Goodreads Authors/Readers discussion
II. Publishing & Marketing Tips
>
Do self-published ebooks have a bad reputation?
Jonathan wrote: " Secondly, we're not publishing houses"Thanks, your quote from my post nicely illustrates why indies need to use editors. You can't catch everything as you type.
Yes you are a publishing house, albeit a small scale one. That's the "independent" part of independent publishing. This, IMO, is the problem with some SPAs - they fail to see publishing as a business. You need start up capital (to PAY for an editor), a marketing plan, know your tax obligations etc.
Personally I see self publishing split into two camps. One has those who take it seriously, treat it as a business, work with professionals, put out a highly polished product and are rising to the top and making enough sales to write full time.
The other camp contains those who throw up unedited drafts (usually with home made covers) and then complain that their book isn't selling and that readers should cut them slack because they're indies, not large publishing houses.
Readers are deciding with their dollars which type of indie book they would rather purchase and its from the former camp, not the latter.
Tommy wrote: "But how many free copies are you having to give out to get a sale? In my experience, most people who download free ebooks are serial downloaders. They read maybe 1% of what they download."If you think about it, though, what have you really lost by giving away these books? Absolutely nothing. It's just data, after all, not a leather-bound physical book. And if these are serial downloaders, they weren't going to buy your book anyway, so who cares if they pick up the freebie? Let them inflate your download numbers and be happy that they're inadvertently helping you gain visibility.
Jonathan wrote: "I find bad writing and sloppy editing as repellent as everyone else here, and no one will drop a lousy book faster, but I do expect rough edges when reading self-published books."
While I agree that there may be a diamond in the rough somewhere (i.e. a fantastic book obscured by a poor cover), I have to say that I'm much more willing to pick up an eye-catching cover than one that appears homemade. Not because every book with a homemade cover is going to make me close the browser window within the first minute of reading, but because the people who do commit to hiring a cover artist to make something good are also likely those who committed to having someone look through their writing at least once, even if that other person isn't a "professional" editor. The probability is just overwhelmingly higher that theirs is a book worth reading because they've made a large commitment to its excellence, showing that they believe in their work as much as I should.
I have two editors. One to look over the story as a whole and for me to get feedbacks whether the story is interesting or not. He's not being paid though. The other is to look over the grammar and that the English made sense. I still haven't recouped my investment for the second editor though..
S. wrote: "I have two editors. One to look over the story as a whole and for me to get feedbacks whether the story is interesting or not. He's not being paid though. The other is to look over the grammar and ..."The whole return on investment question is the biggest problem for Self-Pub. Every time a professional is used the cost of production goes up with little hope that there is a return that will cover the cost in additional sales. That is the conundrum.
As a reader I am forgiving of SPAs on grammar and typo's far more than I am on plot and fact failings. Perhaps it is because as an SPA I don't want to throw those stones in my glass house.
After negative comments on my own work I invested in Professional editing. Excellent job done I thought by my editor. Impact on sales - zero. Just my experience and clearly some old reviews will hurt despite the product description and version changes to reflect editing.
There are on-going issues with Kindle downloads not updating which I am investigating, as a known recent purchaser appears to have got an older version. I am doing a detailed check as Amazon does not appear to be selling/downloading the updated version despite one being uploaded.
I am not complaining - I have reaped what I sowed. I appreciate that some readers are put off by descriptions, covers, typos, grammar etc, but for myself I hate bad plots, poor facts - far more. I am reading 2-3 books per week during my daily commute - nearly all are Kindle SPA efforts - trad-pub books are just too expensive for this rate of consumption. So, I have read a lot of free and 99c books. Yes some of them are poorly formatted, have bad grammar and have typos but so are trad books costing far more.
If readers think that 99c or less is too much then think about a different pricing level for SPAs compared to Trad pubbed. If a trad pub book has grammar and typos then it should be absolutely slammed in reviews.
If I buy a home made cake baked by children at a charity stall I do not compare it's looks (cover and formatting) to the cake from a bakery made by a master chef. I'll compare its taste and texture (plot and character). I also won't expect to get it for free or minimum price which seems to be the expectation for SPA books. If the market is prepared to pay the rate for entertainment consumption e.g. 2hrs of professional film movie = £10/$15 then surely it is prepared to pay the same for 4-5 hrs of reading experience - but apparently the market is not. Free, 99c and $2.99 seem to be the key price points. A guaranteed $10 price would allow me to invest in my product with professional services.
