SciFi and Fantasy eBook Club discussion

I was hoping that we could discuss indie books. What ones you like which ones you hate. Please do not talk about your own books. I would like to hear from readers what indie books they have found interesting. for me it was ps powers and brock deskins that brought me into the world of indie books.

I'm a big fan of Powers' Dead End series.

Also David P. Forsyth's Sovereign Spirit saga.

And Hugh Howey's Wool series.

But I've also run into many poorly written and/or edited indie books.

True randy there are a lot of poorly edited and written indie books out there but also a lot of good ones. It can be a struggle for indies to find good editors that are within their price range. I myself can overlook most editing issues as my own English skills are lacking...just was never my cup of tea. never read powers dead end series I was more into the young ancients series myself.

My nominations for worst indie books, mostly because of editing issues:

Austerity

A ZOMBIE TALE PARTS 1-6

I usually highlight errors when I read books on my Kindle. I gave up on these two. There were just too many.

Randy wrote: "My nominations for worst indie books, mostly because of editing issues:

Austerity

A ZOMBIE TALE PARTS 1-6

I usually highlight errors when I read books on my Kindl..."
I would have to check my kindle I have a whole list of books in a group named bored...really bored for books that I just couldn't get past the first chapter.

I enjoyed Hugh Howey's wool, though I've only read the first as yet.

Other Indies, not as well know as Howey, I've read and enjoyed recently:

Ravenfold, Few Are Chosen, The Cartographer's Apprentice: Leave Them Wanting More

I started many others, but not even finished reading them.

It can be difficult, I agree, to find quality Indie books--though I maintain it's not because they're not out there, it's simply that there's an overabundance of the other peppering the fields around them.

That said: Karen Charbonneau's The Wolf's Sun. Splendid little (ok, long!) book. Hit every cylinder in my love of historical fiction. A lot of people have also, of course, notably loved the Riryia (though now they're no longer Indie, having been picked up) books amongst the fantasy section, though personally those were never quite my cup of tea.

I've encountered some good ones, some mediocre ones, and some awful ones.

The good: Kojiki, The Goddess's Choice, and The Soulkeepers

The mediocre (but I enjoyed them): The Gauntlet Thrown and Angelfall

The bad: Ever Shade, Besieged

Oh wait. That last one was traditionally published. And it was AWFUL.

In honestly, all the indie books I've read have been mediocre at best, but tending towards poor to bloody awful more often than not. For example, this month's fantasy selection, Four Kings, is a perfect example of indie shoddiness. A lot of readers found the writing too poor to finish the books. Other indie authors give it five stars, but most regular readers don't.

Writing is hard and most indie authors rush to self publish before their skills are up to snuff. In fact most want to be authors will never be ready to publish just like most people who enjoy singing privately will never be ready to publicly.
In the late 80s and 90s I wrote a lot and tried to get published; I wasn't because it wasn't good enough. I didn't realize it the time - I thought it was great - but how bad it was, how bad. Yet I could have joined the indie ranks if the option was available back then.


Based on the indies I've read, it would be better to skip them in the future. Even the best of the indie authors, such as Hugh Howey, isn't an author I'd read a second book by.

Here are a few indie books that I've enjoyed:

The Emperor's Edge (steampunk fantasy)

Zero Sight (urban fantasy)

Bad Radio (Lovecraftian horror)

It isn't indie anymore (because it was acquired by Orbit), but I found Theft of Swords to be very enjoyable fantasy as well.

Wool was one of the best books I've read in a long, long time. There is also The Devil's Grin though that is mystery.

