Goodreads Authors/Readers discussion
II. Publishing & Marketing Tips
>
Do self-published ebooks have a bad reputation?
Roger wrote: "I think everyone who writes now has access to the tools to polish and proofread. There are lots of free tools available. I do agree that they may not know that the tools are available or where to get them. All of that is a part of learning the trade. It doesn't have to take money to do it."You assume that "everyone" has internet access at their beck and call and/or live in an area with a large enough population of quality writers to join a Critique Group. For economic reasons, I moved away from a larger population area to one more rural. In doing so, I lost an excellent Critique Group, with none anywhere near me at the my new location. I did have unlimited Internet access, but discovered most of the few writers in my area did not. They were forced to utilize the Internet very sparingly via the tiny local library. And many of those people couldn't even afford a computer. They wrote via old typewriters. Those tools you mentioned were virtually out of reach for them. So, your statement should be amended to replace the word "everyone" with "most people". Keep in mind that being poor doesn't mean a person is not intelligent enough to be a good writer.
As for the people who flood the market with badly-written garbage, these were the people I referred to as the hacks giving the rest of us black eyes. You are absolutely right about them, and hope you are correct about SPAs reputations improving over time.
Just like you, I also continue to learn and grow as a writer. Any writer who doesn't is doing themselves a great disservice.
Tom wrote: "Those tools you mentioned were virtually out of reach for them. So, your statement should be amended to replace the word "everyone" with "most people". Keep in mind that being poor doesn't mean a person is not intelligent enough to be a good writer..."I concede that I shouldn't have said "everyone". I usually try not to be so absolute. And I agree with you entirely about money. However, having access to the tools of any trade is not always as easy as a click of a mouse button. Those tools may be in the libraries where these people have to go in order to use a computer.
Yes, it may be much more difficult for some to access these tools than it is for others, but the effort is worth making, no matter how difficult it is. From your writing here, I can tell you are one that makes the effort. This is why I think SPA reputations will improve.
Although I rarely write them, I think reviews off of Amazon samples are perfectly fair as long as the reviewer acknowledges that is what is being reviewed. In almost all cases, the sample is enough for a reader to form an opinion of the book. I think most of the cries of "unfair" stem from most of them being negative, because if the reviewer had liked what they had read, they would have bought it, and we'd be looking at a review of the whole book.On the subject of money I quote Dr. Johnson liberally.
No-one is too poor to learn their craft and approach it with respect. Internet service does cost money, but thrift shops are full of second-hand computers. Even fairly obsolete ones will make acceptable word processors. The library is not only an internet source, but one of reference books and books on writing, and an excellent place to form a writers group. Editing and proofing can be bartered for.
Linda wrote: "I expect to get kicked out of this group for not being nice enough, not being supportive enough, not being welcoming enough, not being helpful enough..."Linda, sometimes being nice is overrated.
Writers who don't take the time to learn the trade, who don't polish and proofread, who are only in it to make a quick buck, do give SPAs a bad rep. That's for sure. But sometimes it's reviewers who give us a bad rep too. Some of them think they know how to review a book. Some of them have poor skills in spelling and grammar. They don't help SPAs either. Reviewers need to learn their trade just as much as writers do.
Roger wrote: "Linda wrote: "I expect to get kicked out of this group for not being nice enough, not being supportive enough, not being welcoming enough, not being helpful enough..."Linda, sometimes being nice ..."
Reviewers have no trade. They are reviewers. The only requirement they need to meet is having an opinion. And possibly having some very broad definition of civility.
D.C. wrote: "Reviewers have no trade. They are reviewers. The only requirement they need to meet is having an opinion. And possibly having some very broad definition of civility. Anyone can have an opinion. A good reviewer needs the ability to have an informed opinion. A book should be judged on how well it stacks up against other books. Reading lots of books and also reading lots of reviews by others is learning the trade -- also knowing spelling and grammar. What works for the writer also works for the reviewer. Both of them have a responsibility to their readers to do the best job possible.
Roger wrote: "D.C. wrote: "Reviewers have no trade. They are reviewers. The only requirement they need to meet is having an opinion. And possibly having some very broad definition of civility." "Roger wrote: Anyone can have an opinion. A good reviewer needs the ability to have an informed opinion."
The thing is, like a book can be dismissed for poor quality, you have every right to dismiss a review that you consider poor quality.
I see many reviews that I don't value, but I won't express any disapproval of these reviews because I don't buy them, and they don't pretend to be something they're not.
Books, however, have an inherent value. A book should adhere, quality-wise, to a certain standard. If a book doesn't reach these standards, I will express my disapproval, because the book purports to be a book while it's a rough draft (at best).