/rant
A.W. wrote: "Personally I see self publishing split into two camps. One has those who take it seriously, treat it as a business, work with professionals, put out a highly polished product and are rising to the top and making enough sales to write full time. The other camp contains those who throw up unedited drafts (usually with home made covers) and then complain that their book isn't selling and that readers should cut them slack because they're indies, not large publishing houses...."
I take some offense to the second part of this comment. Nothing is stark black and white.
Yes, writing can be a business if one chooses it to be so. However, the statement that high quality, professionally polished books are the only ones that readers will buy and give the author a profit is naive. In this thread, we talked about the trash that some people put out that sells, mostly because it deals with sex and/or porn. These people crank out poorly written, unedited books by the dozen and make a lot of money. They have a working business model, but not because of quality books.
To say that everyone else who does not hire professionals to create covers and provide editing services "throw up unedited drafts" is just insulting. There are many of us who cannot afford professional services but we work very hard at editing and try to put out a book that is as good as we can.
There are some authors who do have some talent in those areas as well as writing. I'm not saying I'm one of them, but I work hard at producing a good book.
Philip wrote: "S. wrote: "I have two editors. One to look over the story as a whole and for me to get feedbacks whether the story is interesting or not. He's not being paid though. The other is to look over the g..."I'd placed more weight on story and less weight on language for SPA. 70:30 perhaps. So unless if the sentence structure does not make sense, if the story is there, I don't mind reading it.
Roger,You said this:
"There are many of us who cannot afford professional services but we work very hard at editing and try to put out a book that is as good as we can."
Question: Why not try the traditional route? After all, if your writing is good, you should be able to find someone to foot the bill for the cover and editing. If no one is willing to foot the bill, maybe your writing isn't there yet?
I agree completely with this statement:
"However, the statement that high quality, professionally polished books are the only ones that readers will buy and give the author a profit is naive."
Tastes vary widely. A novel that I place in my top 10, you may hate with a purple passion. How does one define terms like "good" and "success" in this environment?
I have no real clue. If you can find an audience to purchase your books that's large enough to make it worth it to you, that pretty much sounds like the definition of "success." And who am I to judge if you're "good" enough if your readers have declared you to be?
If we accept the definition above, however, we also have to accept that, if we don't find an audience, maybe the market has judged us to be not good enough.
Thanks.
Brian
Maybe, for clarification's sake, we should ditch the term "traditional publishing" and go with "commercial publishing." Commercial publishers go with what they believe will sell, whether it's quality or not. It's all about what the mass market will buy, what's going to be the next big thing after sparkly vampires. Sometimes a quality, intelligent, challenging piece of literature makes the jump, but that is demonstrably NOT the impetus for being published commercially.
Sorry, not interested. I'm not up for having someone twiddle with my stories to make them more "marketable." Marketable is not synonymous with better. Commercial acceptance is not my definition of success, it's a sidebar, a fluke. I can't speak for Roger's take on it, that's for him to do.
Renee,I use the term "traditional publishing" to describe the process by which a author writes a book, gets an advance for it, and is then not responsible for the expense of editing, cover art, etc.
I'm not sure what your "clarification" gains us? Are you saying that there are no publishing companies that exist other than those who fit your narrow definition? That there are no companies who seek to put out a quality product - serving their customers while gaining a legitimate product?
I don't know anything about publishers, but, from the personal stories a lot of published authors have shared, I'd have to say that a lot of those authors would disagree with your assessment.
Renee wrote: "Maybe, for clarification's sake, we should ditch the term "traditional publishing" and go with "commercial publishing." Commercial publishers go with what they believe will sell, whether it's qua..."
Commercial acceptance is not my definition of success, it's a sidebar, a fluke.
Success -- each of has our own definition of success. Some SPAs are happy with just holding a book in their hands and have family and friends buy it. Others want to go for the gusto -- recognition, meeting their target of unit of sales, perhaps landing a traditional publishers.
I recently was a guest speaker at book club meeting that had combined their smaller groups together for this meeting -- 62 participants. Each brought Juror 1389: Dorsie Raines Renninger for signing. I answers questions, signed and sold an additional 20 signed books that would be given as gifts. Readers told me face-to-face how much they enjoyed my novel. Some pointed to sentences, phrases or scenes that struck a chord with them.
Did I feel successful? You bet I did! I had results to show my work was marketable, highly acceptable by the reading public and knew that my boots-on-the-ground marketing campaign was gaining more momentum.
All -- FYI I've never done a Kindle freebie. I did do a giveaway here. I don't do Facebook or Twitter or blog. I have a website. My manuscript was edited, at no cost, by a retired college creative writing professor. I've recouped my costs for outsourcing file conversions for upload to Create Space/Kindle/Nook. Four units sold paid for the cost of the photo image I used for the cover. All of these things combined resulted in me having a product that is selling to consumers who are part of a commercial market.
