Goodreads Authors/Readers discussion

I have read a heap of discussions on this subject as I am going to SP my first book. So far, this has to be the most constructive thread I've read and it has given me a lot to think about (as though my head wasn't crammed up already).

I'm writing in English, which is NOT my first language. Getting my manuscript proofread by an editor was a no-brainer and it has taken a lot of work and patience to find information, decide on an editor and polish my book. I edited 5 complete drafts on my own before submitting the entire script to my editor, which ihas been amazing! My book would not be anywhere near publishable without her help, even with a good plotline and what I believe to be interesting characters.

I've realized that in order to become an SPA I need to do the groundwork and spend hours on research on how to get my book as good as it can possibly be and then hopefully be able to reach out to as many people as possible!

Should we not Always aim to do our best and reach our target audience? We're selling a product, which I believe require quality control and a finished product to be proud of. We owe that to our readers. I for one would like them to return to read my next book and the only way to do that is to make sure the first one lives up to their expectations and then some.

I don't want to just sell! I want it to be engaging, intriguing, spellchecked a hundred times over, clean in terms of continuity and concistency and above all a GOOD and enjoyable read!

Lynn, I think you have summarized the issue well. The important thing is to present our readers with a well written (and yes edited) manuscript that keeps them wanting to turn the page. If we don't do this they will likely never read another thing you write. The sad truth. That is the standard we wish to clear. Best-of-Luck!! Rory Home by Christmas

Several months after retiring, I received an invitation to attend the annual reunion luncheon for retirees. I attended.

During conversations, most who had never advanced beyond a lower management position during their career seemed intent upon explaining that the blame for their not being promoted could be attributed to upper management or events and things beyond their control. Never themselves.

Those in attendence who had moved up through the management ranks and eventualy reached the executive level did not talk much about it. They knew how they had succeeded: by obtaining the skills and knowledge required to perform exceptionally well and then doing it. Then, after being promoted, continuing the process in preparation for the next promotion, and the next, and the next.

The previous information is not as off-topic as it may seem at first. It applies to any career, including writing. Most authors who are not succeeding tend to blame it upon the system, readers callousness, unfair reviews, lack of funds, etc. Everyone and anything, other then themselves.

Rory wrote: "Lynn, I think you have summarized the issue well. The important thing is to present our readers with a well written (and yes edited) manuscript that keeps them wanting to turn the page. If we don't..."

Thank you Rory :) I appreciate that! We set our own standards ;)

Jim wrote: "The 364 messages posted on this discussion thread to-date have muddied the waters quite a bit by straying off-topic..."

Very entertaining, though. I thought the topic seemed familiar, then noticed I started it back in 2012. I read a lot of indie books and I think standards are improving (either that, or I'm being more ruthless judging book samples before buying). I've self-published two novels since I started this topic, both of which were vetted and accepted by Awesome Indies. Which is fine, but not everyone has heard of Awesome Indies, so it becomes just one more thing to promote. Which I'm rubbish at. I'm still not sure what the answer is.

Something that's increasingly bothering me is the sheer number of books on offer. I've discovered a few new authors who I think deserve success, yet they have tiny readerships here on Goodreads. I'm sure the opposite is true, too. The volume of books on offer is making it difficult to find the good ones. Ebooks theoretically have an infinite shelf life, but should they?

There is a little confusion over types of editors on this thread. At the point at which I responded to the oh so middle class comment "just save up for it." The discussion was about content editing which not only costs thousands if it worth a penny, but is something that is lacking from many mainstream published books, and something that is largely an invention of the English speaking world in the mid 20th century and has made limited in-roads into the non-English speaking world. Editors to improve your grammar are copy editors. Editors to root out your typos are not editors, they are proof-readers (and they can be the most expensive of the lot).

It is also important to consider that those offering editorial services are as unregulated as the authors themselves. Anyone can claim to be an editor and you find many setting up businesses with websites that are littered with grammatical errors. Those ones are easy to avoid the problem is the ones that get someone decent to write their website, but are hopeless as copy editors. Yes as an SPA you can sack your editor, but those mistaken hires add to the cost per book. So with the standard of editing being so variable knowing that someone has been edited is no guarantee of quality.