There was a time, not so very long ago, when those, upon whom the titles author or reviewer had been bestowed, were formally recognized as professionals. The titles and recognition were well-earned because the recipients had expended the time, effort, patience, and persistence to learn and then continuously improve upon the skills of their chosen profession.
The invention and proliferation of personal computers and the internet changed the traditional concepts of author and reviewer forever. Now anyone with access to a PC and the internet may technically lay claim to either or both titles. Whether that is a good thing or bad thing is the subject for another time in another discussion thread.
Something has not changed. Merely writing something does not mean that the one who has written it is truly a writer. Merely posting a review does not mean that the one posting it is truly a reviewer.
Consumer reviewers, as opposed to professional reviewers, are more common than they used to be, but I have not encountered any who claimed to be professionals. On the other hand virtually all of the "authors" (there's a small amount of freefic and fanfic, whose writers could legitimately claim amateur status) on Goodreads are theoretically professionals. They are charging, or trying to.
Meh. Realistically, if you write, you're a writer.After that it breaks down into sub-categories: professional/amateur; good/bad; fiction/non-fiction; gifted/"for gods' sakes, break his/her fingers before he/she vomits more detritus into the world of words."
Roger wrote: "... reviewers who give us a bad rep too. Some of them think they know how to review a book. Some of them have poor skills in spelling and grammar. They don't help SPAs either. Reviewers need to learn their trade just as much as writers do..."Perhaps you don't realize but readers do not write reviews for you - they write them for other readers. Honest reviewers are not professionals and are not making a career of reviewing books.
The readers, who take the time to review a book, are expressing an opinion for the benefit of other readers. I doubt they care about the authors opinion of their skills - that is NOT the point.
Reviews are for READERS, not for AUTHORS.
(I think I need to put this line in a Word file and leave it on my desktop so I can save my time typing it into threads)
Your attitude is what makes readers hesitate before they use their time and energy to review a book. Authors complain they need reviews - with this attitude - Good Luck.
Yes, self-pub books have a bad reputation...until they don't!
Renee wrote: "And there are different and personal definitions of success. It isn't always money or numbers.
Sometimes it is writing/making music or art ethically, honestly; staying true to the story, the so..."
I'd agree - success is what you make it. My mother died a couple of years ago after a long illness - she lived just long enough to see my first book in print. She was so proud, she told EVERYONE - I mean everyone, neighbours, family, friends, the nurses... She didn't read the book, partly because she didn't read fantasy but mostly because she was so ill. Anyway the look on her face when she held that book will stay with me forever. I made a dying woman proud and happy in her last few weeks. To me, THAT is success. If I make some money selling books then wonderful, if I don't I will still write, as I always have, for myself.
I do agree though, to sell the books there should be decent writing, grammar, plot, characterisation etc.
Reviews are for readers, some find them important, some don't. Really reviewers shouldn't be gatekeepers. People like and dislike a very wide variety of things. One will think a book is wonderful, the next will think it is garbage. Both are right.
Many reviewers simply say "I loved this book, it was cool," or such like. Fine, that is their view and they may have reviewed for themselves and their friends. Not everyone writes a long critique.
D.C. wrote: "Although I rarely write them, I think reviews off of Amazon samples are perfectly fair as long as the reviewer acknowledges that is what is being reviewed. In almost all cases, the sample is enough..."I'd agree. If someone read the sample and didn't like it then they might choose to review the sample, but probably it would be helpful to say so that other readers know the review wasn't based on the entirety of the book.
A.L. wrote: "I'd agree. If someone read the sample and didn't like it then they might choose to review the sample, but probably it would be helpful to say so that other readers know the review wasn't based on the entirety of the book. ..."It would also be the honest thing to do, and ethical. Anything less is misleading, whether intentional or inadvertent.
True. As one should divulge a free review copy.
A.L. wrote: "I'd agree. If someone read the sample and didn't like it then they might choose to review the sample, but probably it would be helpful to say so that other readers know the review wasn't based on the entirety of the book."Sorry, but there is no "probably" about it. Reviewing any book on just the samples, and not specifically making that fact known, is absolutely fraudulent, in my humble opinion. Why hide the fact? It says more about the reviewer if he is honest about how little he read. As I've mentioned previously, I've only given a review on a book I didn't finish once. I told the readers I didn't finish it. I explained that I got through over a third of the book, but did not find myself caring about any of the characters. I said that I asked myself "why am I still reading this?" As a reviewer, this was important information to relay to the readers of my review. That let them know that I knew nothing about the writing and/or characterization beyond that point. That lets the readers of the review make up their own minds whether the information I provided is relevant to them.
