World, Writing, Wealth discussion

With the growing self-publishing industry, I think we are missing some players on the scene. It's a rare thing, but some books pretty much pick up from their launch, imagine: no reviews yet, no ratings, low exposure - yet they gain height and hover, while others never pick up despite sometimes decent amounts spent on their reanimation. Something in the package - is missing: whether it's typos in the opening line, unattractive cover, lukewarm blurb, uninteresting theme or writing, something.
Now of course - editors can tell you about the grammar and flow, betas about - content. All helpful and important - no doubt. Even here on GR, you can ask and get opinions about covers and blurbs, marketing tips. Some even go further and offer - 'magical' solutions: pay us this and that and we guarantee you that much sales. Don't know whether someone tried those and maybe it's worth a try, but I'm a little skeptical about magic. Yet, from the cacophony of different opinions - it'll be hard to distill what's wrong. Plus - many would just say pleasantries and be nice, so you'd never know their real opinion, that's why it's not recommended to ask friends and family, for example.
Remember Wolf from Pulp Fiction - the guy solving problems? -:) Do you think such Wolfs, say - book doctors are in demand and, if so, exist? Charlatans are abundant, but someone who can say - hey this doesn't have a chance, nothing could be done and establish death like a coroner, or tell - hey, your cover is junk, the blurb sucks, but actually can become a decent book, if half of it cut and the rest offered to elderly at 3.59? -:) If one existed, would you consult a book doctor?

I've played around with the possibility of actually doing this. But at the end of the day it boils down to one person's subjective opinions, right? Besides, people are very much wedded to their books and often don't want feedback.

Tara wrote: "But at the end of the day it boils down to one person's subjective opinions, right?..."

True - but if and when that subjective opinion boasts a remarkable track record, then it becomes a very weighty subjective opinion

Nik wrote: "Tara wrote: "But at the end of the day it boils down to one person's subjective opinions, right?..."

True - but if and when that subjective opinion boasts a remarkable track record, then it become..."

Lol agree. Trad authors have an advantage here, in some ways. They have no choice over covers and blurbs so they don't get a chance to make errors here. Sure trads aren't perfect but they do have decades of trial, expensive analysis/research and error and seasoned pros to nearly eliminate the margin of error.

There are book doctors - writer's workshop. You have to find a good one, not just where each person reads something and everyone says something nice, but a structured environment, a class, where you give feedback as well as receive it. This is for the writing aspect. For books you can check the covers of ones that are selling well. The Catch-22 with Indie/SPA is that they don't have to take feedback - or there is so much it's hard to know what to listen to - or it's just all nice and therefore good in a way but not helpful in the long run, leaving the basic questions not answered.

M.L. Roberts wrote: "There are book doctors - writer's workshop. You have to find a good one, not just where each person reads something and everyone says something nice, but a structured environment, a class, where yo..."

Yes!

I am tending towards agreeing with Tara - about authors being wedded to their books and not wanting feedback. Among indie authors, it seems, there is no real desire for feedback as to content or pacing or the actual writing of their work. All I ever see here is talk about downloads and sales and marketing as if the fact that they're mostly giving their work away for free doesn't have something to do with numbers. It seems also that a number of self-published authors cut corners and feel they can wing it and hit the "publish" button before their book is really ready for prime time . And, I include authors who then present themselves as authorpreneurs to guide and publish other indie authors.
In my latest blog, about a holiday gathering of writers in Florida I included a writer whose self published book has just been named to Kirkus Reviews' Best Books of 2016. Her book cover is among the most stunning I have seen this year. I include it in my post along with a snippet from her about how she did it at www.joannaelm.com/getting-holiday-spirit
I also spoke to two writers who are working on their first novels and they told me about the writing course they are taking.
I don't remember reading any discussion here about writing courses or classes or any sort of online writing advice that indie authors praise or recommend.
Yet there are professionals out there ( you can call them book doctors, if you like) who give classes, sometimes online, and who arrange retreats and conferences at which they address many facets of writing such as developing your ideas; plotting; outlining; creating characters; editing yourself; re-writing, and oh yes, marketing.
Of course, it's entirely possible that I've missed those threads in which case, I apologize.