I'm in an author review group where we are set up in groups of 10 and no author you review can review your work. It has given me exposure to some books I would not have picked up on my own, as well as given me feed back. I had a professional editor (two actually but the first one was a technical editor and gutted my book so it would fit in a magazine so I decided I needed a change) and one proof reader. There are still 5 known oopses in my book. I plan on fixing them in the next edition.
I also know of traditionally published books with far more than five. And in my author group I have seen some pretty bad proof reading and full on editing. Different editors have different opinions.
To dismiss all indie authors because some have been in a rush to chase their dream is tantamount to dismissing all British authors because you dislike the word "bloody." Some might not use the word. Other non-Brit authors might use it. And dismissing the whole story or group because of one thing you dislike is absurd.
My two cents.

K.W.

You are absolutely right (or should I say write) :)

The term indie should not mean shoddy and rushed writing. It should be used to reference the lack of or avoidance of a big publishing house. It has nothing to do with the quality.

Just because there is a big publishing house logo on the book, does not mean it is a great book. The same as even a great author can write a dog of a book. Also, established authors can be rushed by deadlines and commitments, which shows in the books poor flow or numerous grammatical failings and flailings.

Last year (and this year) I have been disappointed by some of the established authors that I like. Poor grammar, contextual slips, and just going for a high word count were in all. Yet, my number 1 favorite book from 2013, had no grammatical slips that I found, and was interesting and enjoyable. And yes it was not just indie, but the horror of it, self published. I only hope my first book will be half as good.

So, yes, my friends, pick up that odd little book, that was published on a shoe string. You may find an amazing tale that will truly delight you.

Happy reading (and writing)

I will never discount any story as good or bad I will only give my opinion as either good readable or unreadable. There are a few that I I enjoy so much I will rave about them but they are few and far in-between. If I was to rate most books I read honestly they would get 3 stars but I tend to be a little nice and give them 4-5 stars.

Same here. Fives like ones and twos are far and few between. Threes and fours are common. I will round up or down between 3 and 4 based on how much support I think the author should have gotten from the publisher. A 3.5 becomes a four for an author with limited support, but a 3 three for a book from a big publishing house.

Fives are the stand outs, the story incredible, the editing near flawless. You don't even notice that you've been reading for 20 hours straight. ;)

They are the exception not the rule.

I also, don't believe that just because it's a "classic" it deserves a five. Great expectations just depressed the daylights out of me.

Thomas wrote: "Same here. Fives like ones and twos are far and few between. Threes and fours are common. I will round up or down between 3 and 4 based on how much support I think the author should have gotten fro..."

While I agree with this to a large extent, I also think it is wrong to assume that the same rules of engagement can apply to every reader. A book that turns one reader off, could very well be mind-blowing for another reader or ten other readers, and that could be regardless of editing for things like typos. Some readers aren't all that concerned; they just want an exciting story. Some readers seem to be bothered only about technical accuracy and aren't really concerned about the quality of the tale being told. If a book is a five for a reader, who is anyone else to tell them they are wrong? That is how they feel about that book. I can't stand coffee, yet other people seem to love it. Each to their own, I say.

I don't read a lot of indie books but that's because I'm rather picky and a lot of the ones I come across just don't sound interesting to me. Course that can apply to trad published books too. But I have liked most of the indie books I've tried, with only a few feeling like it was lacking or needed more work. In the past year alone I found two I would consider my best reads all year (even against trad published books)

A few months ago I read the book Exodus Conflict and I really liked the book as a whole. Had an interesting story, was well edited, and for the most part engaging. I had some personal issues with how some of the scenes went and that resulted in a low score from me, but others probably wouldn't have been as affected as me.

In the past month I read Luckbane and I loved this book. Great mix of sci-fi and fantasy, well editing, and fantastic story.

One problem I'm noticed is that in some books, what people describe as a lot of 'typos' are in reality someone using US or UK spelling or grammar and the reader not being familiar with it

A lot of publishers seem to default to US spelling, because they get less fuss from UK than they do from US.

Saying that, there are a lot of bad books out there, but thanks to the 'look inside' feature, it's comparatively easy to weed them out

Very true, David. One reason why I love Goodreads 'compare books' feature. If someone says that such and such book was terrible, then I usually compare bookshelves. If they hated my favorite books then it's a good indication that I'd like the book they didn't. Everyone has different tastes, but it's great we can all discuss the mutually loved subject of books.

