SciFi and Fantasy Book Club discussion

I was browsing through the giveaways today, and thought of some other things about what to do and not do.

* Don't start your blurb with something like "from horror writer [name of someone no one's ever heard of]". Unless you're a big name author, selling a book based on who you are or other books you've written does't mean anything.

* Don't list a bunch of random accolades. I know marketers love those things, but I'm not going to be interesting in your book because some random reviewer liked it - I want to know what the story's going to be like.

Hi Sherri,
I've had three people say they twitch when ever they see a slurry tanker on the road after reading 'The Day the Ravens Died'! somehow it doesn't have the same effect as the comment on the weather channel! The contents of said tankers also began with 'S' but wasn't the obvious!!
All the best Paul Rix [oldgeezer]

L.E. wrote: "As an author, I thought I'd bring up another issue, one which does come up more often than any of us like. What should an author do when either a reader or a reviewer posts something which is fact..."

I am of the belief, that if there is an actual error, then it should in fact be pointed out so that it can be corrected. Now of course, that goes without saying that you shouldn't be rude and rub it in their face or be petty and childish in any way. Personally if I review something and make a mistake I would like to know so that it can be corrected. I also think that any such correction should come with a show of appreciation for having taken the time to review the work, regardless of if they gave it a glowing review or a very poor one.

That is where any publicity is good publicity. A bad review can be better than not receiving a review, especially for readers such as myself, if the author shows themselves to be a good sport about it and take the bad as well as they take the good (at least on the public face, lol).

* Put a picture-link of your book in every thread you post in - especially in such a way as to make it seem like it's part of your comment.

Colleen ~blackrose~ wrote: "* Put a picture-link of your book in every thread you post in - especially in such a way as to make it seem like it's part of your comment."

Oddly enough, several marketing "experts" suggest this tactic. I don't know of anyone who's done a scientific study on this technique.

It probably depends on the venue, Al. I find it annoying to see a fairly active poster a with repetitious signature, no matter is in it. I don't particularly like picture links of books, either. I usually can't tell what the book is unless the cover is very simple. When added to the number of authors trying to get our attention on GR, the practice of adding a picture link becomes maddening, IMO.

Not to mention it's just annoying and generally irrelevant and it tells me that the author is unimaginative and uninteresting. If the book is good enough to be pushed, it should be good enough to warrant at least taking the time to tell people about it rather than just spamming pictures all over. If the author can't even talk up their book, why would I want to read the book itself?

What is this, kindergarten? I read. I don't need pictures shoved at me in the hope that I will see the book in stores and buy it simply because I recognize it.

I don't just vote for the name that I recognize on the ballot, I take time to research the candidates and make my vote count. Likewise, I don't just buy books because the author linked a picture of it in every post. Generally that annoys me enough to never read an author. Picture spam is still spam.

Nicki, I read sentences containing cover images like that anyway, and I'm reading on a computer with mouse-over technology (oooh!).

I read words, not pictures. (Says the girl who loves Graphic Novels. O_o That's DIFFERENT! LOL)

Let me be honest: I got adblock, I was only going to see it the first time anyway and I would never ever see it again, even if I was on the book page´s itself.

But the other people who got to see it all the time, dunno if that would not alienate more people than the ones interested ( to people likely to be alienated a tip: the great joy of adblock is not blocking ads, which I do not usually mind that much and let through. The great purpose of adblock is blocking annoying icons, annoying sigs, annoying background images, annoying music and annoying "useful" bars. Though must admit it raises some ethical questions, do true friends block icons and block background images from friends they love?)

Thank you Sherri. I have been justifying it to myself that way :) and it is very nice to have it validated by somebody else.(and it is not annoying behaviour, just differing taste)

Hirondelle, your adblock is set to prevent cover images from being displayed?

Like this:

How exactly does that work? Do you not see any covers on the site at all?

No, which is I meant I would only have to see it ONCE. To block anything, unless one subscribes to a list of things to block and something is on that list, you have to see something the first time before you block it. But once you see it and add it to your blocking filter, no, not unless somebody changes the url from the image or you turn off adblock you will not see it again. In the case you posted I could right click the image

and it would add a filter like this

www.goodreads.com##IMG[src="http...

