On the Likes and Dislikes of Self-Published Books (Book Blog Hop)

Book Blogger Hop

What do you like/dislike about self-published works?

This week's book blogger hop question was submitted by Nicki - Nicki J. Markus/Asta Idonea .

Assumptions

One needs to understand the definition and the subsequent breakdown of what self-publishing means and the many avenues through which it can occur.
One needs (speaking primarily to myself) to understand the elitist nature of this question. It implies that self-published titles have something to dislike. (Of course, some readers will have a different take on this, as will readers of certain genres that are typically self-published.)
With respect to the definition of 'published works', I am defining this as a book and not any other 'work', including magazines, blogs, or other content.

Short and Sweet Answer
The same thing I dislike about traditionally (the Big Five) published 'works'.

Lack of editing (Yes, I find plot inconsistencies in books, particularly cozy mysteries and complex psychological thrillers.)
Lack of page formatting (Yes, I have read a few books by HC where the formatting of the ebook was significantly off. I received a Kindle update later.)
Lack of originality (sure there are no new plots under the sun, but each human has a different reality and this should be evident in their stories)
Ugly (ok..that is not a nice word) covers that lend nothing to the story within
Copycat-ing. This is different from lack of originality. This is sheer repurposing content, where there is a change to the characters' nationalities and quirks, modification of a few plot points, and tweak to the setting in an effort to create a new story.

Question-inspired Rant
First, it is important to understand what 'self-publishing' is.

Possible Definition - publication of any content by its owner/author without involvement of an established (i.e., one of the Big Five) publisher.

There are different mechanisms one can employ to get a book published, outside of the Big Five and their many imprints. There are vanity publishers, hybrid publishers and assisted self-publishing (think of those companies that do cover design, ebook formatting, editing, and/or minor marketing). Thus, I think this question is talking about true self-publishing where the author does everything from designing the cover to editing the story.

Outside of The Shack, Fifty Shades of Grey, and The Martian, self-publishing gets a bad rap. Why? Simply because it is implied that the author could not get a traditional book deal with one of the big publishers, or one of the hybrids. Sure, for some that is true. But for others it is not. Yet, truly self-published titles miss several queues seen in the traditional publishing workflow (or filter, if you will) - an agent and the publisher's team of editors and cover designers. Those queues play a significant role in why most self-published titles are not viewed in a positive light.

Now, my answer to this question is sure to emit sparks. Quite a few readers have so many negative things to say about books that circumvent the aforementioned key aspects of traditional publishing - writing, reworking, editing (developmental), more rework, more editing (developmental, line, and copy). These negative comments do nothing to inspire authors part of the 'rejection club' to seek alternatives.

As a corollary argument, it can be said these negative comments can encourage the author who wishes to self-publish to seek out the best freelance cover designers, developmental editors, copy editors, and proofreaders available.

Still the question at the precipice of my inquisitive mind remains - while most of the self-published authors want to present a marketable book, what is being said about the editors they hire and the quality of said editors work?

As a ravenous reader of urban fiction, a genre typically self-published via hybrid publishers or the author themselves, I see extremely poor grammar and significant misspellings of common words. For example, the word hearse was spelled 'hurse' throughout one title. Upon researching the author and the editor (who was listed in the acknowledgements), I learned that this editor received training from a popular proofreading course. Well, proofreading and editing are not the same. Either way, the editor did a job worthy of a D. The author was horrified when I brought the error, among others, to their attention.

The question about editors is important. Authors hire editors, but if the editors do poor work and the subsequent book is published, is it completely fair to place 100% of the blame on the author and the microcosm of self-published authors? I think not!

What are your thoughts on the quality of truly self-published books?

Follow this week's blog hop!

History of The Book Blogger Hop

March 2010 to December 31, 2012 - Originally created by Jennifer - Crazy-For-Books
February 15, 2013 - Relaunched with permission by Billy - Coffee Addicted Writer

How The Book Blogger Hop Works

Fellow book bloggers are invited to submit and book-related questions. A question is selected and book bloggers join in and share their answers. (For the submission form and Hop Schedule, including the question of the week, check out Billy's dedicated Book Blogger Hop page. Each Friday a new 'hop' starts and lasts until the following Thursday.