Happy weekend, everyone! Okay, almost weekend. I know I could do with one right about now.
Today, I'm pleased to welcome superwoman Kate Allan to my blog (and if you knew everything she does, you'd think she's superwoman, too!). She's got a very important question on which she'd like your feedback, and I'm curious about your take on it.
But before I turn it over to her. . . today and tomorrow, my novel (self-published! not slushy! I hope!) Build A Man is free on Amazon.com and Amazon.co.uk. And even more exciting, I'm over at Piedmont Writer's blog, talking about self-publishing and what I've learned! Drop by to say hi if you get the chance.
Take it away, Kate!
Today, I'm pleased to welcome superwoman Kate Allan to my blog (and if you knew everything she does, you'd think she's superwoman, too!). She's got a very important question on which she'd like your feedback, and I'm curious about your take on it.
But before I turn it over to her. . . today and tomorrow, my novel (self-published! not slushy! I hope!) Build A Man is free on Amazon.com and Amazon.co.uk. And even more exciting, I'm over at Piedmont Writer's blog, talking about self-publishing and what I've learned! Drop by to say hi if you get the chance.
Take it away, Kate!
From Snow to Slush...
Actually the weather here in the South East
of England has been mightily strange over the last few weeks. Two weeks ago we
had minus temperatures and snow, and yesterday we were basking in 18C sunshine.
I launched my enovella, just before the
snow hit secretly hoping to be on topic with the weather. This was my first
venture into self-publishing, a short romantic story called Snowbound on the
Island, and the gamble worked when the snow came 48 hours later.
But I've actually not come here to talk
about snow, but rather slush; that thing called the slushpile, which is what
people in the book trade call the mountains of unpublished material that
writers submit to be considered for publication. I've a commission to blog
about it for a publishing trade magazine and part of the brief is to tackle the
question, “is self-publishing the new slushpile?”
So I thought I should do a little research,
and what better place than Talli Roland's wonderful blog. I'll tell you what I
think and then I'd love to know what you think.
My initial reaction is no, but then on
further reflection I found myself thinking, “what does that question actually
mean?” Does it means that ordinary readers will now be the judges of the
slushpile? Thus readers, and therefore sales figures will elevate those worthy
stories to publishers' notice? Will publishers only publish stories that have a
proven market?
I don't think any publisher is wishing for a
future when self-publishing decides the slushpile. And the reason for this is
that editors want to be the ones to discover, and bring to market – for the
first time – super writers and great stories. When a publisher “discovers” a
self-published author I think it's the author they are discovering first,
rather than the book. They will want new books from that author. Yes,
self-publishing will continue to grow. It provides a useful niche for some
types of material where authors are ahead of publishers on knowing what readers
actually want to read. And it also provides a useful way to keep backlist
(authors older works) available at little cost. Professional authors will
correctly treat self-publishing as a business and make sure their material is
edited and correctly marketed. At the other end of the scale, there will be
writers who will – just because it's so easy
– throw up unfinished and substandard work on Amazon Kindle. Will
readers ignore good stories that are marketed poorly and conversely, be
frustrated with poor stories, marketed well?
So what do you think? Is self-publishing the
new slushpile? Have you read many self-published books, and how do they compare
to books from publishers? What is the future for self-publishing?
Kate Allan's new novella Snowbound on the
Island is available from Amazon Kindle for 84p.
What a great question; I can't wait to read the answers. Have at it, and have a great weekend, everyone!
UPDATE: Thank you so much to everyone who has taken the time to leave such thoughtful and interesting comments below!
UPDATE: Thank you so much to everyone who has taken the time to leave such thoughtful and interesting comments below!
Is self-publishing the new slushpile?
ReplyDeleteNo.
Have you read many self-published books,
Yes.
and how do they compare to books from publishers?
Huge variation.
What is the future for self-publishing?
Bright.
