Publishing not dead + interesting tips for self-pubbers

ios · Aug 30, 2011

Holly Lisle posted on her blog in response to this article.

She makes several good points, but I like her tips just by themselves, for they make good sense. Especially the one about listening to the people who like your work not the ones who hate it.

What do you think about either one--her response or the article that prompted it?

Jodi

tim290280 · Aug 30, 2011

That Guardian article was rubbish.

The basic assumptions and statements of "fact" were so poorly understood it was laughable. E.g. Skype isn't free, you have to pay for the internet connection, the webcam, the microphone. These are quite often termed on-costs, or appear as overhead, or can be thought of as replacement technologies.

Books are just a medium for story-telling. I think it is safe to say that as long as we have communicated humans have told stories. Does anyone seriously think this will ever not be the case?

kaitie · Aug 30, 2011

On one hand, I can understand the concept of if someone hates your stuff don't listen, but on the other, I think the definition of "hates" matters a lot, too. I've had a couple of people give me really negative critiques that made it obvious that the reader just didn't get it. They didn't get the character, or the story, or the concept. And that was okay. I just thanked them and moved on.

At the same time, I've had people say some pretty negative comments before that were spot on and right. While I love hearing what people love about my books and I'm glad that they love them, what helps me improve are the people who point out flaws. I think I understand what she's trying to say, but I'd just hope that people wouldn't take that to mean "only listen to criticism that you favor."

gothicangel · Aug 31, 2011

ios said:
Holly Lisle posted on her blog in response to this article.

She makes several good points, but I like her tips just by themselves, for they make good sense. Especially the one about listening to the people who like your work not the ones who hate it.

What do you think about either one--her response or the article that prompted it?

Jodi

The Guardian blog is pretty much old news. They also published this response yesterday:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2011/aug/30/death-books-exaggerated

gothicangel · Aug 31, 2011

kaitie said:
At the same time, I've had people say some pretty negative comments before that were spot on and right. While I love hearing what people love about my books and I'm glad that they love them, what helps me improve are the people who point out flaws. I think I understand what she's trying to say, but I'd just hope that people wouldn't take that to mean "only listen to criticism that you favor."

Repeating what Kaitie said.

If we just listen to positive criticism, and ignore the negative we'll never learn to be better writers.

ios · Aug 31, 2011

gothicangel said:
Repeating what Kaitie said.

If we just listen to positive criticism, and ignore the negative we'll never learn to be better writers.

I understand hearing out criticism, but I also understand it's more important to listen to what your fanbase is saying. Otherwise it's like that Aesop's tale about the farmer, his son, and the donkey--try to please everyone and you won't please anyone.

By the way, I'm not talking about actual critiques in a beta reading or critique exchange situation.

Also in light of reading a certain chapter in Malcolm Gladwell's Blink, I am more apt to take a second look at the reason behind the dislike instead of automatically thinking something is wrong. In Gladwell's chapter, it is brought up that sometimes people say they hate or dislike something, not because they actually do, but just because it is different. Dislike becomes proxy for different. I never thought of it before I read that chapter in his book, but it makes sense. Because it's happened to me before, such as with songs or a tv show (which didn't change, but my reactions did to it). I don't mean to say that I think that is the case everytime or even most of the time, but it's something to keep in mind. Especially for myself as what I am doing is weird in the first place. So that means all "negative" criticism is going to be deeply analyzed before I do anything about it.

Jodi

Lady MacBeth · Aug 31, 2011

The negative criticism is usually what sticks with me. However, like others have said, I've learned from it.

ios · Aug 31, 2011

Lady MacBeth said:
The negative criticism is usually what sticks with me. However, like others have said, I've learned from it.

Negative from whom? People that were fans or people that never were?

Jodi

efkelley · Aug 31, 2011

Scalzi had a good post on heeding and ignoring criticism just the other day: http://whatever.scalzi.com/2011/08/...o-get-people-to-take-your-critique-seriously/

It's on the long side, but I would boil it down to discerning when you're reading something helpful and discerning when that sound is an axe grinding.

Friend and colleague Ferrett Steinmentz had a really superior post about guidelines for good critiques. http://theferrett.livejournal.com/1465575.html

I've found that by applying Rule One to any critique I'm hearing, I can weed out the axe grinding from the useful stuff quite easily. For those not clicking through:

Rule #1: Your Goal Is To Make This Story Into The Best Version Of What The Author Wants It To Be.

So, if your critic saying 'This is a passable space opera, but if you really want it to resonate, it should be set in Victorian England', then you know exactly how much attention the critique deserves.

shaldna · Sep 1, 2011

pusblishing is dead, publishing is not dead, no publishing is really dead, okay maybe publishing is dying, only print publishing is dying, all publishing is dying, publishing is alive and well etc, etc

Every week there is an article predicting what is happening or going to happen in publishing, when in reality no one really knows for sure.

What I know is that publishers are still buying books, authors are still writing books and readers are still buying books, when any of those groups stop doing those things, THEN we should worry, until then I wouldn't put too much stock in speculation.

dondomat · Sep 1, 2011

shaldna said:
pusblishing is dead, publishing is not dead, no publishing is really dead, okay maybe publishing is dying, only print publishing is dying, all publishing is dying, publishing is alive and well etc, etc

My hovecraft is full of eels; my nipples explode with delight

efkelley · Sep 1, 2011

shaldna said:
pusblishing is dead, publishing is not dead, no publishing is really dead, okay maybe publishing is dying, only print publishing is dying, all publishing is dying, publishing is alive and well etc, etc

Hee hee.

Now I don't have to read any articles for the next six months!

James D. Macdonald · Sep 1, 2011

My take on that article?

Guardian needs to fill column inches! Film at eleven!

gothicangel · Sep 2, 2011

ios said:
I understand hearing out criticism, but I also understand it's more important to listen to what your fanbase is saying.

I haven't published a novel yet, so I don't have a fanbase.

I hope when I do have a fanbase, I would treat them with a certain amount of cynacism. Great if they enjoy my book, but I don't want to be constrained by them. I don't want to write only Roman novels, I have a series planned on the early Stewart Scottish kings. I sure as don't want to surround myself with yes men, who only gush about my writing. The last thing I want is to see the quality of my work deteriorate.

One of my favourite past-times are reading the one and two star reviews on Amazon. They are a great learning tool.

Publishing not dead + interesting tips for self-pubbers

ios

Weirdo.

tim290280

kaitie

With great power comes

gothicangel

Toughen up.

gothicangel

Toughen up.

ios

Weirdo.

Lady MacBeth

Out, damn'd spot! out, I say.

ios

Weirdo.

efkelley

ow

shaldna

The cake is a lie. But still cake.

dondomat

efkelley

ow

James D. Macdonald

Your Genial Uncle

gothicangel

Toughen up.