Also, wanting a fair review is not the same as wanting only good reviews. Do I want good reviews? Of course, but only if they are fair. I don't want someone who knows me to write a review of any of my books stating how great it is if they have never read it. Nor do I want them to praise the book if they really didn't like it. What I do want in a review is what the reader liked about the book, and/or what they didn't like. The more specific the details, the better it is for me as the writer, and equally so for potential readers who are taking the time to peruse the reviews. And I am also sure that those same readers are like me in wanting the reviews to be by people who actually like the genre' of the book. If you don't like science fiction, how can your review of such a book not be considered tainted, and of absolutely no value to those that do? This is made even worse by reviewers who do not like the genre', but don't say so in the review. This is not only a disservice to the writer, but also to potential readers who might otherwise enjoy the book. And don't tell me reviewers are only writing for the readers. They need to realize what they write is read by ALL interested parties, which includes the writer.
Linda wrote: "note: "genre" doesn't have an accent mark."Yikes, you're right. I wonder when I started making that mistake? Thanks for the correction.
I could go back and fix it in my previous posts, but that just doesn't seem honest. I'll just leave the error.
How in the name of Creation is a review of the sample, particularly labeled as a review of the sample, fraudulent? I wouldn't agree, but you could make an argument for incomplete, and people claim unfair all the time, but fraudulent? Not unless you claimed to have purchased it and read the whole thing, and even then it's stretching it a little. Even if you are making the supposition that someone who reviews a sample never, ever had any intention of purchasing the book, it's not fraudulent. Their opinion is of the sample. Personally, I rarely review samples, for a number of reasons, and I often leave those reviews unrated, but you may be sure that if I do, I have a very strong opinion about the book in question.
Sample reviews are valid (so are any DNF reviews) because even if the reading experience were suddenly to improve, the author has lost the reader. Some readers rarely abandon books, others do so frequently.
The suggestion that out of genre reviews are invalid is also ridiculous. Even negative ones are likely valuable to other readers and a positive one is priceless.
Reviews are not for writers. They are for readers (consumers). They are not critiques or feed back. They don't have to be constructive. I prefer civility, and really dislike sarcasm applied to amateur work, but that's pretty much it. And even that is my preference, not a hard and fast rule that reviewers should obey.
D.C. wrote: "How in the name of Creation is a review of the sample, particularly labeled as a review of the sample, fraudulent? I wouldn't agree, but you could make an argument for incomplete, and people claim ..."Sorry, but you didn't read my post correctly. I said "Reviewing any book on just the samples, and not specifically making that fact known..." The fraudulence comes in misleading the people reading the review into thinking the reviewer has read the entire book.
Also, you have misinterpreted my points on genres. I'm talking about people who DO NOT LIKE a specific genre reviewing that genre. As I stated, those have little to no value to the readers that do like the genre, unless, of course, the book appeals to readers outside the genre (or is advertised as such). It's like me saying I hate Westerns (just used an example) but I read a Western novel, then proceed to write a negative review on it. Unless I'm just attacking it from a grammatical sense, what use would my opinion of this book be to people who actually read and enjoy Westerns? Absolutely none. Suggesting otherwise is actually ridiculous.
Lastly, as for "Reviews are not for writers," That is also a ridiculous assumption. Do you speak for all reviewers? You definitely don't speak for me. I wrote a review on a book by an author I really like. (If you are interested, you can visit my webpage, go to the area called My Thoughts, and click on the article "Enough With The Damned Cliffhangers Already.") In it, I do address it to the readers, but I also want the author to read, and hopefully learn from it. Sure, not every reviewer wants the author to read it, but those reviewers are mistaken to think that they won't. As an author, I want to read them! And, as an avid reader, I put little stock in reviews that don't tell me why they either liked or disliked the book. Giving these lame, lazy reviewers a free pass is absurd. They need to be called out on it. Those people should just click on a star rating, and say nothing in the review. It least that is more honest than writing stuff that says nothing. But I do agree with you in preferring civility and disliking sarcasm. I disagree with abusing those traits to be an obnoxious reviewer. Name calling and insults tell more about the reviewer than the book being reviewed.
Don't get me wrong. I've had no issues with reviews on any of my books. Even if I got a "bad" review, I would pay attention to it, but I wouldn't worry or argue about it. It is what it is.But I maintain that there are "reviewers" that get off on writing reviews because they want followers. Maybe they like the attention. Maybe they are trying to boost their readership so that they can go out and obtain advertising on their site. This is a mercenary as the "writers" who pump books out with no regard to proofreading in order to maximize income. It happens in both worlds.
Writers and reviewers should have a trusting relationship. Reviewers should expect the best work from writers and writers should expect honest , unbiased reviews. Both bodies of work are for the readers. Authors would like to get paid. Some reviewers want to get paid too.
