Fringe Fiction Unlimited discussion
Self-published books are like homemade cookies
message 51:
by
Lynne
(new)
Apr 06, 2015 07:11PM
Just about every book, no matter how professionally edited, will go out with one or two mistakes. It's when they are obvious and there are a lot that it becomes a problem.
reply
|
flag
I own a lot of very old books. And quite a few newer published ones.
The old ones don't have mistakes.
The new ones are rife with them. I'll have to hand it to DAW, though. They seem to have the fewest of the large houses. Better bakers ;-)
Those older books probably did when they were first released. It's probably because you're reading a later edition that they're error-free, as all the errors were found and corrected.
The ones I have that are first editions don't. Like "The Silmarilion," and the ones published decades before that.And I've found most of the university press published books are extremely clean.
I don't know, I'm not seeing more mistakes in newer books than oler books. The only difference I see is that newer books tend to include a lot more dialects and variants of the English language. But when, it was only one dialect and nothing else. In other words, phonectic English.
It still did happen back then too, though, and back to the start of printing. I remember hearing that one of the original English versions of the bible went out with quite a major typo. It said:Do commit adultery.
They had to fix that one up pretty fast! :-)
That one's famous (or infamous), known as the Devil's Bible. There's always been speculation that the errata was an early printing prank.Dialect is a totally different animal from printing/publishing mistakes and it's not hard to tell the difference.
I've always been a hellish proofreader, lol. There've been times it's taken all of my self-control to not correct legal filings and correspondence and send them back to the originating attorney.
Well, I have to say... that's not reading for pleasure.
I don't purposely proofread when I'm reading fiction, it just catches my attention, like tripping over a broken place in the sidewalk.
I only purposefully proofread if I've been hired to do it. Some mistakes can slip by most people's eyes when they're reading normally. Those are usually the ones that even we proofers don't see because they tend to be hidden. However, many books today have so many it's painful. Even worse is when you see a word spelled incorrectly over and over again, like putting 'desert' when they're describing what they're going to eat when calling for the menu after their main course. Things like that drive me mad.
Yes! The dread homophobe/homonym (and who decided that changing the terminology from -nym to -phobe was a good idea?). And the contraction/possessive apostrophe apocalypse.It's hard for me to shut that proofing eye.
In indie books, you can't swing a cat without finding typos. Exceptions here and there. But then, that's the whole point of this group. To find the polished gems hidden in the rough sand.
Lynne wrote: "Or reign instead of rein."Right/write/wright/rite as rain!
Courtney wrote: "Honestly, as much as I support self-published authors and have been impressed by a few I have - in most instances - been overwhelmingly disappointed by how rushed and lackluster the quality of most..."Everything you said Courtney, 100%.I also find that a lot of self pub. authors cant take criticism of their work. It's almost an insult to the reader to put unedited and proof read work out there. So damaging.
Absolutely, Yolanda. I've had people send me manuscripts for editing and then they seem surprised and insulted when I tell them there's work to be done on it! I often wonder if they do anything or just ignore me.
A.B. wrote: "I like the prostitute analogy, too. :)"Thanks. I wanted to put in pederasts, but I was thinking that would go to far. :)
A.B. wrote: "I can spot typos faster than most (and have found typos in books that were professionally edited) but know that I am incapable of spotting all the typos in my own work. There's nothing like a second, third, fourth, twenty-fifth set of eyes."
And ears!
Since one of my protagonists is blind and written realistically, I have visually impaired and blind fans. One of my blind fans became a beta-reader and he has a conversion program that turns ePub into spoken word, so he has a computer read my novels to him. He found typos nobody found, because most people don't read out loud and as exact as a computer.
I commend you on acknowledging that it's extremely difficult, if not impossible, to proofread your own work. As the author, you will read what you think you wrote, not what is actually on the page. There are ways around that, like putting the manuscript away until you forgot what you wrote, or enlarging the font so you can only read one sentence at a time, but strange eyes see more.
