What Advice Can You Give Independent Authors?

[kcmay]

In my estimation, self-editing can be done well by about 1% of authors. It's a skill like any other that takes time to learn and master. If you're that good at self-editing, go for it.

[caleb72]

Originally Posted by kcmay

In my estimation, self-editing can be done well by about 1% of authors. It's a skill like any other that takes time to learn and master. If you're that good at self-editing, go for it.

Do you think you can combine a 3rd party reader with your own efforts to make things more effective?

I think if you're willing not to be defensive and to take a step back and have an independent party giving critical feedback, that you might do a better job of self-editing.

Eg.

If I wrote something and had no feedback, it might be difficult for me to jolt myself outside of my own bubble to critically assess what I've written.

However if I had an independent person challenge me on what I've done, I might be able to remove myself enough to look at my work from a different point of view.

All probably easier said than done of course, but I guess my point is that if circumstances are such that self-editing is the only option, then doing it from within that "bubble" probably isn't such a good idea.

Still - finding that 3rd party willing to help is not necessarily easy I would imagine.

Regards
Caleb

[dworth]

I always edit my own stuff after the first draft and also do re-writes/additions/removals/re-jigging.

I then re-edit the second draft, and possibly a third.

I then pass it to a third party. I can guarantee that they WILL find something within a couple of pages that when it's pointed out to me is so glaringly obvious that I wonder how I could have missed it, particularly grammatical issues (misplaced commas of the 'eats shoots and leaves variety') A fresh pair of eyes always helps. You will read what you think you've written, not what you actually have.

[kcmay]

Oh, I agree that beta reader input on what works and what doesn't prior to the book's release is invaluable. I make heavy use of critique groups, but not for the editing phase. I use betas/critiquers to get feedback on the plot elements, pacing, continuity, characterizations, etc. When the story is "done" and I'm preparing for publication, I self-edit, then use a proofreader or two.

[Lemurion]

Any author can and should self-edit to the best of their ability.

There are always things the author can do to improve their work, and every writer should do that. The difference between a commercially published book and many indie books is that for the commercial book that's usually the first step in the editing process, and for indie books it's often the last (and some indie authors may not do that much.)

I know I'm not saying that authors cannot do any editing on their own work; what I am saying is that it is very and often prohibitively difficult for most authors to do all the developmental editing a novel needs on their own, and almost impossible to proofread one's own work successfully.

One area where I often see issues come up is that an author may explain or indicate something in a very oblique or subtle way. Because they know the story, they immediately catch up on the clue and follow along, but a reader coming in cold may not pick up on that and thus get lost in the story. One of the things editors do is point out those things which authors miss by being too close to the story.

As for the need for additional eyes to proofread, that should be self-evident.

[James_Wilde]

Originally Posted by TwoKindsofColor

The biggest complaints that come from Indie Authors, is their hard time connecting with readers. What advice can you give us?

Hi Deborah, and welcome to MR.

As you will have gathered, very few of the comments in here address your question. You have inadvertently started a regularly recurring flame war and there is nothing you can do about that other than hop over the dross.

Editing and proof-reading will not help you one whit in connecting with readers, however useful they may be. The give-away is here:

Originally Posted by Worldwalker

Well, David, look at it this way: There are people selling thousands upon thousands of books a year with fancy publishing contracts, and there are people selling a handful through vanity presses. One of those two makes use of editors, and one doesn't. I'll leave you to guess which is which.

No offence, Worldwalker, but those big sellers got their copy editing after they got the fancy publishing contracts, and it's the fancy publishing firms who were responsible for their work connecting with readers. Those big sellers are not indie-publishers. And the reference to "vanity presses" was a bit of a snide dig.

It's just possible that the lack of copy editing will lose you a sale or two if problems show up in the first few pages or in the blurb. They may play a role in helping you to sell your second and subsequent novels, but actually I think your story plays a much bigger one. Speaking for myself, and most of the readers I know, we're a lot more tolerant of grammatical errors than copy editors would have you believe. Not that we have no standards, but we're even more tolerant if we know it's an indie-production.

Having got that out of the way, pluck out the comments about blogging, getting reviews on literature sites, or in newspapers. Maybe join the library circuit - libraries and other cultural centres often have literary evenings when a writer comes and talks about their writing, and maybe has fifty or so copies to sell at a discount. How about a signing day at bookstores within commuting distance? Just don't expect your first million in the first six months. Almost everyone agrees that it's the long haul for indie-publishers.

If you have more than one genre that you write in, choosing one that is popular, like crime fiction or chick-lit might help. If it's an ebook, sci-fi and fantasy seem to go over well. I don't know whether ebook readers are nerdier than the general population.