The lack of a guarantee of quality goes for mainstream publishing as well. I recently read my first Mountlake book and if I was to judge them all by that one I would never read another. It was well enough structured as a story (content editing fine, although the antagonist was drawn a little too melodramatic for the genre), it had no more than five typos (proof reading excellent), but the author was in need of a copy editor who could double as a dialogue coach (which was such a serious problem it maybe should have been referred back to content editing).

SPA might have a bad reputation, but so does small press and big pub. Every time a reader reads a poor book a bad reputation is invited whatever sector of the industry it comes from. As an author I feel sorry for poorly edited mainstream books because that author had signed away rights and accepted a lower royalty in return for work that has not been done. I mostly read mainstream published books and I am mostly unimpressed by the editing standards.

I will stick to being SPA and continue to stick up for its poorer members, who probably would not get a mainstream contract anyone because its who you know (and what accent you speak with) not what you've written.

Mercia wrote: "...It is also important to consider that those offering editorial services are as unregulated as the authors themselves. Anyone can claim to be an editor and you find many setting up businesses with websites that are littered with grammatical errors..."

Case in point: https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

Mercia wrote: "There is a little confusion over types of editors on this thread. At the point at which I responded to the oh so middle class comment "just save up for it." The discussion was about content editing..."


Personally I think it is a good idea to do some serious digging if you want to find a good editor/proofreader. This is part of the work. I found mine through http://www.sfep.org.uk and I had email correspondence with her for a while before deciding. (she is not expensive either, which I thought might have been a red flag. Luckily with her it wasn't).

She also had to give me a sample by editing parts of my book before I hired her. - I think it is crucial that you get to see proof of what they are able to do. She is always quick to respond, thorough and concise. Plus, she goes beyond what I initially hired her to do and she seems genuinely engaged in the book, which is a nice bonus. One might want to find someone who is really interested in the genre you are writing too.

As for quality, I believe it varies no matter how you are published.

I found my editor through Sisters in Crime, an organization for mystery writers. The members are supportive and knowledgeable. There are numerous benefits in joining a group like this for one's genre, and meaningful recommendations for editors and cover art are one of them.

I have only recently started reading independently-published books, having gone through all the stuff I wanted to read on my Kindle. Like many things in life, it has an upside and a downside for readers. The up-side is that having no publisher to filter them, there is a much wider range of books to read - the downside is that having no publisher to filter them, inevitably some are rubbish. Crass plots, clunky sentence construction, rambling narrative... Suddenly I have deep sympathy for all those editors having to plough through their slush piles.

I have dealt with this by changing my approach to reading. I look for good reviews - though don't always trust them, especially the ones that gush about this book being the best they've ever read. (Really?) In the past, I would rarely leave a book unfinished - now I do it all the time, and keep a list to remind me not to bother with that author again (it helps that most of these books are cheap/free on Kindle.)

As a writer... No, I don't use an editor or a proofreader. Does that sound arrogant? I was at school in the days when we had correct grammar drilled into us, and have been a teacher in adult education for many years, marking students' work by the ton. So I'm pretty good at spotting errors. I also do a read through in Comic Sans 16, which helps. I have a small team of good friends who do Beta-reads for me - by the time it gets to them, there's no more than one or two errors in a 50,000 word manuscript.

They're also good at spotting holes in the plot - "What happened to her guitar?" - or places where I've repeated myself. So far I've felt that was enough. Being able to write to any length, instead of having to meet publishers' requirements, frees me up to cut out the padding (I used to write for Mills&Boon, and found the length requirements deadening.)

And I guess I'm just a control freak - I want to do it my way, for better or worse. If it all goes pear-shaped, I accept the consequences.

(PS - what shape do pears go when things go wrong?)

What is worth it when it comes to editing?

I think that's an interesting question/discussion.