Renee wrote: "I don't purposely proofread when I'm reading fiction, it just catches my attention, like tripping over a broken place in the sidewalk."I agree. Turning off the inner editor is extremely hard. I liken it to watching a movie with a film student who is constantly criticizing the director's choice in camera angle and editing.
Yolanda wrote: "At their own peril Lynne."Yes. It always makes me sigh.
Renee wrote: "Yes! The dread homophobe/homonym (and who decided that changing the terminology from -nym to -phobe was a good idea?). And the contraction/possessive apostrophe apocalypse."I had to laugh out loud at that. :D
Renee wrote: "Lynne wrote: "Or reign instead of rein."Right/write/wright/rite as rain!"
"baited breath"
"decapitated head"
"nauseous/nauseated"
"paddled/peddled/pedaled"
"could care less"
Maybe it's because I'm not a native speaker that I'm more careful about proper usage than most native speakers, but I'd be embarrassed if an Englishman would correct my written Dutch.
You forgot about the breathe/breath problem.
Or when someone write that their character was electrocuted and is recovering. IF YOU'RE ELECTROCUTED YOU ARE DEAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Lynne wrote: "You forgot about the breathe/breath problem."No, I didn't. I just listed the first few that came to mind, and breath/breathe is not in my Top Five Most Irritating Errors... :D
Spelling, shmelling.Yeah, some things are obvious mistakes that could be avoided, like write/rite, but welcome to online publishing where anyone can publish anything and it means nothing.
Spelling is the least of the problems, in my opinion.
I find it far worse to read a book where each sentence is absolutely pefecct on a technical level ((pelling, grammar structure) and there's no story. No heart, no soul. Nothing there.
I would happily trade a few spelling errors for a story with actual substance. And to be further honest, I'm a little tired of seeing tecchnicalities being the only complaint. Every time I see that I instantly think to myself, who cares? What about the story?
Those cookies can look perfect, but if they taste like cardboard, I will throw them in the garbage.
True, Lily. I don't finish those. Mostly I don't even buy them in the first place, although I'll confess there have been a few times I've bought major, highly lauded bestsellers and found that. I'll keep them long enough to tackle a time or two more to see if it was just the mood I was in (it rarely is) before I take 'em to the used bookstore. The reason I don't find that with indies isn't because that's not a real problem, but because I vet those better before I buy instead of foolishly trusting the lists and professional reviews and letting them overcome my natural wariness.
Which brings me to one of those word misuse errors that makes me grind my teeth and revoke all of the person's writing privileges until such time as they learn better . . . subbing *weary* for *wary*.
Lynne wrote: "You forgot about the breathe/breath problem."Which is really problematic when you don't know whether to lose or loose your breath.
Or, it can be an honest mistake. When I type too fast, I missed letters, especially on a touch keyboard. I don't think that means I deserve any bashing. It's just an honest mistake.
Lily wrote: "Or, it can be an honest mistake. When I type too fast, I missed letters, especially on a touch keyboard. I don't think that means I deserve any bashing. It's just an honest mistake."Honest mistakes in casual writing like posting is fine — sometimes fingers do have minds of their own and exercise creative license — and it's unlikely to not miss a typo here and there in a manuscript (but it should be less than a handful), but if you (general) pay a professional copy editor, or a major publishing house is handling it, it had damn (not dam) well better be perfect. Or at least very, very, very close.
That's what we pay them to do. It's like paying someone to paint your house and they leave small areas here and there bare (not bear).
Back to the analogy:In self-publishing, you mostly rely just on your taste - and maybe your family's and friends' but they will call you a great cook anyway so they won't hurt your feelings.
In trad publishing, there's a third party who had tried more cookies than you will even see in your life, and who can simply tell you that what you made is just inedible, if not poisonous.
