Catherynne Valente takes down her own award-winning ebook

[Iphinome]

Originally Posted by starrigger

I don't get it. What are you people complaining about? She put the book up for free for a good long time. Sure, the community helped her, and she helped the community. Then she found a publisher--which is grounds for cheering, not snide remarks--then she won a Nebula, which is also grounds for congratulations--and finally she acceded to her publisher's request to take the free book down. If people liked the book, then she gave good value for the donations. She didn't promise it would go on forever.

One can quibble over whether she might have given more notice, or whether the publisher was smart to demand the takedown. But that's no reason for the kind of condemnation I'm reading here. I've got books up for free download, and some people have made generous donations. If I decide to end the offer at some point, is this the kind of treatment I can look forward to? I hope not.

I think she did a cool thing, and it's a shame it had to end, but that's life.

The one time I took a look at her blog, I saw a lot of expressions of support for her move. She did what she had to do, and most people seem to understand that.

I'm going to just parrot elfwreck here, she had the right to do it. But it wasn't nice, taking donations implied that it was paid for that's all.

You threw some books up already finished and can take them down at your pleasure. She put hers up bit by bit and took donations in exchange for posting the next chapter. Think of it as someone building a castle and every day people who think castles are pretty cool come by and drop off a few home depot gift cards to keep the project going. Then when the castle is finished someone picks it up with a helicopter and flies it away. The people who offered their help stand there stunned saying what the hell.

Her choice, no laws broken, no promise to keep the castle where it was built. Just... I don't have the words. uncool I guess. If i were the publicist I'd be offering people who donated over a certain level autographed hardcovers or something to try to smooth ruffled feathers and maybe everyone who donated a coupon for a discount on the hardcover. Something to show those people that they really do matter because they probably feel used right now. But that's just me, I think a short term hit in income beats long term bad will.

[Avarwen]

It's a double edged sword in this case she could have kept it up and earned much less and had less fame while keeping her fans or she could have sold it and taken it down to a known publisher to get more money and fame along with more fans she know will pay a good price for her work. She chose the latter. Let's be honest here most people who want to write for a living want fame and fortune at some point. I've learned not to be a fan of anything because things and people change and by the end they are not worth my time anymore because they have conformed in order to survive . If this books really is good she might get the fame and fortune she seeks and in this day and age that's all that matters. Fan's at some point become worthless because if you are popular enough you will gain as many as you loose. Which is why I refuse to be a fan of anything now.

[Ankh]

Originally Posted by Dusty Bottoms

Without the community the work would be valueless, it would have gained no attention and she wouldn't have had the opportunity to rat out the community that brought her the attention in the first place.

Huh? Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that I suffered a sudden urge to add a Nebula award to my humble collection of earthly possessions.

Last time that I've checked, Science Fiction and Fantasy writers of America did not hand Nebulas for the best community formed around the author, so I am still convinced that my sudden and utterly fictitious urge to call myself a Nebula winner can hardly come to fruition even if I have a horde of well-wishers and campaigners for my Nebula award.

Writing something that qualifies for the award might help.

[basschick]

it was a foolish move imo. the more people who have a book, the more who will read it. in the short run, that may not make sales, but as sequels come out, having the free book available on people's harddrives will mean more sales as they get around to reading it. now they can't get around to reading it as most of the people i know who read don't read in their browser.

i have a queue i work through, but my eyes can't take reading a full book on my monitor. i've bought a LOT of sequels to free ebooks, and sometimes bought the original as well. i've only once bought an ebook that was "free" but only available to read online (coraline), and i was already a big fan of the author.

[Avarwen]

Also I really don't see too much wrong here it was her work and her right to do as she pleases. If she want's to be a pro and make a living off her work she has to be able to turn a good profit and not just a petty sum. Sure she'll loose fans but if this book can sell well enough she'll gain more and get good money as well. The fact of the matter is if you are not signed to a major publisher you will have a much harder time selling your product. Sadly that's how it is to survive in the game you have to make hard choices that some will not like.

[starrigger]

Originally Posted by Iphinome

She put hers up bit by bit and took donations in exchange for posting the next chapter. Think of it as someone building a castle and every day people who think castles are pretty cool come by and drop off a few home depot gift cards to keep the project going. Then when the castle is finished someone picks it up with a helicopter and flies it away. The people who offered their help stand there stunned saying what the hell.

Her choice, no laws broken, no promise to keep the castle where it was built. Just... I don't have the words. uncool I guess. If i were the publicist I'd be offering people who donated over a certain level autographed hardcovers or something to try to smooth ruffled feathers and maybe everyone who donated a coupon for a discount on the hardcover. Something to show those people that they really do matter because they probably feel used right now. But that's just me, I think a short term hit in income beats long term bad will.

