? No. Am I guilty of this? Yes, unfortunately I am.The original question was basically how do I fix that mistake. As I am trying to fix my own mistakes, I was very interested in the answers my fellow authors and readers have. For those of you who answered with constructive advice, I say thank you. For those of you who took this opportunity to tell this author looking for help how wrong he was to produce such a substandard work. I can tell you from experience that when you realize that your work isn't as error-free as you thought it sucks.
I guess what I'm asking is that we stop the dog pile and keep it constructive.
I am always furious when I buy a book (e or paper) that has clearly not been copyedited or proofed. I can think of no faster or better way to lose a repeat customer -- certainly you will have lost me. If you want anyone to buy your SECOND book -- in other words, if you want a career! your first book had better be as good as you can get it.
Martyn V. wrote: "Rosalind wrote: "It really is worth having a proof read before any publisher gets your book."It's always good to have a pair of disinterested eyes read your book for mistakes. One of my beta-read..."
That's awesome! :)
Heather wrote: "That's awesome! :)"The thing is, you can do something like that yourself by turning your manuscript into an epub and having your e-reader's 'text-to-speech' reading it back to you.
Martyn V. wrote: "Heather wrote: "That's awesome! :)"The thing is, you can do something like that yourself by turning your manuscript into an epub and having your e-reader's 'text-to-speech' reading it back to you."
I've heard of the feature, but I've never scoped it out. I have an iPad and a Nook. Wonder if those have it? So cool. Does the reader sound robotic?
Martyn, if you have never met an author that went to multiple editors, let me introduce you to Curtis Edmonds. http://jakonrath.blogspot.co.uk/2014/...
Heather wrote: "I've heard of the feature, but I've never scoped it out. I have an iPad and a Nook. Wonder if those have it? So cool. Does the reader sound robotic?"Depends on the sophistication of the software. Some sound almost human...
Mercia wrote: "Martyn, if you have never met an author that went to multiple editors, let me introduce you to Curtis Edmonds. http://jakonrath.blogspot.co.uk/2014/..."Thanks.
Now, do I need to introduce you to the thousands of crap artists who don't even think about hiring an editor before they publish? And who have the frigging gall to tell the world that it's okay to do so, because the readers will give them the feedback they need to improve their work?
The thing is, you have to strive for excellence, just for the striving part. Curtis made mistakes, not by hiring different editors, but by not thinking it through on hiring editors. He hires two editors at the same time for different purposes, he hires a developmental editor who lets him down three months into the job, etcetera.
And then he gets impatient and publishes prematurely.
Self-publishing is not for everyone, despite what everyone might be saying. You need to understand the publishing side. Promoting yourself, business plan, ability to pick out the right editors and cover artists.
Curtis acknowledges himself that he didn't do enough research in how to self-publish. His cautionary tale is just that, an example of how you can go wrong. Curtis has learned from his mistakes, and he will do it differently the next time. The article serves to warn and educate those who set out to self-publish. And I think it's great.
However, nowhere in the article does Curtis say, 'we don't have to strive for excellence, just publish your crap and get on with the next book'. He realizes he shouldn't have hired lots of editors, but just one editor to edit his polished manuscript.
As to the time he wasted, Curtis lost a lot of time not just because he hired inept editors, but because he was querying agents to get a trade published deal. And when that didn't happen, he rushed the self-publishing side.
So, while the article is great, it's not an article about an author with anxiety issues who won't let go of his book before it's error-free.
What I observe more often than anything is self-published authors not giving a crap about editing and polishing their manuscript and just uploading it to the retailers. To tell these people that it doesn't matter if their books are far from error-free is irresponsible, because that perpetuates the stigma that self-publishing equates crappy novels.
It goes without saying that anything that is offered to the public should be as error-free as you can make it. If you cannot afford an editor, get yourself a couple of critical betas and acquaint yourself with a style manual. Reading aloud to yourself is a great way to catch certain things.I suspect that many of the people who use their readers as betas aren't paying a whole lot of attention to their feedback either. While not absolute, I do think the ability to produce relatively clean copy the first time is indicative of general ability to write, or at least a commitment to professionalism.
Hello goodreads world, I've returned after a short period, heh. My answer was to update my manuscript for my book, I never changed any edition numbers or anything like that. Now I'm ready to get my book up on Kindle. So, thanks to everyone who shared their opinions on the matter, I read through all of them! :)Now to offer my input on the subject matter that's going on now:
When I published my 1st book it had mistakes in it, I will not hide behind this. Mainly the mistakes were tense changes from present to past vice versa. Having a few readers helped point this fact out to me but this was done after the book was published. So I felt like an idiot in a sense because I published a book that clearly wasn't as close to perfect as I thought. The readers still very much enjoyed my book and looked past the little blips here and there, which really was a blessing for me. Here I was thinking that if there were a lot of grammatical issues I would be getting 2-3 stars on my book and I was DONE for.
As it turns out, only some of the readers had issues with my book's blips and the readers were typically authors themselves so they already knew what I was going through in a sense. I apologized to them and told them it was not my intention to be so unprofessional and that I would definitely work on the corrections they saw and had an issue with.
Now my book has been edited once again. I feel good about it. Great, actually. I've updated my manuscript and now I'm ready for Kindle. Beforehand I wasn't very confidant to go on Kindle because of the mistakes. But now I'm ready and I can promise you this--- come time my second book, this will not be a repeat of the first. Will my second book still have blips? Sure, no book is perfect. But now because of what I learned about my mistakes in my first book, I'm now aware of the issues and how to correct them.
What was my biggest 'mistake'? I would say it was me waiting and procrastinating to fix my book of its blips. I'm being honest, here. I didn't immediately fix issues once I saw them (this is after the book is published, not in the editing stage). For that, I had to put more work in after the fact. It was a tough cookie to swallow but I can proudly say I've learned and I'm moving on.
Anyhoo, that's just a quick summary of the stressed out, hopeful, and coffee filled life of L. Benitez. Hahaha! :D
Last minute thoughts:What I just posted about above wasn't easy for me because I don't want anyone thinking I'm unprofessional. But I would be lying if I said I knew what I was doing 100% of the time. So for the authors who post about the mistakes they made or share their experiences, I really do appreciate it. For all the authors out there who feel discouraged or frustrated, I would just like to say take a deep breath and carry on! :)
Well, I think most of us are kind of feeling our way on the first book or two. That's not a reason to publish something that isn't as finished as you can make it. I go back and look at my first couple and I know there are things that I would do differently now. That's normal.
D.C. wrote: "Well, I think most of us are kind of feeling our way on the first book or two. That's not a reason to publish something that isn't as finished as you can make it. I go back and look at my first c..."Thanks, I've come to that conclusion as well. It's more assuring when others say it too, however. :)
I published my book and it's been out for some time. I've edited the book (even though it's already been published) and cleaned it up even more. Don't get me wrong, the book didn't have any glaring holes or anything like that. Little things, like a double space or an unneeded comma.
Anyway, the book is already published. I'm planning on updating it with its new version. There's nothing about the story that's changed, just the grammatical side. I've seen some authors come out with new editions of their book. So, that's my question. Do I (or should I) come out with another edition of my book, since it's technically not the same as when I first published it?
Maybe I'm all wrong on how editions work. The front cover is the same, as is the illustrations inside. I'd rather not say this is 'edition two', I'd rather just update it. However, I'm not sure how that works. It's disheartening enough that I published the book and found all these little things. Please tell me I'm not the only author out there going through this... XD
Thanks for the help!