Not necessarily, Jacek. They may just be telling you that they don't think their regular customers will buy your cookies. Or that they don't foresee anyone wanting to buy movie rights. Remember, they're looking for BIG profits, as quickly as possible.Unless you're dealing with small publishers, but they aren't going to have the marketing machinery and, in many cases, you're still going to have to be responsible for at least part of any editing costs.
You have to weigh (way/whey) the various options and whether (weather) they have any real worth to you, personally.
Actually, Jacek is accurate in terms of how it can be for the author.The business side of things, that's up to the companies. Authors don't deal with that in traditional publishing. In essence, it's not the author's business.
For an independent authors, they have to deal with everything. Some enjoy it, most screw it up.
Renee, but there's (theirs) an obvious difference between "sorry, it doesn't fit our publishing scheme" and "sorry, it's just some random blabbering full of every kind of mistakes".Of course, it will look slightly different in each single case, but vast majority of self-publishers doesn't even realize how awful they are at writing. And in vast majority of cases, they don't get rejected by trad publishers because "it doesn't fit regular customers". They do because they simply suck.
This is interesting to me. I have no doubt that you're all correct, that the "majority" of self-pubbed authors are spewing dreck on the literary world...and I've found a few, no doubt...but most of my indie author experience has been, at least, pleasant. Competent. Even if I didn't like an indie book or didn't finish it, it would more likely be technique or story than typos and grammatical errors. Again, I've seen them, of course, and I've seen a few novels rife with them...but not the "majority" of what I've read.I find that interesting. Maybe it's my perception.
Rejection is the spic of life. Just had to throw in another food analogy.Bottom line, as far as I'm concerned, is choice. If an author 100% believes they have what it takes to self-publish and sell their own book, that's their choice.
If, however, an author prefers the traditional publishing model, that's also their choice.
Neither is wrong. Some clothes fit better than others, you find the right fit for you. The rest, as Courtney said, is hay.
On a side note, any decent indie book I've read, the author always turns out to have experience. And it's virtually impossible to gain experience without any rejection. It's not a bad thing. It's a good thing. What doesn't kill you makes you stronger and all that.
Yeah, there's undoubtedly a lot of drivel that gets sent to agents and publishers. That's what form rejection letters are for ;-)Sadly, the people who really should probably take the rejections as an invitation to turn to other endeavors usually don't, and the ones who are truly being told they don't fit the customer base too often DO take it that they should never, ever write again.
Mod
Self-publishing is a crap shoot and I'm always seeing snake eyes because too many authors have little experience/business trying to tell a story to thousands of people.
Seriously, if we're going to acuse traditional publishing is "pigeon holing" the industry because they have standards it's got to swing the other way.
Self-publishing is a lot of "monkey see, monkey do" writing. They read Twilight yesterday? They're gonna write the next Twilight starting today!
Enthusiasm and fondness for a genre doesn't make someone the least bit qualified to write in it. They may not understand the nuance or tropes EXPRCTED of these genres or what draws readers to them.
Traditional publishing, conversely, tries to KNOW it's readers. Not individually but on a whole. It knows it lives and breathes by picking winners for readers - it's obligation is TO THE READERS.
I'm not sure self-published authors always feel the same. Not if they're expressing their priority is to tell a story on their terms, hope people take a chance and see who likes it.
As a readers - I don't like how self-publishing takes my money and hands me a pair of dice, blows on them and whispers:
"I really hope you enjoy my book. I've been working on it for years and am so thrilled it's finally out. Also, it would mean so much if you liked my Facebook page".
When I first graduated from the multimedia institute, I couldn't get a job. It's an an age old thing. Need experience to get a job but need a job to get experience. It took me a year of struggling, abject poverty, measly little freelance projects, and eventually a company willing to give me a chance before I finally got my first graphic design job.I was turned away from numerous job positions. And I do mean a lot, in the course of that year. I was a talentless hack, I have no experience, etc, etc. I've heard it all.
