The Writing Process discussion

The logo of "The Writing Process" is the public version of the Seal of Approval of the Awesome Indies organization. The all gold version is sent only to those authors whose submitted work has passed a strict selection for quality writing. They can then feature the Seal on their book cover as in here:


The AI describe the criteria of the selection process.

Why it is mentioned here? Because the writing process does not end when -- The End -- is finally written. There's still a long way to go, beta-readers, proofreader, line editing and content editing. A serious writing effort is like an iceberg, only the tip is visible, a book can provide an easy flow and pleasant reading, and it has required hard work and countless editing hours.

Tim Vicary's "Bould Counsel" has received the AI Seal of Approval

http://awesomeindies.net/2013/05/06/a...

I endorse the Awesome Indies Seal of Approval, not just because it has approved my own book, but because it is about helping the whole world to find the genuine gold among the "How-can-we-get-rich-quick" chaff that is on Amazon.

I agree, I wish Amazon had a filter for quality before accepting to list whatever. I understand those readers who refrain from Indie works and the AI group, and similar ones, are there to help and support those readers who could then approach an Indie work with more confidence. As AI puts it, you might not like the story, but we can assure you it is well written.

They are thus helping both the authors and the readers.

I can see why you think a filter system by Amazon would be a good idea and in some ways I agree, but then we would all be up against the same problem as we were when trying to find a traditional publisher, all dependent on someone's opinion. I have had an agency request the complete manuscripts for three of my books only to then reject them. Since buying my kindle I have only read books by indie authors and I have to say that some of them are far superior than a lot of the rubbish that is deemed fit for readers by traditional publishers - and they've all been rejected by publishers. I wonder who they are actually choosing for when they decide who they'll publish. I think if Amazon were to have a filter system we'd be back to square one and many good indie authors would continue to go unread.

Sherrie wrote: "I can see why you think a filter system by Amazon would be a good idea and in some ways I agree, but then we would all be up against the same problem as we were when trying to find a traditional pu..."

Hi, Sherrie, and thanks for your comments. It would be difficult indeed, but then why not adding a lenient filter that would send the manuscript back to the writer with errors, the way people at Smashwords do when an author submits the work for the Premium Catalogue.

Simple problems like typos, wrong spelling, singular/plural match, formatting, are easy to catch. It is irritating to find "They all goes to church on Sanday" in an e-book, or paragraphs that are single spaced at the beginning and double spaced subsequently. A minimum could be filtered out, without judging the story itself, and the author might then be enticed to look at the manuscript a bit more carefully and catch clunky passages as well.

Not a censure, nor any judgment of the story, but something :)

And it is true, there is traditional published rubbish around.

Yes I see what you mean. It is the small things like typos and punctuation etc that give indie authors a bad name.

Hi Massimo
I think this would be a great idea, as many of the books I have looked at are terrible. My only worry would be the cost. I think Amazon would need to charge and if it was too large a fee then it would prevent some of use from getting our work published.

Caroline wrote: "Hi Massimo
I think this would be a great idea, as many of the books I have looked at are terrible. My only worry would be the cost. I think Amazon would need to charge and if it was too large a fe..."

Hi, Caroline, in reality it only requires Amazon to be asked by many self-publishers. If they'd see a better ROI (return of investment) because more readers would feel safer when buying Indie, Ammy would do it in a blink.

Besides, there would be no need to hire people to vet a manuscript, it would be an automatic process in addition to what they already have when digesting the word document in order to create a kindle version out of it. The price for Ammy would be infinitesimal and people would be right in screaming 'scandal' and 'scam' if Ammy was to ask for additional fees.

MHO, of course.

If it could be done that way I would love to see it.

Hmmm... I echo the sentiments, but what you are proposing, Massimo, is rife with difficulty. The filter would have to be complex to take account of variations in spelling and grammar between different countries. It would have to differentiate between narrative and dialogue as sometimes characters may speak ungrammatically (so for that matter might a first person narrator) or mispronounce words that would be picked up by a mechanical filter as a spelling mistake, when what is written is precisely what the author intended. The filter would have to make allowances for made-up names and races (common in fantasy). And sometimes authors make up new words that later enter our lexicon - didn't James Joyce invent a few new words in The Dubliners?

Sam wrote: "Hmmm... I echo the sentiments, but what you are proposing, Massimo, is rife with difficulty. The filter would have to be complex to take account of variations in spelling and grammar between differ..."

What if the filter did as CreateSpace does. When you submit your manuscript, if there are things CS believes are wrong, it refuses the submission and invites to go through them one by one in order to fix them, or tell CS, "I mean it", keep it that way, and ignore the issue. Then, resubmit, bingo.