Copy editing, in my understanding, speaks mostly to writing technique. Did the prose flow? Is the grammar correct? Should that be lie or lay? Emdashes aren't supposed to be used that way! Is the narrative clear?

(First or all, is my understanding correct? Can someone define it better?)

It seems to me that, if we're talking about genre fiction 'cause literary fiction appears to be a whole 'nother thing entirely, writing technique only gets you so far. As long as the reader can stomach your narrative enough to get through the book, is the writing really going to sell you more books?

Personally, I've never recommended a book based on the grammar being really good and the writing smooth. On the other hand, I will certainly say, "Don't buy this book b/c it's horribly written."

I recommend books because the story spoke to me.

Based on my experience, it seems like:

1. As long as you can write "not horribly" you're okay. (Though opinions of "not horrible" vary considerably :) )

2. An editor who can improve the content of your story stand a much better chance of getting you more sales than an editor who cleans up your writing.

Thoughts?

Thanks.

Brian

Yes, Brian - I'm pretty sure your definitions of editing/copy-editing are correct.

I agree that good writing technique only gets you so far - it's the absence thereof which causes problems. If a book is badly written, it jerks me out of the narrative, and once that happens a couple of times I'm likely to lose interest.

When I'm writing, I put a LOT of effort into getting a good "flow" - I like nothing better than when someone says they read one of my books in one sitting (when I took a whole year to write it!)

Susanne,

I've always thought that getting the reader to finish in a single sitting was more a function of a high level of tension rather than narrative flow.

That said, choppiness will make a reader throw down a book pretty fast.

I think it can be either - or in the best books, both.

If a writer is serious they will have their book professionally edited. The manuscript will have been rewritten endless times and read diligently by friends and/or writer groups.It seems that readers on Amazon aren't put off by self publishing. Many self published authors have their own imprint, and for various reason self publishing is chosen over the main publishing houses.

Brian wrote: "...1. As long as you can write "not horribly" you're okay. (Though opinions of "not horrible" vary considerably :) )

Yes, I think if a writer does an overall decent job of writing then there will be readers who will enjoy it. The question is, what percentage of SPA books are "not horrible"? I don't have the opportunity to read nearly as much as I used to. I read the blurb. If I like that, I read the first page or first few pages. As a result, the books I read are "not horrible".

Maybe we should compile some analytics based on the number of good reviews versus bad reviews put out by career reviewers. This could indicate the percentage of "horrible" SPA books. Just a thought.


Brian wrote: "...2. An editor who can improve the content of your story stand a much better chance of getting you more sales than an editor who cleans up your writing..."

I think writers producing their first book would definitely benefit from such an editor. The writer should use that information to improve his/her ability to produce better content and not constantly rely on a content editor to make the book "not horrible". If a writer has to rely on the editor to do that, then the writer should give the editor some of the credit for producing the book.

Are a majority of SPA books "horrible"? If yes, then SPAs will always suffer a bad reputation. If no, then are the few "horrible" SPA books causing readers to put us all at the same level?

There are many ways of judging a book's worth, but the fact is self-published authors simply do not have the tools and resources of traditional publishers. Thus, unless the author invests the time and/or money to make a quality product, the book will not work on any level.

(I AM sticking to the topic, btw, am just getting around to it from a different route.)

I read reviews of books I find have shockingly poor writing, and many of these reviews are raves. The sales figures seem to show these reviews are genuine. So on this level, to this audience, I think a book is poorly written when the grammar and style prevent the reader from enjoying the book. The vast majority of these books that I'm aware of are genre exercises, by which I mean they're completely predictable in terms of elements and execution, and are written in simple, "clean" styles.

The reputation such writers have doesn't seem to be poor, probably because most people are impressed by someone completing a book at all, and most readers aren't buying literature. The sales figures of all books tell us most books sold are nonfiction, and the fiction that sells tends to be genre fiction, and not the books that are stretching the genre but which are telling a good old-fashioned story. I don't know who but other independent writers are calling these books horrible, other than writers published traditionally, the vast majority of whom certainly seem to see a difference between themselves and the rest of us.

