When Bestsellers Are Badly Written [Rant]

There's a Darwinian belief that great books become bestsellers and bad books never even get past the slush pile. Of course, we all know that's not true. If you look on lists like Goodreads' Worst Books of All Time, you'll find books like Twilight and The Da Vinci Code. Those books are riddled with weak characters, ridiculous plot twists, and bad grammar. At the same time, we can all agree those aren't really the worst books of all time. I'm not saying those books are well-written, but they clearly aren't the worst. I mean, Moon People by Dale M. Courtney and The Eye of Argon by Jim Theis aren't even on the top ten. Also, there are plenty of people who think these books are fabulous, enough to make them bestsellers. So why are writing problems in so many bestselling novels hated?

"Handbook For Mortals" Shows the Trad Publishing Industry is Corrupt, Too

One of the persistent drumbeats that traditional publishers and authors like to sneer is that only getting published makes you a "real" author. Self-published books are crap, they say. Indie authors are bad writers who attempt to manipulate the system with shoddy work and lousy covers, taking away space from the long-suffering "real" authors. After all, they say, if they were any good, authors would be published through a traditional publishing house, which ensures that only quality material reaches the shelves and success. If only that were true, then books like Fifty Shades of Grey wouldn't be out there. Or the most recent example, Handbook for Mortals.

Why Content Mills Are Bad For Writers [Rant]

A while back, I talked about how I wished there was a "Uber for writers," a place for on-demand work where writers could earn quick cash by banging out short stories and novels for customers. Well, my mistake was thinking of fiction, because it turns out there are services online for writers to produce nonfiction on demand. Quite a few of them, in fact. And they all suck, at least for writers.

Professor Accuses Latina College Student of Plagiarism Because of "Hence"

Via Tiffany Martinez

A young woman attending Suffolk University in Boston got a shock when her paper was returned by her professor. Not because she got a bad grade, but the reason why and how. On her blog, she explained:

This morning, my professor handed me back a paper (a literature review) in front of my entire class and exclaimed “this is not your language.” On the top of the page they wrote in blue ink: “Please go back and indicate where you cut and paste.” The period was included. They assumed that the work I turned in was not my own. My professor did not ask me if it was my language, instead they immediately blamed me in front of peers. On the second page the professor circled the word “hence” and wrote in between the typed lines “This is not your word.” The word “not” was underlined. Twice. My professor assumed someone like me would never use language like that. As I stood in the front of the class while a professor challenged my intelligence I could just imagine them reading my paper in their home thinking could someone like her write something like this?

When she says "someone like me," she means that she's Latina.

Book Reviews Are For Readers, Not for Authors

"Authors, reviews are not for you. They are not for you." ― Stacia Kane

I start with this quote, because it's the essence of what I'm going to talk about today. There's been a lot of talk on blogs and even industry articles on book reviews. Some authors like mystery writer RJ Ellory have been caught giving negative reviews to other books in hopes of damaging the reputation of their peers. Other authors like thriller writer John Locke have been caught buying reviews for their books to try to get more publicity and sales. Every author knows reviews are important to any success in publishing. But what's getting lost in the shuffle is the true purpose of book reviews.

Book reviews are for readers. Period.

5 Dumbest Rejections I've Ever Gotten From Publishers

Before I started self-publishing my books, I tried the traditional route of submitting work to publishers. I got a lot of form letters in return. I also got the occasional letter from editors who actually commented on why they rejected my stories. Some of them were very helpful and I used to improve my writing. Others were downright bizarre. Here are five that stood out to me.

Hugh Howey: Why Don't People Complain About Other Indies?

One thing that annoys me most about critics of self-publishing are the ones who sneer that indie authors self-publish because their books would never be published through the traditional system. They say that indie authors hurt the publishing industry as a whole, and most are not at the same quality as "regular" books.

What I don't understand is why this same backlash doesn't exist in other fields. No one is saying independent filmmakers are ruining the film industry or that garage bands are ruining the music industry. Why is it okay for someone to express themselves creatively in those genres without criticism? More than that, what's wrong with authors publishing their own work just for the fun of it, not to hit the bestseller lists?

Well, self-publishing phenom and advocate Hugh Howey gave a great rebuttal to that perspective.

And I talked about the joys of self-publishing--not as a commercial venture but as a way of producing art and making it available to others. I saw myself as a small-time painter or musician might. Nobody tells these people to stop putting their works in local galleries or to quit playing local bars. We don't rail against the proliferation of YouTube videos from aspiring filmmakers or DeviantArt accounts from future designers. We celebrate the act of bettering our craft by producing early works. Remember that it's okay to write and publish just to make yourself happy, to make yourself fulfilled. 

There will be authors out there, readers, publishing experts, and booksellers who say that this outpouring of unprofessional drek is ruining the industry, which makes me wonder if these same people drive through neighborhoods yelling and screaming at people gardening in their back yards, shouting at them that, "You'll never be a farmer!" Or if they cruise past community basketball courts where men and women unwind with games of pickup and shout at them, "You'll never make it in the NBA!"  

Well said.

Related Posts
Publishing Nightmares: Brief History of TOONS
7 Reasons Why WOOL's Hugh Howey is My Hero
6 Reasons Why Self-published Authors Are NOT Destroying Literature

To hear about my new releases first and get a free short story, sign up for my newsletter

6 Reasons Why Self-Published Authors Are NOT Destroying Literature

 I stumbled across yet another article claiming that self-publishing is destroying the book industry, this one with the unique and not at all alarmist title: "Self-published Authors Are Destroying Literature" by Michael Kozlowski. Normally, I gloss over these, but I've pretty much had it with this crap, so I decided to put together a rebuttal. It seems redundant to call this editorial reactionary and overblown, but I'm saying it anyway. I'll take some points from the article and break down why they're wrong.

The Cost of Being an Indie Author [Rant]

"Don't make your own covers. Hire a graphic designer."
"Don't proofread yourself. Hire an editor."
"Don't depend on free books. Buy advertising."
"Don't format your books yourself. Use a professional formatting service."

There are a lot of people who advocate hiring out services if you're an indie author. I've seen other indie authors actually get angry at the idea of not paying for these services. They outright state that if you're not hiring someone to make your covers, and edit your manuscripts, then you shouldn't be self-publishing at all. They've even said that self-published authors who don't use these services are hurting the industry as a whole.