Seperating the Wheat from the Chaff

[Sparrow]

Originally Posted by Moejoe

Here are the opening paragraphs from two traditionally published books, to make my position much clearer (any choices I make here, can easily be transferred to the independently published)

It was a pleasure to burn.
~
Death, in this forsaken place, could come in many forms. Geologist Charles Brophy had endured the savage splendour of this terrain and yet nothing could prepare him for a fate as barbarous and unnatural as the one about to befall him.
~
Now, one of these is quite clearly brilliant and compelling, while the other is a bunch of old tosh and I wouldn't read beyond that first paragraph. Can you guess which? Anyone with half a brain can, and it's definitely not the second quoted paragraph.

They both seem pretty iffy to me.
The first trying too hard. The second too trite.

But then most initial paragraphs of most novels are fairly unpromising imho.

[Moejoe]

Originally Posted by Sparrow

They both seem pretty iffy to me.
The first trying too hard. The second too trite.

But then most initial paragraphs of most novels are fairly unpromising imho.

Iffy!!! Iffy!*?! That's the first line from Fahrenheit 451. in a single sentence he encapsulates the motivation of a whole character, a flow for a novel and does it while drawing you into the story. Iffy!!!!???? As far as first lines go that's up there with "Call me ishmael" for brilliance.

Iffy?!!!??

[Bilbo1967]

Originally Posted by Moejoe

Iffy!!! Iffy!*?! That's the first line from Fahrenheit 451. in a single sentence he encapsulates the motivation of a whole character, a flow for a novel and does it while drawing you into the story. Iffy!!!!???? As far as first lines go that's up there with "Call me ishmael" for brilliance.

Iffy?!!!??

So, just to be clear then, you don't agree with Sparrow?

[Moejoe]

Originally Posted by Bilbo1967

So, just to be clear then, you don't agree with Sparrow?

Well, to put it succinctly; no

[Bilbo1967]

Originally Posted by Moejoe

Well, to put it succinctly; no

I was always good at picking up on those little subtle hints.

FWIW, Moejoe, I tend to agree with you about the relative merits of those two opening sentences. It would be a hell of a boring world though if everybody agreed about everything all the time!

[tompe]

Originally Posted by Moejoe

it takes a modern agent/editor/reviewer 3 pages (if that) to decide on whether a book is worth publishing (the First 3 Pages is a very famous book about this very process and why writers should not ignore it). I simply take this to any work that I'm deciding upon and reduce it. Read the first 3 paragraphs of any book and you'll have a really good idea of what's coming up and whether that's something you'll really want to continue with. If it's taking you a 100 pages to make a decision on whether you like a book or not, then maybe you do need to be told what to read by the gatekeepers.

Please read more carefully what I write. And agent might read 3 pages and decide that the prose is publishable but that does not mean that the book will be published in the version that is submitted to the editor.

I personally have to read the whole book to see if I like it. I bad ending usually destroys an otherwise good book for me.

I want to read only good books. I do not want to read just OK books. And I still do not believe you can distinguish between Ok books and good books just reading a couple of paragraphs.

If the prose is bad of course everybody can detect that in a couple of paragraphs. But a good book do not just consist of prose you like. It also should have a good plot and it must be internally constistent and do on.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by Moejoe

i
Again, I don't understand why you are so reliant on the opinions of the publishers (whose bottom line is money making, lets not forget. They no more care about fiction than McDonalds do about gourmet cooking). Can't you make those decisions for yourself? Do you need someone else to assign value to a cultural product before you feel safe enough to try it for yourself?

I have not said that publishers are the only possible gatekeepers. Word of mouth and recommendation inf forums and other groups can also work. And I do not have time to sample as many books that can be filtered by a set of gatekeepers. So by sampling myself only I will miss a lot of good books.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by Moejoe

Kelly Link, Benjamin Rosenblum, Small Stories, Nick Name, Moxie Mezcal (brand new find, only today). The traditional publishing industry has very little to offer me that I can't find with the independents or what some would so derisively call "self-published".