Differences of point of view are a big part of this discussion. A few posts above me someone describes economic and cultural issues that are utterly bizarre to me, but he or she believes them. Similarly, I can drone on (obviously) about bad writing, but those books are selling, while I'm just starting to put together a plan which will take me a year and a half before I see results. So who is informed enough to say sweeping things about such a subject? As long as readers enjoy the books, and as long as they don't give up in large numbers due to all the crap out there, I don't think the reputation will be any different from that of the paperback revolution. A lot of the books published in that format are now considered American classics.

John wrote: "There are many ways of judging a book's worth, but the fact is self-published authors simply do not have the tools and resources of traditional publishers. Thus, unless the author invests the time..."

John,

My thoughts on a couple of your comments:

"I don't know who but other independent writers are calling these books horrible, other than writers published traditionally,"

It's not just other writers who are calling SPAs poorly written. Anecdotal evidence abounds of readers who have dived into the pool of SPAs and been drowned in a sea of crapola. Granted, I have no way of knowing how statistically signifigant those number are, but they do exist.

"I can drone on (obviously) about bad writing, but those books are selling"

If a book is selling, that's fine. Obviously, the writer did something right. It seems to me, though, that the biggest complaint among SPAs is that their books aren't selling. If this is the case with one's book, perhaps the quality is part of the issue?

Thanks.

Brian

There are far too many factors that go into whether a book sells or not to tag it with any one reason, especially to say that it's necessarily the quality.

Excellent books, books of heart wrenching perfection have languished for sales, books that are published by respected traditional publishers, especially university presses which are, by their nature, more concerned with quality than the spread sheet.

Enough books of questionable, even deplorable quality sell crazily to make the quality reasoning suspect, although for some readers it DOES play a part.

The whole thing is largely a crapshoot. Write because you want to. Write because the stories won't let you not write.

Then try to load the dice. Do the work. Make sure that if you do put those stories out there they are as perfect as they can be without compromising their essence. Follow the marketing advice of others who have gone before and achieved some decent numbers, but never follow the advice of anyone who has substantively changed their writing in order to be more commercial.

Invoke the Gods of Chance in whatever ritual seems best to you then roll those dice.

Renee wrote: "...Invoke the Gods of Chance in whatever ritual seems best to you then roll those dice."

That's depressing. The Gods of Chance always seem to crap on me.

Roger wrote: "Renee wrote: "...Invoke the Gods of Chance in whatever ritual seems best to you then roll those dice."

That's depressing. The Gods of Chance always seem to crap on me."

Isn't it good luck to have a bird crap on you? As for the gods of chance, that is a crap shoot. (Pun intended.)

I'm much more optimistic than Renee. Granted, having a book take off to such a degree that you land on the bestseller list does, I believe, involve a lot of luck. There's a lot of competition out there, and a lot of it really good. It's simply not realistic to expect that level of success.

I do think, however, that you can gain some level of success based on merit. It seems to me that four factors will determine that:

1. Is your writing good enough for your audience? (If you're writing literary fiction, you probably need to be pretty durn good. If writing erotica, maybe not so much...)

2. Do your stories appeal to readers? (If you're writing solely for you, it seems like your success should be measured by whether you like your book, not whether a bunch of other people do.)

3. Have you done an appropriate amount of marketing? (Doesn't seem to me that putting a lot of effort in getting out the word for your first book or two makes a lot of economic sense beyond the basics, but, at some point, seems like potential sales would be worth the effort.)

4. Have you written enough? (I think the authors who are making decent money are putting out a lot of books. If your first book doesn't do well, write another one. Once you've got a decent catalog, you've got a shot.)

Seems to me that, if you're not successful (depending on the definition), you're probably deficient in one or more of the factors above. Moreso than luck, anyway.

Ah, the joy of optimism! Unfortunately luck is going to play a substantial role for a new indie author trying to get noticed. In my category, for example, contemporary romance, there are thousands (literally) of books competing, and those published by the traditional route are going to clutter up the top of the list on Amazon etc. Not many readers are going to click through at random and just happen upon your book.

