[JRTomlin]

Sorry but I think it's nonsense. If someone puts out an unedited novel with an amateurish cover, why would I think they would care about my opinion about it and wouldn't I be better served by thinking about my own work, instead of someone elses?

It's not as though I can (or should even try) to keep that nameless mug from publishing whatever he or she wants to. Am I supposed to slap their hand away from the publish button?

 

[JRTomlin]

That's one extreme. The other is saying, "Hey, good job buddy. Writing a book is a lot of work and I'm proud of you." Without addressing anything about the product other than its existence.

Everyone's better served if your criticism is, "Here's what I think worked well about your book. Here's what I think you should work on next time."

Or maybe everyone is better served by leaving it up to the reader and getting on about their own business of doing their own work.

ETA: I happen to hate, I mean absolutely loathe, 50 Shades of Gray. I read most of the sample and was sickened by the poor quality and the cover sucked. Did I have the right to tell readers they couldn't buy it or EL James that she didn't have the right to publish it?

No.

And she would have very rightfully ignored my opinion. It's not my business. My next novel is my business and that's all. The author of the blog piece needs to get over himself.

 

[JRTomlin]

To quote the article:

There's nothing in there says we should be telling people they don't have the right to publish anything. I don't believe we should, either. I believe, though, that just praising people for having the courage to publish without offering constructive (operative word there being constructive) criticism is also the wrong thing to do.

So yes, obviously, concentrate on your own work and making it the best you feel it can be. But if I see someone who could be helped, I don't see the harm in helping, without [expletive] all over their work.

If they ask me for criticism, if I have time, I will give it. I have done so recently, and will continue to do so. Otherwise, if they don't ask, it is not my business to offer criticism and on this forum is actually against the rules to the best of my understanding.

ETA: On this forum, people frequently ask for criticism of their covers and receive it. I have yet to see them told "congratulations on the cover and it doesn't matter if it's good or not". I may (or may not) congratulate someone on publishing, but when I do what I am congratulating them on an endeavour that takes considerable courage in my opinion. I will do so if I feel like it, whether someone likes it or not. I will certainly not take it upon myself to go look at their work and offer unsolicited criticism.

 

[JRTomlin]

Which is why it seems a little weird to me that there'd be objection to a post that's suggesting we ... do exactly what's happening on these boards.

If people really didn't care about what other people were putting out, then no one would answer requests for feedback, would they? They'd just say, eh, it's your book, if you think it's good enough, then it is.

I understand not volunteering criticism if it isn't asked for or specifically not asked for. I get that. I don't get why suggesting that criticism is a good thing gets up people's noses though.

No, the post suggests that we go out and force our opinion on other people whether they want it or not. That is quite a different thing.

How can the stigma ever leave if sub-par efforts are hoisted into the air with cheers?

Who cares? We all should.

My cheers, or lack of them, make no difference whatsoever. Have you seen posts by people asking permission to hit 'publish'? I haven't. There will be great books and sub-par ones whether I like it or not.

I don't care because my opinion plain and simple doesn't matter. I won't waste either time or effort and I have better things to put my angst into than what someone else publishes.

 

[JRTomlin]

I don't see that call to action in the post, but we all read things differently, so, fair enough.

To be specific, I'm talking about sections like this which I agree you may interpret differently, but I do see a call to action, but what I don't see is an implication that you should wait until someone asks:

Don't celebrate mediocrity. Don't encourage half-assing this thing for a couple of bucks. This is scrutiny time.

That sounds to me like a call to action.

And

It's time to play hard or get off the field.

This post has a tone of both self-righteousness and entitlement that I just plain don't like and don't agree with, but as you say, people read things in different ways.

Edit to fix an oops.

 

[JRTomlin]

Hmmm. Let's see: Hostile, snarky responses, as though Chuck had murdered your puppy, rather than just suggesting that everybody should up their game and encourage/help others to do so as well. CHECK!

Lots of bandying about of the word "gatekeeper." CHECK!

Flat-out denial that self-publishing has a quality stigma (not a "vanity press" stigma -- that's well and truly defeated now) due to examples everyone can cite without trying hard: no editing, high-schooler-with-photoshop covers, etc. CHECK!

The thoughtful rhetorical jujitsu of "there are also trad published books which are bad quality!" CHECK!

Gosh... I wonder what "culture" Chuck could *possibly* be referring to?

Let's put it in a more positive light: We have successfully torpedoed the old stigma of self-publishing as fly-by-night vanity press operations. It's viewed as a valid option, and that's a huge change to have brought about. Kick *ss!