These days, everyone is a graphic designer when they're not really, only because of the software updates, dumbing it down, fools so many into thinking they're real graphic designers, when what they actually produce is a pile of shit. Back when, if you couldn't handle a program like Photoshop, you didn't have a snowball chance in hell to get a paying job. When I graduated, the starting wage was 150k per year. Now, thanks to all this dumbing down, making it too easy, a new graduate would be lucky to start with minimum wage.
I'm going to be brutally honest, and this may sting a bit, but, in my honest opinion, anyone who doesn't take rejection as an open invitation to do better, probably doesn't deserve to publish a book. You gotta earn it. Blood, sweat, and tears. Same as everyone else.
You're right, Courtney. That's why *Look Inside* features like Amazon has are so valuable.
And GOOD blurbs that give the reader an accurate verbal picture.
Without either of those, I'm not likely to buy, unless someone I know whose taste in literature coincides — or at least intersects — with mine recommends it.
I do diverge on one point, though, that traditional publishing's obligation is to the readers. That's tangential to its REAL obligation — to turn the largest profits possible. Publishing is a business. It's all about the money.
With the exception of university type presses. They can afford to choose what to print on the basis of aesthetics.
Mod
Not at all but one side of this business goes out of its way to pleasure readers while another end is half-obsessed with pleasuring themselves and participating circle jerks.
Sorry for the lewd but I'm not about watching an author get off on their own aspirations and talent for writing when we only have their assurance they've done their PROFESSIONAL best (because that's what authors should bring if this is meant to be a profession) to tell a story people want to hear, not one they need to tell.
If it's really the latter - get a journal. No genre story "needs" to be told because none of us are on a mission from a higher power or blowing whistles on horrible cover ups. An author's job is to tell a story but - just as you wouldn't open a bakery in a place too health conscious to buy - they need to make sure readers will actually line up for these stories they're selling.
- shrug - readers shouldn't have to give money to someone who just likes to bake. Not if they don't know how to make a profession out of it.
Courtney... I didn't know you had it in you to be that crude. I love it.
Mod
Courtney wrote: "Girl...I try to retain respectability and such like but - yeah - I got that side and snicker at nasties ;)"Now I know what you do in your spare time, and that was probably TMI.
Mod
I don't know - maybe the difference in publishing is like showing up for a job interview.
Are you apply to a corner store or a fortune 500? Something in-between? (Are you happy anybody reads or do you want to be a phenomenal success?)
Do you have experience? (Years of writing experience - published, unpublished, fanfiction)
What is your work ethic? (Outlining and research, disciplined schedule and attitude, unwillingness to settle for a rough draft, revisions, betas)
Do you look and act the part of a professional? Does that reflect in your work? (Editing, cover art, blurb, bio - everything that makes you indistinguishable from a traditional pub)
Are you willing to work long hours? Take on tasks that aren't your responsibility but succeed at them? (Marketing, networking, PR)
What is your greatest weakness as an employee? (How are YOU holding you back - figure it out and fix it. No blaming others, no excuses).
Do I have to answer all those questions? Because I kinda answered them about 20 years ago...
Mod
Nobody gets to be a success if the grand scheme is do what you want, when you want, the way you want and hope everyone takes notice and is somehow impressed. There are only so msny points for originality if everywhere else you're a disorganized mess coasting on dreams and self-perceived genius.
People like that don't get hired at big business places or keep their jobs for long because they're under-qualified, insubordinant or incompetent. Why should professional writing be any kinder to those who want a career but aren't willing to work for it?
*Throws out marketing tagline of self-perceived genius*It always seems like a good idea at the time.
Those amateur hour, hype-on-hype author announcements turn me off immediately and it's not likely I'm going to read the book in question, even though I know it's hard for most of us to sell our own work. But that is SO not the way to do it *gags*.
But I'm pretty picky about cookies, too. Having gluten sensitivity comes in handy sometimes. ;-)
*throws out plan B marketing plan*Bummer.
