Goodreads Authors/Readers discussion
III. Goodreads Readers
>
Why don't more people read Self-published authors?
Lisa wrote: "Dave - You could equally say that it's hard to pay for an editor without money. But that would be the same thing as saying it's hard to be a photographer without a camera. Or it's hard to be an e..."
Lisa,
You are so right. I was lucky enough to have photographers and graphic designers as friends willing to help me out in order to add to their portfolio. But not everyone is as lucky.
Despite that assistance, I had to scrimp and save (eating Ramen and pb&j sandwiches for almost six months) in order to afford my editing services, marketing items, and copies for promotion.
Publishing a book isn't only about having a good idea. It isn't just about being able to write it well. Publishing is the entire package - idea, writing, editing, artwork, and marketing.
(All Hail) Grimlock wrote: "Mary wrote: "Ya know... I really thought coming on Goodreads was going to help me as a writer. Over the years I have garnered NOTHING but criticism designed to break my spirit as a writer. What I've found is y..."No words."
IKR? Yeah, I'm an odd duck but in my profession, I always took criticism as a sign of someone interested enough to help me to be even better. Otherwise, why would they waste their time/breath? I'm sure that those folks had plenty of other things to do. :(
ETA: Given the length of this thread, would like to state that I'm not an author nor do I have any aspirations to be one.
Regina... No wrath, just chagrin. I DO wonder tho. I was instructed by my publishing Co that I could not sell it for under $18.20. I agree, the price is too high. What I'm seeing, tho is that I have received NOTHING but criticism...not ONE positive comment. It makes me wonder (again, as I have since my first rejection at about age 18) is it really that bad? When it's like that...you just go with your gut, and your energy.
Mary wrote: "Ya know... I really thought coming on Goodreads was going to help me as a writer."How? What did you expect?
Can anyone remind me what this thread was originally about?
I think it had something to do with the seasonal mating patterns of the aardvark. ;)
How did I post something -59 minutes ago? Does that mean I've somehow traveled into the future?
Elle wrote: "It seems that either people love to read self-published authors, or they refuse to. Why do you or don't you read self-published authors? Likewise, if you find a book that looks good but you find ou..."To comment on the original post for this thread, I read a mix of both traditionally published and self-published authors. I've seen the best and the worst of both from what I can tell--some traditionally published books are fraught with typos and grammars while some self-pub'd books have been concisely edited and beautifully written. I've found several SPA's that have become new favorites of mine. Because of this, I don't think that the method by which one is published should be a deterrent to potential readers. I usually let the reviews I read and the jacket copy/book description help me decide what my next read will be :)
D.L. wrote: "Mary wrote: "Ya know... I really thought coming on Goodreads was going to help me as a writer. Over the years I have garnered NOTHING but criticism designed to break my spirit as a writer. What I'..."I wanted to add to this.
What may seem as negative remarks are what would have been said, spotted, and pointed out by editors if they were published by a publishing house. That is the job of an editor if I am not mistaken. So by self publishing, the editor is a cost burden most skip over and thus the public, who spent their money on thinking it was a published item, become the illegitimate editor. Well except they don't get the pay and they even paid out more so in their pocket books then others (why does this sound so britsh like -Hm). But that is just my thoughts on the matter.
Linda wrote: "Mary wrote: "Regina... No wrath, just chagrin. I DO wonder tho. I was instructed by my publishing Co that I could not sell it for under $18.20. I agree, the price is too high. What I'm seeing, th..."D.L. wrote: "Mary wrote: "Ya know... I really thought coming on Goodreads was going to help me as a writer. Over the years I have garnered NOTHING but criticism designed to break my spirit as a writer. What I'..."
I apologize for whining.
D.L. wrote: "Mary wrote: "Ya know... I really thought coming on Goodreads was going to help me as a writer. Over the years I have garnered NOTHING but criticism designed to break my spirit as a writer. What I'..."I apologize for the negativity.
Joe wrote: "How did I post something -59 minutes ago? Does that mean I've somehow traveled into the future?"You are the chosen one, Joe. Yer a wizard.
I have to admit, until I became a self-published author myself I didn't even realize the wealth of incredible talent out there. And I've met some amazing people by reading their book and looking them up on facebook to tell them that I enjoyed it!
I see. If only I would use my abilities for good instead of evil.
The lesson to be derived from criticism, whether it be constructive, positive, negative, or even hurtful, is that it is an opinion; and one opinion is as good as another.Learn from each criticism and become better at whatever you do.
Joe wrote: "I see. If only I would use my abilities for good instead of evil."Who said you had to?
