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

[MikeB1972]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Obviously spelling wouldn't be an issue in an audiobook . I don't know about grammar - I'm not sure how much I'd notice it. It's not an experiment that I'm especially keen to carry out, to be honest .

I don't know about that, I've heard people mention here that they listen to TTS to check for spelling mistakes (I'm assuming we are talking about a TTS type audiobook here on the basis that if the author wont shell out for editing they are not going to pay for a decent audiobook conversion).

Not sure how TTS deals with misplaced letters and badly spelled words, but it could be worse listening to it than reading it

[HarryT]

No, I couldn't listen to TTS. It has to be "real" audiobooks for me.

[teh603]

Originally Posted by pidgeon92

What does this even mean? The post was about the importance of grammar.

And I'm referring to the fact that "correct" English grammar is actually quite burdensome and doesn't usually help with understanding.

For example, correct grammar means you aren't supposed to overuse the word "said." But as writers, we're told that "said" is transparent. We're ultimately using incorrect grammar, because it works better than correct grammar. And then how many times do we begin a sentence with a conjunction? Dangle participles or prepositions? Use a double negative in dialog or contraction anywhere? Begin a quote as a fresh sentence instead of forcing a comma at the end of the previous one?

Most of the things I listed up there are nitpicky details of correct grammar, which don't actually help with understanding.

[miguel1626]

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.

Me too

I remember reading an editor somewhere saying that most of the stuff that ends up in the publisher's slush pile is the product of barely literate wannabe "authors".

A lot of people think they have what it takes to be the next Faulkner (or at least the next Stephen King). Per the Dunning-Kruger effect, these people are the least aware of the fact that they suck. And now they are all able (and willing!) to self-publish.

As far as my personal opinion is concerned, most of what is published by traditional publishers is also crap that doesn't enhance the world at all (*cough* Twilight *cough*), but publishers do make the search space smaller, generally in a good way.

Nobody wants (or ought to want) access to the Library of Babel - huge search spaces tend to maxentropy, yielding no useful bits at all.

[ProfCrash]

Originally Posted by Josieb1

I'll just carry on enjoying and reviewing the books I love and leave the discussion of what makes a good book (obviously not self published of course) to the rest of you.

And that is the way it shold be.

Most of the folks I know who enjoy Indie authors are not bothered by grammar and spelling issues. Most of the folks I know who have not been able to get into Indie authors are put off by obvious grammar and spelling mistakes.

My grammar sucks. I know it does. I hired a proof reader to review my dissertation because I am aware that my grammar sucks. My spelling is atrocious. I am dyslexic and I have auditory discrimination which makes it hard for me t distinguishing between soft sounds. So I have an excuse for crappy spelling but that doesn't mean that it doesn't suck.

Still, I can catch when there is something off in someones grammar. Normally the page does not flow properly and and I find myself rewriting to correct the problem. That distracts me from the story line.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by mgmueller

There certainly are some pearls out there. But how to find the 5% pearls and separate them from the rest?
I don't want to download samples.

If you don't want to avail yourself of the simplest solution to the dilemma you posed, then you may be out of luck.

Originally Posted by mgmueller

I want to read the description and rely on some kind of quality control.

If you truly rely strictly on the description (and a "trusted" publisher's name), I fear you're already quite used to purchasing a few books that you end up not liking. But I suspect you use other criteria as well.

The idea that someone can't augment the traditionally published books they normally read with a few indie books that have risen to prominence through non-traditional methods (and that meet their grammar standards) is a myth. As is the idea that finding those "pearls" has to be some sisyphean task. It's not.

Everyone's free to choose how or where they buy/obtain their reading material. That's not in question. What's being called into question is your ability/right to declare the waters you're unwilling to dip your toes into "unnavigable."

[fjtorres]

It is easy to delude yourself into thinking all indie publishing is the product of "barely literate wannabees" but that is not the world we live in.

The world we live in is the one where established authors are getting their long neglected backlist titles reverted so they can self publish--books that have already been "annointed" by traditional publishing as good enough.

The world we live in is the one where midlist authors "good enough" for traditional publishers are being dropped by their publishers not because they can't write but because their books don't meet their "filter" of being able to sell 30,000 copies in the first 3 months. 25,000 copies? Feh! That will barely pay for a week of janitorial at the Manhattan glass tower! So the author takes the book to directly to the readers.