Having said that, you can to an extent make your own luck. Get your name known by writing short stories, hit the social media sites - whatever it takes. And as you say, keep writing. Overnight success can take an awfully long time.

We all invoke the gods of chance, whether we're with a publisher or self-published.

Marketing is not an "if x, then y" although don't we all wish it were? I do! I wish I knew what an appropriate amount of marketing is, but I joke that if I were a character in the Divergent series, they'd have to create a new faction for me--and it would be called Relentless.

If I could give only one tip to indie authors it would be Get a Professional Edit. I've seen a number of very good stories marred by typos and homonym issues, like reign v. rein and eaves v. eves. You owe it to your project to make it the very best it can be!

Brian wrote: "I'm much more optimistic than Renee. Granted, having a book take off to such a degree that you land on the bestseller list does, I believe, involve a lot of luck. "

I disagree with that, I believe it involves a lot of work. Authors who are doing well (regardless of how they publish) are working hard. I have a friend who is a successful self published author of erotica romance. She regularly lands on the NYT/USA Today best seller lists and she's been doing it since her debut came out in 2013. She also works damn hard. I mean 12-14 hour days of which she devotes 3-4 hours to social media, marketing, managing her street team, engaging with readers etc

There is this perception that all you have to do is write a book, hit publish and wait for the money to roll in. The reality is very different. Writing and succeeding takes work and dedication. It's about learning your craft so each subsequent book is better. It's about studying the market, identifying your target and knowing what others are doing that does/doesn't work.

There seems to be a small segment of authors who want to complain their books aren't selling, but who don't want to put in the work that it takes to gain visibility in the market.

AW,

Perhaps I didn't make my point well.

I never meant to imply that it doesn't take hard work to succeed.

The discussion, in my understanding, was whether or not success is guaranteed if you work hard enough.

I don't believe that it is. There is a lot of competition and few spots at the top. I find it hard to believe that every author who works hard reaches the pinnacle absent all other factors.

I believe luck plays a huge roll in a writer's commercial success. I say this from experience having had three novels hit the lists, the first of which I did nothing to promote except put it up for R2Rs on GR. But...

I also believe other factors are involved. Good writing and editing are essential. As Susanne pointed out, your choice of genre and sub-genre plays a role. While my paranormal romances do very well, my contemporaries do not even though the reviews are excellent. Same writing, similar style and plot (without fur or fang), but it is a much more competitive market dominated by big names.

Marketing takes a great deal of time and finding promo sources that actually deliver is a job in itself. The payoff for that time and effort won't produce a best seller, but it will produce a steadily growing readership. Many authors don't seem to have the patience to wait and grow.

Patience and determination also play their part. Remember Richard Bach? He wrote a lot of books that went nowhere. Nobody else remembered him either until Stephen King re-released his books while making sure it was known he was Bach.

Just because a book was traditionally published doesn't mean it is a quality book, or that it has escaped mistakes. One of my favorite author's recent books had more than 40 spelling mistakes that I caught and reported in the first release.

This book was released through a major publishing house and I was shocked at the lack of quality control in the final product.

You need to judge the book by it's content, not by how it was published.

Poor quality and high quality can exist from any publishing source.

Jacqueline wrote: "I believe luck plays a huge roll in a writer's commercial success. I say this from experience having had three novels hit the lists..."

By "lists" do you mean NYT/USA Today bestseller list, or top 100 genre list on Amazon? Just curious, since the two are very different (and several thousand sales apart).

A.W. wrote: "Jacqueline wrote: "I believe luck plays a huge roll in a writer's commercial success. I say this from experience having had three novels hit the lists..."

By "lists" do you mean NYT/USA Today best..."

I've made top 100 on Amazon in sales rank three times (for a few days) and a half dozen times on the genre lists where I stayed in the top 20 (first page) for several weeks. It's nice while it lasts, but unless you're a big name, it never lasts long. Which is why I concentrate on building a loyal readership. It provides a more stable income since I'll never sell a million copies of anything, but I'll always have bills to pay. Never made NYT/USA and probably never will! I earn a good living, but I'll never get rich. As it is, that's more than I ever dreamed possible and I'm grateful for every day of it.