:)
Your first question is from an industry perspective, which is to say, coming from the viewpoint of the traditional publishing model. It asks, "Is self-publishing going to replace the query?" as if self-publishing is a new key that fits into the old lock of unlocking the pathway to success as a writer. This presumes a lot, but most importantly, it misses entirely that self-publishing has eliminated the door.
Self-publishing is a new publishing model. It is separate from (and does not replace a part of) traditional publishing. It reaches readers in a different way, empowers writers in a different way, is in fact an entirely new beast.
Which is not to say there won't be cross-over between the two worlds (self-pub and trad-pub). In fact, I think we will see more authors in the future that choose to be hybrid authors (I'm one) that pursue both paths in different areas for different reasons (and for different books).
I am curious to see what your article for that publishing trade magazine will look like in the end, but I would be much more interested in the answer to this question: "What does an author in the New Era of publishing look like?"
Already read your guest post at Anne's, Talli!
ReplyDeleteI've read self-published books that were better than most traditionally published books. I've read a few that were awful. I don't know if it's the new slushpile, but it does give readers more options.
Wow! I was going to leave a long comment, but I think Susan said it all. Bravo.
ReplyDeleteI'll leave with these few thoughts instead. Self-publishing has a bright new light focused on it with a universe of potential. I don't believe it's an arena to showcase the traditional industry's slush, but a new way to explore and discover authors and their works.
I don't have a kindle (which is really frustrating, let me tell you!) but I do like the fact that whether the material is good or not, it's the readers who decide whether it does well or not. That's how it should be.
ReplyDeleteIt's a much more democratic process.
Jai
It's a question that's been bothering me because I'm afraid it'll be hard to tell before you buy which ones have been properly edited and which are substandard. And if you don't have an e-reader, you're paying out some money. Yet the new possiblities are so exciting. Either way, I'm afraid of ending up in a slush pile.
ReplyDeleteI think that the two models, self and traditional, will change and evolve in strength, quality and influence, over time.
ReplyDeleteI don't think self-pub is the new slushpile, but there might be a temptation in the industry to treat it as one.
ReplyDeleteWith the traditional model (sub, sub, find an agent, the agent finds a publisher) it was getting harder and harder to get an agent. Even with a well written book, there was a huge dollop of luck involved. Your book had to go before the right person at the right time.
Self pub allows the public to decide what they like. This might be different to what the publishing industry THINKS people like.
I've read two self published books in the last four weeks. The first was well written, well edited and a joy to read. The other I gave up on after about 30 pages. They were both well presented and well marketed. How could I tell one was going to be great and the other not? The answer is - I couldn't.
At least the kindle store means it's cheap enough that I can take a risk.
I think I will end up following the authors whose first book I liked and taking fewer and fewer gambles on new authors who self pub.
I think Susan's right in that most authors will end up hybrid authors who have a combination of traditional and self pubbed books.
Personally, I would be delighted if Epub were to be the new query (that's E-pub, not self pub). That would give me the chance to sell the print rights to my ebook...
Have a great weekend all.
Susan, I'm going to quote you:
ReplyDeleteIs self-publishing the new slushpile?
No.
Have you read many self-published books,
Yes.
and how do they compare to books from publishers?
Huge variation.
What is the future for self-publishing?
Bright.
I agree completely with all of that. And the rest of your comment. I wish I had more to add, but I don't! You said it all!
I've read many self-published books and some are truly better than traditionally published ones. Others that I've read have left me with a bad taste in my mouth because they were not edited or spell-checked properly. Books by those authors I will not read again.
ReplyDeleteI love the fact that self-publishing gives readers more choice on what they can read. Some industry experts say that chick lit is dead (I wholeheartedly disagree) but as long as authors are still willing to write and self-publish it, I continue to have all of the choice in the world! I think that those authors who do not fully prepare their manuscript for publication will find their sales dropping off as people come to realize how frustrating it is to read a barely edited book.
I don't think self-publishing is the new slushpile at all. The publishing business is so subjective that it's sometimes difficult to get a good book through to publication. Readers know what they want, and they vote with their wallets. I don't know if this is making sense, but that's a fascinating question!