SPAs, whether want to admit it or not, ARE selling to the commercial market. Unless they're a SPA who is happy with having friends, family and a few strangers purchase the book.
Jonathan wrote: "♥♥♥Kristin♥♥♥ wrote: "I do everything myself. I don't like the idea of someone I don't know telling me what I should change in my book."I would have welcomed some editing assistance, but couldn't..."
I'm curious why authors feel they have to publish before they can afford editing. Is there a deadline? What time pressure is driving this? If it takes a couple of years to save up, it seems to me that those are years that can be spent revising, writing, and studying the craft of writing. The book won't suffer for it. At least, that's how I see it. The book will be all the more ready for editing.
Amber wrote: "Jonathan wrote: "♥♥♥Kristin♥♥♥ wrote: "I do everything myself. I don't like the idea of someone I don't know telling me what I should change in my book."I would have welcomed some editing assista..."
Amber,
Excellent observation and suggestion. The old saying, "Patience is a virtue." is still a valid . It is far better to wait until we can produce a quality product than expeditiously submit a shoddy one.
Brian wrote: "...Question: Why not try the traditional route? After all, if your writing is good, you should be able to find someone to foot the bill for the cover and editing. If no one is willing to foot the bill, maybe your writing isn't there yet?..."That's a valid question. There are many reasons why an author chooses SP or TP. Actually, I did send a few queries to agents at first, and they were rejected. The more I read about what agents wanted, the more I realized I probably wouldn't be a "good fit" for them. I don't write mass-marketable books.
Sure, I wish I did. Who wouldn't want to make millions by writing? My books don't neatly fit into one genre. I don't know they fit into the literary category. I don't write that way. I write the story and worry about where it fits in later.
To be fair, agents are busy people. They are as bombarded by would-be TPAs as Amazon is by SPAs. They have to make quick decisions on what will sell to the publishers. Do they miss good opportunities? Yes. Do they care about missing something? Most of them say no, because they have plenty of clients anyway.
Still, because you can't retain an agent is not a good reason for self publishing. Going the SP route should involve different factors. Does my work fit agent/publisher needs? Do I want fame as a traditionlly published author? Am I willing to give up the rights to my book? Am I willing to take a small advance and probably see nothing else on my first book? If my first book doesn't sell, will I be able to sell anything else? There are pros and cons for both TP and SP.
I chose SP not because I wanted to get it out there quickly. It took nearly three years to get my first book published. Two of those years were spent on editing. I wanted my work to stand on its own. I wanted to control how it was published and marketed. I believe ebooks are the future. There will always be people who will not pick up an ereader. Just like there are people who will listen only to vinyl records. But it is still the future.
Some famous writers started out as self published in the past. They were successful because they were persistent -- and good writers. Maybe they paid for editing, but they didn't sell books because they were edited professionally. They sold books because they were good writers who took the time to learn good writing.
I'm sure there were a lot of books self-published before ebooks that never went anywhere, just like the majority of ebooks that are self-published today that will not go anywhere.
Ok, I think I've rambled round and round enough. I'm getting dizzy.
Philip wrote: "If I buy a home made cake baked by children at a charity stall I do not compare it's looks (cover and formatting) to the cake from a bakery made by a master chef. I'll compare its taste and texture (plot and character). I also won't expect to get it for free or minimum price which seems to be the expectation for SPA books."You make an interesting point. I've never thought of it that way, though I think my conclusions differ from yours.
If an author believes his book is on par with those traditionally published and warrants a price to match, then it's reasonable for the reader to expect a professional product. If an author is not willing or able to commit the resources to that end, then he is putting out an amateur production.
That is not necessarily a bad thing. There is a role for community theater, local orchestras, children's charity bake sales, etc. Many of us probably participate in or support such things. But readers who are buying amateur books will likely expect a cheaper or free book. If they are willing to pay a higher price, it's for reasons that go beyond the book itself. People don't generally buy from bake sales because that's how they do their grocery shopping. They may enjoy what they bought, but they also find value in supporting the cause.
I think the confusion arises when authors try to be both. It's hard to claim a book is professional while expecting readers to excuse major problems. It's not really fair to complain that people spend money on a phone or coffee or whatever else has been mentioned in this thread but won't pay more for a book of questionable quality. You can't make people support a cause. Some will do it because they believe in it but it may be hard to build a profitable business on that.
