My Grand Theory About What E-Publishing is

A book is just a container.

They used to be made out of clay.

Then they were made out of papyrus, then vellum, then paper, and now, silicon.

Note that the word book etymologiclaly refers to the beech tree; because beech tablets were used for writing notes.

Disagree ..
but they are a nice avoidance tool.

The analogy is having a recipe (print) and adding too much vinegar and baking soda. Whole lot of nothing that is all that appetising results.

e-publishing is just another delivery system for a story and, e-publishing is not as new as people think...

Google is coming out next year with a glasses that feature a heads up display system. You wanna bet e-books will follow? If so, will they still be e-books?

b_radom said:

I’ve been thinking lately that the transition from print to ebooks isn’t a transition at all. I think it’s more like the difference between movies and plays.

Do you accept this premise?

Click to expand...

No.

You can do things in film that you can't do on the stage (CG, SFX, editing, camera techniques, etc.).

You can do things on the stage that you can't do in film (audience participation, ad libbing, etc.).

They're two different art forms entirely.

Printed books and ebooks, however, are just different methods of delivering identical content. Ebooks have thus far proven resistant to "improvements" like the inclusion of rich media (audio, video, interactivity, etc.). If and when that happens, I don't think we'll call those things "ebooks" at all.

inclusion of rich media (audio, video, interactivity, etc.). If and when that happens, I don't think we'll call those things "ebooks" at all.

Click to expand...

You, sir, are describing a Visual Novel

b_radom said:

Even though, right now, ebooks contain identical content, and will always be capable of being "identical" to printed books, at some point, the print publishers will pull the plug on their ebook releases (due to the smaller profits they make off of them), and the two forms, though similar, will no longer be seen as identical forms. Also, there are further differences: Ebooks are often shorter (at least, when sold exclusively as ebooks), and the writing is different. People write faster and revise less when they're writing ebooks. It's a difficult problem, but ultimately I think the jury's still out on this one.

Click to expand...

I think you have an entirely false impression of ebooks, and should perhaps get a much larger sample.

They are frequently not identical to printed versions of the same books, for instance. It's not like "enhanced" or multimedia ebooks are new; they date back to the 1990s. Your assertion that people "write faster and revise less" is absurd, and bordering on offensive.

leahzero said:

No.

You can do things in film that you can't do on the stage (CG, SFX, editing, camera techniques, etc.).

You can do things on the stage that you can't do in film (audience participation, ad libbing, etc.).

They're two different art forms entirely.

Printed books and ebooks, however, are just different methods of delivering identical content. Ebooks have thus far proven resistant to "improvements" like the inclusion of rich media (audio, video, interactivity, etc.). If and when that happens, I don't think we'll call those things "ebooks" at all.

Click to expand...

Very well said.

leahzero said:

Ebooks have thus far proven resistant to "improvements" like the inclusion of rich media (audio, video, interactivity, etc.). If and when that happens, I don't think we'll call those things "ebooks" at all.

Click to expand...

No, they haven't proved resistant!

Look the kindle is not the ebook market.

http://www.digitalmedievalist.com/bibs/mackers.html

http://www.bl.uk/ebooktreasures/

http://www.economist.com/blogs/prospero/2012/02/enhanced-e-books

Also, there are further differences: Ebooks are often shorter (at least, when sold exclusively as ebooks), and the writing is different. People write faster and revise less when they're writing ebooks. It's a difficult problem, but ultimately I think the jury's still out on this one.

Click to expand...

Are you talking about self-published e-books? I don't know of any e-books that have been shortened from their original length and sold as e-books. I would think just the opposite would be true -- more content would be added in the way of other books, author information, links and whatnot because there are no paper page limitations.

b_radom said:

Even though, right now, ebooks contain identical content, and will always be capable of being "identical" to printed books,

Click to expand...

Print and e-books don't always contain identical content, though; and because this initial assumption of yours is incorrect, so is all that follows.

at some point, the print publishers will pull the plug on their ebook releases (due to the smaller profits they make off of them),

Click to expand...

Some questions.

If a publisher is a "print publisher" then it won't be publishing electronic books, will it? So how can it then stop publishing them?

Why would a business drop a profitable line just because the profit it made on that line was small?

If the profits on electronic books are too small to bother with, that implies that the profits on print books are bigger: are you sure about this? What are your sources?

Ebooks are often shorter (at least, when sold exclusively as ebooks), and the writing is different. People write faster and revise less when they're writing ebooks. It's a difficult problem, but ultimately I think the jury's still out on this one.

Click to expand...

The writing is different? People write more quickly and revise their work less if it's going to be published as an e-book? Are you sure?

We have one rule at AW: Respect Your Fellow Writer. By making these assertions you are coming perilously close to breaking that rule and insulting our many members who work very hard on the books that they write, and who revise just as carefully regardless of the way those books will eventually be published. Please be more careful in future.

Just a case-in-point to disprove the concept that the writing is different in ebooks,

I started writing my novel Hatchings, which I self epublished on Amazon and Smashwords last year, in 2007. I wrote the first draft in 35 writing days. That books spent the next 5 years in revision and the submission process. I know that the entire book went through at least 7 revisions. It went through at least 3 different reviews and edits. I polished the daylights out of that book (and yes, you can still find mistakes in it). Does that count as a faster or less rigorous writing process?

I have 3 other novels in the process of being written. One of them has been in the process for almost 10 years. Each of them is slated to be an ebook when they're finished to my satisfaction and after they've been edited by outside parties and then revised.