The world we live in is the one where the BPHs are scouring the indie book listings for successful titles to leech off. Even if only by doing the pbook side of the book's business.

The world we live in is the one where established authors with ongoing tradpub contracts are self-publishing not because the new book isn't good enough for their old-school publisher but because they want to see what happens or because their new story doesn't fit any of the marketting pigeon holes or because they're tired of predatory book contracts...

The world we live in is the one where business-savvy writers that are good enough to be "validated" by the traditionalist establishment don't even bother to submit (in all senses of the word) to the establishment.

The world we live in is the world where the backlist is eternal, where niche titles that don't appeal to the masses are readily available to those that have a taste for that niche, whether it be Amish romance novels or Babylonian gay erotica, and where thousands of *good* writers, many with decades of experience, are for the first time making a living off their creativity. Where the Canadian writers union is drafting rules and termsto accept indie authors as members and where the Romance Writers of America have already done so.

The world we live in *is* the world of the Library of Babel.

And it is a glorious world to live in if you have an open mind and can read promo blurbs with a critical eye, know how to download ebook samples, or know how to interpret online book reviews. Yes, there is a lot of crap out there--but there always has been a lot of crap out there and experienced readers have never let that get between them and a worthy read.

It is a world where you are not limited to the hundred titles the local supermarket, newstand, or convenience stores (because the big chain stores don't consider your town worthy of their presence) or, for that matter, to the ten thousand "handpicked" titles said big chain store might carry if they do. You are not limited to the few thousand titles your cozy neighborhood bookstore carries (a great place to while the time browsing, BTW--nice to see they're weathering the ongoing disruption reasonably well) or even the hundreds of thousands of titles they can special order from the catalog of in-print tradpub'ed titles.

It is a world of millions of new ebook titles every year--and notice I said ebook, because many of those new to ebook titles are not new, but republished from established authors' backlist--some from traditional publishers, some from new independent ventures, and some from self publishers. And some are from the Big Publishing houses newly-launched Predatory Presses, created to fleece the unwary.
(shrug)

Anybody who wants to limit themselves to only "traditionally-validated", "quality", "filtered content" is welcome to do so. Nobody is going to demonize you.
It would be nice if the courtesy were returned but not required.

Pretending the world of indie books is beneath you only impacts you--the rest of the world will keep on merrily fishing the troubled waters of the ebook disruption and enjoying the fun reads to be found in the Library of Babel.

In the world we live in, *we* the readers are the gatekeepers.
We decide which authors get the bulk of our reading money. And when we do, they get 50-60% of what the money right on the spot, not 3-12% 6 months later or upon litigation.

And bear in mind that in the world we live in the first important decision in getting (good) books to readers no longer is whether the traditional establishment accepts it but rather whether the author *chooses* to go with traditional publishing. Some will. Some won't. Over time the latter pool will grow, the former will shrink...

Power is moving to authors and readers.
Both camps will benefit.
The rest will have to scramble.

That is the world we live in.
It's called the 21st Century.
Toodles!

PS: To get the full story of what is actually going out there, it pays to actually visit some author-centric online communities in addition to the industry mouthpieces or reader sites. It can be very educational to see what the veteran authors are saying, and more importantly, doing.

[Prestidigitweeze]

Originally Posted by Billi

Could or would you enjoy these books that create the greatest criticism here - bad spelling, grammar... - when you would listen to them as audio books?

Certain books are actually written aloud. An extreme example is Lautremont declaiming the text of Maldoror triumphantly while striking loud chords on a piano. (Small wonder the text includes a scene in which the author rejects a woman's attentions in favor of a shark's.)

Ungrammatical language, as thought and uttered by characters, is often captured realistically by the writer, like the blemishes and pores on a person's face in a superrealist painting. (Huck Finn is a famous example.)

When the writer is accomplished, their use of that apparently butchered language feels as stylized yet precise as the sweep of a painter's brush.

Manet could render the sparkle of an ale-aglow glass with strokes that seemed loose and spontaneous, yet we know from others' accounts that the effect was sometimes accomplished over days and weeks.

Find a high-resolution image of one of his boozier paintings and look at it closely; scrutinize the alchemy by which he conjures tavern vernacular. The same can be true of writers with a colloquial gift.

