MobileRead Forums - View Single Post

Fat Abe · 03-29-2010, 12:31 AM

Rather than submitting a novel to a professional or semi-professional editor, why not submit one chapter to a consumer committee, comprised of readers with an interest in the genre(s) the novel falls into? This provides the first tier of filtering, which should remove 90 percent of the dreck that is below generally accepted publishing standards.

Another idea is to program an artificial intelligence engine, which can analyze the writing for poor sentence construction, redundancy, or cliches. It could also look for a cohesive style, on a paragraph to paragraph basis. Most people write to communicate, great authors write to express. "If it sounds like writing, I rewrite it." -- Elmore Leonard. But if it sounds like gibberish, take a language class. The AI engine could easily tells us if the proficiency level of the writing was between kindergarten and eighth grade. Amazingly, this could eliminate quite a few manuscripts.

Alas, since there are no perfect solutions, we wind up with the same old publishing model we've had for centuries. You send a manuscript to a publishing house, and you, most likely, receive a rejection letter. Here are some responses that were lifted from

http://frankfiore.wordpress.com/2009...ction-letters/

Lady Chatterley’s Lover by D H Lawrence

‘for your own sake do not publish this book.’

Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov

‘… overwhelmingly nauseating, even to an enlightened Freudian … the whole thing is an unsure cross between hideous reality and improbable fantasy. It often becomes a wild neurotic daydream … I recommend that it be buried under a stone for a thousand years.’

Believe it or not, Ripley!

Teresa (unknown last name) posted an essay entitled, Slushkiller, with a funny list of bad writing filters:

"Author is on bad terms with the Muse of Language. Parts of speech are not what they should be. Confusion-of-motion problems inadvertently generate hideous images. Words are supplanted by their similar-sounding cousins: towed the line, deep-seeded, dire straights, nearly penultimate, incentiary (sic), ... "

Source: http://nielsenhayden.com/makinglight...es/004641.html

She really knows what she is talking about. Lmao. Well, don't give up. Just because no one has formulated a business plan for a profit-making internet-based manuscript clearing house does not mean it can't be done. Most of the best writing today is sitting in email servers. Funny, off-beat, unbelievable. Harvest that, Gmail, Yahoo, Hotmail, etc.

03-29-2010, 12:31 AM	#53
Fat Abe Man Who Stares at Books Posts: 1,826 Karma: 10606722 Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: 50th State, USA. Also, PA, NY, CA, and elsewhere. Device: All of the Above	Rather than submitting a novel to a professional or semi-professional editor, why not submit one chapter to a consumer committee, comprised of readers with an interest in the genre(s) the novel falls into? This provides the first tier of filtering, which should remove 90 percent of the dreck that is below generally accepted publishing standards. Another idea is to program an artificial intelligence engine, which can analyze the writing for poor sentence construction, redundancy, or cliches. It could also look for a cohesive style, on a paragraph to paragraph basis. Most people write to communicate, great authors write to express. "If it sounds like writing, I rewrite it." -- Elmore Leonard. But if it sounds like gibberish, take a language class. The AI engine could easily tells us if the proficiency level of the writing was between kindergarten and eighth grade. Amazingly, this could eliminate quite a few manuscripts. Alas, since there are no perfect solutions, we wind up with the same old publishing model we've had for centuries. You send a manuscript to a publishing house, and you, most likely, receive a rejection letter. Here are some responses that were lifted from http://frankfiore.wordpress.com/2009...ction-letters/ Lady Chatterley’s Lover by D H Lawrence ‘for your own sake do not publish this book.’ Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov ‘… overwhelmingly nauseating, even to an enlightened Freudian … the whole thing is an unsure cross between hideous reality and improbable fantasy. It often becomes a wild neurotic daydream … I recommend that it be buried under a stone for a thousand years.’ Believe it or not, Ripley! Teresa (unknown last name) posted an essay entitled, Slushkiller, with a funny list of bad writing filters: "Author is on bad terms with the Muse of Language. Parts of speech are not what they should be. Confusion-of-motion problems inadvertently generate hideous images. Words are supplanted by their similar-sounding cousins: towed the line, deep-seeded, dire straights, nearly penultimate, incentiary (sic), ... " Source: http://nielsenhayden.com/makinglight...es/004641.html She really knows what she is talking about. Lmao. Well, don't give up. Just because no one has formulated a business plan for a profit-making internet-based manuscript clearing house does not mean it can't be done. Most of the best writing today is sitting in email servers. Funny, off-beat, unbelievable. Harvest that, Gmail, Yahoo, Hotmail, etc.