As someone who reads her genre but not her books (saw a few paragraphs, decided to pass), I'd say:
1) The quality was noticeably worse than authors in the genre I enjoy but, critically, difficult to distinguish from at least some New York books that I've paid money for.
2) I did not find myself thinking "Dang, you know what this excerpt needed? A publisher. I mean, look at it, it's so... not published."
3) I wish her every success, and strongly hope that authors I enjoy adopt the model themselves, because continuing the current model adds no value to me and, in fact, subtracts it when I have to deal with territory lockouts or "The book is ready -- you can read it next year."
In re #2, I really do dislike the lack of editing in every self-published ebook I've read. It's too easy to get distracted by poor grammar, spelling, or sentence structure.
Most of my reviews of ebooks on Amazon are driven by a pedantic hatred of poorly edited written material.
I did read an ebook recently[1] where the author credited a couple online editing services in the acknowledgements. However, they missed a number of places where the author forgot to put a verb in a sentence, or forgot a preposition, or misspelled a proper name. I highlighted (thank you Kindle) passages such as"The table about ten feet away from the fence I planned on coming over,"[2] because it stopped me from "flowing" through the book while I tried to figure out what just happened. Wait, what about the table? Did it do something? Did someone do something to it? I WANT TO KNOW ABOUT THE TABLE!
[1] Because the author asked me to give me a bad review of his book after reading my review of another book in the same genre. http://www.amazon.com/review/R19V93VWMFZB8W/ref=cm_aya_cmt?i... -- I'm a sucker for the post-apocalyptic wish fulfillment junk. Dissatisfied with my life? Don't get personal.
[2] Some more examples: "The curved angle of the claws in this position would actually help guide the spears into chest," "He said it take much extra effort," and "People can get used anything especially if their lives depend on it."
The editing IS a mixed bag, self-pubbed authors who take the whole thing seriously and aren't broke DO pay for editing services, but obviously not all of them do.
This is why sampling is so important, unless they got someone to edit the first part but not all of it, the grammar/etc issues should be obvious within 5 pages.
Edit 911 was one of them. They claim all their editors have phds. I think the other one was something such as "A 1 Editing Service." they definitely sound cheesy but better than nothing if your own skills are lacking.
The value traditional publishing adds is a variety of professional staff (editor, copyeditor, designers, etc), potentially fronting advance money to cover costs for writers to devote full time to writing, and to some extent as a filtering mechanism (you know a published book usually isn't going to have egregious spelling/typesetting errors that make it unreadable).
That's legitimately valuable, but the quotes by Konrath in the article are spot-on: If you don't need the full traditional staff to put out a good product and don't need the advance money, traditional publishing becomes less and less useful to you.
I'm a little more optimistic about the traditional model than most people are - I think with some basic adjustments and modernizations, they've got another pretty good 10-30 years in them doing things similar to how they're done now. But it's definitely more viable than ever to go outside the model, especially for people able to put out a polished product without help.
The professional staff is dirt cheap and already almost 100% outsourced by the publishers. That's a barrier like not having Photoshop skills is a barrier to selling on the Internet: pay somebody money, problem solved.
Hiring a professional editor and copy-editor is probably going to run you four-figures for a feature length book. Considering most books don't sell well, the first time writer takes a significant risk eating those costs.
Some people can write/polish well enough without those roles, and they stand to gain a lot from the new models. But it'll be a while before traditional publishing is no more. Actually, the biggest worry they should have is that bestselling authors go off on their own after one or two wins, like how Seth Godin just announced he's not doing any traditional publishing any more. That's got to be a little scary for the industry.
> Hiring a professional editor and copy-editor is probably going to run you four-figures for a feature length book. Considering most books don't sell well, the first time writer takes a significant risk eating those costs.
If you're an author, your first book is like a startup.
You have to either beg your friends and family to do copy-editing for you, do a lot of it yourself, or somehow raise funds to get a pro copy-editor.
The most important staff on the book is the editor. None of the major publishing houses outsource their editors. What is outsourced is a few additional reads for copyediting of spelling, grammar, and usage.
An editor will make an author take a book through several drafts, and often have the author make major cuts and additions. A good editor will force the author to make the small changes that make a book have a compelling emotional arc. The difference between "moving" and "flat" is often just a few sentences. A good editor actually has the power to demand a better performance out of the author--like a good coach on a sports team.
"Pay somebody money, problem solved." Is this like programming? I need someone to build a web app, so I just pay somebody money, problem solved?
I'm not trying to say that the publishing industry isn't going to undergo big changes, but your comment seems to me dismissive of a profession requiring dedication and creativity.
Gavin: there are editors for hire, and have been for sometime now, as organizations outside the publishing houses. And I expect more (freelance editors) to come when they realize that the balance of power is shifting to favour the author.
Absolutely. Heck, if you know the right people, you can even freelance hire the same editors who are working at major houses right now. (Side note: if anyone at HN wants that, I'd be happy to make the introductions.)
My only point is that the editorial process is important and finding a good editor just as difficult as finding a good designer or programmer. It's not a problem you just throw money at.
For this purpose you could even argue that going freelance is better because you get to choose your editor and have control over choosing a new one if that person leaves the profession or isn't any good.
I've read books from major publishers that had enough grammar/spelling issues to bug the hell out of me, and just because it's NY published actually isn't as much of a guarantee as it should be, if your preferred genre gets popular, because if they decide they need x books of y genre/month, but they are only getting z (some number smaller than x) they have been known to lower their standards to fill the supposed market need.
Of course that is part of why bubbles in publishing pop so hard, people get burned out on the crap put out to "fill the need"
This wasn't ''bad'' per se, and as an aspiring indie author I've faced the same issues so can empathise.
But an excerpt full of constant "I" and "He" really trips up the flow and is a classic newbie author mistake (the first novella I wrote had an identical problem and was almost unreadable). Plenty of issues with sentence structure too; random example "Mr. Meade suggested, and I groaned." (stuck between two pieces of speech by Meade).
There is a strange and magical skill to making the words of a story flow properly. She doesn't seem to be there yet, but it takes time.
Also; copyeditors you don't know (i.e. not family & friends) are crucial :D
Ask me this via email and I'll answer at length when I've got time. I have a release and client engagement tomorrow, so my only HN time today is while Capistrano is running.
1) The quality was noticeably worse than authors in the genre I enjoy but, critically, difficult to distinguish from at least some New York books that I've paid money for.
2) I did not find myself thinking "Dang, you know what this excerpt needed? A publisher. I mean, look at it, it's so... not published."
3) I wish her every success, and strongly hope that authors I enjoy adopt the model themselves, because continuing the current model adds no value to me and, in fact, subtracts it when I have to deal with territory lockouts or "The book is ready -- you can read it next year."