Timothy wrote: "Just because a book was traditionally published doesn't mean it is a quality book, or that it has escaped mistakes. One of my favorite author's recent books had more than 40 spelling mistakes that..."

Which book and which author? I would like to confirm your accusation.

I hear this all the time. There is no comparing the few errors in TP books against some of the amazing garbage being put out by SPAs.

I've read SP books that would have been easy if it was just spelling that was the problem. But instead you had spelling and grammar, sentence structure, missing words, incomplete sentences, no character development, huge plot holes, lack of research, formatting problems, and logic errors. These render a book unreadable. I can give you a list.

Christine wrote: "Timothy wrote: "Just because a book was traditionally published doesn't mean it is a quality book, or that it has escaped mistakes. One of my favorite author's recent books had more than 40 spelli..."

I'm an Indie, Christine, and though I hate to admit it, and wish I didn't have to, I agree with you. I wish I knew what to do about it.
I put a lot of time, effort, and money into producing my books and I know my sales are hurt because of readers who've been turned off by some of the poor quality found in the Indie market.

Christine wrote: "Which book and which author? I would like to confirm your accusation.

I hear this all the time. There is no comparing the few errors in TP books against some of the amazing garbage being put out by SPAs."

She has since updated her eBook and repaired these and other mistakes, so you would not be able to verify.

Of course by saying this you are calling me a liar.... thanks for that.

Jacqueline wrote: "...I put a lot of time, effort, and money into producing my books and I know my sales are hurt because of readers who've been turned off by some of the poor quality found in the Indie market.
..."

Please understand there is always a market for a well done book and readers are depending more and more on word of mouth to select their books. If you put out a good product - it may take a little time, but you will succeed and in the long run be able to sell all your books as your reputation becomes known.

Timothy wrote: "She has since updated her eBook and repaired these and other mistakes, so you would not be able to verify. Of course by saying this you are calling me a liar.... thanks for that. ..."

I'm asking you to substantiate your accusation. You said it and I think before I take your word for it - I'd like to check for myself. You still haven't provided an author or title. Since I don't read e-books, I would be checking a hard copy.

You can take this as an insult if you'd like, but I don't know you and you just joined GR. Why would I take your word for anything? I've heard this accusation numerous times (TPs are as bad as SPs) and no one has ever been able to back up that statement. It's juvenile mud-slinging and I'm sure there are others besides me who are tired of hearing it.

The numerous, verifiable examples of works, rife with technical writing errors, that have contributed to the bad reputation, attributed to independently and self-published books, can be remedied.

The corrective action required is: determination, discipline, patience, and a willingness to expend the time and effort needed to learn and master the technical writing and narration skills that separate very competent authors from the less competent.

This can be accomplished very inexpensively. There are many free and low-cost seminars that teach basic and advanced writing techniques. The public libraries have shelves dedicated to books and periodicals filled with information pertaining to writing, editing, publishing, marketing, and promotion.

Many independent and self-published authors have already mastered their craft. It is time for those who have not to follow their example. Instead of making excuses, make an effort. Your reputation depends on it.

Jacqueline wrote: "Christine wrote: "Timothy wrote: "Just because a book was traditionally published doesn't mean it is a quality book, or that it has escaped mistakes. One of my favorite author's recent books had m..."

I'm afraid I agree. I take care too - I used to work in publishing, and I take advice from beta readers, proofread, and use a professional designer. I'm also reading two books from other indie authors right now, and they're just as well-written and produced as anything you'd see from a commercial publisher. So I wish people were not discouraged from buying independently published books by the poor quality of some of what's out there.

Trouble is, who's to say what should and shouldn't be published? If someone wants to put out crap, no-one really has the right to stop them. All we can do is hope that readers adjust to the new publishing landscape and find ways to hunt out the good and avoid the bad.