ReplyDeleteAs I was reading this, I thought: ditto, ditto, ditto. Agree with everything. I think self-publishing can be considered a slushpile since these books are already out there, ready to be read, no approval needed to reach the eyes of readers. Tight writing and super careful editing (because I've seen some self-published books that could really, really use an editor) will win the day, no matter what route the author took to get the book out there :)
ReplyDeleteI meant "CAN'T be considered a slushpile" ... darn my tired Friday typing fingers!
ReplyDeleteIs self-publishing the new slushpile?
ReplyDeleteHmm... I think it is and it isn't. It is because a whole lot of rubbish is going to end up being (and already has been) self-published; and yet it isn't because there's some really quality stuff that's being self-published.
And I don't think we have to worry too much about the good stuff being lost amongst the rubbish. Fortunately we're allowed to read samples before we buy, so that can cut out some of the rubbish, and then there's word of mouth. If readers think a book is good, regardless of who published it, they WILL tell other people about it.
I have just bought a Kindle and can't wait to start reading some self-published novels as I'm keen to see what the standard is out there and how they compare to traditionally published books.
ReplyDeleteRe slushpiles: with the traditional slushpile, authors are dependent on their manuscript catching the right agent's eye on the right day from a pile hundreds deep, which may or may not lead to a publishing deal. In other words, your chances are slim. With the Kindle slushpile, if you are web-savvy and have the time, contacts and confidence to promote yourself, then potentially there's nothing to stop your book becoming a bestseller.
As a self-published author myself I often worry that people will judge me as second-class because I don't have a publisher's official seal of approval. But I know there are hundreds of other authors like me who have had agents who have been unsuccessful in placing their books, and for that reason I know I'm going to find some great 'raw' reads on my Kindle. With regards to the future, I think the words independent or indie might do more for self-published books.
I think the key here is figuring out, like you say, what the question is supposed to mean. If self-publishing means readers are, in fact, becoming the judges where agents and editors once were, then sure. I think. (Sorry. Brain's a bit frazzled today.)
ReplyDeleteHave a wonderful weekend, Talli and Kate!
I just want everyone to get along - self-published and traditional - I'm hoping the seeds of high standard publishing are already sown. I am hoping writers wanting to e-publish do so using the bestest quality resources available to them to get their stories super duper polished and wonderfully sparkly!
ReplyDeleteI think there are bound to be awful books/stories on whatever published format as there are bound to be great ones there too.
Take care
x
I wanted to say pretty much what Susan said.
ReplyDeleteIt's going to be interesting to see how publishing changes over the next few years.
My thoughts have pretty much been covered already. I do like the fact that, as in music downloads, readers can promote a book up the kazzoo, more than in the tradtional marketplace.
ReplyDeleteI think new venues are always a good thing.
ReplyDeleteI don't really care if a book is published by a big print house or small one or self- pubbed - is it well-written and (relatively) typo-free? I've read hugely marketed best-sellers that I hated, and smaller self-pubbed books with unimpressive covers that I loved.
As I grow older, I'm becoming a more discriminating reader, because I realize I will die before I read all the books in the world I'd like to read. I've read Talli because I've followed her website, loved her writing style, and her books fit my budget. (Thanks for the freebie, btw! I've just recommended Build A Man to the members of my chick lit reading group.)
Other authors who self-pub and continually flog their books on their sites and twitter feeds, etc., I have turned off to. Sadly, some of them don't realize how BAD their writing is, and how their cluttered, messy website is doing them more harm than good. They're the kind of writers who give self-pubbing a black eye - but they have always existed, they simply used to be the uncle who brought boxes of his awful books to the family Thanksgiving and tried to press everyone into buying a dozen or so.
I'm more likely to read a sample chapter or do a "look inside the book" for a new author rather than just buy the books, especially if it's higher priced. And although I am trying to switch to e-books, I still buy dead tree books as well.