Each of my dozen or so short stories I epublished last year was written, put into SYW for review and critique, revised, sometimes very heavily, and only when I was happy with them did I epublish them. As they are short stories they are shorter, yes. But every single story goes through a process of write/spell check/revise/grammar check/ revise/post in SYW/revise/ review/edit/publish, a process that can literally take weeks. Some of those stories I've even submitted to professional publications.

I believe your opinion of the epublisher and self-publisher's (and I view them in remarkably similar manners since we used to, in 1982, call this desktop publishing, and that's how long I've been in this game) is shortsighted and based on remarkably incorrect assumptions. It may be that you are basing your assumptions on the mountain of slush or poorly written erotica that is available on Amazon and Smashwords or over at PubIt! It may be that your assumptions are based on the mountain of get-rich-quick-writing schemes available via the Interwebz (I get the ads too).

Good writers, whther they self-publish or commercially publish take the time and effort and make the sacrifices necessary to make sure their work is the best it can be. Not all of us are great writers, but we generally try to respect one another and the time it has taken us to get where we are today.

I take a great deal of time writing my stuff and revising it, spell checking it, editing it, reviewing the critiques, etc., etc., before I self-publish to Amazon, Smashwords, and PubIt!. I know most of the other writers here at AW do as well.

Oh, another case-in-point from professional author Ben Bova. His book, The Star Conquerors, was his first novel, which I read when I was a kid about 40 years ago. I just purchased the ebook of that novel. Aside from a new cover there is no, none, zero, nada, substantial difference between the original novel and the ebook (which I purchased and started rereading yesterday).

b_radom said:

People write faster and revise less when they're writing ebooks.

Click to expand...

In my limited survey with a sample size of one )) I write at the speed I write regardless of destination format. In fact, with stuff I submit to magazines I have no idea if a paper zine or e-zine will be the one to buy it so there's no way to know during the writing process. For stuff intended to be self-published in ebook form I've found I spend more time on the revision process. There's no safety net of an editor to catch minor errors so my paranoia rises and I end up doing several more editing passes than I would otherwise.

b_radom said:

Even though, right now, ebooks contain identical content, and will always be capable of being "identical" to printed books, at some point, the print publishers will pull the plug on their ebook releases (due to the smaller profits they make off of them), and the two forms, though similar, will no longer be seen as identical forms. Also, there are further differences: Ebooks are often shorter (at least, when sold exclusively as ebooks), and the writing is different. People write faster and revise less when they're writing ebooks. It's a difficult problem, but ultimately I think the jury's still out on this one.

Click to expand...

LMAO! Is that really what you think? Oh dear--you need to actually...you know...LEARN before you speak. Seriously. I'm the co-director of a digital publishing house, and I can tell you from a decade's worth of experience in the business that you are WAY off base here.

The print publishers aren't going to pull the plug on ebooks "due to the smaller profits they make off them". Believe you me--e-books are FAR more profitable than print books. The overhead, for example, is MUCH lower. Once the print publishers start doing their e-books WELL is another matter entirely. But--they will.

Print books and e-books are not identical in content.

Ebooks are not "often shorter." Why would you think that? The market for NOVELLA length stories has shifted to digital publishing, but that doesn't have a damn thing to do with the format itself.

Oh and any assumption that an e-published author "writes faster and edits less" is way out of left field. E-publishing is run the same way that print publishers are for the most part. They are still screened, edited, proofed, laid out, etc. by the publisher who signs them. To say otherwise is really, really offensive.

And if you meant SELF-published e-books, then this is the wrong forum.

b_radom said:

Hopefully, we can move on from this and get back to the original topic.

Click to expand...

Here's the thing though; you still don't seem to really have any familiarity with what an ebook is.

At the very least, you need to go download a bunch of ereader apps (Stanza, Kindle, Calibre, Nook, Acrobat, for starters) and read some.

There are loads of ebooks for free, from house-hold professional authors; check out Baen books for one. Look at the classics. See if your local library is an Overdrive client.

mscelina said:

LMAO! Is that really what you think? Oh dear--you need to actually...you know...LEARN before you speak. Seriously. I'm the co-director of a digital publishing house, and I can tell you from a decade's worth of experience in the business that you are WAY off base here.

Click to expand...

Celina, I'd appreciate it if you'd be less abrasive in your tone and keep in mind our one rule: respect your fellow writer. You're coming across as rude rather than forceful. I'm cutting you some slack because I know you're taking some heavy-duty pain meds right now, so perhaps your judgement is a bit skewed at the moment: but let's have less of the attitude, thanks.

b_radom said:

My apologies. I take it back.

Most of my research into marketing my book as an ebook was limited to the self-pub spectrum. That's a big part of why I'm not subbing to publishers directly. Hopefully, we can move on from this and get back to the original topic. Sorry again.

Click to expand...

Let's see. The title of this thread (that is, the 'topic') is 'My Grand Theory About What E-Publishing is'.

Your grand theory was built on the faulty assumption that e-publishing = self-publishing.

Since the base assumption is wrong, anything built on it is also likely to be wrong.

It's much the same as if someone's grand theory of the solar system is built on the faulty assumption that the sun circles the earth, the rest of their assumptions about the solar system are wrong.

So what's left to discuss?

b_radom said:

Maybe this is a thread for others to post what their grand theories are. I don't know.

Click to expand...

Maybe there is no grand theory. As has been stated, e-publishing is a book format. It is more of a definition than a theory.

I admit to being a little cranky, even mor'n usual, regarding this topic.

Because I've yet to see anyone say anything that wasn't being said in 1994, or earlier.

It seems to me that many companies making enhanced ebooks aren't doing well. So if that's the future, it's not in a hurry to get here.