Wednesday, 13 March 2013

Self- Published Authors Who Hate Editors!

I admire the spirit in which self-published authors take their careers and the vision for their art in their own hands. I think they are very brave and very daring...but.

I've just come across too many self-published books that read like they are written by Creative Writing Class novices who could really do with more experience before going to print. Not only is it in their own interest - after all, who will read your second book if you make a really bad impression with your first? Secondly - what about all the self-published authors who do work on their drafts, hone their skills and take advice from experts? If you keep on putting out drivel then people will lose faith in the self-published author.

 This may be controversial but I'm sure I'm not alone in this.

Another thing that bugs me is that I read so many interviews in praise of the writer of a self published book then look at sample and wonder if the writer ever read a book in their lives.

Whilst it's very hard to get a publishing deal the traditional way, don't belittle the hard work of editors, agents and publishers who want to continue allowing real writers a chance to shine. Not everybody can write a novel. I know many of you are saying, 'what about 50 Shades?' An example of a poorly written book that became a success. I hear you but that is a rare breed of books.

I love a good read. I try every time I write to become a better writer and advice I get tells me it's working. We should strive to be the best we can be in our chosen field. After all, we write so that others can enjoy. We owe it to our readers to at least use the spellchecker. Just saying.

Would so love to hear your views and comments. Let me have 'em!

ps just hope I got my spelling right!

Enhanced by Zemanta


  1. Fran, though I agree with you that poorly edited works give self-published authors a bad name, not all of us hate editors. In fact, many of us pay our hard earned money to hire the same editors that traditionally published authors use. And I have to say I'm sad to see the term "real writers" used in the one sentence about traditionally published authors. I very much consider myself a real writer, and I think to make that differentiation in an age when self-published authors are consistently making the New York Times Best Seller list is a bit of an out-dated perspective.

    1. Ripley - apologies for my terribly worded post and thank you for editing me! By 'real writers' I was being inclusive of all writers - however we get published. I promise I'm not outdated. My gripe was with the little care taken by some self published writers - that's all. I'm sorry for how this post came across and am surprised that it didn't get more comments considering how many views it had!

  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

  3. For what it's worth, I just saw this post (been checking out fellow A-Z Blogging Challenge participants) and I completely get what you're saying. OK, so you might step on some toes playing it free and easy with a post like this, but sometimes it's good to have a rant. I work as a writer/editor, and I would totally back up what you say here.

    "Real writers" is a valid concept imo. They can be traditionally published or self-published - either way, real writers accept that proof-reading, editing, research and all that jazz is part of producing real writing. It's like claiming everyone can be a musician if they just pick up an instrument and give it a go without working out how to play. Sure, you'll make a noise, but whether it's music is another matter entirely.

    I'd argue that everyone *can* write a novel - I'm just not sure if everyone should ;) Honesty won't always win you friends, but it's the only thing that will help people to do better with their writing.

    1. Thanks for your comment and glad someone gets where I'm coming from here. Had to get this off my chest. I'll be looking out for your posts during the challenge circles!