Reputation of SPAs come from many directions, including some publishers that speak badly about them. Maybe it's because SPAs step on a lot of toes.
Roger wrote: "Don't get me wrong. I've had no issues with reviews on any of my books. Even if I got a "bad" review, I would pay attention to it, but I wouldn't worry or argue about it. It is what it is.But ..."
I agree with you 100% on this post. The only thing I want to add is Authors get their writing reviewed by the reviewers. The better authors try to learn from them to improve their art. Reviewers, on the other hand, are more often then not, given a free rein in what they write. I believe they hold the same responsibility to learn to do it correctly. The mercenary reviewers need to be called out just as much as the mercenary authors. When the authors do call them out, however, they are immediately attacked for it. To remedy this, more non-mercenary reviewers need to post replies to the bad ones to point out how to improve the way they write reviews. Of course, the mercenaries will ignore these, but it may help the ones who take what they write on reviews seriously.
Just my opinion here:The current realm of self publishing relies heavily on consumer feedback in the form of reviews. You want every review to read like Time Magazine wrote it? Well, I want every book to read like a team of professionals went over it. To bitch that reviewers are lazy is insulting and absurd. Amazon encourages customers to share their experiences in a written form for the benefit of other customers. They don't require a thorough, fair evaluation written by a fan of like products. I don't write editorial reviews, nor does the average GR member. If that's what authors are looking for, perhaps they should stop advertising on this site. We're just people providing an opinion on a product for others like us.
Linda wrote: "A review is a person's take on what she read, and it's going to be biased because of what the reader brings to the experience"Absolutely correct. I, as an author, expect this. That is why best-selling books get their fair share of negative reviews. Just to be clear, though, there is a difference between a good/bad review and a fair review. A fair review expresses why he/she did/didn't like the book. They give specifics that justify their opinions. This helps other people make informed decisions. Your rape example helps to illustrate this. Some readers would take offense at a graphic rape scene, and say so on a review. Other people who are like-minded would probably avoid the book because of this person's review. Others, who are not offended, would adjust the weight of the reviewer's comments accordingly. This review is fair.
An unfair review would be one based upon their dislike of the specific genre, or because the reviewer doesn't like the author personally, or even just states I like/dislike this book. The first two are obvious and shouldn't need any explaining. Let me explain the last, though. How can any reader know whether to trust a review if they don't know why they liked/disliked the book? We know nothing about the reviewer, and he doesn't explain why he has this opinion.
As for the SPAs who repeat their writing errors and refuse to change them, I'll have to take your word on that. I personally don't know any of these. The SPAs I know spend years of their lives perfecting their craft, trying to better their writing skills. Most have spent tons of their time and money getting as much feedback on their writing as was possible, and fought tooth and nail to break into the "Big 5 or 6", with no luck, while a teenage kid was able to leap right in because he was related to someone in the business. Whether you like her or not, J.K. Rowling was turned down by almost every publisher. She got lucky with Scholastic and went on to make a fortune as a writer. If she'd attempted Harry Potter today instead of back then, she'd probably be a SPA herself. If anyone truly thinks that there are not thousands of unpublished writers out there who are at the very least as good as her, then they are sadly mistaken. To make it into the Traditional Book Publishing houses today, you need to know someone, or be extremely lucky, despite being a talented writer.
And frankly, I'm not seeing too many books that interests me coming out of the Big 5 or 6 in my genre. SPA are giving me reading options I wouldn't otherwise have.
Linda wrote: "@Tom --You're kidding, right?"
No, I'm not. Here is why. The very first book I reviewed, I liked and said so. However, I used a poor choice in words to describe the book in my review. I said something like it was a mixture of a comic book and a Tom Clancy novel. I was younger, and had very little exposure to Mr. Clancy's novels. Needless to say, many Clancy fans replied to my review and stated their displeasure with my comparison. They were right in their sometimes harsh comments toward that review. Clancy and the other author were far different in writing subjects and styles. Even though I still like the book, I regret that my comparison may have caused Clancy readers to buy the book I reviewed and it was not what they expected. I learned to be careful in writing a review. I refuse to make the same mistake again. Some people corrected me back then, and I see no reason why people couldn't do the same for others now.
Jen wrote: "To bitch that reviewers are lazy is insulting and absurd"I don't expect a New York Times review from everyday readers. See my post on message 144 about what I expect. It talks about fair reviews vs. non-fair reviews. The reason most people post a review is to tell other readers (and most times the writer as well) what they thought about the book. Writing I did not like this book, and nothing else is lazy, and totally useless to everyone. Why even bother.
Below is a review from one of my novels, from an everyday reader. Let's look at it.