Thomas wrote: "Tommy wrote: "But how many free copies are you having to give out to get a sale? In my experience, most people who download free ebooks are serial downloaders. They read maybe 1% of what they downl..."Thomas,
You hit the nail right on the head. Yeah, you worked hard on your story and you want to be paid for it like everyone else who works hard, but like you said, it's data. And how are they going to learn about you if you aren't willing to give something away?
And by giving away freebies, you get noticed where otherwise no one would have bought your book in the first place.
By giving away some of my books for free, now readers know who I am, word of mouth has spread, and now my sales are starting to reflect that. If you're not willing to make the sacrifices, how are you going to succeed?
Roger wrote: "Brian wrote: "...Question: Why not try the traditional route? After all, if your writing is good, you should be able to find someone to foot the bill for the cover and editing. If no one is willing..."Roger,
You say that you spend a lot of time editing because you want the best possible product. You also list an awful lot of reasons as to why agents didn't choose to represent you.
I guess I can't help but think, "Are you sure that the reason your book wasn't chosen was simply because it wasn't good enough?"
A lot of authors went through years and years and years of rejections before learning what it took to get accepted.
Truthfully, I'm in the same boat you are, with the exception that I plan to hire another editor before self publishing. If my editor tells me, however, that the book isn't ready, it'll be another major rewrite. I'm not going to rush it to market if it's not ready.
Sometimes a story can be wonderful but it just does not fit in with what's selling. A commercial publisher is in business to produce something that will sell, that will realize a significant ROI.
And to answer Brian: I'm not sure what your "clarification" gains us? Are you saying that there are no publishing companies that exist other than those who fit your narrow definition? That there are no companies who seek to put out a quality product - serving their customers while gaining a legitimate product?
Yes, there are. University presses, for one. They are publishing for the prestige of being associated with quality literature and have been, over the years, a haven for incredible works that no commercial publisher would have touched — because they didn't fit their commercial market, the ROI wasn't apparent.
I'd be far more gratified to be published by, say, the University of Iowa's press than Doubleday.
Amber wrote: "I'm curious why authors feel they have to publish before they can afford editing. Is there a deadline? What time pressure is driving this? If it takes a couple of years to save up, it seems to me that those are years that can be spent revising, writing, and studying the craft of writing. "Let me satisfy your curiosity - literature is not the sole preserve of the middle classes. Some of us do not have enough to set aside to give some vaunted editor guaranteed riches so that we can appease some false notion of validated quality and make 10% of what this quality editor wants paid. There has been talk on this thread of treating this as a business and yet I see clock cuckoo economics at play. The editorial costs (Fiverr aside) are vastly out of proportion to expected authorial incomes which are an average of £500 per annum whether published traditionally, on your own, or as a hybrid. The loudest talk about the need for expensive editing (not necessarily on this thread, but possibly so) comes from SPAs who can afford to throw good money after bad and yet don't make it big so want to keep the riff raff without money to burn out of the game. Sorry people, the revolution has already been televised and the working and non-working and disability benefit classes are not going back into the box.
Mercia wrote: "Some of us do not have enough to set aside to give some vaunted editor guaranteed riches so that we can appease some false notion of validated quality..."Statements like that make me afraid of trying your books.
Writing is a hobby. Publishing is a business. If you aren't in it for money, go to Wattpad. If you are, don't expect readers to invest their money if you won't.
Jim wrote: "Most skilled professions require a learning process, during which the person must first serve as a helper and then an apprentice. Only when they have learned the required skills and demonstrated th..."
Well said!
Well said!
Mercia wrote: "The editorial costs (Fiverr aside) are vastly out of proportion to expected authorial incomes which are an average of £500 per annum whether published traditionally, on your own, or as a hybrid. The loudest talk about the need for expensive editing (not necessarily on this thread, but possibly so) comes from SPAs who can afford to throw good money after bad "I don't agree with that. You do your research, you ask other authors who they use or you check the front matter of books you enjoy. There are many reasonably priced editors but sure, it takes work to find them. You should also avail yourself of their sample service (which most reputable ones should offer) where they do the first page or two for free so you can see if their work fits what you want. Also the good ones are often very busy so you have to be patient, you might have to wait 3+ months for a spot. Some indies have this driving sense of urgency and won't wait because it has to be for sale NOW! What's the rush? NaNo is nearly over and I can bet you there will be a rush of first drafts loaded to Amazon by the first week of December.
You can reduce editorial needs by having a great critique group. CPs, for example, can reduce the need for a developmental edit so you may only need a copy edit and proofread.