Break open the champagne. I sold another one. Once again excuse the moodiness and thin skin. I've learned it will never go away. I'm now up to 35 sold in about a month.
When I was only a reader, it never occurred to me to check out if an author was self-published.Now that I am an author, it still doesn't matter to me. It's a striking cover, a well-written blurb, and a strong opening that get me to buy. If a book passes my criteria and I buy it, I am happy to be pleasantly surprised.
Linda wrote: "When there are plenty of e-books available for $6.99, $3.99, $0.99, and FREE, pretty much no one in their right mind is going to plunk out twenty-five bucks for a paperback novel. Not from a traditional publisher, and certainly not from an unknown, self-publishing author."
On that particular point, I have to agree. Production costs do not dictate what the market will actually pay, and realistically the market will not pay that much for something unless it is something special (or a something like a specialist academic work, for example). For that kind of price you can pick up a signed hardback from an established author like Dean Koontz - the number of people who are going to pay that kind of price for a paperback book from an unknown and self-published author is likely to be very close to zero.
The production costs don't matter at all - the vast majority of purchasers doesn't care. If you can't price competitively, you need to seek an alternative, which is why so many self-publishers go with ebooks rather than physical ones (even if they also offer physical ones at a higher price). Pricing always has to be about what the market can stand.
Lynda wrote: "Martyn wrote: "...people like my comment/article and click on my avatar/signature and find their way to my blog/website, where they find out that I write suspense fiction. ... I think that works mu..."I understand what you mean, Lynda. I am a SP author, yet I'm turned off by the 'Buy my book!' authors. I want interaction. I want a relationship. All of ur time is precious, and many of us do not have as much time to interact online as we'd like to have (with hectic lives), but something would be appreciated.
Like you, however, I've found several new SPA's on forums here that I'm now interacting with, have enjoyed what I've read of their work thus far, and have also began helping to promote. Some of them have taught me things I didn't know as well. A win for all, I believe, with only a few minutes of time and a genuine lack of self interest.
LOL. True. I tend to rate high, perhaps. But I only read books they're enjoying. If it doesn't grab me, I r..."
In the past, I've been accused of rating low. I try to qualify my rating system with an explanation, but people still seem to get upset.
To me, a three star review is good. Many don't seem to see it that way. I rarely rate above a 4.5, for example, even if I thoroughly enjoyed the book (and it was pristine of errors). Some believe my lack of willingness to give a 5 star rating is harsh. I don't.
In the game of rating, it is distinctly personalized.
B.C. wrote: "LOL. True. I tend to rate high, perhaps. But I only read books they're enjoying. If it doesn't grab me, I r..."
In the past, I've been accused of rating low. I try to qualify my rating system wi..."
Next time you rate a story, rate it a sack of puppies out of five, just to see how the author responds.
I apologize for going off topic, but since we're talking too-high prices and subsequent low sales, I'm gonna go there for a moment. Sorry in advance.Mary...others...long story short, I wrote a huge toe stubber of a story. It was far too long and too cost prohibitive to print it as one thing. So I broke it up into reasonable-sized smaller works and made a series instead. Kept cost down to a manageable level. Also, I understand series sell better.
You kind of have to do a little number crunching before you commit to page numbers and whatnot to figure out what you can sell the finished product for. Nobody's going to pay nearly twenty bucks for a trade paperback from an unknown writer. At retail of 14.99, mine is still too high. However, since I paid for extended distribution (which was like 20 bucks, not much) and various distributors undercut each other, it waffles between about eleven and thirteen bucks on Amazon. I don't sell a ton of them, but I do sell some. The vast majority of my sales are for Kindle. Still, it's a nice thing to have and adds a little cred to your work. And there's artwork in my books, so some people like to have that as a paper copy.
Mary, I would consider re-publishing your stuff as multiple smaller, less pricey works rather than one big expensive one if I were you. It might help your sales.
We now return you to your regularly scheduled thread.
B.C. wrote: "LOL. True. I tend to rate high, perhaps. But I only read books they're enjoying. If it doesn't grab me, I r..."
In the past, I've been accused of rating low. I try to qualify my rating system wi..."
My wife and I were discussing this issue the other day. A got a 4 rating and was disappointed. After thinking about it, a 3 would be average and anything above that should be considered a positive.
You also have to keep in mind that your book just simply might not appeal to someone. They might hate it for some reason that has no reflection whatsoever on your writing. When you put yourself out there, you just have to brace yourself and grow a thicker skin.I know that's hard. We're talking about your heart and soul and countless excruciating hours of your life. I get it.
