... I think with the literally millions of titles already published in the last few years that 'choice' isn't a problem.
In my experience, one major difference between traditionally published books and self-published books is the quality. I'm willing to bet anything that the average quality of self-published novels is worse than the average quality of novels published via traditional publishing.
I disagree. Over the last couple of decades trade publishers have done an increasingly bad job of publishing the books people want to read. Entire genres disappeared, not because readers didn't want to read them, but because publishers decided to stop publishing them. Westerns, for example, pretty much vanished but seem to be doing OK as self-published books. In my case, they pretty much stopped publishing the kind of SF I liked to read, but now there are a vast number of self-published books I can read instead; yes, many of them are poor quality and some of them are awful, but better poor quality than non-existent.
Hi Ed, I agree with you. Westerns aren't my cup of tea but you're right, they did vanish. Thing that puzzles me is did they dissappear because they weren't popular and so publishers decided to give them away? Or did they dissappear because publishers decided they weren't popular enough, and so effectively killed them by not signing them? To a certain extent the trad pubbing industry has dictated the markets. Cheers, Greg.
Hi Ed, I agree with you. Westerns aren't my cup of tea but you're right, they did vanish. Thing that puzzles me is did they dissappear because they weren't popular and so publishers decided to give them away? Or did they dissappear because publishers decided they weren't popular enough, and so effectively killed them by not signing them? To a certain extent the trad pubbing industry has dictated the markets. Cheers, Greg.
The question is why would publishers quit publishing books that were selling? That makes absolutely no sense. Just like any business, when sales on one item start to drop, the business looks to see what products are still selling well or where sales are starting to increase. When products stop selling enough to make them profitable, the business drops them. So who really decides what books/genre should be published? The readers.
Yes and no. For a traditional publisher it is what is profitable that counts, not what is popular. People who bought cheap novels (such as used to be produced as SciFi or westerns) only wanted to pay a small price for a paperback (they didn't buy expensive hardbacks). It is not economical to sell these books (in paper form).
Why exactly does this make finding a good book a problem? Bookstore shelves have always been overflowing with books. The majority of these books go unread by your average shopper. Think about it, when you go to the bookstore, have you read everything there? Every book in every genre? Are you inclined to read every book in every genre? I don't read sci-fi. So, to me, that shelf space is wasted anyway. But my friend Jay loves sci-fi so when he goes, he only ever looks in that section. Despite this, he has not put his hands on every single book that sits on the shelf. He doesn't sift through what's on the shelf, so why would he have to sift through everything on amazon? Even if you are the type who goes to a bookstore and looks at every single book in a genre, you'd be foolish to try that on amazon. You'll never finish searching. Beyond self-published books, there are tons of small press publishers who have been around for decades. Many of those presses just don't have B&N or Chapters shelf space. But they are all listed on amazon. Friends still recommend books to one another. Critics still review books. There are still places to try to wade through the enormity of selection. But to say that self publishing has made it impossible to find a good book doesn't make much sense to me. I have been reading good books all year. My friends have been reading good books all year. Some of them were even self-published! Perhaps you can clarify how a self-published book located only on Amazon, for example, is rendering you incapable of finding reading material?
I didn't say it has. I said it will. Eventually. And people will lose faith in random books if most random books are amateur crap.
I'm not so sure I agree with this. Poor quality is poor quality. Good writing is good writing. If someone were to write a good story that took place in a Western setting, it would get published. Agents say all the time that the most important thing they look for is good writing. I think the issue with "Westerns" is that as our society gets further away from what that particular time period and place was like, it's more difficult to write a believable story set there, and it becomes just one more segment of something like historical fiction. I think there are fewer writers who are interested in writing something in that particular setting. But if one wants to do it, and writes it well, there's no reason it can't be done. I wouldn't be surprised if, at some point, someone does write a successful book in a Western setting, that would then spawn a bunch of other stories of the Western genre, some of which would be of at least decent quality. But keeping a genre alive merely via poorly-written stories isn't doing much to help anyone. And to the point of the ease of self-publishing and the sheer quantity of stories that exist -- yes, there will be a huge number of badly-written stories. But we have a lot more well-written stories, as well. There are so many sites that can lead one to find the types that one likes. I do think that traditional publishers do function as a gate-keeper of sorts. Of course, there are books that are traditionally published that cause one to shake his head and wonder how the heck it got published. And there are some wonderful stories that have emerged from self-publishing. But the percentages still favor traditional publishers -- there will be a far lesser percentage of crap from a traditional publisher, given that the books have been through a vetting process. That doesn't mean that traditional publishing doesn't miss some great stories, and self-pubbing is a great option for them. It's just that they will be harder to find.
Is that a bad thing? I don't have faith in random books. I never have. I have faith in reviews and recommendations. But I have always acknowledged that buying a book randomly in a store is a crap shoot. Case in point, two weeks ago a friend recommended a book that was self published. It was great. I thoroughly enjoyed it. Meanwhile, the last random purchase I made was WEB Griffin's The Traffickers. it was bad. It was so bad that I actually went back out into the cold wintery night to return it. I have no doubt that the book was published because WEB Griffin out his name on it and for no other reason. To give you an idea of how bad it was, they dedicated an entire page to recapping an episode of It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia. It was Atlanta Nights bad. Yet, that was on the shelves of B&N. It may seem novel to blame self publishers, but I think it a misguided attempt to place blame on the new(ish) kids on the block. If you are relying solely on publishers to protect you from bad writing, I think you may have misplaced your trust.