First explanation I've seen that I can wrap my head around. Thanks. I don't quite agree with the analogy, but at least we're no longer arguing at cross purposes.

To me, the fact that she had the book up for a fair length of time is sufficient honoring of her side of the implicit bargain. I acknowledge that there can be a difference of opinion about that. And certainly about whether it's a smart move strategically. But just on the point of honor, I don't see a justification for excoriating her.

BTW, my bad on calling her award a Nebula. It was the Andre Norton Award for outstanding YA SF. It is awarded with the Nebulas, but is not a Nebula itself. (I should not have made that mistake, considering that I was part of the group that created the Norton award, and I chair the rules committee that governs both. )

To the comment someone else made about authors seeking fame and fortune--give me a break. Authors want to earn a decent living from their work. Few can. If actual fame and fortune come, that's amazing and special. It happens to few of us. I know very few authors who take fans for granted.

[Iphinome]

I understand there can be a difference of opinion and I'm not overly familiar with this situation just what I've read since the thread was posted thank you for seeing my side you're far more polite than some other people. In another thread I'm being crucified as a thief and a freeloader for arguing in favor of shorter copyright so a civil disagreement feel like you just gave me a big hug and a cookie.

[starrigger]

Originally Posted by Iphinome

I understand there can be a difference of opinion and I'm not overly familiar with this situation just what I've read since the thread was posted thank you for seeing my side you're far more polite than some other people. In another thread I'm being crucified as a thief and a freeloader for arguing in favor of shorter copyright so a civil disagreement feel like you just gave me a big hug and a cookie.

You like chocolate chip oatmeal?

[Iphinome]

I do! and you get karma just for that cool offer

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by Avarwen

It's a double edged sword in this case she could have kept it up and earned much less and had less fame while keeping her fans or she could have sold it and taken it down to a known publisher to get more money and fame along with more fans she know will pay a good price for her work. She chose the latter. Let's be honest here most people who want to write for a living want fame and fortune at some point. I've learned not to be a fan of anything because things and people change and by the end they are not worth my time anymore because they have conformed in order to survive . If this books really is good she might get the fame and fortune she seeks and in this day and age that's all that matters. Fan's at some point become worthless because if you are popular enough you will gain as many as you loose. Which is why I refuse to be a fan of anything now.

All the other bloggers that got publishing deals that I am aware of have left the original blog versions online.

[oggelbe2007]

Originally Posted by Ankh

Huh? Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that I suffered a sudden urge to add a Nebula award to my humble collection of earthly possessions.

Last time that I've checked, Science Fiction and Fantasy writers of America did not hand Nebulas for the best community formed around the author, so I am still convinced that my sudden and utterly fictitious urge to call myself a Nebula winner can hardly come to fruition even if I have a horde of well-wishers and campaigners for my Nebula award.

Writing something that qualifies for the award might help.

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.

[mr ploppy]

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.

How many people would be put off reading L Ron Hubbard's old books because of what else he was responsible for?

[pricecw]

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

[Hatgirl]

What sets my teeth on edge about the whole affair is the lack of notice given to the contributers.

I can completly understand how a new author (even one who is getting a lot of favourable press) wouldn't be able to stop their publisher having a fainting fit at the idea of the novel they had bought being available on the big, scary Interwebs But she said that she had been trying to persuade the publishers to relent for ages. So why on earth did she just whip the thing down at a moment's notice?! How about "it'll be coming down on Monday" or something. And yes, I know that she had had some vague, nebulous statement along the lines of "it won't be up for ever", but give me a break, that's not advance notice.

I hadn't heard of Catherynne Valente until she won the Andre Norton award, but I certainly took notice of her then because of the all the publicity about the interesting way she had found to fund her book. And then the next piece of news I hear about her is that she has snatched her book away from the readers that stuck with her when things were rocky. Terrible, terrible PR move. I don't think I have some sort of entitlement to read her book, but the people who gave her money deserved advanced notice of the removal, at the very least.

[DawnFalcon]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

2) It has the potential to cut into the income of any future author who wants to try a similar post-chapters-for-donations methods; readers are likely to be skeptical that the content will remain available. Readers may demand to know how long the material will remain up, which sets up a hostile interaction instead of a friendly one. This is likely to discourage both the author and other readers.

Unless the author puts it under a redistributable licence such as CC, yes. But you can't do that AND get a commercial publishing deal unless you're Cory Doctorow.