But at the end of the day, the reasons people like or hate something are infinitely varied. And a four, from someone who owes you nothing and has no reason to coddle you, is pretty awesome. :-)
Cozen wrote: "D.L. wrote: "Mary wrote: "Ya know... I really thought coming on Goodreads was going to help me as a writer. Over the years I have garnered NOTHING but criticism designed to break my spirit as a wr..."Cozen,
why were other people paying out after the other for the same book. (You used then instead of than.)Sorry to use you as an example but it is a classic mistake.
Mary,
Those are the kind of little mistakes people see and an editor will catch. It is those kind of errors that will sometimes throw a more particular reader off. The only thing that will cause a reader to not give a good review on a well written book is if they didn't like the story. (In well written I mean a book with few grammatical errors a decent plot and minimal holes.) I understand that a copy-editor can be expensive and an editor to help with the plot even more so. But, they are almost required for your books to be very well received until you know what to really look for yourself. Using resources such as the Chicago Manual of Style, a thesaurus, and a good dictionary should help with most of the issues you come across.
Next, read as many books in your chosen genres as you can. Learn what works as a plot in that genre. Then write, rewrite, and rewrite again. Once your happy with it, put it down for a couple of months and rewrite again.
Pricing is a very important tool. Make sure you get the best pricing you can from your printer so you can sell it as cheap as you can. It is hard to compete with trad pub books that are selling for half your price. With my books, both paperbacks are priced on the high side. I try to steer people to the hardbacks (which are better priced compared to trad pubs in the same genre) or eBooks which are less than $5.
Next cover art, make sure it is the best you can get. If you have a friend or family member that is an artist AND they are good, use them to draw or manipulate free pictures for your cover. You can also find art majors in college. They are always looking for projects and if they are getting a grade they will work that much harder to make it the best in the land. The old adage of not judging a book by its cover is a lie. Every book is judged by its cover and its cover copy.
Feel free to review my books, they are not the best in the world but they are in the top 25% IMHO. No comments Grimlock about how that isn't very hard either.
Good Luck with your endeavors as an author and keep quality job 1 (trademark Ford Motor Company)
J.T. Buckley
Elle wrote: "Wow, I am so happy to hear how many people enjoy reading self-published work. I moderate a group called "Connecting Readers with Writers" on here, and I have a lot of self-published writers who fee..."I'm going to have to check out your thread.
Dave wrote: "My wife and I were discussing this issue the other day. A got a 4 rating and was disappointed. After thinking about it, a 3 would be average and anything above that should be considered a positive. "The 1-5 I find is a bit restrictive, as a lot of books I would rate about 3.5 which cannot be done. I only give 4 to books I really liked, as 5 is for books I LOVED!!! so 3 has to be sort of OK, pretty enjoyable, but had something
a bit lacking - so not something bad as such. Mediocre in the real sense of the word, not as an insult as it tends to be used, or otherwise good and bad in balance, some really crap bits, some good.
2 is crap with some redeeming value, for example if it was a SP and just nonsense plot and blindingly dull characters, I would give 2 if it had no typos and grammar mistakes in every page, so one gold star for at least making an effort. Unfortunately there is no option for 0 stars as sometimes it galls me to have to give the 1! This goes for some 'really' published books as well. I am also not objective and cool, if I hate a book for some reason I will give it 1 star.
Uh, that was not the comment I came here to make, I had this in mind about sharing your work: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs...
XD
Joe wrote: "I was calling it "No Sales November" until somebody bought a copy and ruined it for me. Gah! ;)"Above is my lesson of the day.
Got to admire a struggling author who can keep their sense of humor.
Dave wrote: "B.C. wrote: "LOL. True. I tend to rate high, perhaps. But I only read books they're enjoying. If it doesn't grab me, I r..."
In the past, I've been accused of rating low. I try to qualify my rat..."
I only give a book a five star rating if I never tire of reading it, and I've given many great books a four star.
This is the reason I hesitate to rate indie books. I want my ratings to be honest, but don't want to risk hurting an author's sales.
Hehehe, I try not to let it get to me. The 4 reviews I have on Amazon show that people generally like the book. There just aren't a lot of people who know about it. That's fine. I imagine that will eventually change. I'm working on getting it more reviews, and we'll see where it goes from there.
(All Hail) Grimlock wrote: "J.T. wrote: "Cozen wrote: "D.L. wrote: "Mary wrote: "Ya know... I really thought coming on Goodreads was going to help me as a writer. Over the years I have garnered NOTHING but criticism designed..."and that percentage is PURELY unbiased and I meant of Self Published. top 50% overall ;)
Loren wrote: "Dave wrote: "B.C. wrote: "LOL. True. I tend to rate high, perhaps. But I only read books they're enjoying. If it doesn't grab me, I r..."