Perhaps it is the new slushpile, but sometimes there are gems in the slushpile. Harry Potter anyone?
ReplyDeleteLooks like you've really chose an interesting topic.
ReplyDeleteFor me I've adored several self-published books and have noticed no difference in the editing that of a big six published novel.
I think it's all built on perspective. I've read terrible books on both ends, and by terrible I really mean 'not for me'.
I'm with Susan, the fabulous first commentor... the future of self-publishing is bright, and the slush pile isn't found there!
An interesting discussion. I'm enjoying reading the comments, too. Thank you, Kate and Talli, for raising the matter.
ReplyDeleteLiz X
I too have read some self-published books with eye-watering grammar and spelling mistakes, but surely the main issue is whether the non-writing public think self-publishing is the new slushpile. They may not be as familiar with that term as we are but they know a well written book when they read one and just a single experience of reading one of those eye-wateringly bad ones will label the whole self-publishing industry as bad.
ReplyDeleteI really have no idea, but I'm interested to see how things evolve.
ReplyDeleteI'm actually starting to read more self-published books than traditional. I started reading indie books to support my friends, but I kept reading them because many of them are as good~and better~than the traditional books I've been reading. If one is selective in their choices, there are fantastic self-published books out there that you would never know are self-published by reading them.
ReplyDeleteTalli, I was just on Amazon and saw your 'Build a Man' on the homepage under, 'What Customers Are Viewing Right Now.' It was the Kindle edition. Thought you'd want to know.
ReplyDeleteHave a great weekend!
I'm sure some self-published books should never have seen the light of day, but doesn't that also apply to some traditionally published books?
ReplyDeleteI agree with Susan's first two paragraphs, especially, where she writes about self-publishing being a 'new beast' which 'reaches readers in a different way' and empowers writers in a different way. The only problem at the moment is that the 'new beast' is constantly being compared with the old one.
I do think, though, that for self-published books to get a good reputation, it's important for writers to make their book the best possible product it can be.
I self-published a novel 'Unravelling' and was thrilled when a bookseller said to me 'You'd never know this was self-published' as the way to acceptance of the self-published book by the traditional industry is for these books to hold their own on the bookshelves.
Hey, thank you for the free book! Whoot.
ReplyDeleteAs far as self-pub, as a librarian, I used to look at self-pubbed books and go "Yeah, there's another book the author just wouldn't have been able to get published otherwise." Self-pub *used* to be the end of the line- if you can't get it out there any other way, cough up the cash and publish it yourself. And it usually showed in the quality, big-time.
That's not true any more. The self-pubbed ebooks I've read lately have been quite on par with regular-published ones. Now, self-pubbing is no longer a poor-quality end-of-the-line choice, but it's a stand-alone alternative. Writers might self-pub not because they *couldn't* get published otherwise, but because they *prefer* doing things this way.
Is self-publishing the new slush pile? Maybe, in a way. But if it is, then readers are the new editors- and that, I think, is the more pertinent point.
I think it will be part slushpile and part new publishing platform. For me the main thing is allowing authors to put books out there that wouldn't see light of day with trads due to the content, style, whatever.
ReplyDeleteThere's a whole industry growing around self-publishing - conversion help growing, for example. I'm sure copy editors are going to offer services too and canny authors will take advantage.
There will always be junk as well, but as others have said, readers will read what they like. The sample facility is excellent - just like checking the book out in the bookshop!
Wow great discussion. Not sure I can add any insight, but whatever happens I'm excited at the new opportunities for writers.
ReplyDeleteI'm also excited to read my new copy of Build a Man!!
Also Talli, I don't know if you do blog awards, but I have one for you on my blog! :)
Such a great question. I've found so much variation with self publishing that I can't really say either way.
ReplyDeleteInteresting post, Kate, and congrats on your newly-released book.
