Quote:
Originally Posted by moonshot
Mobile Read. Not Mobile Write.
eReaders are for the reader. Another way to read books, more convenient for some.
It is also, by default, more convenient for people who write 'stuff' to have this 'stuff' displayed with 'proper' books and their e reader version. Sort of gate crashing the party.
If this generation of new writers are so keen to have their work read then they should at least offer it for free, much like software and apps developers do, in the hope that it is noticed and is good enough to be developed further with maybe a publishing deal.
But for someone to write and upload this 'stuff' as a book and charge for it without it being expertly proof-read and checked or money back guarantee offered, this is being delusional.
Ok there are exceptions to every rule but that percentage is very very small.
(Like the new author of 'Half Bad'. Her first book, sent to a publisher, accepted straight away, then given to a film company to read and they bought the rights to make the movie). A writers dream, but a exception to the rule.
Since all these small fish share the same ocean as the more established ones, we the reader need to be able to distinguish one from the other. Maybe by a vanity notice on these books, could be the line in the sand.
One exception might be a person writing a one off story, in their own words about an event in their life, where they state that it is 'in their own words' and has not been proof read.
|
Eaten any good books lately?
Yes, this is Mobile Read, not Mobile Write, but so what? You seem to assuming that anyone who objects to your bizarre definition of "author" must be doing so because they are writers. A person who writes a bad, unedited book expecting to sell a lot of copies may be delusional, but that person is still in fact an author. A bad artist is still an artist, a bad musician is still an musician and a bad author is still an author. Is an actor not an actor if he only gets a few roles as an extra?
We do need methods to tell good books from bad books but:
1) Redefining author doesn't do this for us. Redefining author doesn't help anyone find a good book.
2) Redefining author to meet some arbitrary criteria only leads to confusion. It leaves us with illogic like a book not having an author.
3)
We already have ample means to tell good books from bad. Critics, reviews, sales numbers, awards, recommendations, word of mouth, etc. You keep insisting that it's so difficult to find good books, yet you ignore these ample means. What is it that you find so faulty about them?