I found this story a good one and had trouble putting it down. It was hard trying to predict what was going to happen next, which is what I like about a good story.
This adventure takes you all over the planet Teardrop and has an interesting storyline. I could tell you some more, but then I would spoil a really interesting story.
The first paragraph tells me as a writer what I did right, and why other readers would like the book. The second paragraph tells a little about the story, and even creates a hook for the reader with a little humor to boot. It also gives the reader information that may help them to decide if they would be interested themselves. This was a fair review, and not just because it was positive. If the reviewer felt the exact opposite, and said that he had trouble wanting to keep reading and that the events were predictable, that would also be a fair review. Both give valuable information to anyone who reads the review.
I'd give an example of a review from an unfair, lazy reviewer, but I'm lucky enough not to have any so far. I hope what I've already said above makes my point about what constitutes a lazy reviewer clear.
If someone can't support their own opinion on a book they've read, why would they even bother to post it?
Linda wrote: "the reviewer has a gig on fiverr and charges $5 apiece to post reviews written by the author. ..."Those reviews are completely worthless too. It's sad that people actually pay for reviews. I wish there was a way to stop this because it hurts writers and readers alike. I'm even hesitant to offer a free copy of my book for a review. I really don't want to be one of those authors who put profit above integrity. Still, it is really hard to get people to review your work. One of my novels produced 4 reviews from a free promotional giveaway, while the next one didn't get a single review from a similar giveaway. What's an author to do?
I've found that I get very few reviews from the free days. In 1000 downloads I may get 1 on average. They will more likely come from people who bought it later.I'm not obsessed about reviews however. For me, just a few is enough. No reviews at all or only 1 bad review is the only bad situation.
Tom wrote: "Linda wrote: "the reviewer has a gig on fiverr and charges $5 apiece to post reviews written by the author. ..."Those reviews are completely worthless too. It's sad that people actually pay for ..."
Tom,
A reader will review a book they have read if and when they choose to do so. Those who wish to write an honest review and share their sincere thoughts about a particular book cannot be bought or bribed in any other manner.
Promote the book correctly and consistently, using time-tested and proven methods and tools, and the reviews will come.
Tom wrote: "If someone can't support their own opinion on a book they've read, why would they even bother to post it?"A variety of reasons, believe it or not. Just as some use ratings for their own organizational purposes, some might write: "This sucked," not for the author, not for other readers, but for their own reference. If they happen upon a forgettable book ten years from now, their review stands as a reminder not to waste their time again.
(Note that I'm not arguing whether this is right or wrong, I'm merely giving you an answer to your question. Not everyone is trying to spread the word one way or the other about any book.)
I thought of this as an appropriate example of an author telling a reviewer how to review.Many here are probably already well aware of this particular meltdown, but for those that aren't, skip down to the comments where the author of the book proceeds to absolutely tear into the review, complete with quotes pulled from the book and comparisons of himself to great writers past. All over it not being a proper "literary" review.
Sheesh. Some people.
Roger wrote: "I agree with you 100% on this post. The only thing I want to add is Authors get their writing reviewed by the reviewers. The better authors try to learn from them to improve their art. Reviewers, on the other hand, are more often then not, given a free rein in what they write. I believe they hold the same responsibility to learn to do it correctly. The mercenary reviewers need to be called out just as much as the mercenary authors. When the authors do call them out, however, they are immediately attacked for it. To remedy this, more non-mercenary reviewers need to post replies to the bad ones to point out how to improve the way they write reviews. Of course, the mercenaries will ignore these, but it may help the ones who take what they write on reviews seriously. "This is the kind of advice that lead to nuclear moments in Goodreads history with accusations of sock puppet accounts, and people believing the writer responsible for the trolls attacking other people's reviews. A big writer can take that hit, but small SPA's never recover unless they write under a new name.
If one more person brings up JK Rowling I will scream. She did not "get lucky" with Scholastic. She wrote a good book and had the perseverance to keep submitting it until somebody wanted it. Most of the staff at the other publishers who read it liked it and told her so, they just (erroneously) didn't think there was much market for it. Scholastic, with it's long track record with children's books, and children's fantasy in particular, thought it would have a decent run. It happened to succeed beyond their wildest dreams, but it's not so to claim that those early readers thought her manuscript without merit.
And I can tell you from experience that the only consideration an "in" with the publishing business will get you is someone willing to put your manuscript on top of the slush pile and make sure someone actually reads at least part of it. The answer may well be "It's well-written but there's no market." Or possibly even "it's dreck," unless you're really, really well connected.
The publishing industry is in it to make money. They are, by the nature of the beast, very cautious about taking chances, but it's simply not true to state that you have to be connected, famous, or already a well-known writer to get published. Talented writers may choose to self-publish for a number of reasons, but the inability of the industry and the public to recognize talent isn't one of them.