In the past, I've been accused of rating low. I try to q..."
But how are they to know their books are not up to the readers'expectation of quality. They will continue to think their product is worth selling even if it is not.
Mary wrote: "Ya know... I really thought coming on Goodreads was going to help me as a writer. Over the years I have garnered NOTHING but criticism designed to break my spirit as a writer. What I've found is y..."Mary -
If people are investing their time to try to help you get better, that's free coaching that you are not listening to. They're not trying to break your spirit. They're trying to help you. They could instead be helping the many other writers out there who desperately crave suggestions, if you're not interested.
It doesn't sound like you're listening to the advice.
If you keep doing what you're doing, you're going to keep getting the results you're getting. If you're fine with those results, then enjoy them.
A lot of good conversation here.On the topic of ratings, I think it's fair to say that most of us, in school, would have been miserable with a 50% grade on a paper. Our parents would have punished us for that. That grade isn't "average". It's a sign of something which barely meets the minimum requirements of what should be in the product.
I wouldn't agree that a 50% rating on a book is a good thing. We are trained from childhood to see ratings in a certain way. If one person comes along and says "I want 1s to be great and 5s to be awful" sure they can say that but they can't expect others to be happy with how that then alters the standard rating system that everybody else has agreed on using.
I do wish we had a 1-10 scale in most systems rather than just a 1-5. In my years of doing reviews there are many times that I really think a 3.5 or 4.5 is what I need. Still, maybe that's too challenging for most people.
I have many legitimate reasons for using a 3 review. However, I think assigning that to a book which is well written doesn't match the standard meaning of the rating across Amazon. And a reviewer who decides to use their own definitions, rather than the standard one, has to acknowledge that they are therefore skewing the Amazon reviews in an unhelpful way.
What the reviewer should do is put their own review WITHIN their review, and then "translate" it into the Amazon (or whatever) system. What is entered into the Amazon official system should be in the Amazon standard scale, for the system to work at all.
Richard -My post was aimed at Amazon, but the theory would hold wherever one chose to post reviews. I would explain my view thoroughly in my write-up, give my personal feeling about its score, and then translate that into the score of the system I was in.
I would prefer that GoodReads had a scale more in line with industry standard. While I appreciate their aim, the world has a certain view about ratings which they have been indoctrinated in since birth. GoodReads creates a system where people feel a way emotionally about a rating which is not in line with the rating's intention.
I think everyone kind of understands when a book gets 1 star out of 5, it sucked and a 5 out of 5 it was great. Its all those pesky numbers in the middle that allow for a great deal of interpretation ...that's where I at times get confused.
That's what I was about to mention, too. The rating scale on GR is definitely different from the one we were all "taught" to perceive (a.k.a 1=poor, 3=average, 5=excellent). Here, 3 is actually above average—but for a lot of us, it still translates unconsciously as "merely average".I wish we had a half-star option, too. Or a scale from 1 to 10 (though counting little stars this way can be a hassle).
Yzabel -And, if anything, a 3 would mean "average amongst all the stuff being published" which in most of our minds isn't exactly great.
Personally, I ignore ratings when they are not accompanied by a review, because I need to know why the reviewer dis/likes a book. I've picked up many books where the reviewer complained about issues that I look for in books, and the other way around. If I write a review, especially a 'negative' review, I'll be sure to write why I have an issue with the book or elements from the book.Especially on GR, where a 1-star can mean that the rater just doesn't want the book/genre recommended to them, the review-less rating loses all value to me.
Also, I don't regard 5-star rating as suspect per se, because some books do stir me enough to give out a 5-star review. Still, without a review, the 5-star rating is as useless to me as the 1-star rating to evaluate a book.
To wend a little back to the topic of "Why don't more people read Self-published authors?" I'll say first that I don't know many people who care who the publisher of a book is. They look at the cover, the blurb, and the context of the reviews. They judge on those things.So there are two points to make.
First, many self-published authors market so poorly that you never FIND their books to even consider buying them. Their titles and key words are awful. Their covers are awful and look like a blur at the small size that the Amazon / etc. browse screens show. The user never even gets to the detail page to think about buying the book. The book doesn't show up anywhere in the reader's normal life or in the searches they do for books they might want.
So that is an area where publishers often help their authors. They know how to choose titles and keywords. They know how to create high quality covers that shine at the small size. They can lure people to at least GET to the detail page and learn more. If someone never gets that far, they can never learn about the book to think about buying it.