Joanna wrote: "It seems also that a number of self-published authors cut corners and feel they can wing it and hit the "publish" button before their book is really ready for prime time ..."

I would agree with this. I read a number of MSS and often say to the authors, you need to put it on one side and then re-edit it again. And again. And again. That's before I even edit it.

Short-changing myself? Maybe, but at least I'm honest.

I do agree with Tara. Everything is subjective (well, apart from appalling grammar, spelling, writing etc). But, for my part, I disliked the one book of J K Rowling's that I read. I doubt she'll lose sleep. I have read far better books than the Half Blood Prince (?) but, marketing and contacts are all :)

Joanna wrote: "I am tending towards agreeing with Tara - about authors being wedded to their books and not wanting feedback. Among indie authors, it seems, there is no real desire for feedback as to content or pa..."

there are some indie authors (on goodreads as well as IRL) who take any and all feedback and subject it to rigorous analysis. those will become the successful ones.

Joanna wrote: "Yet there are professionals out there ( you can call them book doctors, if you like) who give classes, sometimes online, and who arrange retreats and conferences at which they address many facets of writing such as developing your ideas; plotting; outlining; creating characters; editing yourself; re-writing, and oh yes, marketing."

in a word, janefriedman.com.

Nik wrote: Charlatans are abundant, but someone who can say - hey this doesn't have a chance, nothing could be done and establish death like a coroner, or tell - hey, your cover is junk, the blurb sucks, but actually can become a decent book, if half of it cut and the rest offered to elderly at 3.59? -:) If one existed, would you consult a book doctor?"

inkitt.com is a kind of crowd-sourced book doctor:

https://www.inkitt.com/publishing?ref...

one of our members--i believe Rachel--is giving it a go. maybe she could give us an update.

but to answer the OP, i wouldn't consult a book doctor (and they do exist) b/c s/he's liable to be a quack. i'm using Self-Editing for Fiction Writers: How to Edit Yourself Into Print and skunk and white and Publishing 101 and researching my genre (horror, right now) before even going to an editor and/or publishing.

It fascinates me how many authors don't realise there are different kinds of editors (acquiring-, developmental-, copy-, line-, at least), but Nik, I think in your first post you largely described the traditional developmental editor. The gatekeeper kind so many indies talk about being so thrilled to get away from in trad publishing :)

Of course, there's nothing stopping you hiring the same developmental editors the big 5 use - most of them are freelancing now :) In fact, many of them are on contract only to the big 5 and don't have a steady gig, so they'd probably be happy for your custom. (I suggest most indie authors would get a better bang for their buck with a line-editor though).

Most of the indie editors I've seen shopping their talents are copy-editors (or are actually proofreaders, and shouldn't even be selling themselves as editors), which is a fine skill, but nothing like developmental editing. Of course there are exceptions, see last paragraph.

I've been both a copy-editor and a line-editor, but in newspaper-land only, so nothing longer than a featured article length and that was enough to make my eyes bleed with the concentration. Not that you can tell I've done either of those jobs from how sloppily I write on GR. And I've done some developmental editing, but for non-fiction - that was for a friend who got backlist rights to several books though and needed the help seeing how to take them apart and put them back together to suit a modern audience, not as a job. And non-fiction is a horse of a different colour to a novel. So I probably can be taken with a grain of salt here.

But it's all really hard and generally tedious and thankless work, but they are three wildly different skills, without even going into back cover copy writing (a whole job on it's own at the big houses) or graphic design. I doubt there are very many people who could really do all the things (at least, not without charging for doing three or four entirely different jobs), and hence I tend to distrust people who say they can and will for a budget price.

Joanna - very encouraging.
Alex - perfect due diligence.

I think there are several issues here. The first is how badly do you want to get big sales. I think there are two sorts of ways to get that, The first is to catch the spirit of the times, and here a development editor, etc would be very useful. The second is to write something different that catches on and becomes the spirit of the times, or at least something that everyone wants to read. Ny guess here is a development editor is a waste of time because they are no better than anyone else at guessing what will work. What would such an editor have done to fifty shades? Tom Clancy couldn't get anyone's attention, until he got the Reagan's. The Reagans added nothing to the book, but they sure changed the publicity/marketing aspect.