My own method is to check the blurb or synopsis first. If it's poorly written or contains poor grammar and spelling (and I'm not talking about the occasional typo), I move on to the peek inside option. It's not always fool proof, but it goes a long way in filtering out high school creative writing projects or first drafts of projects that might shine with a bit of polishing. Those talented first drafts are the ones that break my heart.

Jacqueline wrote: "My own method is to check the blurb or synopsis first. If it's poorly written or contains poor grammar and spelling (and I'm not talking about the occasional typo), I move on to the peek inside opt..."

Yes, I do that too! It is surprising how often the blurb has errors. It's a fair indication that the book might not be too polished either.

That said, I did once agree to review a book that turned out to be excellent - and only noticed later that the blurb was badly written. But I think that was an exception.

Blurbs aren't easy to write. They're advertising copy. I know many writers hate doing them, me included. I wonder how many Indie authors write their blurb quickly and say, "There. That's done." without taking the care they do with their novel. It was something I had to learn - the hard way - and I'm still not good at it. Although I do edit!

Jacqueline wrote: "Blurbs aren't easy to write. They're advertising copy. I know many writers hate doing them, me included. I wonder how many Indie authors write their blurb quickly and say, "There. That's done." wit..."

I wrote mine at least 20 times. It became an obsession. I finally edited it down to a 200 word count without losing the thrust of what my novel was about. I think blurbs are critical. A blurb's sole purpose is hook the interest of a reader and turn them into a buyer.

G.T. wrote: "Jacqueline wrote: "Blurbs aren't easy to write. They're advertising copy.

Yes, G.T.! Put your 90K novel into 200 words. Don't give away the plot, but make it enticing to readers. Gaaack! I try to think of old movie trailers.

Jacqueline wrote: "Blurbs aren't easy to write. They're advertising copy. I know many writers hate doing them, me included. I wonder how many Indie authors write their blurb quickly and say, "There. That's done." wit..."

I agree blurbs are extremely hard to write. I honestly lost track of how many different times and blurbs I wrote before deciding on the one I used. I almost fear it more than the 200+ times I go over my manuscript.

I am dreading the writing of the blurb. Wound up making a blurb file and when a thought, description or sentence with possibilities hits me I go write it down there before it gets away.

I'm trying to write a blurb now, and getting feedback in another group. They seem to hate my adjectives, and I assert that adjectives are what make a blurb, and generate the excitement necessary to make you want to read the book. But I'm as bad as anyone else when it comes to writing blurbs.

It happens a lot. I found many typos in an edition of Isaac Asimov's short stories, published by Tor Books.

Pointing out mistakes made by others does not justify or provide a logical reason for making mistakes. Pointing out inappropriate behavior in others is not a good reason to condone inappropriate behavior in general.

If that doesn't provide sufficient incentive to be the best you can be, regardless of the behavior of others, someone once wrote in the most published and best known book in the world, "Judge not, lest ye be judged".

Jim wrote: "Pointing out mistakes made by others does not justify or provide a logical reason for making mistakes. Pointing out inapropriate behavior in others is not a good reason to condone inapprpriate beha..."

True, but someone did ask for an example.

Ken wrote: "Jim wrote: "Pointing out mistakes made by others does not justify or provide a logical reason for making mistakes. Pointing out inapropriate behavior in others is not a good reason to condone inapp..."

Ken,

The post was not intended as a direct response to your previous post. It was a general observation, intended as an attempt to steer the thread back on topic. "Do Self-Published E-Books Have a Bad Reputation?". I apologize if it was misleading or misunderstood.

Whether one believes it is warrented or not, the answer is simply and undeniably, "Yes". Which would account for someone posting the topic in the first place.

Jim wrote: "Pointing out mistakes made by others does not justify or provide a logical reason for making mistakes. Pointing out inapropriate behavior in others is not a good reason to condone inapprpriate beha..."

Of course not, Jim, but isn't it nice to know these authors are human, too, and publishing houses aren't perfect? I find it more comforting than critical, for while I strive for perfection, like all grammatical sinners, I never reach that sinless state. At least now I know I'll find good company in writer's purgatory!