ReplyDeleteI think self-publishers are pretty much divided into two camps: those who take it seriously, and put out finished, quality products, and those who simply throw their latest story (unedited, unprepared) up on the internet. Fortunately, with the 'look inside' and sample features, I think it's usually pretty easy to tell which type a book is. I've read some outstanding self-published books (like Talli's, for example) that are of equal quality to their traditionally published counterparts. Of course, I've also seen some cringe-worthy efforts, where someone obviously put minimal effort into creating an ebook.
And I agree with Susan. Self-publishing is a separate thing from traditional publishing, and many authors who self-publish do so for good reasons (like more income potential, and greater control), not because they couldn't get a publisher for the book(s).
I think in a way, it is or can be. What I mean by that is a lot of books are queried to agents or publishers that aren't ready... and while some of these might have features that make them sell anyway (think Twilight) most won't get very far if they are sub-par. And in both cases, some that don't make it will be very GOOD books that just didn't get the persistence behind them. But mostly, the better ones rise.
ReplyDeleteGreat play on words Kate, and an interesting question. I review for a HisFic blog and my only criticism of self published work is the quality of the editing, which varies a great deal. Some really good stories are spoiled by basic mistakes - but then all authors are on a learning curve. I agree though that the reader decides what is good and what isn't.
ReplyDeleteThere are good and bad books in both camps. I'm frequently appalled at the mistakes in traditionally published books. Equally some self-published books lack careful proofreading and editing. If the book is not good enough, no matter what the form of publishing, it will not sell well.
ReplyDeleteI think that self-publishing, for most writers, is a choice that they have made- they are there instead of with a tradi-publisher, not because they couldn't be accepted by one. Therefore the 'slush-pile' debate is defunct. They are already where they want to be, not angling for a pick-up from a tradi-publisher.
ReplyDeleteI've read some amazing self-pubbed work, well edited and delicious. I've read some stinking examples too. Same goes for tradi-published works.
Looking forward to reading your novella Kate.
Laura xxx
I see self-publishing as it's own avenue. There will be those who's sales will make traditional publishers take notice, however, I can't see it becoming the next slushpile. So many writers still favor the traditional publishing path so publishers will have plenty of unsolicited MS's to fatten the slush.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the majority that you can't lump all self-published books into a " slushpile." As with all things, there are many examples of good and bad. Looking forward to Build A Man, which is sure to be an example of self-publishing at its best! Julie
ReplyDeleteI have read self published books that I like and some that I don't. I feel too inexperienced to answer your questions but I will say that I like that there is a self publishing option. For the future and myself. Also, there are a couple books that I would have been sad not to have read or been touched by them. Have a great weekend!
ReplyDeleteI've only had an ereader for a few months, but since I've had it I've read almost exclusively self-published work. Some of it was better than I've seen from the big publishers. Some of it was just as good and I wouldn't have known one way or the other. A few needed a lot of attention. So I think, as with anything else, there's a mix. And the price had little to do with the quality. One of the best books I read was 99 cents.
ReplyDeleteI've read very few self published books and many of those that I have through recommendations (I will very rarely buy a book without a recommendation from somewhere).
ReplyDeleteAs an aside I do think Amazon make it very easy to self publish and sometimes it can be hard to tell which books are published in the traditional way and which are self published.
I think books that would have been ignored by agents are getting a chance to reach readers. The public will decide what is successful instead of the gate keepers of old.
ReplyDeleteQuite the discussion going on here! :) Great post!
ReplyDeleteThanks all for your comments and some great points have been made so far. I can't reply to everything, but just to pick up on a few points.
ReplyDeleteSusan, yes, I'm a "hybrid" author (like that term!) myself now as I'm quite happy with my current publisher - they get me into Tescos - but Snowbound on the Island was too short a novella for them and the offer I had for it from another publisher I decided was too poor financially, so that's what made me give self-publishing a go. Someone made a comment about the financial motive for authors to self-publish and so yes, that's spot on.
Jai, like the word "democratic" there to describe readers being the ones to decide. Quite right.