I'm not actually the best one to answer your question since I'm not there myself yet, but it's a long pull, and it seems to me that more time goes to connecting with readers for the indie-publisher than actually writing the book which is a shame. Reminds me of when I ran my own small accountancy firm. I reckoned that nearly 40% of my time went on administration and marketing.

I hope more successful indie-publishers will come and answer your question, so I can learn, too, but I'm afraid if they have the secret, they might not be willing to let on!

[Lemurion]

Originally Posted by James_Wilde

Hi Deborah, and welcome to MR.

As you will have gathered, very few of the comments in here address your question. You have inadvertently started a regularly recurring flame war and there is nothing you can do about that other than hop over the dross.

Editing and proof-reading will not help you one whit in connecting with readers, however useful they may be. The give-away is here:



No offence, Worldwalker, but those big sellers got their copy editing after they got the fancy publishing contracts, and it's the fancy publishing firms who were responsible for their work connecting with readers. Those big sellers are not indie-publishers. And the reference to "vanity presses" was a bit of a snide dig.

It's just possible that the lack of copy editing will lose you a sale or two if problems show up in the first few pages or in the blurb. They may play a role in helping you to sell your second and subsequent novels, but actually I think your story plays a much bigger one. Speaking for myself, and most of the readers I know, we're a lot more tolerant of grammatical errors than copy editors would have you believe. Not that we have no standards, but we're even more tolerant if we know it's an indie-production.

Having got that out of the way, pluck out the comments about blogging, getting reviews on literature sites, or in newspapers. Maybe join the library circuit - libraries and other cultural centres often have literary evenings when a writer comes and talks about their writing, and maybe has fifty or so copies to sell at a discount. How about a signing day at bookstores within commuting distance? Just don't expect your first million in the first six months. Almost everyone agrees that it's the long haul for indie-publishers.

If you have more than one genre that you write in, choosing one that is popular, like crime fiction or chick-lit might help. If it's an ebook, sci-fi and fantasy seem to go over well. I don't know whether ebook readers are nerdier than the general population.

I'm not actually the best one to answer your question since I'm not there myself yet, but it's a long pull, and it seems to me that more time goes to connecting with readers for the indie-publisher than actually writing the book which is a shame. Reminds me of when I ran my own small accountancy firm. I reckoned that nearly 40% of my time went on administration and marketing.

I hope more successful indie-publishers will come and answer your question, so I can learn, too, but I'm afraid if they have the secret, they might not be willing to let on!

I have to disagree.

Marketing is vital for getting that first sale, but it's not what connects a writer with readers.

Writers connect with readers through their words.

The big problem with grammatical and spelling errors is that they change the meaning of the words. You may have the greatest story in the world that any reader would love, but if you make too many grammatical and spelling mistakes the meaning will change so the reader won't get the benefit of your story.

Readers connect with authors based on their interpretation of the author's words, not the author's interpretation of their own words - and the more errors in spelling and grammar the greater the divergence between interpretations. It doesn't matter how great the story is if the words don't tell that story.

That's why grammar and spelling matter: They are the tools you use to convey your story to the reader - and it doesn't matter how great the story is if the reader doesn't get it.

[Worldwalker]

I'm quite fond of this xkcd strip: #808.

Publishing corporations are not in the charity business. While it may be argued (and I have) that they are making errors in their pricing structure for ebooks, I've never seen anyone argue that they err on the side of providing authors with too many services or giving away anything they don't have to. They spend quite a bit of money on editing and proofreading (which are not, by the way, the same thing). They're not doing this out of the goodness of their hearts. Like any corporation, they're doing it for one simple reason: because it provides a positive return on investment. Since they're investing money, for the ROI to work out in their favor they must be getting more money back -- that is, the books sell more than those without such treatment, and sell enough more to make the extra work profitable. Publishers will avoid paying for anything that doesn't have an adequate ROI -- for example, reading the slushpile, in many cases. If they're paying for proofreading and editing, the ROI has to be there. Arguing otherwise, as xkcd says, really means that arguing that modern capitalism isn't that ruthlessly profit-focused. I don't think even our resident shills would argue that commercial publishing is some form of charity.

No, the reference to "vanity presses" was not any form of snide dig. That's the conventional term for publishing houses in which the expense and risk is borne by the author. There are plenty of snide digs possible on that subject; however, using a conventional and widely understood term for a particular category of publishing isn't one of them.

