Quote:
Originally Posted by oggelbe2007
I wonder how many fans/readers consider an authors personality when they decide to read a particular book? If an author is really a jerk how likely are you to actively seek out their work and spend the time/effort reading it? Does that factor in at all? I'm not implying anything about this particular author but just authors in general.  |
I do, and I also consider how an Author let's a publisher treat readers, if an author allows a publisher to abuse the reader, do I really want to deal with them?
I was ready to give this book a try. Saw the notice that it won, was interested, so figured it would be in my queue. Luckily, this move happened before I started reading it, otherwise, I might be as angry as some of those that posted on her blog. The excuse that the publisher demanded it be taken down is lame also. She just won a major award with this book, she has more power to negotiate than normal.
Anyway, with this move, I will probably never end up reading the book (by the time I have an chance, it will most likely have slipped from my interest to try), and I will not be buying from her backlist. I saw a few that I might have bought, had this book grabbed me, but she lost that chance.
Anyway, it was a dis-honest move, she has the legal right, but that doesn't make it ethical. Especially with the press pushing it available as community sourced. I think if I had donated, I would have been pissed. Especially since I tend to donate early, usually would happen around the 1/3-1/2 mark. I probably would have gone from a small vent of frustration, to outright spreading the word to avoid such an author.
Mr Carver, the thing to understand here, it was legal, and it was her right, but it was a very terrible thing to do. When you want to build a career on the willingness for people to give you money for temporary enjoyment, making those people angry is a very poor move.
--Carl