I don't "throw good money after bad" and I certainly don't have money to burn. I'm in this to generate income and pay my bills (probably like most people who write). I am fortunate in that I also have books published through a traditional publisher and this has given my insight to the process and I can access the same cover artists and editors who do freelance work. I do my research, I know my production costs, I have an idea (based on sales of my other books) how many weeks it will take to earn that back and start turning a profit. Royalties earned are then set aside to fund the next project.
The analogy was made of a homemade cake on a charity stall as opposed to a professionally made cake. But that doesn't work, unless you are suggesting there should be a different store for indie books, so readers know to have lower expectations when they shop there. For example, indie and traditional books alike sit side by side at Amazon. The vast majority of readers don't care who published a book, they just want their next read. We are all competing in the same market for readers and a sale. By having a professional product you are increasing your chances that the reader will click the buy button.
Mercia wrote: "Amber wrote: "I'm curious why authors feel they have to publish before they can afford editing. Is there a deadline? What time pressure is driving this? If it takes a couple of years to save up, it..."Mercia,
If your path is leading you toward success, then I say, "Fantastic! Congratulations! I hope you sell as many of your books as possible."
I'm rewriting a chapter in my manuscript right now that I thought was ready to be published. It's complete excrement. Had I published this pile of crap, I can't imagine that I'd have sold more than the standard five or so to those friends and family who cared enough to check it out.
After hiring an editor, I've found that my writing is much improved. If my writing is good enough, I'm confident that, if I put it in front of enough people, I'll gain an audience. If it's not good enough, then I won't.
I don't think you should hire an editor to fulfill some grand concept of creating adequate quality. I think that, if you're anything like me (and you may not be), the editor will improve your chances of success.
Best of luck to you.
Brian
With an editor or not, anyone can write a good book. If people don't like your book, then I guess that's just too bad for the person who bought it.
♥♥♥Kristin♥♥♥ wrote: "With an editor or not, anyone can write a good book. If people don't like your book, then I guess that's just too bad for the person who bought it."I guess that depends on your definition of "good." :)
Brian wrote: "♥♥♥Kristin♥♥♥ wrote: "With an editor or not, anyone can write a good book. If people don't like your book, then I guess that's just too bad for the person who bought it."I guess that depends on your definition of "good."
*like*
Mercia wrote: "The editorial costs (Fiverr aside) are vastly out of proportion to expected authorial incomes which are an average of £500 per annum whether published traditionally, on your own, or as a hybrid. The loudest talk about the need for expensive editing (not necessarily on this thread, but possibly so) comes from SPAs who can afford to throw good money after bad and yet don't make it big so want to keep the riff raff without money to burn out of the game."What bothers me most about people offering excuses for publishing shoddy workmanship, is how they're telling everyone they couldn't afford an editor but it's all a sham anyway.
Every business requires investing. An investment of money and/or time. If you don't have the money, you have to invest the time to learn how to do things yourself, or invest time in cultivating a network/friendship, with people you can trade skills.
I trade beta-reads with professional editors who cannot edit their own work, simply because they know they'll read what they think they wrote, not what's actually on the page. And since I'm a critical reader who won't pull punches telling someone what I didn't like about their work, they do the same to me. And, being editors, they cannot help themselves giving me invaluable editorial advice.
And some professionals enjoy my work and just want me to succeed, so they offer to beta-read for me. And I show my gratitude by writing the best stories I can.
♥♥♥Kristin♥♥♥ wrote: "With an editor or not, anyone can write a good book."Everybody can tell a joke, but that doesn't make them comedians.
Anyone can fill three hundred pages with words strung together in more or less coherent sentences, slap on a cover and call it a book.
A good book requires more than that. Just like it takes more than telling a joke to become a comedian.
♥♥♥Kristin♥♥♥ wrote: "If people don't like your book, then I guess that's just too bad for the person who bought it."
If someone doesn't like my books because they didn't read the blurb or sample or totally ignored the 'Amsterdam Assassin Series' in the title and then complained that the protagonist wasn't the kind of person they like to read about, I would take their criticism with a pound of salt.
If someone doesn't like my books because they were littered with craft issues, I would be totally embarrassed.
I make sure I turn out a book that can measure up to what traditional/commercial publishers put on the market, if only because I consider it a matter of personal pride that my work isn't sub-par garbage intended to turn a quick buck.
Darlene wrote: "I wish people would use the Look Inside feature! Smashwords also allows a partial download, which I think is a bit more than the Amazon sneak peek..."Smashwords lets you decide the % of the preview, anywhere from 0-100%. Amazon's Look Inside uses an algorithm based on the length of the work. Longer works get longer previews. I haven't seen where amazon lets you alter that.