With regard to proofreading, your words are how you are presenting yourself. They are your story's appearance. James Wilde suggested library events, for example. Would you show up at one of those wearing torn pants and a shirt that smells? You wouldn't dream of it, I'm sure. But the people who will never see (or smell) what kind of shirt you wear will read your words, and have nothing but those words to judge you on. If your words are sloppy, they will believe that you don't care enough about them to make them otherwise. Whatever reaction you might want people to have to your writing, "what a slob!" is guaranteed not to be it.

Then there's editing, which is a different matter entirely. The reason you can't do it yourself is that you're too close to the story. For example, I recently wrote a short story (just a few thousand words) for a friendly challenge. After it was done (un-edited), someone said "hey, what happened to so-and-so? He was here, but when they got there he wasn't with them." I knew exactly what happened to so-and-so, of course: he had walked away to do certain other things that weren't relevant to the story (nor was he, any longer). I hadn't even realized I'd just "vanished" him because I knew exactly where he'd gone and why; I hadn't included him in my mental image of the people at their destination, so I didn't write him there. But, because I'd never said that he left, my readers by inertia expected him to be still with the group after their short walk, and I confused the heck out of a bunch of readers. As soon as someone other than me read the story, they could point at exactly what the problem was, one which I hadn't even seen. Putting in a single line to send that character on his way made it a stronger story. That, writ large, is the kind of thing a good editor will do. They're that second set of eyes who spots all the things a writer can't. There is a reason why the acknowledgments for just about any book include thanks to its editor, and that reason is not that the author gets paid any more for putting that in.

I want to read a good story. I don't care if it came from BigHugePubCo Inc. or some random person's desktop. Either it's a good story, or it isn't a good story. As far as proofreading, I don't give indie writers any special pass on writing correctly any more than I give them a pass on not smelling bad. And when it comes to editing, that's what can determine whether a story is good or not. I'm not going to read something and think "well, this story is actually pretty lame, there are two subplots that go nowhere, I'm not sure who that other character is, and OMG, the protagonist's girlfriend needs to be drowned, but it's not from a big publisher, so I'll read it anyway." If it's not a good story, it's not a good story, and I have plenty of good stories to read; I'm not going to subject myself to a bad story out of some charity toward the author. If I really think the author needs my charity, I'll send him or her a check. But I will not spend a slice of my lifetime on a second-rate story just because of where it's from, big or small.

[James_Wilde]

Originally Posted by TwoKindsofColor

The biggest complaints that come from Indie Authors, is their hard time connecting with readers. What advice can you give us?

OK Deborah, what did you mean by "connect with readers"?

[jaxx6166]

Originally Posted by caleb72

I agree

Where do you find these people? Probably wouldn't hurt to start right here. You may need to negotiate a little informal payment, or maybe not depending on the person - but I think you're shooting yourself in the foot if you think that your work can survive without 3rd party proof-reading at least.

<<SNIP>>

Regards
Caleb

http://www.scribendi.com/service/manuscript_editing

Saw these guys advertised during NaNoWriMo, never used 'em. but they're expensive...

[jaxx6166]

I'm assuming that she means finding people to buy her book. And there's no bullet proof method for that...

Writers are part time writers, full time salesmen.

[James_Wilde]

Originally Posted by jaxx6166

I'm assuming that she means finding people to buy her book. And there's no bullet proof method for that...

Writers are part time writers, full time salesmen.

If that's what she means, then she's at post-production. She's way past editing and proof-reading, which is pre-production. So let's get busy giving her advice for the stage she's at.

[Lemurion]

Good point about what does the OP mean.

I take "connect with readers," to mean how does one get readers to follow them as an author, and look forward to each new book, rather than selling a single book.

[TwoKindsofColor]

I communicate online with a few African American authors. Most of the complaints were about the inability to connect with readers. I had no real complaints because "Two Kinds of Color" has sold over 200 kindles, and a few paperbacks. I haven't gone a month, since the book's been published, without selling something. I know it isn't much, but the sales have been a confidence booster for me.

Thinking there was some great secret regarding how to connect with readers, I decided to ask a simple question. I didn't think it would get any real response. Because of your comments, advice, I know of three writers who are editing their work.

Where I'm concerned, at this point I don't care about sales. I care about being the best I can be. I'll take all the constructive advice I can get. Thanks for taking the question to a higher level!

Always best regards,
Deborah Kennedy

[Dodge]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Sorry to disagree, David, but it's virtually impossible to edit your own work; almost nobodycan look objectively at something they've written yourself. That's why it's so important to use a professional editor.

I agree with this. I now have an editor, my wife, and she sees things that I don't. I can literally read my ms 6 times and think that it's good. It's not. Get someone else to help with fresh eyes.

As far as getting your name out there goes - get it out there anyway you can by pissing off the least amount of people as possible. It can get burdensome but you got to get it out there. Stay in the eye of your potential customers.