12% of ebooks are self-published; most are rubbish, claims editor

[tompe]

Originally Posted by shalym

So are you saying that those books didn't meet your standards? But aren't they traditionally published? Nominated for awards? I thought you implied that your method of choosing would effectively weed out "mediocre" books?

Shari

I have never said anything like that. But in this case I had more information about the books and did not expect them to be really good. I read them since I am going to be in a panel discussing the Hugo nominated books. I said I read award nominated books but I never said that I expected them to be really good books. I read them because they are part of the conversation about science fiction and they are the books that are referred to a lot at science fiction conventions.

What I have said is that just reading a sample can never tell you if the book is really good or just OK.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by tompe

What I have said is that just reading a sample can never tell you if the book is really good or just OK.

Of course it can't. But it can certainly be used (and rather quickly at that) to determine if someone can't spell or doesn't have a firm grasp of grammar or syntax. Which -- if this thread is anything to go by -- seems to be far and away the main complaint with regard to indies being declared "rubbish." Maybe I'm just missing them, but I haven't exactly seen a lot of "indies are just OK where I'm partial to extraordinary" complaints flying around (your posts not withstanding, of course).

I don't think anybody ever claimed samples could differentiate between "really good" or "just OK." Only that they could be used to quickly eliminate marginally-literate spew and/or to help someone decide whether or not they might take a chance on something when the sample didn't do anything to discourage their curiosity about a particular work.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Of course it can't. But it can certainly be used (and rather quickly at that) to determine if someone can't spell or doesn't have a firm grasp of grammar or syntax. Which -- if this thread is anything to go by -- seems to be far and away the main complaint with regard to indies being declared "rubbish." Maybe I'm just missing them, but I haven't exactly seen a lot of "indies are just OK where I'm partial to extraordinary" complaints flying around (your posts not withstanding, of course).

I don't think anybody ever claimed samples could differentiate between "really good" or "just OK." Only that they could be used to quickly eliminate marginally-literate spew and/or to help someone decide whether or not they might take a chance on something when the sample didn't do anything to discourage their curiosity about a particular work.

But the point was why do you need to use that method at all if you look for really good books? To find the really good books (independent or not) you use other methods.

So it surprised me here that people thought that samples was a useful method to find books to read and my conclusion was that people that find it useful are happy with just OK books or medicore books.

[Ken Maltby]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Of course it can't. But it can certainly be used (and rather quickly at that) to determine if someone can't spell or doesn't have a firm grasp of grammar or syntax. Which -- if this thread is anything to go by -- seems to be far and away the main complaint with regard to indies being declared "rubbish." Maybe I'm just missing them, but I haven't exactly seen a lot of "indies are just OK where I'm partial to extraordinary" complaints flying around (your posts not withstanding, of course).

I don't think anybody ever claimed samples could differentiate between "really good" or "just OK." Only that they could be used to quickly eliminate marginally-literate spew and/or to help someone decide whether or not they might take a chance on something when the sample didn't do anything to discourage their curiosity about a particular work.

Originally Posted by tompe

But the point was why do you need to use that method at all if you look for really good books? To find the really good books (independent or not) you use other methods.

So it surprised me here that people thought that samples was a useful method to find books to read and my conclusion was that people that find it useful are happy with just OK books or medicore books.

So the term "Rubbish" is just in reference to the spelling, grammar, and coherency of the book. Nothing to do with the story? Because, for me, a really good story is what I look for first. A good story can override most imperfections. (Of course if things are bad enough to effect my ability to follow the story, then I guess it would be "rubbish".)

I look to the cover, blurbs, and reader reviews for hints as to the nature of the story, not so much for some measure of the quality of the writing. If I were to have some suspicion/concern about how the author writes, I would indeed want to review a sample.

As to "OK or mediocre books"; I still get the feeling that you aren't interested in a book that is simply standard English vernacular, and must have some stilted High Prose, to make it a book you will consider reading. A good interesting story told in simple English IS fine with me.

Luck;
Ken

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by tompe

But the point was why do you need to use that method at all if you look for really good books? To find the really good books (independent or not) you use other methods.

I would argue that it doesn't have to be "other" methods, but rather criteria in addition to the sample, to find "really good" books (if indeed, people feel the need go to such great lengths to ensure their money is only ever spent on books that they "know" will be out-damn-standing).

I step outside my own reading comfort zone far too often to get overly hung up on only buying/reading books I'm going want to rave about after. I don't think reading a book that didn't quite turn out as well as I might have liked warrants taking additional steps to ensure it never happens again. I will surely read (or I guess I should say start) many more "meh" books in my lifetime in pursuit of the "wows!". There's no annual "best book chooser" award given out that I know of (and I'd have no desire to compete for it even if there was).

Originally Posted by tompe

So it surprised me here that people thought that samples was a useful method to find books to read and my conclusion was that people that find it useful are happy with just OK books or medicore books.

That would be understandable... IF you were under the impression that people were relying solely on the sample to make their decision about a book. I don't believe that's very likely. In most cases the sample is probably the last litmus test in a more complex process (genre/subgenre, personal recommendations, mentions by other respected authors/readers) that got a certain book/author to the verge of making a reader's personal TBR list.