I suspect if I edited it to http://photo.goodreads.com/books/*s/*... then yes I probably would not even see any cover images again. But I would not. In this case I just blocked that one image from being shown - where it is displayed, in forum discussions, on its own page, on the author´s bibliography, or on "readers who read this also read" tab. But just the goodreads icon - if I went to amazon I would still see it, just images with other URLs.

Sherri, I do not mind your icon - and a smallish icon would have to be pretty annoying (flashing for example) for it to be blocked. Background images sometimes are worse because they impair readability.

I am using chrome now, after years of using firefox, and I think adblock is super-powerful on chrome. I did block the jane eyre challenge, it is quite easy to do on chrome.

I agree with Becky and Nicki and any others who said that they dislike pic-links in discussions generally, anyway. I also tend to overlook the book actually being discussed (unless it's a really cool picture - LOL). I wouldn't mind it the book cover was put up in addition to the name of the book, but many people use it in place of the name, and I do find it very annoying and jarring.

But, to the point of my post, (which, honestly, I think we know what prompted it), is like what Jim said - I don't want a person's sig to be their book, in every post that they make. And if all it is is the picture, tacked onto a mention of a book, then I find it confusing. At first I thought the pic-link was the book that was just mentioned. It wasn't until later that I realized the two were unrelated - and that just annoyed me even more.

And, in general, an author that annoys me is an author I'm not going to read. *shrugs*

Oh, I see. I run adblock, but I don't use it on Goodreads because the ads are revenue for them. And I generally don't take the time to add a filter for "ignorable" things... just the big ones. ;)

My theory is, right clicking an image is just as easy, easier than seeing it and ignoring again ;)

I can't argue with that. ;)

Seriously, the great use of adblock is not about the ads, it´s that is makes me using some discussion foruns so much nicer!

and I did some pretty wide blockings for music being automatically played as well!

Sherri wrote: "I despise automatic music playing. DESPISE!..."

I agree completely with that.

I use Noscript (?) on Firefox at work. That lets the ads on GR show, but it stops those that try to expand when I mouseover them. That's another pet peeve.

I had considered that. There is always the perverse curiosity to then get a book just to find out how bad it is.

But I also don't think most of those amazon reviews have read the book, and while it could get her sales in the short term, I wouldn't foresee it having any longterm positive benefits - so even if she did do it on purpose, I think she still hurt herself more than helped herself in the long run.

Hi,
thanks for the link on 'flame wars', very interesting. As many on G. R. know I'm an independent author and have some fairly definite opinions on people who swamp things with, what is in many cases unedited dross! Then there are those who, like me, wrote a decent story, only to wreck things by rushing it out, through in my case ignorance and impatience. I am referring to my first published book. Boy did I learn a lot, and quickly, I'm still learning, but my latest thriller I dare put beside anyone's work.
On the other side of the coin, I think I could justify throwing the aforementioned 'hissy fit' at the person who posted a 'review' on the first half of a gardening book my 'publisher' suggested I write.
I have no idea who 'tally-ho whoever' is but clearly he/she can't read, or if he/she can, then doesn't understand what he/she is reading, I think I'll just ignore it, after all there is always one! But I should add it stopped steady sales on Amazon dead in it's tracks, which is a bit unfair, but that's life I guess.
Coming back to the editing bit, scanning the post you linked to it seems as though the story in question was initially posted/published totally unedited then 'sorted out' and re posted/published.
Now, to me this identifies the person as a writer NOT a serious author. There is nothing wrong with that, if this is the way they want to do things, but it does 'screw the pooch' for those who genuinely try to produce readable books rather than a 'throw away' story, if you see what I mean. We must find a way of making the distinction, but where do we draw the line? Frankly I don't know. Ideas?
All the best Paul Rix [oldgeezer]
P.S. I normally write under a pseudonym, hence the 'Timothy'

In grad school, I was taught not to respond to any comments directly while getting critiqued. At the end of the critique, you could ask questions on things that you had in your writing that you didn't feel had been addressed. Never respond. Not unless someone asks you a question about your work.

Yeah. I just did a teaching program, too. They so got on our backs our "digital footprints" and how the internet could get us fired.