I somehow feel editing does little initially, after all, how can you read the poor editing until you have a copy? Initially, until reviews come out pointing out editing blunders, nobody knows they are there. It may well be that amateurish covers inhibit purchase, but I am unsure of that too.

I read a number of indie books a year, and a number of "big 5" books, and I notice a lot of such books tend to be formulaic. If you are going to write that, I suppose a book doctor will be good, because they will ensure you stick to the formula. I am less convinced a book doctor will be any use if you wish to be different. The problem with being different, of course, is the readers you need may not find you because marketing "different" is very difficult.

Nik,

I think you're describing just about what I've been looking for. I didn't want someone to just review the book on Amazon...I was looking for opinions about what would make it easier to read. Does the subject matter really have potential (I think it does or I wouldn't have written it), and what would make it "good"? If you like it, fine, an Amazon and/or Goodreads review would be much appreciated - but I was looking for honest critique. If you don't like it, don't give it a poor review - tell me what to improve and I'll work on it. I am willing to do re-do work if it will make it a "success". (So far I've found just one person who read it and gave me a critique.)

Mustn't there be other people looking for that same thing?

P.J. wrote: "I didn't want someone to just review the book on Amazon...I was looking for opinions about what would make it easier to read. ..."

Reviews are important: But not as feedback. They're directed at other consumers, authors need feedback and critique long before it's gotten to consumers. Any critique in a review ought to be taken into consideration for your next book, but it's too late for this one.

(I know in these days of e-publishing it's easy to rewrite something and pop out a new edition, but... that is a bit disingenuous for the people who have already paid for the book expecting that they received a finished product. If they didn't like it, they are hardly going to read it again. If they did like it, they still may not want to read it again, for fear the things they did like are what has changed. The work is the work, it has to speak for itself once it's out there in the world.)

Krazykiwi wrote: "P.J. wrote: "I didn't want someone to just review the book on Amazon...I was looking for opinions about what would make it easier to read. ..."

Reviews are important: But not as feedback. They're ..."

Hi Krazykiwi, what you said is why I sought honest up-front critique. Not finding that, I went ahead and published. I'm still looking for the honest critique. There haven't been enough paying consumers for that to be an issue. If it were fiction, maybe I could walk away from it and write something else - but it isn't. And either way, there's value in constructive critique at any point in time.

Ian wrote: "I think there are several issues here. The first is how badly do you want to get big sales. I think there are two sorts of ways to get that, The first is to catch the spirit of the times, and here ..."

I have to disagree here. Editing is of the upmost importance before you ever publish your book. As for formulaic books and editing the type of book really doesn't matter if the editor knows his stuff. Good writing is good writing, plot holes are plot holes, inconsistencies are inconsistencies, great characterization is great characterization etc. etc.

Tara, I agree with what you say regarding the quality of the writing, but it does not affect the sales of the first book, because nobody knows about them until they read it. It may well discourage them from buying the second one, though.

Ian wrote: "Tara, I agree with what you say regarding the quality of the writing, but it does not affect the sales of the first book, because nobody knows about them until they read it. It may well discourage ..."

You must factor in word of mouth and those crucial first reviewers. It's so important to send your book out there as professionally edited as possible because you may not have another chance to make a first impression, especially considering how many books are vying for readers' attention.

Ian, I'm not sure I agree that quality of writing, or rather lack of it, does not affect the sales of a first book because nobody knows about it till he/she reads the book. I never buy a book on Amazon without using the "Look Inside" feature and/or downloading a sample. I think Amazon gives you sufficient pages/chapters so that you can assess the quality of the writing, formatting, editing etc before you actually buy the book.
And, again I agree totally with Tara. Editing is crucial. A good editor will be able to give an author guidance on plot holes, pace, characterization as well as pointing to grammatical and spelling errors. To hit the "publish" button on a manuscript that has not been reviewed by at least one professional editor is arrogance/hubris of the highest order.
However, I do not agree with Tara's assessment that first reviews are important. I pay close to no attention at all to them before buying a book. But, I have gone back (after reading a book) to read five star reviews of books that are disgracefully, abysmally bad so far as language, spelling, formatting, plot are concerned. All is revealed when I compare the names or initials of the reviewers to the names mentioned in the author's acknowledgments!