This would solve most issues and leave the writer the liberty to know what he's doing. That is, he breaks the 'rule', whatever the filter catches, knowingly. I think it would work (works for CS, anyway)

That does sound like a workable solution, but one that would make copy editors/proofreaders almost redundant. I wonder, though, whether it would actually encourage more poor writers to publish their jottings if there's a filter that's going to do all the editing work for them...

Sam wrote: "That does sound like a workable solution, but one that would make copy editors/proofreaders almost redundant. I wonder, though, whether it would actually encourage more poor writers to publish thei..."

Well, not exactly, pointing to the problems, but I concur there's no miracle solution.

That's why Awesome Indies is the best solution!

Amazon just publishes absolutely anything including a book with text consisting of the same 8 word sentence reprinted 8000 times. And there are good arguments why this should be allowed to continue, like freedom of the right to publish what we want.

Then an author who THINKS his work might qualify will submit it to Awesome Indies and they will reject that one after looking at the first page, and only accept others that are truly worth it, in their opinion.
The reading public will, over the next few months or years, learn to go first to Awesome Indies (or to whichever of its other counterparts they find focuses most on their favoured type of book)and choose their books there. They only go to Amazon to make the purchase.

BUT! I think Amazon should PAY Awesome Indies a commission for every purchase that links through to them from there. Otherwise AI is doing the job of quality control and marketing for nothing.

I agree with Sam, there would be so many difficulties and as I said in my previous comment we would be back to square one being unable to get published because no matter how good or bad the editing, opinions would still come in to it. If a reader has read a book by any author, indie or traditionally published, if they feel it is poorly written then they won't choose that author again. As I said I have read some excellent works by indie authors that outclass many that I've read by traditionally published authors - and even in work that has been professionally edited mistakes still occasionally appear - to my mind it comes down to how thorough the author is, and if they are not meticulous then readers won't read more than one of their books. It doesn't mean that they won't read works by other indie authors, it's like anything else in life, you will always get good and bad.

Sherrie wrote: "...readers won't read more than one of their books. It doesn't mean that they won't read works by other indie authors..."

I have mixed feelings about that. There is a stigma on Indie writers being all sloppy, with poor grammar, mediocre plot consistency. It comes from too many being below acceptable standards and all the rest suffer.

Hi All, I read with great interest what you all have to say about published "sloppy" writing, whether indie or conventional. This discussion is timely is I'm in the middle of going over the galley proofs from my publisher. I've discovered that my story has been through a proof reader only so I find lots of problems. Nothing that isn't an easy fix, but it gives me more work than if at publishing level the work had been in the hands of an editor. The manuscript holds a lot of filters, which I hate, and don't understand how they slipped by me and my critic buddies.
No matter how many editors and proof readers have gone through a work, once it's published, I'm responsible for every typo and mistake because my name is on the book. So to all of you in the publishing process, be extra careful, take more time to polish your work till it shines like a bright star.
Best
Rayne

Thanks for that Rayne, I haven't used a proofreader or editor as I've read work that has been checked by one or other and there were still mistakes. I figured that if I was going to pay someone and they weren't going to any better job than me then I'd do it myself. I usually read through several times per chapter as I'm working and then the whole thing meticulously. I did have one review say that there was an odd typo but one for my next novel said it was perfect, so I must be getting better! I think it's nigh on impossible to have no mistakes, I've often spotted errors in books by traditional publishers so no one's perfect but I think we should all be as meticulous as possible when it comes to editing. As you say, your name is on the book so it all reflects on the author.
Best wishes
Sherrie

Hi Sherrie, a very good way of proofreading your own MS and avoid a lot of typos and other mistakes is to read out loud. That way your eyes wont skip over words or full lines, and you're bound to catch more mistakes.

Rayne

Rayne wrote: "Hi Sherrie, a very good way of proofreading your own MS and avoid a lot of typos and other mistakes is to read out loud. That way your eyes wont skip over words or full lines, and you're bound to c..."

Yes, I concur with Rayne. It works.

Good idea Rayne, thank you!

Sherrie

Nice article from Awesome Indies about rejection rate (±60%)

http://awesomeindies.net/2013/05/11/h...

Massimo, interesting article. What stands out is that Amazon doesn't reject without cause, as those writers who took the comments and reworked their books, were selected to the Awesome Indies. I've seen some very good Indie books, some not so good, and some outright terrible. I don't know the rejections statistics with conventional publishers, but if the manuscript isn't up to standards, no matter how good the story, it will be rejected.
Rayne