Due to an injury, I lack a job at the moment, but have to admit when my books go up (yes, I'm self publishing, and yes, it is hard to find ways to get your book out there) I'm a little worried about getting a teaching job after that. But I'm not letting that stop my passion.

CicadaGrrl wrote: "In grad school, I was taught not to respond to any comments directly while getting critiqued. At the end of the critique, you could ask questions on things that you had in your writing that you di..."

In college I took a poetry course. Every class we had to read our poem, and then the class could discuss/critique it - but we were not allowed to participate in the discussion. We could not defend or comment or correct. We were taught that the work had to stand on its own - partially because, well, if it doesn't then you didn't do your job properly and partially because we wouldn't be there to defend it or explain it outside of class.

If your work needs explaining outside of what's in the book, then that's no one's fault but the author's.

Sherri wrote: "Merciful heavens, there's a name for it

To "Rice Out"

From the Encyclopedia Dramatica, which is about as full of snark as you'd imagine, so know that going in. I happened upon it while cruising ..."

Hey, did you guys check out the picture of a car built in Japan being tricked out half assedly? The level of cruelty is beyond my comprehension when someone places a label on such a ridiculous behavior. I guffawed though. :)

hmpf! I love the bookcovers function. Pretty pictures work for me. I think I'm not alone. If book covers didn't work to get a person interested in a book, the publishers wouldn't spend the money putting them on the book. When I'm talking about a book I read in one of these threads, I often use the bookcover function and I like it when other people do too.

Did I read that someone wrote a negative review on Amazon and badly affected the sales of that book? I'm sorry for the author but yeah that kind of makes me feel really powerful.

I think a good tip for an author or anyone in the public arena is that old saying "If you can't say anything nice..." Really, don't respond to negative criticism by sniping. It reflects back and the reflection isn't good.

Laurell K. Hamilton is a good example. I happen to like that author. I've read almost everything she's had published. But when she snipes at her detractors, it doesn't make me feel good about her. I always end up thinking- what a b*tch, someone has gotten too big for their britches...

Something my husband teaches me is- Don't take yourself too seriously. No matter how good your work is- not everyone is going to like it. That's just the way it is.

I'm not a big fan of the bible. Rumor has it GOD wrote that. I think if the creator of the universe wrote that, she could have done a better editing job but I digress. The point is a lot of people think the bible is greatest book ever written. Even if you're GOD, not everybody is going to like your book.

Personally, I find that the book cover pictures used in posts are too small too allow me to get a decent idea of what the cover looks like or (in many cases) identify the book if it's one I already know. (And if I don't know it, forget it.) But at the same time, they're large enough to break up the flow of posts. (Especially when you consider that I usually have to mouse over the cover to see what the name and author are.)

Taking the Eon cover on this page as an example - I can see that it says Eon, but it looks like the cover illustration is a donut with arrows sticking out of it at that size.

Hi Irene, and everyone else who has commented.
It was me who got a bad reveiw on amazon which stopped sales dead in it's tracks. If someone had written a bad reveiw on a thriller/action adventure such as 'The Day the Ravens Died', they didn't like it because.... then fair enough. This would have been a matter of taste or I would have learnt a bit more about the art of writing, and I know I still have a lot to learn. Oh I can spin a good yarn, weave all the plots you like along with the best of them, but I know I still have a lot to learn to get the best out of the story.
This was different, the book in question was 'Beyond the Potting Shed' written mainly for those embarking on their first serious attempt at growing their own fruit and veg. on a limited budget.
Now call me cynical but when the head of a horticultural college says it is the most practical and useful guide he has read live on the B.B.C. I am inclined to believe him, and I wasn't in the studio when he said it.
The people buying it off amazon are unlikely to have heard the program. So when someone says it was boring etc it doesn't help, and as I have never bought anything off amazon myself I don't have an account, so replying, which in this instance I feel would be justified, is a tad difficult.
I genuinely don't care if reviews are good or bad, as long as they say why, this is how authors learn!
The lesson here is for anyone writing a review to explain WHY they feel as they do. Having checked the sad individual in questions other reviews it is clear he/she has no grasp of the English language as it is a list of disapointments brought about by not reading about what ever it was he/she was buying. It wasn't as big as I thought, it was too big for what I wanted etc. So you can probably understand why I am a bit hacked off about it.
As I said 'Beyond the Potting Shed is largely aimed at the realative beginner, or those who are not being successful in their endeavors,and want to save a bit of money, this is made clear in the 'spiel' about the book. So if he/she is already an 'expert' or wants to spend a fortune then they shouldn't have bought it in the first place. It's a bit like complaining about the occasional violence in 'The Day the Ravens Died' it's an action thriller not a cuddly love story, if you see the point of this rant!
All the best Paul Rix [oldgeezer]