So now, let's do what we can -- by example, and via encouragement -- to tear down the NEXT stigma. The quality stigma, which, bluntly, DOES exist -- just like the fly-by-night vanity presses exist.

We already took down the big stigma, so this one should be easy!

How's that? Better? Or did I murder puppies, too?

Snark comes with the territory. You have an interesting number of posts, I see. You are free to consider that snark.

Who denied that there were novels out there with no editing and poor covers? Please point to the comment. What some people don't think is that it is a big problem. 99.9% of the readers will never see those anyway a they sink to #2,000,000 in the Amazon rankings with no also boughts. However, if you want to go out and have some kind of a campaign to keep the people who do write them from publishing, have at it. It's your time and your headache. (Or Chuck's as the case may be )

I have better things to do. Now keep your hands off my puppies.

 

[JRTomlin]

Yes, I'm a relative newcomer to your little kaffeeklatsch, despite having been self-publishing for over a decade, and being featured in AP articles on the topic back in 2007, before the big Kindle boom. So are we done "qualification-measuring" now?

Thought so.

*Slow Clap* You show that straw man who's boss! Get him!

Nobody has said anything about keeping anyone from publishing. The only thing that's being discussed is offering honest critique when asked, and, better yet, advice and help, rather than cheerleading... which a lot of people already do, which is great. A call for more of that is not a call to keep people from publishing.

Since you are the one who wants to do "qualification-measuring' for publishing, no, I suspect we aren't done. And that isn't what I was saying. Subtlety isn't your strong point. *slow clap*

See we can both do that. Are you more impressed than I am?

That is most definitely not the only thing being discussed. People here give honest critiques all the time. We don't need someone coming in and telling us to help each other out as though this is an idea that no one had ever thought of and considered. But if someone wants advice and help, they need to ask.

I am not going to force it on anyone and deny it all you like, that is what is being discussed. Hunting down 'inferior' authors who aren't being professional enough for me is not on my agenda for today, tomorrow or any time in the future.

 

[JRTomlin]

This. I think I'm part of the problem Chuck is talking about. I celebrate hobbyist writers and have blogged extensively about this. I celebrate the 12-year-old who completed NaNoWriMo this year and wants to see her book on Amazon. She's not hurting anyone. Let her publish. I'll be her cheerleader.

I'm with Hugh on this one but I'm tired of the argument so I wish you all a good night.

 

[JRTomlin]

Okay, so I called Jazzy last night -- that's my nickname for Bezos, we go way back -- and, surprisingly, he thinks there should be minimum standards of professionalism. Here's what we came up with:

1. One typo allowed per every 3500 words.

2. One dangling participle allowed per story.

3. One homonym confusion allowed per 50,000 words.

4. No more dream sequences to open the chapter and fake out the reader. Jazzy was adamant about this one.

5. No more stories that open with the main character opening his/her eyes to the alarm. Jeff says he's tired of it.

6. All erotica stories will have a Czech named Fred who is more generously endowed than any other guy in the story, and who has flawless lovemaking technique.

7. All romance stories will have a Czech named Fred who is more generously endowed than any other guy in the story, and who has flawless lovemaking technique.

8. All rom coms will have a Czech named Fred who is more generously endowed than any other guy in the story, and who has flawless lovemaking technique.

9. Requirements 6, 7, and 8 are waived for M/M. (Jazzy didn't want to get too restrictive.)

10. All stories will have a woman who undresses and warbles her boson....wait, I can't read Jazzy's handwriting, it's like chicken scratch on this napkin, oh, that should be "wiggles her bosom"

11. F/F stories will have two women who undress and wiggle their bosoms, standing face-to-face, making a slappy sound with their, uh, you know.

12. Sentence fragments are allowed. We went back and forth on this. At first, he didn't want to, but I said, "Jazzy, dude, you gotta let writers be writers." So he conceded. There will be a reasonable allotment of sentence fragments. Each book will be reviewed by a panel of judges consisting of myself and eight others.

13. Deus ex machine IS allowed. I repeat, deus ex machine IS allowed. Jazzy said something about King and The Stand making gobs of money, so it's in.

14. If a book has had 10 returns, it is automatically pulled off the site. Now, that's gonna make it tough on those books that sell a ton of copies, so be careful to write books that fall in the 9 return range at most. Jeff and I thought it was too important not to address.

All these rules will be enforced. If authors stray, Jazzy said he's gonna send drones. I don't know what that means, but I wouldn't want to find out, so toe the line, people.

Thanks for clearing that up.