[QuantumIguana]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

That would be understandable... IF you were under the impression that people were relying solely on the sample to make their decision about a book. I don't believe that's very likely. In most cases the sample is probably the last litmus test in a more complex process (genre/subgenre, personal recommendations, mentions by other respected authors/readers) that got a certain book/author to the verge of making a reader's personal TBR list.

It doesn't matter how many people loved a book, if I don't like it, it's not a good book for me. Since to the whole book, you must read the first 10%, it makes sense to read the first ten percent for free. I probably will have decided well before reaching the end of the sample if I want to read the whole book. Reading the sample reduces the chance that I will be disappointed, just because someone else likes it doesn't mean that I will. It's like going into a restaurant and being offered free samples before you order.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by Ken Maltby

As to "OK or mediocre books"; I still get the feeling that you aren't interested in a book that is simply standard English vernacular, and must have some stilted High Prose, to make it a book you will consider reading. A good interesting story told in simple English IS fine with me.

No. I read mostly science fiction and fantasy so what I want is a good story but also a good idea content and a good sense of wonder. I can also like more literary books like M John Harrison's Light which I thought was brilliant.

I really like Joe Abercrombies books becuse they have something more than just a good story.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

That would be understandable... IF you were under the impression that people were relying solely on the sample to make their decision about a book. I don't believe that's very likely. In most cases the sample is probably the last litmus test in a more complex process (genre/subgenre, personal recommendations, mentions by other respected authors/readers) that got a certain book/author to the verge of making a reader's personal TBR list.

And the point was that this other process must have sorted away all books were you from a sample could have told that you did not want to read it. I mean a review or personal recommendation will not recommend a book that you can sort away just reading the sample.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by tompe

And the point was that this other process must have sorted away all books were you from a sample could have told that you did not want to read it. I mean a review or personal recommendation will not recommend a book that you can sort away just reading the sample.

Actually, I'm not quite certain what your "The Point" is any more. It seems to be moving. So I'll tell you my point: samples help me immensely in whittling down my "I-might-be-kinda-sorta-interested-in-checking-that-out-(provided-the-sample-doesn't-suck)" list. I assume others use them similarly.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

So I'll tell you my point: samples help me immensely in whittling down my "I-might-be-kinda-sorta-interested-in-checking-that-out-(provided-the-sample-doesn't-suck)" list. I assume others use them similarly.

Ditto.
In the pre-ebook era I skimmed the first page or two of the book.
Same effect.

One of the most popular book-selling features on the Amazon *pbook* store is exactly that. So I'm comfortable knowing I'm not the only one who samples text as a *final* step before buying.

[speakingtohe]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Actually, I'm not quite certain what your "The Point" is any more. It seems to be moving. So I'll tell you my point: samples help me immensely in whittling down my "I-might-be-kinda-sorta-interested-in-checking-that-out-(provided-the-sample-doesn't-suck)" list. I assume others use them similarly.

Works for you, that's good.

I am probably differently abled when it comes to reading books. I want to be able to pick a book and just read it. It worked for me with paper books, and seems to be working for me now.

I have never stood in a store or library reading a chapter, although I have looked at many free samples online. In the store I would look at the blurb, and occasionally a page or two if I was totally unfamiliar with the author and the book was expensive.

Strange to say though, I seem to want to have the purchasing/borrowing decision made and the book in my hot little hands, or these days on my ereader before I start reading. Having looked at the sample or read a few pages can give the book a ho-hum yawn feeling.

I don't want to get too quantitative about price either. Squabbling with myself about whether a book is worth 1.99 or 5.99 or 9.99 will carry over to the actual reading. I am not too likely to spend $30 on a novel these days, but I have spent $5-10 on a novel in the days when my wages were $2.00 an hour, and not regretted it for an instant.


Helen

[crich70]

I think the difference between a "good book" and "rubbish" is often in the eye of the reader. Granted there are some things that make a book readable or unreadable such as good or bad spelling but in terms of the story itself the matter is very subjective. A book I think is great another reader might think is a dud and vice versa. Even if two people are looking for books in the same genre (fantasy say) that doesn't mean they will both like exactly the same book or author. Just as two people may both like vegetables and yet one likes spinach and the other can't stand it.

[patrickt]

Originally Posted by HarryT

He's biased, plainly, but it's a fair point that traditional publishers do play a valuable role as "gatekeepers", in terms of filtering out the unreadable crap. That's why I personally generally stick with books from publishers - I don't have the time to find the gems that I'm sure do exist in the large garbage pile of indie books.

Then how do you explain the high level of crap in the expensive company published books? If I start a book and it's crap I feel a lot better dumping it if it cost $1.99 than I do if it cost $11.99.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by patrickt

Then how do you explain the high level of crap in the expensive company published books? If I start a book and it's crap I feel a lot better dumping it if it cost $1.99 than I do if it cost $11.99.

What do you mean by crap here? Just because you do not like a book does not mean that the book must be crap.

[speakingtohe]

Originally Posted by patrickt

Then how do you explain the high level of crap in the expensive company published books? If I start a book and it's crap I feel a lot better dumping it if it cost $1.99 than I do if it cost $11.99.

I'd rather not have the crap at any price. My experience with books has been 90+% good and I have bought or borrowed or traded several hundred a year for 60 years. So I stick with what I know.

If you find the quality of self published books to be as good or better overall than those by the traditional publishers, then that is what you should buy. Keep in mind though, while they are often cheaper, that there are many very expensive Indie ebooks as well.

Helen