Discussions

Would you read a self published book?

Posted by clairec23 • 10/19/07 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Topics: novels, self publishing, writing

Would you intentionally buy and read a self published book? The reason I ask is because I read a great self published book this week and reviewed it on my blog. But, anyone I've told about it seems interested in it until I mentioned the words self published...

It's bugging me because I really did like this book but it seems as though the writer now has this stigma attached to her because she didn't go the conventional route. Are big publishing houses the only way to go if you want a book to be read? Does anyone have any ideas on how to get people to give the book a chance?

Here is a sample chapter and my review:

www.bebo.com/finklestreet

beboauthor.blogspot.com/2007/10/despite-losing-it-on-finkle-street.html

User Comments

10/19/07

crkian

Why mention its self published at all

[reply]
10/19/07

clairec23

She has to tell people they can only buy it on Amazon or order it straight from Gardners, it isn't available at book shops so people ask why.

[reply]
10/19/07

clioandme

It's nice to have the imprimatur of a great publisher, but self-published is legitimate. What are all of us doing? Blogs are self-publishing.

[reply]
10/19/07

monkeytale

Self published wouldn't bother me a bit. If it was interesting and a good read is all that would matter to me.

[reply]
10/19/07

FlyingFader

I was just thinking about the stigma of self-publishing for books and how it doesn't apply for music. Music recorded and released by a band is judged on its quality and no one cares if there's a big label behind it. I don't know why this is.

[reply]
1. 10/19/07
  
  clairec23
  
  That is a good point, look at how many unsigned bands become popular, especially online.
10/19/07

XIII

Hmm, a good book is a good book. I wouldn't care.
Just leave the amazon link and remove the mention of it being self published and I doubt anyone would think twice.

[reply]
10/19/07

clairec23

It's nice to know it doesn't put some people off! I'm sure I've read more self published books than I realise, when I read a book I don't look to see who the publisher was. Besides lots of great books get turned away by publishers, it doesn't mean they aren't worth reading. I just think it is a bit unfair that a lot of people see all self published books as sub standard.

[reply]
10/19/07

tikirob

Same here...a good book is a good book. Yes and I have read a few.

[reply]
10/19/07

techfun

If the book was on a topic that interested me HOW it was published would not be a factor.

[reply]
10/19/07

robinj

wasnt the celestine prophecy self pubished to begin with? and then republished by a major compnay?

guidetolifeblog.com

[reply]
10/19/07

ender

*runs to lulu and immediately publishes my novel and expects every single one of you to buy it*

[reply]
1. 10/20/07
  
  libdrone
  
  lol
10/19/07

varniticula

The publisher is not a factor for me, for I have read self published books before. It's the content that matters, and if its solid content, people should appreciate the good read!

[reply]
10/19/07

MyDen

A good read is a good read. The publisher does not play any part in my selection of books.

[reply]
10/19/07

doreen

I would read a book that was self published - just as good as any other way of publishing.

[reply]
10/19/07

bnsullivan

I've read some excellent self-published books, and some poor ones. But given the growth of the online writing community I expect we'll see more and more self-published books. As others have said -- I do not select things to read based on who published it.

[reply]
10/19/07

Stinkypaw

I don't really care how a book is published but more about its content.

[reply]
10/20/07

cyberpunk

same here...

finding a publisher takes a long time...and we've all heard of now-famous writers who got rejected by a lot of publishers when they weren't household names yet...

luckily, writers nowadays have another option, which is self-publishing...

of course, just as with traditionally-published books, i will try to find reviews of the book first...a sample/free chapter will also be very useful...

[reply]
10/20/07

Carolshmarol

I don't care if they are self-published. I'm only interested in the subject.

And Clair...if someone asks why it's not in a bookstore, you don't have to give them all the details. Just say "she's just starting out". (which is true) That would end the questioning.

[reply]
10/20/07

DaneMorgan

I probably read 3-4 self published books to every one house published book. And I read a lot more ebooks than bound books.

It's funny, but I've gotten to the point where I'll spend $50 on an e format self published book that I wouldn't have spent $20 on for a traditional bound book on the same topic.

[reply]
10/20/07

melbs1969

as an aspiring children's picture book author...i would read self-published books. sometimes, that is the foot in the door that is needed! like what has been said...a good book is a good book. it doesn't matter the avenue taken to make it public!

[reply]
10/20/07

MadameX

I think that the hesitation in many people comes from the fact that there's no check on self-published books. There are excellent self-published books and there are crappy books from major publishers, but with a major publisher there is a guarantee of at least a minimal level of literacy. I have seen self-published books that are so poorly edited (or perhaps not edited at all) as to be barely comprehensible. I expect that they're the minority, but there's an aspect of the unknown in choosing a self-published book that is somewhat mitigated by the idea that a publishing house has screened, selected and edited a book. I suspect that the reason the same reluctance doesn't attach to music is that music is much easier to sample; you can listen for just a minute or two and get a pretty good feel for not only the music itself but the production quality--books are a bit harder to spot-check.