The second point is that, for the tiny few people who actually finally make it to the detail page, many self-published authors sabotage themselves. They have awful blurbs. They have blurbs full of typos! They have typos and errors in their "look inside" initial pages. All of those things drive away buyers. And if you only got a handful of buyers to make it to the detail page in the first place, that means sales are a mere trickle.
While one could say that the self-published people are at a disadvantage because they don't have the publishers doing all those things for them, they also have to take some responsibility for not doing it themselves. This stuff isn't rocket science. There are step by step instructions ALL over the web to help authors do these things properly. If you can't be bothered to invest even a small amount of effort in your product, your readers can see that. Instantly. They see the typos and other issues. And they go to another book! There are over 12 million books in Amazon. It's not like the reader is on a desert island with no other choice :). They have millions of other choices, and if yours is in poor shape, there are plenty of others for them to choose from which are in awesome shape.
So I think if a self-published author puts in even that basic amount of work, they can have a steady stream of sales. Their book will appear just as good, to a reader, as any other published book they'd see. Heck, maybe even better :).
Lisa
Mary wrote: "Break open the champagne. I sold another one. Once again excuse the moodiness and thin skin. I've learned it will never go away. I'm now up to 35 sold in about a month."If I'd sold 35 books in a month, I'd be in a champagne coma!
Congratulations Mary! You must be so proud.
J.T. wrote: "But how are they to know their books are not up to the readers'expectation of quality. They will continue to think their product is worth selling even if it is not. ..."
I'm not sure if this was directed to my comment, or to Loren's?
As far as how they know about mine, I am very clear on what my stars are rating. A 2 in my book means the story was fine, may have had a few minor grammatical issues or typos, but didn't grab me (for example). I say as much in the review.
If the quote/answer wasn't meant toward what I said... nevermind then. :)
Mary wrote: "Break open the champagne. I sold another one. Once again excuse the moodiness and thin skin. I've learned it will never go away. I'm now up to 35 sold in about a month." Congrats! If your book, or any book had been in all the bookstores, it still may not have sold more than 35 in one month. And 35 is not a bad number for a month. Being on Amazon and Goodreads seems to give us a better chance to sell than in bookstores, unless we are famous or infamous authors.
Loren wrote: "I only give a book a five star rating if I never tire of reading it, and I've given many great books a four star. This is the reason I hesitate to rate indie books. I want my ratings to be honest, but don't want to risk hurting an author's sales.
..."
I agree with the reason behind the 5 star rating. If I never tire of it, I'll rate it a 5.
Not sure I agree with the second part, however. Yes, reviews do help an author's sales. *But* the primary reason for reviews, imho, is to help readers. An honest review of an indie title helps the author learn to write better and helps the reader to know what to expect with that author/title. I mean, a teacher isn't worried about how my GPA is affected by a low grade. They're concerned with whether or not I learn the material.
E.B. wrote: "When I was only a reader, it never occurred to me to check out if an author was self-published.
Now that I am an author, it still doesn't matter to me. It's a striking cover, a well-written blurb,..." Agreed! If we see a film which was produced by the actor, do we say or think, "Oh, that actor has done the film himself." So what? If I like the film, I may see it again, whoever "published" it.
Now that I am an author, it still doesn't matter to me. It's a striking cover, a well-written blurb,..." Agreed! If we see a film which was produced by the actor, do we say or think, "Oh, that actor has done the film himself." So what? If I like the film, I may see it again, whoever "published" it.
Joe wrote: "That really is a shame. It's a struggle to get reviews as a SPA. It's frustrating to hear tales of reviews with constructive criticism in them being wasted on people who don't acknowledge them for what they're worth."Hear, hear! It is difficult to get reviews as an SPA. To get constructive reviews offering help...? Those are pure gold.
Goodreads Authors/Readers
Books mentioned in this topic
The Devil's Workshop (other topics)A Prophecy of Dawn (other topics)
Evah & the Unscrupulous Thwargg (other topics)
Vampire Asylum (other topics)
Women and Goddesses in Myth and Sacred Text (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
Vicky Adin (other topics)K.D. McQuain (other topics)
Jeff Goins (other topics)
Jenny Blake (other topics)
Chris Guillebeau (other topics)
More...
Well I think this dates to the pre-self-publishing era before Ebooks.
The thought that if a major house wouldn’t look at your book, it probably stunk. And this was probably mostly true when printed books were king and bookstores were full of shoppers.
It was a good idea to have your book carefully screened by editors, etc. It filtered out a lot of crap. But then it got out of hand. The gatekeepers went berserk and plenty of good writers were kept out of the public’s eyes.
So the stigma of a guy or gal hawking their 81/2 x 11 on a street corner stuck. Even now as we speak.
R Felini
author of Chicago Style
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1...