Once again, we also need to make the distinction between bad writing and writing that one doesn't like. I've seldom been disappointed with my favored writers, but once in a while, I do find one that makes me wonder if they had someone else write it. And of course trade publishers are going to have some fails in the editing department, but let's face it - the chances of coming across a badly written self-published book is much greater than coming across a badly written trade published one. And the biggest reason for that is because self-publishers typically have no one looking over their shoulder, pointing out problems.
Ditto. Even in a book store I'd at least skim through a few pages before buying a book. The bad self-published books are normally obvious from the first two paragraphs, let alone the first two pages.
You're missing the point. How are you happening upon these self published books? If I self publish a book tomorrow, you could go an entire lifetime not knowing the book exists. You might also go an entire lifetime not knowing about a book that was published by HarperCollins. If your method for finding a book involves going exclusively with amazon recommendations, then I could see the potential for self publishing to make finding a decent book difficult. But barring that, you will still have critic reviews. You will still have friends and family reading books and recommending them to you. The self published books can remain in a vast expanse of obscurity and I cannot see how them simply existing (in potentiality, since they are POD) will prevent a person from finding a decent book. Also, I did differentiate between bad writing and something I didn't like. Recapping an episode of a television show that is irrelevant to the story is bad writing.
Trade publishers aren't buying books to ship to the book store tomorrow, they're buying books to ship to book stores in two years and have to guess what will be popular then. When a genre does become popular, they start saying 'everyone's publishing that stuff, we don't want any more because readers will be bored of it in two years'. Even if a genre dies for good reason, they'll completely miss a resurgence of interest in that genre because they're not publishing any books in that genre. Books that aren't available can't sell.
why are people worrying about poor quality self published books that fact is 99% of self published books you will never even see or hear about as most people who self publish or use vanity publishing in what ever format don't understand marketing or can't afford to market their book, as it cost to do marketing so stop worrying abut them and just worry about the quality of your story.
True. I suppose if one is using sites like Amazon almost exclusively, it would become a morass of frustration. But as you mention, most people buy books because they're recommended by people they know or whose tastes they share. I think what will happen (once people start noticing who's selling books cheap and e-readers lose their novelty) is readers will start paying more attention to the publisher. One 99 cent book that's a loser is one thing - after paying out $20-30 in cheap books and finding maybe one good one, people start paying more attention to what they're actually buying. I don't think I'd use the phrase "have to guess". Publishers are professionals - they watch trends, and not just in books. They watch sales figures. They watch their competitors. And when a genre becomes popular, I doubt very much they say "We're not going to publish that." In fact, they may even push forward their schedules on books they have that are 'in favor' to take advantage of the popularity. And let's also remember that someone has to start the new trend, or the next 'revival'. Maybe westerns in general aren't as popular - but show me an agent or publisher who reads a really well done western, one that hits all the sweet spots, and turns it down just because it's a western.
Dude, they sell Dale Brown books in every airport terminal in the country. Have you ever read Dale Brown? The man writes like he's never read a book cover to cover, Dan Brown looks like George Eliot or Salman Rusdie compared to Dale Brown.
Hi, I think the role of the agents and publishers in determining the market is being underplayed here. You've got to remember that are in it for the money, and if they think a genre won't sell, that's it. Doesn't matter if it's good or bad. Doesn't matter if it could sell well or not. It only matters that they think it won't sell. So no. Until someone comes up with a good western that sells massively, which will probably have to be done through the self pubbing route, westerns are simply not likely to be published. Now while I'm no fan of westerns, I think the ramifications of this go much further. As self pubbing becomes more popular and even acceptible, agents and publishers are going to become ever more determined to focus on what sells. Nothing else matters. And of course the way, or at least the best way to work out what will sell, is to look at what has sold. So every novel, good or not so good, about a teen angst ridden girl besotted with a vampire, seems to hit the shelves. While other novels, good and bad, get dumped. Now is the reader determining this? To an extent. But don't forget many readers can only chose from the selection that's put in front of them. If your choice is between one sexy vampire and another, already you're stuffed and the market has been skewed not by the choices of readers, but the choices of agents and publishers who think they know what readers want to read. Self pubbing, as well as potentially creating some of the pressure that shapes this problem, is also a solution. Want to read about hyper intelligent aliens that don't even know what a vampire is but love cowboys, chances are you won't find it on a bricks and mortar shop shelf, or published by the big six. But search through Amazon and the chances are that you will in the self pubbing aisles. Cheers, Greg.
What has that got to do with it? My point has been entirely missed, and I blame myself for not being able to communicate it clearly enough. Selbbin ends.
Well, again, agents and publishers aren't dumb. They don't operate with tunnel vision. If they can make a profit, they will sign and publish - and even if it's a small profit, it's still profit. If they start seeing an upswing in sales of westerns, they're going to watch that very carefully and see where it goes. (And btw, westerns are indeed still being written, published, and purchased.) And let's not confuse subsets of genres with the genre itself - there is no teenage vampire genre. What's popular within a genre fluctuates much more than the genre itself. Publishing is a competitive business - companies are not going to ignore what the readers want because they are the customer. A company that refuses to acknowledge customers' preferences are going to lose business to the companies that do.
My point (and everyone else's it seems) is that we already are flooded with rubbish, and some of that rubbish is even popular. And we have had self-publishing for many years now. Functionally the search for quality is not really likely to change in any scenario.
