Quote:
Originally Posted by GlenBarrington
I don't look for self published books, I look for interesting books. I just don't reject self published books out of hand.
|
If I have the choice between a traditionally published book and a self-published book, both from to me unknown authors, and they sound equally interesting, I'll go with the traditionally published book because I still haven't seen a compelling argument why I shouldn't. The risk of wasting time and money is lower.
It was mentioned a few times that there are self-published books that are re-issues or written by authors who previously published books traditionally and their niche publisher went out of business. These are not examples for what I was referring to when I voiced my experience with works by self-publishing writers. A self-published re-issue was at some point a traditionally published book, and authors whose previous works were published traditionally have already demonstrated their ability (although I would still be more hesitant here because there is a substantial difference between a submitted manuscript and the post-editing product).
At the end of the day, I'm guided by my own experiences. I have been satisfied with the majority of traditionally published fiction I've read, and only a small portion of self-published novels left me feeling good about the time I spent with them. That's my vantage point. I'm just not keen on continuing to experiment only because self-publishing appeals to me on a romantic level. It's a nice idea, a great concept even, that largely doesn't (presently) work for me as a consumer/reader.