And reviews just aren't that big of a deal. The book that I've made the most money from has eight reviews, most of them saying, "this is cute but these dudes say dude a lot" and a 3.0 average. I'm not getting rich, but I am hoping it will send me on vacation.
The 4.5 star one that a number of people seem to think has serious literary merit might have made me ten bucks.
I agree that reviews aren't a big deal, at least they don't seem to be. My books sold better before I got reviews, even though almost all of the reviews were very good. I think too many readers have come to believe that all reviews above 3 stars came from buying or trading, and don't take them very seriously. It seems we may be better off without them.
The only reviews I like on my books are the ones that I know were written from what the reader thought, not what they felt I wanted to hear (read). Open, honest reviews have the possibility to be helpful, while puff reviews only hurt everyone involved.I have written for television in small and medium markets. Actually won a couple regional Emmy awards for my work as a writer and cameraman. Have written a couple novels and screenplays (none picked up by publishers or producers) and a few shorts stories, travel pieces, etc.. I was a newspaper writer for a short stint.
I started publishing on Amazon almost four years ago. Came late to the party, I guess. My first novel made me about $500. While my ego hoped for a blockbuster, my heart appreciated what readers I found. I had hope. My second book, a collection of nature essays on my own experiences over a 45 year period of my life, sold only a handful of copies. And my third book, nonfiction about my time living an off-grid life in Idaho wilderness, is doing decently, but not hit the $500 mark yet (after about 4 months on the market).
I write what I feel moved to write. I also need to make some additional money, as I am 57 and wanting to retire some day. I have lived a wanderers life, had a blast, and am lucky. If I get hit by a train tomorrow, I can honestly say, I had a truly great time here. But in case I live another 30, as is my hope... I may think more about writing what is popular, selling, even if with my own flare. I'd like to see what happens. Writing is fun and I think I am creative... so who knows.
I think you've all got it right here: if you want to be an artist and write from the gut, do that, and be who you are. If you are blessed, you'll have the talent and patience to find your audience, and the glory of true inner-expression. Soulful birthing. If you want to write to sell and make some money, look at it as a business/moneymaking venture, and get smart, look at what sells and how it sells. Try to do that. Find a passion in it.
I am still learning. And I'll still be learning when this is all over. I hope to learn how to create at least one good run of 30,000 to 50,000 sales. I'm not greedy. That would feel like the end of the rainbow for me.
Night you all. Happy dreaming.
Linda wrote: "@D.C. -- Exactly, especially with reference to Rowling.I think some of the comments upthread may be prompted by the "luck" of a certain teen-ager who struck it big because his parents were able t..."
And whoever at Harper picked up Fifty Shades is a genius. Not because it's a good book, but because they were able to recognize a terrible book that would sell well. By the way, I think I have unraveled at least some of the magical formula that led to its success.
Tom and RogerYou have a lot of demands when it comes to reviews and I thought you probably must have gotten some really bad ones to be this demanding of anyone reviewing your books. I went looking to see if there were real issues with the reviews you have received on this site.
Color me very surprised - Tom you don't have any reviews on this site and Roger you only have two and they're from the same person and both glowing 5*.
How can the two of you make demands and insult these readers over reviews you don't have. They haven't done anything. They weren't lazy or unprofessional, biased or simply really bad at reviewing - they haven't reviewed either of you.
There are people here who have spent a lot of their time on this thread to answer your comments. I think you need to explain yourselves.
Christine wrote: "Tom and RogerYou have a lot of demands when it comes to reviews and I thought you probably must have gotten some really bad ones to be this demanding of anyone reviewing your books. I went lookin..."
Christine, I don't know you, but you just became my hero.
Christine wrote: "Tom you don't have any reviews on this site "I never said I had any bad reviews. The reviews I do have are on Amazon. And I did not pay anybody for any of them. My comments about people who post useless reviews ("I hate/love this book" without taking the time to say why) are from what I have seen posted on books I didn't write, from the POV of a reader. I've seen this a lot while searching on Amazon for books I am interested in finding more about. So, don't go pigeonholing me as an author attacking reviewers. I'm mostly talking as a reader on this issue. Of course, as a writer, I am interested in what reviewers think of my work. I want to know what I'm doing right and wrong as an author. Totally ignoring reviews of your work, as suggested by someone else, is a totally bad idea. The moment a writer believes he cannot learn more about his craft, is the moment he becomes the type of author everyone else hates, an arrogant jerk.