Old Geezer - I got two words for you: White Space

Especially in a forum like this, that little bit of white space makes posts much easier to read. It's a simple matter of hitting enter twice when starting a new paragraph instead of just once.

Otherwise your post looks like a giant block of text, which are, generally, harder to read.

And, FWIW, I'm not being facetious. It really would help make your posts easier to read. (Well, it would help me, and I'm just going to assume it would help some other visually impaired people as well.)

Cheers.

Hi Colleen,
fair comment! point taken
All the best Paul Rix [old geezer]
P.S. my books aren't like that, promise!!

I was at the Ad-Astra convention this weekend, which is primarily a scifi writer's convention. I had read this post about the blow-up a couple of weeks ago and linked to the blog to take a look at what had been posted.

On several panels during the convention and during the question periods, this was actually referenced and not in a good way. Don't do a 'Howett.' It's pretty bad when your name becomes a joke and synonymous with what not to do as a writer.

One more piece of advice:

* Don't use a marketing place which is a "pay for review" type place. Or, if you do, then at least make sure the reviews are believable. Over-hyped reviews for unknown books are immediately suspect to us cynical types.

Colleen ~blackrose~ wrote: "One more piece of advice:

* Don't use a marketing place which is a "pay for review" type place. Or, if you do, then at least make sure the reviews are believable. Over-hyped reviews for unknow..."


Seconded!

Accepted, but where do you go to for reviews if not to those companies? As a self published author the opportunities for a review of your novel (ones which carry any credit) are severely limited, aren't they? Can you name any sites/people?

Accepted, but where do you go to for a review if not to those companies? As a self published author I have found the opportunities for a credible review severely limited. Can you name any sites/people? Reviews of any sort are surely better than none at all? Thanks

Do a giveaway, look for real honest people to review it and don't just pay people to say amazing things about it, whether it's amazing or not...

Thanks. I have plenty of decent reviews from ordinary folk on amazon and on site but it's those who have marketing/promotion benefits an author seeks. Unfortunately they all charge money and fall under the above umbrella (the companies you speak of) as most established reviewers for mainstream media won't entertain the idea of reviewing a self published work.
:-( Hence why we have to use a 'pay for review' site.

M wrote: "Accepted, but where do you go to for a review if not to those companies? As a self published author I have found the opportunities for a credible review severely limited. Can you name any sites/people? Reviews of any sort are surely better than none at all? Thanks "

Have you tried the blogging community?

And no, reviews of any sort are not better than none at all. It's generally frowned on to accept payment for reviews. How can anyone trust that review/reviewer if we know that they were paid for it, especially one so over the top glowing? Answer: I don't trust them.

If I see paid reviews I assume the book is... not good. And I can't think of a better way to turn people away from your books than to sell them something marketed as 'challenging the greats' and for the book to not live up to the promise. Word of mouth reaches far.

Even negative reviews are better than paid blurbs, in my opinion.

I have asked for nothing but honesty but accept all you say. How then would you approach this problem? Who would you contact/how? Marketing is the single most challenging aspect of self publishing and can cost an arm and a leg. As stated I have lots of healthy reviews from people who weren't paid/I do not know but how do I increase this figure and communicate it to my target audience? Being my first novel I've done lots of things wrong and I'm trying to learn.

Becky wrote: "Even negative reviews are better than paid blurbs, in my opinion."

I agree with this. Or, at least, some honest 3-star reviews.

Aside from an overly glowing review being suspicious, having a handful of reviews and all of them being 5-stars is also suspicious. I tend to think they're mostly from family or friends.