Tania, you commented that if an author was web-savvy etc "then potentially there's nothing to stop your book becoming a bestseller." This I disagree with but only because I really believe that "product is still king" (one of those marketing expressions!) and readers will be the ones that propel books to the tops of the charts. So web savvy authors can make bestsellers, but with the caveat that their books must also be exceptionally appealing. What is true is that you don't need a vast marketing budget to promote online, but I think it will get harder for self-published authors to stand out because of the volume of material, and also with publishers themselves becoming more digitally savvy.
I truly now understand why agents can tell if a manuscript is for them by the end of the first paragraph. I never download a free book or purchase a book without reading the sample pages. And sometimes it's not bad, it's just not for me.
ReplyDeleteI think the trouble comes in trying to compare the publishing road of traditional to self publishing. They are very different. So slushpile? I think that has such a negative connotation. There are a bunch of books and there will be more and the smart authors with well written books will rise to the top.
And not all of them are self publishing b/c they couldn't make traditionally or because they hope to be noticed by an agent or editor.
I think there will always be a slush pile and many will chose traditional publishing ... and strive for that.
ReplyDeleteI do love that self publishing is an option.. and it give the reader some variety that wouldn't see the light of day if left in the traditional system. But for it to be a great read (SP) a stringent edit is required.
my thoughts
xx
As many have already said, I think it's great to have the choice. Self/ePublishing might be right for some while others would prefer the more traditional route, but now there is also the opportunity of the hybrid.
ReplyDeleteI've read bad traditionally published books one I can think of had 3 cliches on the first two pages, equally there are bad self published books as well as great ones. At least now the reader can be the gatekeeper and have the choice, and with blogs, review sites, Twitter etc. there are plenty of ways to find the good books as well as those to avoid.
As many others have said : self-publishing just offers another choice for readers. Many books that would not make the cookie-cutter mind-set of agents and editors are now available for the reader to decide on the merits or lack thereof!
ReplyDeleteI've read two self-published e-books this year and both were fabulous.
ReplyDeleteI'll certainly be downloading yours, Talli.
Hi Talli .. blogger is being very slow - so the thing I like is that we can read books from our friends that we'd have never have known about - and who knows what doors will open from there.
ReplyDeleteSelf-publishing - certainly the books need to be edited to a high standard ..
Cheers - enjoy the weekend .. Hilary
That is a GREAT question. Maybe. I have certainly come across some duds and some gems, so I guess there are authors out there who should be published.
ReplyDeleteI'm a self publishing writer as well and don't want to be in any slush piles! I made the decision to publish my books myself - it wasn't made for me by repeated rejections or anything like that. I just have an 'indie' frame of mind, I think and really wanted to do it myself plus I'm very shy and find the way some publishing people talk on Twitter etc really off-putting and hostile.
ReplyDeleteI have to admit to having pretty low expectations of how things would go when I first self published a book but several thousand sales later (and getting over a thousand sales a month now which is probably nothing to most of you but means a lot to me as it keeps me in stockings, fans and bars of expensive soap!), it's now pretty unlikely that I would consider going with an agent and signing my work away - they'd have to come up with a pretty amazing offer to make it worth my while to be frank. ;)
As to the future for self publishing - I'm finding that there are increasing numbers of authors who are like me and don't even want to be 'traditionally' published. Getting an agent and seeing your book in Waterstone's (I'm a rebel and won't drop that apostrophe) used to be the Holy Grail but that's not really the case any more and rightly so.
That is a great question.
ReplyDeleteI think that although there are some great self published books (Talli's for example!) I've found it hard to find books that completely blow me away in the self publishing slush pile. But when I buy a book that was traditionally published, the quality is almost always, better.
Publishing depends on readers, readers depend on stories. We will get our stories - but how? Around a fire? On our computers? At the library? On the television? At the movies? Yes, to all. The smart story teller (writer) will do what she has always done - tell compelling stories!
ReplyDeleteI don't know. I haven't read any self published books to be honest.
ReplyDeleteTerrific post, Kate!
ReplyDeleteI'm in the self published side of things myself, because I rather like the freedom.