And about the response to my Rowling comment, It wasn't about the quality of her work. It was about the absurd notion that only talent played a part in her getting published. I've talked with professional editors, and know for a fact that every submission to the big houses goes through quite a few people before anyone of any importance at the publishing company gets to see the manuscript. Any one of the people weeding out the slush pile could dump the manuscript, for whatever personal reasons they may have, including personal taste. And if someone actually knows somebody in a publishing house, they can bypass a lot of people in the weeding line, increasing the chance of getting the book accepted. Back to Rowling, I've read all the Harry Potter books, and loved them. Still, I remember when I read the first, I couldn't help but notice that I personally knew a few unpublished authors who had better written novels, with just as much selling potential, but never got them sold. So I stand by my point, an author's talent and the quality of his manuscript alone will not guarantee an author will get published. There is a huge element of luck involved. Denying this is just burying your head in the sand.
My wife had 3 books published in the traditional way, so I don't say this out of bitterness toward mainstream publishing. I do realize they are businesses out to maximize their profits, and they can only publish so many books in a given amount of time. I say this in defense of the SPAs out there that do have talent, that do write good books, and take the time and energy to do everything they can to polish their work prior to publishing. Just because someone self publishes, it doesn't mean they are as horrible as the people bashing the SPAs say. Yes, a lot of them are bad, but quite a lot of them are good. Judge them by the work, not by the stereotype.
Paganalexandria **wicked juices bubbling over** wrote: "Christine wrote: "Tom and RogerYou have a lot of demands when it comes to reviews and I thought you probably must have gotten some really bad ones to be this demanding of anyone reviewing your bo..."
It seems I forgot to broach this topic from your "hero" about my demands, so I'll do it here.
Actually, my demands are pretty small. If you take the time to post a review to say you like/dislike my book, or a book I'm considering to purchase, please tell me why you feel the way you do. I'm not asking for a college paper here. Just a few simple sentences to explain your feelings. I cannot fathom why anyone would object to that.
Ive said it before and Ill say it again: Authors have a public image to protect. You can't afford to take a scathing tone with a reader on a public forum. Whether your book is crap or pure gold, your comments will alienate potential customers.
Jen wrote: "Ive said it before and Ill say it again: Authors have a public image to protect. You can't afford to take a scathing tone with a reader on a public forum. Whether your book is crap or pure gold, yo..."I think you can be outspoken (I won't hide my opinions either), but I don't demand anything from my readers. No reviews, no feedback. I do enjoy feedback, so I encourage readers to send me emails, but I won't prescribe how they review my books for their friends.
TomAn unsolicited manuscript, sent to a traditional mainline publisher, will end up their trash bin, unread.
A member of the publisher's acquisition team will take the time to read a query letter from an aspiring author and, if they deem it worthwhile, will then request a copy of the manuscript.
Members of the publisher's editorial and management staff will determine if the manuscript has commercial potential. Then, and only then, will the aspiring author be offered a contract.
However, those with built-in commercial value, such as a well-known politician, athlete, entertainer, etc., or authors who have established themselves with a best-seller, are given preferred treatment by a publisher.
Tom wrote: "It seems I forgot to broach this topic from your "hero" about my demands, so I'll do it here.Actually, my demands are pretty small. If you take the time to post a review to say you like/dislike my book, or a book I'm considering to purchase, please tell me why you feel the way you do. I'm not asking for a college paper here. Just a few simple sentences to explain your feelings. I cannot fathom why anyone would object to that.
"
Tom, being a writer, I'm sure you understand the concept of tone. You DEMANDING anything was very off putting. Which is why Christine's post made my night.
Plus my Goodreads' review space is my space to journal my reading experience, not to please you or anyone else. A lot of authors forget that people use this site for various reasons. My Goodreads account was initially started to replace the spreadsheet I created to keep up with the books in my library, and what to purchase next. Those "reviews", were really short notes that would fit in in a printed excel sheet legibly. If someone read it, fine but really not for anyone else's benefit. Later after discovering the groups, I made online book friends, and now my review space has become an open source of my reading experience to give a heads up or warning of gems, and bombs found. If an author likes it, hates it, or loves it, not my concern.
I am not your beta reader, or your test dummy. If you want to use my rambling for that purpose, pay me. Then you can critique my product, the way I critique your product.
Tom wrote: "Paganalexandria **wicked juices bubbling over** wrote: "Christine wrote: "Tom and RogerYou have a lot of demands when it comes to reviews and I thought you probably must have gotten some really b..."
So you went on for hours on this thread when the problem was on Amazon? You have no reviews on this site, but this is where you complain?
How a reader reviews any book is up to them and basically none of your business. They already paid for the book - it belongs to them now and they don't owe the writer anything. Expressing their opinion for the benefit of other readers is the point. If you don't think they do it right - sorry - that's on Amazon. I'm sure the readers here don't care what you think.