Brian wrote: "...I don't think you should hire an editor to fulfill some grand concept of creating adequate quality. I think that, if you're anything like me (and you may not be), the editor will improve your chances of success...."I think hiring an editor will not definitely improve your changes of success, but it definitely can. A beautifully edited book can sit at the bottom of Amazon's pile just as easily as a horrible mess. It takes more than just good content and editing to make a book a financial success.
That being said, given that all other things are equal, I whole-heartedly agree that a well written book, professionally edited and professionally covered, stands a much better chance at success. If all SPAs would produce that kind of book, there would be no respect issue and no need for this thread.
Now, that being said, I still don't agree that a writer has to hire a professional editor in order to put out a good, if not equal to a professional, quality book. I'm not saying everyone can do it. Maybe only the top 1% of writers can, but it can be done.
However, we shouldn't assume we have that ability. I don't assume that about myself. As I said, I would love to employ a good editor and cover artist. I would if I had the money to do so, but the bills and necessities of life come before this part-time profession. It just isn't in the budget. That's the way it is. If that changes, I will gladly hire the professionals.
Would professional work help the majority of SPA books? Yes. Are all SPAs going to use professional editors? Probably not. Is that what causes any kind of lack of respect for SPAs? I don't think so. Almost always, the behavior of a small group hurts the majority of people. There are badly written, poorly edited books that hurt SPA reputations, but I don't believe these come from the majority of SPAs.
Notice that everyone seems to be talking like editors all have some sort of arcane ability to improve anyone else's story, regardless.Editors don't always get the story they're editing, or they don't have a grasp of what the writer's aim was (like being true to the story vs. making it *sellable*) and wind up screwing it up.
Sometimes writers do get it right — with a little help from their friends. And a helluva lot of effort. There is no "one answer fits all."
I have to admit in the beginning when I first released my self published novel it wasn't the best. However the beauty of amazon KDP is that you can rerelease your work and correct any bad mistakes. Some authors are a bit fearful of correcting work because they feel that they are cheating people who have already brought their books, no you’re not. You are just simply improving on your work so new people can download your work and enjoy it. I have received no complaints from people so far and I am on the third edition of my book. Its not perfect but it doesn’t contain any glaring mistakes that stand out.As for self published authors getting a bad rap, that’s down to the mainstream publishers. They hate self published authors simply because we are stealing their thunder. There are plenty of indie authors out there who are doing very well out of self publishing. Its estimated that mainstream publishers are losing millions to self published authors who are going it alone.
Good luck to all self published authors.
Jason wrote: "I have to admit in the beginning when I first released my self published novel it wasn't the best. However the beauty of amazon KDP is that you can rerelease your work and correct any bad mistakes...."Why wasn't it 'the best'?
I have updated my books on Amazon to remove a few typos and to update information in the back matter (new book in the series, et cetera), but if a book requires structural corrections (plot, characters, story line), it is 'prematurely published' and, in my opinion, should be pulled from publication. Not repaired while being on sale. You don't publish a 'work-in-progress', you sell a finished product, and you have to be absolutely sure that your book measures up to general book standards, at the very least.
I have fixed typos as well. But I can also see how people's writing progresses over time. Is your first book as good as your later books? probably not. My first book was terrible and I refused to publish it. But I also recognize that the more I write, the more I improve.Honestly, I have read some small press books that are TERRIBLE and after seeing what my friend went through.. and the finished product, I say no way. I am happy with things as is.
Jason,"As for self published authors getting a bad rap, that’s down to the mainstream publishers. They hate self published authors simply because we are stealing their thunder."
I'm sorry, but that statement just doesn't hold water for me.
SPAs get a bad reputation because there are too many people publishing complete crap.
"Martyn V. (aka Baron Sang-Froid) wrote: "If you don't have the money, you have to invest the time to learn how to do things yourself..."It's kind of like the old software developing axiom: "We can develop this quickly, inexpensively, or to a high level of quality...Pick two."
Many SPA slect quickly and inexensively because they don't have the funds to do it expensively, and don't have the patience, inclination, talent, and/or critical awreness to do high quality.
That's fine. Except that people tend to lump all SPA in together...as we've seen throughout this thread.
Micah,"That's fine. Except that people tend to lump all SPA in together...as we've seen throughout this thread."
I think that the problem is the bell curve. The vast majority of all self published work is, by definition, average. That average, unfortunately, is of poorer quality than the average traditionally published work.
On the top end, the few "good" self published books compare quite well with "good" traditionally published stuff. There is so much being published, however, that it's hard to find the good stuff in the midst of so much chaff.