Reviews mean something different to everyone. I can't buy a book until I've read a great deal of its reviews. I read them word for word and I compare the tone of one review to another, looking for overlap and/or disparities. My sister is the sam e way and we both are wary of books with a handful of reviews. The exceptions are free books. Our other sister is the opposite - she cares about covers and blurbs and doesn't even read reviews. So they matter a lot since to not have them may hurt while having them only helps.

Joanna wrote: "Ian, I'm not sure I agree that quality of writing, or rather lack of it, does not affect the sales of a first book because nobody knows about it till he/she reads the book. I never buy a book on Am..."

Great point about the look inside and preview - had forgotten about those.

I agree the "look inside" will uncover frequent typos etc, but it cannot uncover plot holes. Then, as for writing quality, fifty shades is hardly likely to feature in the fine writing stakes.

Joanna wrote: "Among indie authors, it seems, there is no real desire for feedback as to content or pacing or the actual writing of their work...."

Maybe, in my case though me it interests more than an assumed marketing value of a good review...

Joanna wrote: "I don't remember reading any discussion here about writing courses or classes or any sort of online writing advice that indie authors praise or recommend....."

Whoever's taking classes, please, raise your hand -:). Seriously, if anyone wants to recommend something he/she found helpful, you are most welcome.
Wonder whether King, Rowling or Grisham attended those.

Krazykiwi wrote: "t fascinates me how many authors don't realise there are different kinds of editors (acquiring-, developmental-, copy-, line-, at least), but Nik, I think in your first post you largely described the traditional developmental editor. ..."

Sure and I worked with both types. Happens that DE may be a little less successful on copy-editing and vice versa. One person being equally strong in developmental as well as in tiniest detail on copy-editing level is a rare breed. Not all indies hire one editor and I bet very few - hire two.
And then there is cover, blurb, pricing, marketing - not editor's scope ...

P.J. wrote: "I was looking for opinions about what would make it easier to read. Does the subject matter really have potential (I think it does or I wouldn't have written it), and what would make it "good"? If you like it, fine, an Amazon and/or Goodreads review would be much appreciated - but I was looking for honest critique...."

Me too.. In this respect I understand why, but still regret that literary agents don't explain when rejecting -:) Could be a valuable input..

In general, I think many authors have expectations and (false) hopes and they try everything - improve their books on their own or after reading that some reviewer found a typo, change blurbs, covers, try this or that marketing. Encountering no sales and then more of no sales, some low sales, no sales again may be depressing. But that's not all - some spend a lot of time and some - money on something that is not gonna fly. To a degree - like all those plane/glider prototypes, invented along the centuries, that couldn't fly and their inventors perished in field testing.
Many harbor hope and replenish inspiration from stories like - 'Harry Potter picked up only after a third book' or other wonderful stories of miraculous coming into prominence. But these are few among thousands of unsuccessful ones.

Me? I'd rather prefer 'quick and dirty' from a book doctor, who'd know to evaluate and determine whether the book is dead or alive or potentially alive in the beginning than long slow suffering -:)

Not too optimistic, I know, but I argue disillusionment is equally important..

Nik wrote: "And then there is cover, blurb, pricing, marketing - not editor's scope ...

Not always true. Depends on the editor's background. An editor who can't work with blurb or comment on proposed covers probably shouldn't be doing the job.

Roughseasinthemed wrote: "I disliked the one book of J K Rowling's that I read..."

I read the entire series and I can't say I like them. I argue they are phenomenally mainstream, just perfectly middle in everything: action, pacing, plot, characters. No extremes at all in any aspect. It's unique in how they are ideally mainstream. Just my opinion, of course, and Rowling has my utter respect for her success!

