Rude author blasts commentor who complains about typos

[Hellmark]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

I'm a STRONG proponent of listening/watching Shakespeare over reading him, so that was actually why I picked him for the example.

So, I agree.

That's why I mentioned him in my example too. It is a different experience, one that Shakespeare wrote for. He intended much of his work to be performed, not read.

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

I don't do that; and never did. I read silently at the same speed I read aloud.

You're a rarity. Most people don't. I know I read silently faster than I can read out loud. I also read silently faster than the rate of most audio books

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by Hellmark

You're a rarity. Most people don't. I know I read silently faster than I can read out loud. I also read silently faster than the rate of most audio books

I read silently at the same rate as audiobooks. I also prefer audiobooks to ebooks.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by kennyc

I keep reading the same sentences over and over and then I fall asleep.

When I start to do that, I just shut my Kindle off. Experience tells me to quit; otherwise, I'll just have to reread it again anyway.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by leebase

What utter hogwash. There is absolutely no difference between reading and listening to a book among adults talking about the books they have "read" on a web forum.

Perhaps were we speaking of children who are still learning to read....ther could be a minor point to be made.

But to be FRIGHTENED that adults talking on a web forum about a book they have read, when they listened instead, is absurd even given the obvious hyperbole.

I read about 40 books a year and listen to 10 or so. I say that I've read 50 books because there is no difference worth mentioning between the two. I comprehend them equally well. But if not, if I did have trouble reading - then it's fantastic that I would still enjoy books via audio books. I would in no way feel inferior talking amongs the "real readers" about those books.

I surely hope your moronic differentiation hasn't scarred sone poor soul who thought they were participating as an equal talking about the books they "read" via an audiobook.

Lee

This response is pretty harsh.

One big difference between listening and reading is that reading helps to improve your reading and writing skills. You see how words are spelled and how punctuation is used, how sentences and paragraphs are structured. You can, if so inclined, look up an unfamiliar word and improve your vocabulary. You can linger over a sentence to suss out the meaning, or simply to appreciate its beauty.

Listening is just listening. You get the story, sure. But it's much more passive. I think it's fine to listen to audio books when one is on the move or can't read for some other reason, but I do believe a steady, exclusive diet of audio books would generally not be a good thing.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

This is *entirely* subjective. I hated "The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo" until I listened to it -- the narrator brought meaning and inflection to the text that I simply wasn't. Other people will feel differently than I in regard to that text, and their opinion is just as valid as mine because this is subjective.

Tl;dr: This is a very silly argument.

It is not subjective that some texts are not suited for reading aloud.

[Joonbug1]

Thanks for giving this "rude author" publicity. Never would have heard of him if it weren't for this post, but I'm going to go buy his books now.

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by tompe

It is not subjective that some texts are not suited for reading aloud.

Yes, it is.

Now let the no-its-not-yes-it-is begin.

But, yes, in all seriousness, this is silly. If you'd like to name a text that is "not suited for reading aloud", we can debate it, but just your bald assertion that It Is So? Not buying.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

Yes, it is.

Now let the no-its-not-yes-it-is begin.

But, yes, in all seriousness, this is silly. If you'd like to name a text that is "not suited for reading aloud", we can debate it, but just your bald assertion that It Is So? Not buying.

It seems trivially true to me that things like punctuation, length of sentences, rythm an so on influences how well a text works when reading it aloud.

I know that for example M. John Harrison selects his texts to read at science fiction convention according to that. And he also sometimes re-writes a text bit for it to work better. At one con he actually thought that a reading he did was so bad because the text did not work to read aloud (it was a text he had never read aloud before) that he had an extra reading as compensation.

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by Joonbug1

Thanks for giving this "rude author" publicity. Never would have heard of him if it weren't for this post, but I'm going to go buy his books now.

I bought the free one to see what the fuss was, it's not too bad as far as those type of stories goes. I'll send him a list of mistakes when I've finished it, see if he fixes them.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

I bought the free one to see what the fuss was, it's not too bad as far as those type of stories goes. I'll send him a list of mistakes when I've finished it, see if he fixes them.

It's beyond me why anyone would want to help out an author who's rude and idiotic, as this one seems to be. Why do you want to do his work for him?

I guess you must be a better person than I.

[HomeInMyShoes]

To me, the author is pretty much saying "I don't give a crap about the quality of my work." To which I would respond by not buying the shoddily crafted book. End of story.

There's so many books out there. Why would I read one with crappy editing?

[MrsJoseph]

Originally Posted by HomeInMyShoes

To me, the author is pretty much saying "I don't give a crap about the quality of my work." To which I would respond by not buying the shoddily crafted book. End of story.

There's so many books out there. Why would I read one with crappy editing?

^This. I can't even be bothered to go to his site.

[Hellmark]

If an author comes across as a douchebag (as this one did), and it is known that their writing is substandard (as this one is), why should I support them?

[M.L.Stewart]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

I bought the free one to see what the fuss was, it's not too bad as far as those type of stories goes. I'll send him a list of mistakes when I've finished it, see if he fixes them.

At last! We are getting somewhere. Of course I will fix them. Only a fool would spend so many months penning a story and be so blasé about his errors. I apologize to the original poster for any offence caused but if you read my follow up blog, you will realize that my comments were part of the ongoing experiment into self-promotion of an Ebook.

I am purposefully avoiding the all-too-common method of spamming forums with a synopsis and link, instead attempting to generate debate (be it in a positive or negative scenario) around my story and ultimately myself as the author.

I have the greatest respect for the craft and it is one which I hope to master one day.

The original manuscript was mistakenly uploaded in its unedited state. This was rectified as quickly as my schedule permitted.

Once again, please forgive me for any offence caused but at least I gave you something to discuss


Kindest regards,
ML Stewart (The rude author)

[DiapDealer]

Welcome Rude Author.

Can't say that I respect the tactic of creating a disingenuous online furor for attention, but it's hard deny it's effectiveness.