The vast majority of all published work is, by definition, average.There, FIFY. ;-)
Renee wrote: "The vast majority of all published work is, by definition, average.There, FIFY. ;-)"
Whether you're talking about self published, traditionally published, all lumped together, or any subset you wish to examine, the bell curve says that the vast majority is average.
Jason wrote: "As for self published authors getting a bad rap, that’s down to the mainstream publishers. They hate self published authors simply because we are stealing their thunder. ... Its estimated that mainstream publishers are losing millions to self published authors who are going it alone..."I don't know who told you this - but they lied to you. Your statements have no basis in fact. Traditional publishers are making money as always and have little or no concern about SPAs stealing their "thunder". They don't hate SPAS and don't put them down. They adapted their offerings by adding e-books and are now recovering much of the lost ground due to the huge initial impact of this medium.
I would say the reputation of SPAs is well deserved in most cases. Unedited and unprofessional work is being thrown into the marketplace daily. Doing the politician's "thing" of mud slinging at the perceived competition is truly sad. TPAs don't care. They're holding their own and will continue to keep and expand their readership with professional business models.
It always fascinates me, how many SP writers have put out pure crap and when their reputation suffers, they blame everyone but themselves.
I think that, as an author, it's good to be able to see both sides of an argument. After all, presenting the antagonist's POV realistically makes for a fully rounded character.I must admit, however, that I have a hard time understanding the opposite side in this debate.
There are those authors who decide that, economically, it just isn't worth it to "perfect" novels. If the amount of time necessary to edit a book fully doesn't provide the same compensation for penning new work, I can see not spending the extra time. It's not the choice I would necessarily make, but I understand it.
What I don't understand are the people who seem to believe that "good" doesn't seem to exist in terms of books.
My thinking:
1. Any human endeavor requires learning. Even Michael Jordan didn't step on a court and automatically acquire the ability to dominate a basketball game. He had to put in time and effort to become an NBA all star.
2. Writing, as a human endeavor, requires learning.
3. If something requires learning, it's a task that one gets better at over time.
4. If you can get better over time, one obviously wasn't as good at the beginning.
5. If one wasn't good at the beginning, one could be termed as "bad."
Thus, logically, it seems that there is "good" and "bad" writing. Thinking that one's debut effort as an unedited SPA compares to a work of an established master of craft, to me, seems delusional.
The Other Side's Thinking (to the best of my ability to discern):
1. Judging writing is completely subjective.
2. If the judging is subjective, there can be no objective standards.
3. If there are no objective standards, no writing can be termed as "good" or "bad."
4. Since there is no "good" or "bad," everything is good?
To which I answer:
agbawtgj0pjhgi'63 jatijhntg i0-qyj qT9OW40A
which, since everything written is "good," is a fantastic rebuttal.
I don't know. I must be missing something...
Brian wrote: "Thinking that one's debut effort as an unedited SPA compares to a work of an established master of craft, to me, seems delusional..."We are talking about humans here. There's no lack of delusion when it comes to that species.
But also, you have to realize that SPAs cover a huge range of people. For example, a friend of mine has a nephew who published his first book at age 13. He wrote it longhand and had relatives type it, edit it, and then he did the front cover. Obviously, it's not a professional work.
So included in the SPA category, you've got everything from teens (probably pre-teens as well) writing naive fantasy stories, to octogenarians telling their life's story, to seasoned authors who used to be TPAs and already have large fan bases. And, yes, you also have delusional egotists who used to be confined to the vanity press scam culture. All these different factions have different reasons for publishing, and expectations of what they will accomplish.
The technology of publishing and distribution now makes no distinction between these levels of writers...and it lumps all of these into a shopping experience that includes, and again makes no distinction between, TPAs.
So the onus has fallen on the reader to sift through all this. That's where things like the Look Inside feature on amazon come into play. Non-professional reviews are arbitrary, subjective, and notoriously unreliable measures of a book's worth.
I don't think readers have quite caught up to the mindset shift that this new model requires. Traditional publishers are having a hard enough time adjusting themselves, and really they should have been the ones leading the digital revolution.
And as for us...well, in discussing the reputation of SPAs and how SPAs "should" do things, we really need to try and not assume all SPAs are in the same boat with the same goals and expectations.
Micah,"And as for us...well, in discussing the reputation of SPAs and how SPAs "should" do things, we really need to try and not assume all SPAs are in the same boat with the same goals and expectations."
TPAs who have a huge audience and are now self-publishing are typically referred to a "hybrid authors," are they not?
As to the quote above, though, I don't understand what good breaking SPAs into categories does? Even if there are good authors out there self publishing, SPAs have earned their reputation as a group. Shouldn't the message to that group be consistent?