Careless writers are another matter and so is their sound. Whether the text is on the page or read aloud, you can hear them stumbling in the halls of syntax and breaking entire shelves of porcelain. All of that can throw off any reader with an ear for grace.

[hidari]

anal retentiveness about grammar is great for people who care..... I reckon most don't.....Story trumps anal retentive grammar faux pas any day...

[Rbneader]

Originally Posted by teh603

And I'm referring to the fact that "correct" English grammar is actually quite burdensome and doesn't usually help with understanding.

For example, correct grammar means you aren't supposed to overuse the word "said." But as writers, we're told that "said" is transparent. We're ultimately using incorrect grammar, because it works better than correct grammar. And then how many times do we begin a sentence with a conjunction? Dangle participles or prepositions? Use a double negative in dialog or contraction anywhere? Begin a quote as a fresh sentence instead of forcing a comma at the end of the previous one?

Most of the things I listed up there are nitpicky details of correct grammar, which don't actually help with understanding.

Correct grammar helps a great deal with clarity and understanding. There's a point at which you have to choose between absolute correct grammar and a natural-sounding story, just like you have to choose which characters get fleshed out and which are stock characters, which details of a room to describe, etc. But that doesn't mean that grammar can be ignored. I think many people, including writers, are told incorrect things about grammar which puts them off.

For one thing, 'said' isn't really transparent. Using it too much will begin to seem strange, just like using any other word too much. Many authors use formatting to indicate when the speaker has changed and intersperse that with 'said' for this reason.

The other things you listed are all things authors can choose to do or not. It depends on how they want their book to sound. If a book is full of misspellings and grammar mistakes, I come away with the impression that the author doesn't actually know what their voice is or care to present a good reading experience to their readers. I'm OK with that in fanfic. I'm not OK with that in something I pay for. On the other hand, there are authors who consistently write a certain way, even though it's not 100% grammatical. I'm fine with that - it's a deliberate choice by someone who knows that they're doing. Andre Norton does it beautifully, which makes her books very memorable.

Originally Posted by hidari

anal retentiveness about grammar is great for people who care..... I reckon most don't.....Story trumps anal retentive grammar faux pas any day...

The problems start when bad grammar gets in the way of enjoying the story. If the author is making a choice to use strange grammar consistently, that's one thing. Making elementary grammar mistakes is something else. I think the point for where this happens is different for everybody though.


90% of everything is crap. I view publishers as people who try to filter out the junk (ex, My Immortal), and who attempt to impose some editing standards. They don't always succeed, and they don't always pick books I want, but even if they only filter out 30% of the junk that's still a 30% bigger chance the book will be readable and entertaining.

[ProfCrash]

I would love it if there was a good way to filter for the indie authors who are the midlist equivalents. Honestly, I would. I don't have a solution for that but it would be nice for folks.

[hidari]

Originally Posted by HarryT

No, I couldn't listen to TTS. It has to be "real" audiobooks for me.

Some TTS voices are better than some of the readers on Audible.com....

[hidari]

Well said... The Sleeper has Awoken...

Originally Posted by fjtorres

It is easy to delude yourself into thinking all indie publishing is the product of "barely literate wannabees" but that is not the world we live in.

The world we live in is the one where established authors are getting their long neglected backlist titles reverted so they can self publish--books that have already been "annointed" by traditional publishing as good enough.

The world we live in is the one where midlist authors "good enough" for traditional publishers are being dropped by their publishers not because they can't write but because their books don't meet their "filter" of being able to sell 30,000 copies in the first 3 months. 25,000 copies? Feh! That will barely pay for a week of janitorial at the Manhattan glass tower! So the author takes the book to directly to the readers.

The world we live in is the one where the BPHs are scouring the indie book listings for successful titles to leech off. Even if only by doing the pbook side of the book's business.

The world we live in is the one where established authors with ongoing tradpub contracts are self-publishing not because the new book isn't good enough for their old-school publisher but because they want to see what happens or because their new story doesn't fit any of the marketting pigeon holes or because they're tired of predatory book contracts...

The world we live in is the one where business-savvy writers that are good enough to be "validated" by the traditionalist establishment don't even bother to submit (in all senses of the word) to the establishment.