Roughseasinthemed wrote: "An editor who can't work with blurb or comment on proposed covers probably shouldn't be doing the job...."

Of course, they can, I just think blurb and cover are more in a 'marketing' field than in 'writing' and not all would tell what's best for sales. Don't know if it's a good analogy, but I think speechwriters and those who invent election slogans might be different people -:)

Joanna wrote: "All is revealed when I compare the names or initials of the reviewers to the names mentioned in the author's acknowledgments!..."

-:) Good due diligence investigation !

Nik wrote: "In general, I think many authors have expectations and (false) hopes and they try everything - improve their books on their own or after reading that some reviewer found a typo, change blurbs, cove..."

I understand your issue but no one can tell you what will fail or succeed. A great editor can only take your story and make it as great as it can possibly be. Then it's about discoverability and creating a spark with readers. That's it.

As I stated above book success is based on talent and discoverability. Nothing happens without those two things and those are the only two things that matter.

Everything else is a component of, not substitution for, those two factors I stated. Authors will never quite agree on the degree to which other aspects of writing affect success but there it is. As for editing, my views may be a tad conservative. If you publish without editing you are being less than responsible to your readers, less than creditable to the profession and less than fair to yourself and your vision.

Not sure every well edited book can sell. Even in trad publishing a success seems rare - maybe what 1 title out of 10, 15?

Tara wrote: "As I stated above book success is based on talent and discoverability. ..."

The latter is attainable, the former - either exists or not, how can one know?

Nik wrote: "Tara wrote: "As I stated above book success is based on talent and discoverability. ..."

The latter is attainable, the former - either exists or not, how can one know?"

The question every author and publisher would kill to know the answer to. There is no answer, my friend. There are only the elements you can control. Put your book in front of as many readers as pissible and listen to see if they love or hate the exact same things about your book. Even if people tell you why your book doesn't work that is valuable information. For xample, I'm a details fanatic and while I can't predict success (I wouldn't even try) I am really good at showing people where their book falls down.

Tara wrote: "I am really good at showing people where their book falls down..."

An important skill by itself and in a high demand

On the editing question, it's disheartening to find mistakes on the first page - a portent of things to come - and I don't want to be mentally correcting as I read, which I would do, so I won't read those.

About reviews I think they matter to most, but for me it's the look inside - do I like the voice - then the sample - do I like the voice and is the pacing going someplace right out of the gate (this is for completely new writers). A ton of reviews will not matter to me if I don't like the style. I make up my own mind; I also do not want to know that much about the book if I plan to read it.

A question on 'quick and dirty' from a book doctor. Do you really know any single person you'd trust? It's so subjective - and anyone even presuming to be a book doctor (Dr. Feelgood!) would be highly suspect. I would not trust them. :-)

You must remember that even with the trad publishers, a lot of books lose money. The publisher succeeds because of the few that make heaps of sales. Further, the trad publisher covers a lot of costs through library sales,that are made because there is a budget to spend. The librarian does not really know. Sorry but the evidence is nobody knows what will take off, and good editing by itself is not sufficient. The problem for the indie is that (s)he does not have the library fall-back position, nor the big list, so if it all goes wrong, which almost inevitably it will, ouch financially.

I am not interested in who amongst us paid for various forms of editing: I want to know who did that and made a profit. Raise yur hands.

It's a matter of expectations. Readers that read only sloppily unedited books won't know, or maybe don't care, about something done well. I'm not there to mentally 'correct papers' so nope. Author, do your due diligence. :-)

M.L. Roberts wrote: "It's a matter of expectations. Readers that read only sloppily unedited books won't know, or maybe don't care, about something done well. I'm not there to mentally 'correct papers' so nope. Author,..."

Of course the author must do the best (s)he can. I too am against sloppy books. That does not mean thee author should splash out money in all directions, though.

Ian wrote: "I am not interested in who amongst us paid for various forms of editing: I want to know who did that and made a profit. Raise yur hands."