I don’t think self-publishing is the new slush pile. Like Susan said, it’s a new way of publishing all together. Good authors will make it their first port of call. It’s a far more direct access to readers. Look at the way the music industry went. Digital formats are the future, though printed books are not dead or dying. There is no black and white, where one takes over and the other goes to the grave, they can co-exist. Some people will choose to self-publish over traditional publishing. Why wouldn’t they, when they can decide everything from the title to the cover. And instead of having to push on readers what trad publishers think the public wants or follow the same 'winning' formula, they can go their own original routes. A shift in mind set is needed though for some of them, they need to treat self publishing in a more professional manner. You need to act like an author to be one, that means giving your work the respect it deserves and edit!
ReplyDeleteThat said, a smart publisher or agent is, of course, going to try entice some of the self-publishing superstars to their companies, they’d be silly not to! Though I’m certain they still want to find their own future superstars in their usual ways, the already established ones will have more bargaining power with the weight of their own hard work and track record behind them.
That’s my possibly boring two cents! Great article by the by, thanks for it!! I look forward to reading more!
I find I'm using the 'look inside' feature, then if I like it, try a sample feature a lot more these days before buying, and by that, really honing in on buying a book I really want to buy. Much more like the old browsing a bookstore experience - I like it!
ReplyDeleteHi Kate (and Talli)
ReplyDeleteCongratulations Kate, on publishing your new novel Snowbound. Your post has got me thinking which I suppose is what you had intended :)
I have read a lot of self published books and accidentally self published one of my own a couple of years ago (what a disaster). I found most of the SP books I have read to be well written and well edited. There are, of course, the occasional cringeworthy exception but luckily not too many, and I hope it remains that way.
I read more self pubbed than I used to. The thing with Kindle is you can download a sample of a book for free and that, at least, gives the opportuniy to sort out those poorly edited, badly written books without having to pay for the priviledge of checking them out.
ReplyDeleteI haven't read that many SP books, but the few I've read haven't been too impressive as far as editing. SP authors need to be exceedingly sure they have their books proofread! It makes the books SEEM less polished overall, even with a solid story.
ReplyDeleteInteresting thought that SP could be the new slushpile. I think only slightly. Sure, SP authors CAN be picked out from it, but as more and more people go for that means of publishing, the sheer numbers will make it more difficult to stand out.
Hello, Talli & Kate.
ReplyDeleteThis is a great question and/or topic. I have been reading indie books almost exclusively for the past year and a half. One reason is because many of the authors were acquaintances of mine, but the overwhelming reason has been because they have been doing some amazing work!
Is it easy to get some substandard work out there, as you put it? Yes, it is. However, more often than not, the writers have been putting in the hard work to make their novels just as brilliant as the traditionally published folks.
Thanks for asking.
-Jimmy
Hi Talli and Kate,
ReplyDeleteGreat discussion and some insightful comments above. As a reader I read many books but yes, some self-pubbed are not up to par.
Talli, thanks for the links.
Riya.
Oh, went to buy your book, Talli and found it's already on mum's Kindle! So will be reading it now...
ReplyDeleteTo me, it's a total mixed bag. I've read some amazing self-published books and also some real stinkers.
ReplyDeleteI also think that folks who believe that all self-published books are inferior are suffering from a case of elitism.
Lol! at Riya's comment above! Of course I have the latest Talli Roland title on my Kindle!
ReplyDeleteInteresting discussion.
What an interesting discussion this has been. There is a big future for self publishing but I do worry a little about how the quality is going to be controlled.
ReplyDeleteI don't feel well read enough in either the self pubbing world or in the publishing industry to really take a stab at answering the question, but I did want to at least comment to say thank you for this discussion. The comments are SUPER interesting. I love reading Susan Kaye Quinn's optimistic attitude!
ReplyDeleteThanks for this post. It Very nice Blog. It was a very good Blog. I like it. Thanks for sharing knowledge. Ask you to share good Blog again.
ReplyDelete