And I'm not sure how these companies really provide a "credible review". I only found out about the company because the "Tolkien and Lewis have met their match" comment was suspect, to me, so I googled the place that gave you the review, and I found out they were paid-to-review place. That's not even remotely credible - because I'm going to assume they're giving you a 5-star glowing review because you paid them to, and not because the book actually deserves it.

(Also, side point, as a self-publishing author, I would look into e-books. Very few people are going to pay $16 for a paperback for an unknown author. I have seen several self-published authors offer e-books for anywhere from $3.99 and less, and people are much more likely to try an author for $4 than they are for $16.)

I also agree with Becky's suggestion of the blogging community. And also Dawn's about giveaways - here and other places.

I do know some people only listen to, like, a New York Times Book review or something but a lot of other people couldn't care less. I take opinions from people I know, from people's whose tastes I can gauge in comparison to my own, and I'd be much more likely to take an honest seeming review off of goodreads than I would about most "credible sources" anyway.

But that's just me.

M, I would do a google search for 'book blog', 'book review blog' 'review blog' etc, and just start browsing blogs. Find some that feature the type of book you've written, and contact the blog's author and ask if they would be willing to review your book. You'd likely have to provide them with a copy of the book, which I'm sure isn't free. Many bloggers also post reviews to Goodreads, LibraryThing, Amazon, etc, but word would get around.

Colleen ~blackrose~ wrote: "I do know some people only listen to, like, a New York Times Book review or something but a lot of other people couldn't care less. I take opinions from people I know, from people's whose tastes I can gauge in comparison to my own, and I'd be much more likely to take an honest seeming review off of goodreads than I would about most "credible sources" anyway. "

I agree with this completely.

(Also, side point, as a self-publishing author, I would look into e-books. Very few people are going to pay $16 for a paperback for an unknown author. I have seen several self-published authors offer e-books for anywhere from $3.99 and less, and people are much more likely to try an author for $4 than they are for $16.)

Thanks. I'll try all you say but what if the book actually was that good? When I found out the price that Authorhouse had set for the book I was totally distraught and I completely agree with you. Despite this ridiculous albatross around its neck it has/is selling well and I am amazed. Unfortunately the author gets very little say as the publisher's costs are huge.
Thanks for your input - I have to go and read the Kid's bedtime stories now. Cheers

I agree 100% with what both Becky and Colleen have said, for what it's worth.

M wrote: "Thanks. I'll try all you say but what if the book actually was that good?"

That good - to what? Be worth $16 in paperback? Or to get only 5-star reviews?

Doesn't exist.

I'm sorry, I don't care how good your book is - I'm stingy and I'm not likely to pay $16 for a paperback for authors I know and like, and no book gets only 5-star reviews. It's not just a matter of quality, it's a matter of taste. (As evidenced by the fact that not even Tolkien is to everyone's taste...) ;)

Colleen ~blackrose~ wrote: "Becky wrote: "Even negative reviews are better than paid blurbs, in my opinion."

I agree with this. Or, at least, some honest 3-star reviews."

I just wanted to comment on this, because I will still read a book with very negative reviews... if the things that the reviews say lead me to think that I might disagree, or feel differently about the book.

Becky wrote: "I just wanted to comment on this, because I will still read a book with very negative reviews... if the things that the reviews say lead me to think that I might disagree, or feel differently about the book. "

I agree with this, too. I recently got interested in a series via negative reviews. Person didn't like it 'cause it was too dark, the main character too cynical, there was too much cussing and violence. I was all "Ooh, right up my alley!"

(I'm sorry if my comment seemed to suggest otherwise. My phrasing and grammar are particularly atrocious today.)

Exactly Colleen.

Or, "I don't like sad books that make me cry." OOH! I do!

I just commented because you and I have very different rating styles and expectations. I just wanted to clarify what I meant. :)

Becky wrote: "I just commented because you and I have very different rating styles and expectations. I just wanted to clarify what I meant. :) "

I don't know what you mean. I have the same tastes as everyone else. ;)

Right. Yes, of course. What WAS I thinking? ;)

Sherri wrote: "Blurbs are barely worth the paper they are printed on given the peculiar relationships in publishing and writing"

Yeah ... I almost always discount blurbs from authors, even authors (whose work) I like. Because frequently this is the equivalent of blurbing a friend's work, or that of a colleague one wants to remain on good terms with.