You wore the author hat though out your comments. I question your motives and suddenly you're a reader. You have no respect for the members on this site - that's very clear.
Jen is right too - your attitude will alienate readers. They're not lazy or unprofessional - and they're not stupid. They recognize when they've been insulted and degraded on social media.
Jim wrote: "TomAn unsolicited manuscript, sent to a traditional mainline publisher, will end up their trash bin, unread.
A member of the publisher's acquisition team will take the time to read a query lett..."
Depends on the publisher, actually, although yes they will tell you that because they really don't want you to send them and if they do get thrown out unread? Oh, well. Because almost all of it is junk (some of it unbelievably bad), but there's always the fear that the next Harry Potter is buried in there somewhere. Many editors feel that's what interns are for (at least back in the day-the process may be a little different now in the digital age) but most of them won't get more than the first page looked at. Query letters don't necessarily get a whole lot more attention, particularly from unagented writers to major publishers, but the important thing with submissions is to check the publisher's guidelines.
I write specialty romance of a type that's pretty much only published by small and e-houses, but even there the process varies a lot. The publisher that I am with takes unsolicited manuscripts, and states that query letters are kind of a waste of time, because if they're interested they're going to want to see the whole manuscript anyway, so you might as well go ahead and send it. Others want a query letter and a few sample chapters. Or a query letter and the whole manuscript. Or just a query letter and then they'll see.
With the major publishing industry "in" will usually get you in front of that first pair of eyes, but it can be a difficult favor to solicit, because no-one ever wants to be the person who put some piece of utter junk on his or her boss's desk.
http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runnins... This is film, but the principle is pretty much the same.
Paganalexandria **wicked juices bubbling over** wrote: "Tom, being a writer, I'm sure you understand the concept of tone. You DEMANDING anything was very off putting. Which is why Christine's post made my night."Actually, it was you who used the word Demand first. You who set that tone. I only used that word in response to your use, a little tongue-in-cheek humor not as obvious as I'd hoped. The reality is, I don't really demand anything of a reviewer. My entire string a posts has been to address the a very few number of people who post reviews without saying why they liked and/or disliked the novel in question. I'll admit that I didn't specify that I was mostly referring to Amazon.com reviews, where I search for books I want to buy. I apologize for that oversight. If you read all of my posts, you'll see that I was not asking anyone to be my beta reader. The whole line of posts about reviews was about presenting a review useful to those it was meant for, people interested in the book in question. This also happens to include me as the author, if it is one of my books in question. Now, if you wish to use Goodreads as your personal database on your ratings of books you read, I have no problem with that. Go right ahead. More power to you. If you are doing so on sales sites like Amazon, however, don't you think that it is unfair to the people considering the purchase of that book? I personally would never do that. And asking for just a few sentences from a reviewer (on Amazon and the like) is far less demanding then asking people posting their opinions on threads like this to read your mind and adhere to your interpretation of what the tone of the posts should be. From the beginning, I've made sure not to make any of my posts personal attacks against anyone posting. This post is the exception, because you were personally attacking me.
You don't have to agree with my opinions, but please try to refrain from personal attacks while saying so.
Tom wrote: "Jen wrote: "To bitch that reviewers are lazy is insulting and absurd"I don't expect a New York Times review from everyday readers. See my post on message 144 about what I expect. It talks about ..."
See, I find that review pretty useless. It doesn't really tell me much about why the reviewer enjoyed the book.
Which is exactly the point. What may be considered important to you may not be important to other readers. So, "demanding" that reviews be written a certain way or questioning why someone would write a review that you don't consider helpful is simply tilting at windmills.
Goodreads Authors/Readers
Books mentioned in this topic
Home by Christmas (other topics)Juror 1389: Dorsie Raines Renninger (other topics)
The Snowflake Effect: How the Self-Esteem Movement Ruined a Generation (other topics)
A Clockwork Orange (other topics)
I think everyone who writes now has access to the tools to polish and proofread. There are lots of free tools available. I do agree that they may not know that the tools are available or where to get them. All of that is a part of learning the trade. It doesn't have to take money to do it.
Everyone wants to earn money for his or her creativity, but I think there are a small number of people who throw together novels as quickly as they can without regard to polishing and proofreading in order to flood the market with as many books as they can. These few hurt the reputation of all SPAs. That happens in every industry. I hope that the majority of people who read SPAs understand this, but there will also always be people who judge an industry by those few examples.
I believe the reputation of SPAs will improve over time as SPAs improve on their trade. I will always need to improve on mine and plan to keep learning. Those of us who do that will get attention from readers. It's up to us to make our own reputation.