Kelly Link and Benjamin Rosenblum is not self-published. They are extremely well known name in the science fiction field. And I have noticed them through the traditional publishing industry.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by kennyc

Oh and on the topic of reading the first few paragraphs to determine if it's for you or not, certainly that is appropriate but that is no guarantee that it well be a good investment of your time -- particularly for a novel that will take a substantial amount of that precious time -- when the writer and publisher know this is the case. I've seen many a book that starts off excellent but totally peters out and is full of padding sometimes all the way to the end. Those are the ones I end up throwing across the room for wasting my time! (no I'm not going to throw my 505 ).

Especially since authors know that a lot of reader read the beginning before deciding to buy the book so they make an extra effort to hook the reader there.

[Moejoe]

Originally Posted by tompe

Please read more carefully what I write. And agent might read 3 pages and decide that the prose is publishable but that does not mean that the book will be published in the version that is submitted to the editor.

I personally have to read the whole book to see if I like it. I bad ending usually destroys an otherwise good book for me.

I want to read only good books. I do not want to read just OK books. And I still do not believe you can distinguish between Ok books and good books just reading a couple of paragraphs.

If the prose is bad of course everybody can detect that in a couple of paragraphs. But a good book do not just consist of prose you like. It also should have a good plot and it must be internally constistent and do on.

I believe you're wrong on basically everything you say, and also you're terribly condescending in assuming that I did not understand what you wrote in the first place.

Books need neither plot nor do they have to have much consistency. Some of the greatest works of literature are essentially 'plotless' and might consist of vignettes or moments stolen from life, or anything else that takes the authors fancy. Plot has never been the best yardstick of a good novel, nor has prose, to be frank. Hemmingway's prose is flat and without style (a stylistic consideration, I'll give you that) and there isn't much of a plot to a story like "The Old Man & the Sea" - Man goes out to catch fish, man catches fish, fish escapes, man returns.

I also want to read only good books, not just OK books, but I don't think the traditional publishers have any more of a grasp on what is great and what is OK than do I when I make my own decisions on the culture I obtain.

[Moejoe]

Originally Posted by tompe

Kelly Link and Benjamin Rosenblum is not self-published. They are extremely well known name in the science fiction field. And I have noticed them through the traditional publishing industry.

I never said they were self-published, I said I'd discovered them on Feedbooks. Out of the list I quoted, 3 of the 5 are 'independently published' not 'self-published' as you so rudely insist.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by Moejoe

There's never a guarantee, I remember being immensely impressed with the opening of David Guterson's "Our Lady of the Forest" and then giving up on the book about halfway through (in the paper book days), same for the terrible novel "The ice Storm" (which was relatively short). I think what I'm driving at here is that there's crap published across the board, and there's not really anybody who can tell you what is crap and what isn't, that's for you to decide.

I disagree. I think there is a significantly better chance of a print book published by a major publisher to be worth reading than there is for a self-published or e-published book.

[Moejoe]

Originally Posted by Bilbo1967

I was always good at picking up on those little subtle hints.

FWIW, Moejoe, I tend to agree with you about the relative merits of those two opening sentences. It would be a hell of a boring world though if everybody agreed about everything all the time!

Yes, I agree, but it is fun arguing the toss

[Moejoe]

Originally Posted by kennyc

I disagree. I think there is a significantly better chance of a print book published by a major publisher to be worth reading than there is for a self-published or e-published book.

Most of the trad publishing, especially in the last couple of years, has been utter dreck across the board.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by Moejoe

I never said they were self-published, I said I'd discovered them on Feedbooks. Out of the list I quoted, 3 of the 5 are 'independently published' not 'self-published' as you so rudely insist.

You gave them as example of authors that was not offered to you by the traditional publishing industry.