Review Group discussion

I broached the question whether Goodreads is mainstream in a review. The advice I got there - move it here.

Since Amazon and Goodreads are linked, and both are mainstream, the simple answer is yes.

But:

As far as publishing goes, both Amazon and Goodreads are infants. The iterations of publishing online are new. And nothing demonstrates this more than the plethora of folk who have become online authors.

Easy. You create a text and publish it on Kindle. You can get a free cover and even a spell-check emailed to you.

But if and when one reviews more than a few of the books offered, three verdicts begin to form.

1. Some books are simply not there. They would not stir the interest of a conventional publisher even if said person was in a niche that did not care about financial returns. Such books are often the urgent messages of would-be authors, but they fail in organization, continuity, thematic resonance, inherent interest and authority.

2. Other books show potential and might be publishable by a conventional concern, but they have major flaws. Among them - a simple lack of writing ability; writing that is strong, but no engaging story or characters; or nothing of sufficient interest or quality to compete in a very crowded market.

3. At the top of the pile is a small number of books that are frustratingly close to being winners. When such a book shows forth a writer of clear talent, a story of palpable interest and characters that engage, you want that book to be at least in the top hundred in its genre. But even the author will concede that such a book is not yet ready for prime time. It has need of copy-editing beyond simple spell- or grammar-checks. And it needs the eye of an experienced book editor to ensure that everything works well.

Now I believe these three categories are fair descriptions of what is here. The take-away should be that even if a book is in the third category it may be destined to languish. It may never receive the help it deserves.

Is Goodreads mainstream? Yes, in the sense that from here, one could leap into the realms of success. But to move from category three to mainstream recognition requires the author's willingness to keep at what shows promise until success emerges.

To help this along, there is much reviewers can do. It is no help at all to call someone a budding Salinger and give five stars to their book, even if it is in category three. Better to observe the flaws and give honest praise when it's due.

Some very successful books have less merit than a good category three book here. What's the difference? Partly polish. Partly little things. Partly luck. Partly a track record. We need to try harder, that's all. Getting a text right is not half the battle. It's almost the whole kahuna.

The mainstream is where we want to be, whether we manage to self-publish our way there or get picked up along the way by someone with the resources to help us make it.

If this is a crapshoot, it is being played under better auspices than most and that should improve chances. Never give up. Proceed undaunted. Celebrate all successes.

Well stated.

Although I don't agree with your post on other threads. A reviewers job is to review not edit. I for one would take offense if someone changed my words without asking but would be grateful for an honest review that pointed out the flaws. My personal opinion is that too many rush to publish without using beta readers and honest editors.
The other side of the coin is that the book is published which implies that the author has completed the work. That being the case if the book warrants bad reviews then so be it. Harsh reality is a tough tutor but a good one none the less.

It would help if reviewers were willing to praise a book instead of writing semiliterate and sometimes personal attacks. GoodReads has a pretty terrible reputation, in my experience, with other readers outside the medium.

So yes, it is mainstream, but perhaps not in a way that we readers would like it to be.

Mark, I agree. If the book is 'out there', on Goodreads and/or Amazon or any other place where it's available for public consumption, the implication is that it is done, finished, and ready to go. Reviewers of any type - here in this group or elsewhere - should not be expected to edit or beta-read. That's the author's responsibility to take care of first. To me, it's like putting out a book with a partially-finished sketch for a cover and asking other people to add to it as they go to help complete it. Well, that might be more fun, come to think of it...

Just parenthetically, I now use a generic cover for most books I have written recently. (For Kindle.) I see the cover as a sort of brand. and not essential unless the book was originally available in stores.

Stephen wrote: "Just parenthetically, I now use a generic cover for most books I have written recently. (For Kindle.) I see the cover as a sort of brand. and not essential unless the book was originally availabl..."

I don't understand your reasoning and further think you're making a big mistake.

I would never buy a book of any kind with a generic cover, it indicates to me the author is a rank amateur and/or doesn't give a damn about his/her work enough to do a professional job.

The question is what is professional. My first books were published in the 1960s and until the 1990s they all had conventional covers. I do not write any more or less professionally now than I did then but now I do it all myself and make choices about how to proceed. I suspect these choices might be seen as "unprofessional". For example I mainly use Twitter as a potential market so I concentrate on developing a global Twitter community. I use only Kindle because my mind cannot easily embrace using a spate of different publishing platforms. I modify my view of things with the thought that at the age of 77 I do not need to make money as I did when bringing up children and so forth. I console myself that I now feel I am getting an education due to things that never would have taken place had there been no Internet. Is there a method to all of this? Yes. It is to take each day as it is and watch with interested how it all seems to go. And I suppose if I had to pick keywords to describe myself I would not choose professional in preference to nomad or seeker or flawed soul. Oh and by generic cover I mean one of the abstract designs that Kindle provides for free and which I happen to like because the title shows up well on it. And do not assume it is what shows up here on Goodreads because I am apparently unable to change the covers I originally had which I have now replaced.

Ed wrote: "I don't understand your reasoning and further think you're making a big mistake.

I would never buy a book of any kind with a generic cover, it indicates to me the author is a rank amateur and/or doesn't give a damn about his/her work enough to do a professional job."

I have heard a lot about the importance of a good cover towards books sales. A good cover grabs readers and a bad cover doesn't get a second look. Doing it oneself usually results in a less than professional cover. That said, some of us don't want to spend $150 or thereabout getting it done professionally. I uploaded a photo from my own pictures and used the Kindle Beta cover maker to create my final product.

Ed, you sound like you would give a straight up cover review that pulls no punches, if you were willing, that is. I know my cover is not professionally done. Could you take a look at it and tell me how likely would it be to put off the average reader?

Actually, that might be a tricky question. Could you give me a simple evaluation?

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2...

Thanks. Maybe you can recommend a good cover designer with attractive pricing.

Phil, your cover looks fine. Unlike those generic covers, it says something.

The only thing I would suggest is the type blends in too much. I would go with a brighter-lighter color or 'ghost' the font (put a background behind the type)so it stands out against the background.

Hey Ed,

I'm happy to hear that my cover passes muster… kinda. And, you are right, the lettering doesn't stand out enough. I have to figure out a way to shrink the photo a little bit too so the lettering doesn't run into my brother-in-law's head! I'll be the first one to admit that I didn't put as much work into the cover as I could have. Not very clever with graphics and maybe I could find somebody to spruce it up in line with your recommendations as well as get the photo a wee bit smaller.

Some people have been PO'd about the fact (which I disclose in the very first line of the Preface) that the book is not about my grandfather's uncle or anyone's grandfather's uncle in particular. Some people like it that way and say it makes the message of the book immediately that much clearer. One top Amazon reviewer figuratively threw the book back in my face about that, calling it bait and switch. I think he had a hang up though lol; I'd like to read his biography!

Thanks for the welcome critique.

I was totally gobsmacked when I first realised the range of skills I needed to master to self-publish. I had no option - no funds meant I either didn't do it at all, or I did it all myself.

I have since earned a few pennies from my work and have bought covers for my first 2 novels. For the group's anthology



James of humblenations.com donated his skills for the cover. Actually, have you looked at his site? He's not expensive and very skilled.

Jay wrote: "I was totally gobsmacked when I first realised the range of skills I needed to master to self-publish. I had no option - no funds meant I either didn't do it at all, or I did it all myself.

I have..."

That's a really nice cover!

Gotta remember that when next cover time comes around...