The world we live in is the world where the backlist is eternal, where niche titles that don't appeal to the masses are readily available to those that have a taste for that niche, whether it be Amish romance novels or Babylonian gay erotica, and where thousands of *good* writers, many with decades of experience, are for the first time making a living off their creativity. Where the Canadian writers union is drafting rules and termsto accept indie authors as members and where the Romance Writers of America have already done so.

The world we live in *is* the world of the Library of Babel.

And it is a glorious world to live in if you have an open mind and can read promo blurbs with a critical eye, know how to download ebook samples, or know how to interpret online book reviews. Yes, there is a lot of crap out there--but there always has been a lot of crap out there and experienced readers have never let that get between them and a worthy read.

It is a world where you are not limited to the hundred titles the local supermarket, newstand, or convenience stores (because the big chain stores don't consider your town worthy of their presence) or, for that matter, to the ten thousand "handpicked" titles said big chain store might carry if they do. You are not limited to the few thousand titles your cozy neighborhood bookstore carries (a great place to while the time browsing, BTW--nice to see they're weathering the ongoing disruption reasonably well) or even the hundreds of thousands of titles they can special order from the catalog of in-print tradpub'ed titles.

It is a world of millions of new ebook titles every year--and notice I said ebook, because many of those new to ebook titles are not new, but republished from established authors' backlist--some from traditional publishers, some from new independent ventures, and some from self publishers. And some are from the Big Publishing houses newly-launched Predatory Presses, created to fleece the unwary.
(shrug)

Anybody who wants to limit themselves to only "traditionally-validated", "quality", "filtered content" is welcome to do so. Nobody is going to demonize you.
It would be nice if the courtesy were returned but not required.

Pretending the world of indie books is beneath you only impacts you--the rest of the world will keep on merrily fishing the troubled waters of the ebook disruption and enjoying the fun reads to be found in the Library of Babel.

In the world we live in, *we* the readers are the gatekeepers.
We decide which authors get the bulk of our reading money. And when we do, they get 50-60% of what the money right on the spot, not 3-12% 6 months later or upon litigation.

And bear in mind that in the world we live in the first important decision in getting (good) books to readers no longer is whether the traditional establishment accepts it but rather whether the author *chooses* to go with traditional publishing. Some will. Some won't. Over time the latter pool will grow, the former will shrink...

Power is moving to authors and readers.
Both camps will benefit.
The rest will have to scramble.

That is the world we live in.
It's called the 21st Century.
Toodles!

PS: To get the full story of what is actually going out there, it pays to actually visit some author-centric online communities in addition to the industry mouthpieces or reader sites. It can be very educational to see what the veteran authors are saying, and more importantly, doing.

[Gardenman]

teh603 said

And I'm referring to the fact that "correct" English grammar is actually quite burdensome and doesn't usually help with understanding.


That is 100 percent wrong.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by teh603

And I'm referring to the fact that "correct" English grammar is actually quite burdensome and doesn't usually help with understanding.

For example, correct grammar means you aren't supposed to overuse the word "said." But as writers, we're told that "said" is transparent. We're ultimately using incorrect grammar, because it works better than correct grammar. And then how many times do we begin a sentence with a conjunction? Dangle participles or prepositions? Use a double negative in dialog or contraction anywhere? Begin a quote as a fresh sentence instead of forcing a comma at the end of the previous one?

Most of the things I listed up there are nitpicky details of correct grammar, which don't actually help with understanding.

I don't know where you got these baffling ideas.

Grammar and style are different things.

The use of said or a synonym is a stylistic decision; it is not an issue of grammar. Secondly, in what alternate universe did anyone tell you "correct grammar means you aren't supposed to overuse the word 'said'"? I'd like to see even one citation for such a directive.

Dialog and narrative are different. In dialog (or in first-person narrative), a character who's a high school dropout is not supposed to speak like an English professor, and vice versa.

Dangling modifiers are a pet peeve, because they are confusing. The reader has to stop and figure out just what/whom they refer to.

I don't even know what to make of some of your other examples; who told you you shouldn't use contractions? And I have no idea what you mean by "Begin a quote as a fresh sentence instead of forcing a comma at the end of the previous one."

Frankly, I think your understanding of grammar needs a lot of work.