I completely agree with the idea that one book may not work for someone, but may be someone else's favorite read. I've seen it happen.

I like indies. If I find I'm reading a lot of books published by the big 5 I'll purposely seek out an indie for my next read.

Some of my favorites were Samantha Young's Fire Spirits series, which started with Smokeless Fire. However, the first few books had some editing errors that were annoying. Recently I read Jen Naumann's Paranormal Keepers and really enjoyed that. Reaper's Novice by Cecilia Robert was good too, not one of my absolute faves, but I liked it. Oh, and I loved Laekan Zea Kemp's The Things They Didn't Bury

I do think having good editing does add to having a better book. I like to think that I read just for the story, and that a comma out of place won't bother me. But, I also think authors who take the time to find a good editor also take the time to polish their story in other ways, and maybe spend more time on it all together, leading to a better book.

Jim wrote: "One problem I'm noticed is that in some books, what people describe as a lot of 'typos' are in reality someone using US or UK spelling or grammar and the reader not being familiar with it"

As often as not, the poor spelling is just that - poor spelling. I've seen examples where people just don't get the differences between American and English styles but they're in the minority in my experience.

My favorites have included authors Mainak Dhar, Nathan Lowell, and Charlie Carillo - but, all three were traditionally published before they were indie.

I agree that American\British differences would be only a minor problem with some readers. The real problem is poor skills with English and bad copy editing. For example, using grizzy for grisly. No excuse expect laziness and\or ignorance.

I'm on board with the difference dialects causing some issues. However, I normally won't comment on that. What gets me most are the dropped articles, repeated words words, and when I can't figure out who the pronoun refers to. "In the room full of men, he did it." quite confusing.

The key is that spell checkers and grammar checkers are not the answer. People are the answer: I submitted a shot story (Novelle) to several friends for peer review. While painful, the comments were accurate and needed. I never noticed the issues that were brought to my attention. I'm glad that I can fix the problems, before the public see it. No reason to throw yourself under the bus, others will do it for you.

Greg,

Do you read David Weber? He had a good one during Harrington's wedding. "In the side of God..." I laughed for a while on that one.

Some indie SF&F authors I've enjoyed include J.D. Hallowell, Robert Evert, T. Jackson King, J.S. Morin, Sam Kates, Lindsay Buroker, and Moses Siregar III.

An Indie author recently offered a zombie book for free. I had to point out the blurb on Amazon talked about "hoards of zombies".

So I asked if they had escaped from people that had been collecting them. :)

Thomas wrote: "...and when I can't figure out who the pronoun refers to. "

In a recent book I read, the author would start out new chapters or new sections with pronouns. First word would be, "She..." It sometimes would take me a few pages to figure out which of the two female characters the "she" was referring to. So easy to remedy too. Just change that first "she" to a character's name.

Unclear signposting like that really bugs me too. And like you say, so easy to avoid.

I liked: Thread Slivers, Dragon Fate and it's sequel, The Dragon Within, The Reader of Acheron.

Lemons: Palanquin Of Heaven story was ok - terrible editing and the plot meandered a lot.

Clockwork Blue - couldn't get into it.

Last year, I had two that stood out to me. This year one has been a surprise.
1. Freedom Club by Garnell. He managed to keep something secret until near the end. It was surprising that I didn't catch on before then. Also a great story.
2. A Thread in the Tangle by Flynn. Reminded me of the the classic high fantasy novels of the past. A fun and interesting book.
3. Clockworkers by Ramsey. Writen for a general audience, it was interesting. With all the spins done on Cinderella and Snow White, this one takes the Shoemaker and the Elves to new heights. Intriguing. I found myself looking forward to the reveals about the elves.

All of these are either self-published or small press.