~$650/70k (October 2014) - (wow, has it really been that long?) developmental edit by a non-professional recommended by a published novelist friend of mine. it was a solid edit, but it could've been better if i hadn't rushed her b/c i wanted to publish it right away! <:( (it's my scifi cyber-thriller novel that i haven't published yet.) but then about 6 months, after implementing all of her edits, working on a cover, and the blurb--and subconsciously having gotten burnt out on it after working on it for two and a half years--i realized that it still wasn't good enough and started reading more and writing some short stories.

Krazykiwi wrote: "It fascinates me how many authors don't realise there are different kinds of editors (acquiring-, developmental-, copy-, line-, at least), but Nik, I think in your first post you largely described ..."

Publishing 101 is a great place to start learning about these things.

Ian wrote: "M.L. Roberts wrote: "It's a matter of expectations. Readers that read only sloppily unedited books won't know, or maybe don't care, about something done well. I'm not there to mentally 'correct pap..."

I agree, throwing money around is not a good idea - then it becomes a matter of making it back, throwing good money after bad. Terrible cycle! :-)

Tara wrote: "Put your book in front of as many readers as pissible and listen to see if they love or hate the exact same things about your book. Even if people tell you why your book doesn't work that is valuable information. "

I think thats great advice. Thats what I did and why I had 18 beta-readers work with me 3 chapters at a time for 3 months during the writing phrase. None were authors, all were readers. They shaped the story, picked up a lot of typos and gave me feedback about the plot about - what they liked and didnt like. I didnt write my novel, I wrote their novel.

I dont write for myself, I write for the reader.

Alex - $650 for 70k is a great price and well worth it.

I was getting quoted .5 to .10 a word ($3200 to $7000) developmental editing for my 73,000 words. And that was if they made 0 changes, a few changes or a complete re-write.

While I have no objections to people earning money, but paying someone to read my novel and come back to me with no changes for $5000 borders on the ridiculous.

Im a 20 yr attorney and if I quoted a client $5000 to read a contract and not make any changes I would be laughed at.

Michael wrote: "Ian - $650 for 70k is a great price and well worth it. "

that was me, Alex, not Ian. ^_-

Nik wrote: "Me? I'd rather prefer 'quick and dirty' from a book doctor, who'd know to evaluate and determine whether the book is dead or alive or potentially alive in the beginning than long slow suffering -:)"

Michael wrote: "Tara wrote: "Put your book in front of as many readers as pissible and listen to see if they love or hate the exact same things about your book. Even if people tell you why your book doesn't work t... "

I think thats great advice."

Michael makes a good point on the use of beta readers as "book doctors". I'd argue that beta readers are best used--and appreciated--in a similar way to writers groups or slush pile readers (publishers do hire (for free--at least my cousin did many years ago--and i saw an ad for some a few months ago) for the slush pile.

Michael wrote: "Tara wrote: "Put your book in front of as many readers as pissible and listen to see if they love or hate the exact same things about your book. Even if people tell you why your book doesn't work t..."

Completely agree.

Tara, did you really mean "Put your book in front of as many readers as pissible". That is really asking for it, especially if the ale is flowing.

However, I agree that a writer's group or a set of beta readers is a good way to get feedback. It is cheaper, but you must always state, "This is my book. I shall listen, but I am not going to obey if I do not think it is right." You do not write the committee book, or at least if you do, you do not publish it.

The question I set about editor's costs was to find out who made money at the end of the exercise. It has to be worth it.

I put my money into the formatting and covers. The formatters do a nice job making the book's interior look beautiful and professional. Bad formatting can be upsetting to readers as much as typos. If an author can do a good job self-editing, I don't see a problem with that. He/she can spend years and thousands $ on editing/perfecting and people will still hate and 1-star the book.

On that note, many ebook marketing sites explain that they will turn down your book if the reviews mention typos. Some sites also require x number of reviews with a high average star rating. Most of them require a professional cover. Not exactly a book doctor, but these issues can make or break a promotion before anyone has started reading the book.

I thought you were talking about doctors in books before I read this lol. Leave it to me to miss the deeper meaning. Anyways would I consult a book doctor? If they charge as much as a regular then no. Now if I got some book insurance that could cover the payment for the doctor visit my book would take then yes sure why not.