Right now, the message seems to be, "Write whatever you want, and hit Publish." If the message, instead, were, "Master your craft, write something good, and hit Publish," wouldn't the reputation of the group as a whole improve?
The 364 messages posted on this discussion thread to-date have muddied the waters quite a bit by straying off-topic.The title of the thread is "Do Self-Published E-Bookds Have a Bad Reputation?". An unambiguous question.
Having carefully reviewed all of the posts, the answer seeems to be "yes!".
Brian wrote: "...I don't understand what good breaking SPAs into categories does? Even if there are good authors out there self publishing, SPAs have earned their reputation as a group. Shouldn't the message to that group be consistent?Right now, the message seems to be, "Write whatever you want, and hit Publish." If the message, instead, were, "Master your craft, write something good, and hit Publish," wouldn't the reputation of the group as a whole improve?"
You're missing my point. I'm not saying SPAs should be broken up into categories, I'm saying that they already are by their very nature. There is a vast sliding scale of people self-publishing. That's fact. They do not all share the same goals and expectations.
So lumping all of them into one category and saying that each and everyone of them should do X, Y, and Z before they publish is unrealistic.
That doesn't mean that people don't judge all SPAs' as a whole--unfair as that actually is--but I don't think there's much anyone can do about it other than strive for quality in one's own work.
I also don't think that "the message right now seems to be, 'Write whatever you want and hit Publish.'" Because I don't actually see that message out there, except perhaps in some forum comments, and that's the opinion of individuals, not "the message."
Anyone truly interested in writing as a career is going to research it. If you do that, the message you see is "Strive for quality work; quality triumphs in the end."
The message is already out there. But not all SPAs are:
1) Interested in writing as a career.
2) Logical or mature enough to realize they need to research and learn the business.
3) Self-aware enough to realize their work sucks and could use a lot of work.
4) Serious about either the art or business of writing/publishing.
And the way the publishing/distributing system works, no matter how much we jump up and down demanding SPAs do a better job, people who fall into the above are not goign to listen.
What we're left with is each author striving to achieve their own reputation. SPAs are kind of like used car salesmen in that regard...they get little respect from the public as a whole, but there are some good ones out there.
Brian wrote: "TPAs who have a huge audience and are now self-publishing are typically referred to a "hybrid authors," are they not?"I'm not sure. To me, an hybrid would be ones like Hugh Howey now, who do both self-publishing AND traditional side by side.
People like J.A. Kontrath, however, began with traditional publishing and then switched to self-publishing. There are quite a few mid-list authors who have gone that route.
Micah,Perhaps if this message:
"Strive for quality work; quality triumphs in the end."
were put out there more consistently and stronger, more of the people in your categories would see it. At some point, it might even start to sink in a little bit.
You write:
Because I don't actually see that message out there, except perhaps in some forum comments, and that's the opinion of individuals, not "the message."
Truthfully, I see that message on a lot of writer forums. Just to be clear: a lot of writer forums.
Finally, if we're talking about telling people what they should do and, in fact, it would be better for the people to actually do it, shouldn't we continue to tell them even if they won't listen? It's kinda like voting - even if your one little vote doesn't mean a whole heckava lot, you lose your right to complaint if you didn't show up at that booth.
As for traditional publishers being afraid of self-published authors, I think there's only a grain of truth in that.They are afraid of self-publishing in general, but not of most SPAs specifically. What they fear are their big-named authors defecting because they have lucrative audiences, pretty much guaranteed sales, and stand to make a LOT more profit if they dump their traditional publishers.
I think evidence of this is best seen in the comments traditional publishers made in book/publishing conferences when the subject of self-publishing came up.
Until fairly recently, all the talk of self-publishing at book/publishing conventions from publishers and agents was basically trash talking self-publishing, smearing it with vanity press epithets.
Their fear was expressed in scorn and derision.
However...I don't think that really bled over into the general public. The reputation of SPAs is much more about what's been discussed here so far: the general lack of quality in it.
Brian wrote: "I see that message on a lot of writer forums..."That's almost like saying "I see [whatever] message in a lot of youtube comments." Almost...not quite, but almost! [joke]
I'd bet that writers forums everywhere are about 95% SPAs placating themselves with advice they want to be true. Blind leading the blind.
I'm an SPA, BTW. I should know!
Martyn V. (aka Baron Sang-Froid) wrote: "Jason wrote: "I have to admit in the beginning when I first released my self published novel it wasn't the best. However the beauty of amazon KDP is that you can rerelease your work and correct any..."The book was ready when it came to plots and story, I had to clean up the grama and typos. Its currently doing well on Amazon.
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 was. You nailed it. Thanks.