[reply]
1. 10/20/07
  
  DaneMorgan
  
  Yep. There are some real dogs in my library. The pay off is in those that have good information. They may lack some polish. They may be less than grammatically perfect (esp. those by ESL writers), but they are also a step closer to the authors original thoughts, if that makes sense, and that's where I find some real gems.
10/20/07

libdrone

I am in the minority in this case. With very few exceptions I only read books that come from the library and generally self published books never are.

And a suggestion for any who do go the self-publishing route, consider if you can possibly afford it sending a review copy to the collection management librarian at large library systems in your geographic area. Getting your book read by the right person can result in gaining many additional readers that would otherwise have been out of reach.

[reply]
10/21/07

acousticguitarist

Yes, if the content is good

[reply]
10/21/07

Phattitudes

I read any books. If someone put a book in front of me made solely out of napkins and had macaroni-pasted font, I'd read it. I'm that thirsty to read books. But to be specific, yes I would. Because writers are writers are writers and books are books are books. Also, I'm going the self-publish route. Why should I or anyone else work their asses off to write something and then a big publishing house gets all the royalties and pay when I can just market the book myself and make nearly all the profit?

I will probably by the book you reviewed based solely on the fact that she self-published. I like to support fellow writers.

[reply]
10/21/07

clairec23

Thanks for the replies and the advice too. I'm going to pass this link on to the writer because it really is encouraging.

[reply]
1/18/08

quachee

i like self published books in a way because their views are independent, and can be more bold & interesting at times...

in singapore & malaysia, there is a growing no. of self published authors.. just like musicians. they can produce good books as well.

but of course, the big labels/ publishers have the marketing power & distribution channel especially overseas markets.

as a reader, the content is most important, not the 'book cover'

[reply]
1/18/08

bsilvia

with a lot of nice pictures I would :), haha kidding, yes I would buy it.

[reply]
1/18/08

bsd13

If it was something I was interested in, yes.

[reply]
1. 1/19/08
  
  antibarbie
  
  Self-publishing is a double edged sword. You get your book in print but unless you are willing to shell out some serious cash, you aren't getting the PR you need for the book, stores often won't stock them and there is a stigma associated with it among both publishers and a lot of the published writers I've chatted with as well (from what I have seen in writing groups and the like). Personally I will read just about anything that interests me but I don't think I own a single self-published book.
1/18/08

bornliar

I think there are three big reasons people avoid self-published books.

1. They tend to be more expensive, compared to a large publisher's book in the same format.
2. They tend to be harder to get -- you can't find them in a bookstore. Which also means you can't leaf through them or read a first chapter to see if it's something you would enjoy. (That could be fixed if more self-published authors were willing to put a few chapters on the web for free, but you still have to go looking specifically for that book. You won't just stumble across it in a bookstore, think it looks interesting, and buy it with no prior knowledge of the book.)
3. As MadameX pointed out, self-published books don't have to have been checked for grammar, spelling, readability, accuracy, sanity, or writing quality. With a traditional publisher, you know that the book has been edited to make it at least readable, and that someone other than the author and their mother thought it was worth investing lots of money in. Doesn't mean you'll agree with them, but the chances are a lot better.

[reply]
1. 1/18/08
  
  bsd13
  
  I'll add another. We judge a book by its cover and often the covers of self-published books look like crap.
2. 1/18/08
  
  ghostytwofish
  
  And one more ... I don't have the time to market the thing. So, I'm in the process of getting an agent, and going the traditional route.
1/18/08

bornliar

Oh, good point, bsd13. I've seen a lot of self-published books with covers designed by their authors in MS Paint. Badly pixellated, badly drawn, or with cheesy clipart and big purple lettering. Ick.

I think self-published authors who want to sell a lot of books would do better to get a professional artist to do the covers. At the very least, they could find an artist friend and work out a percentage of profit deal with them, if they can't afford to pay up front.

[reply]
1/18/08

globalgirl

A self-published book is not a deterrent for me to read something interesting. Well written content will captivate me, should it be for topic I seek knowledge.

[reply]
1/18/08

BL

Her her check out

www.selfpublishersplace.com/

Good people promoting, good books.

[reply]
1/18/08

Libertine

Of course, I'd read a self-published book. People must remember that, above all else, the publishing industry is about MAKING MONEY. That is, well-written books are often rejected for publication for reasons not having anything to do with the quality of the writing. A publisher's goal is to sell as many copies of a book as possible, which means appealing to the widest number of people possible, i.e. the "lowest common denominator". Some well-written books are rejected because the topic appeals only to a limited number of people.

Other books are rejected because the topic isn't a currently "hot" one. For instance, right after the release of the movie "Titanic", publishers published anything and everything about the Titanic, and some of it was badly-written dreck. But such stuff got published because publishers knew there were currently a lot of people who would buy anything with the word "Titanic" on it. But, now, that the topic is no longer a "hot" one, it's much harder to get a book about the Titanic published, because now that the movie is old news, only a core of dedicated Titanic buffs will buy such books now.

Self-publishing and POD publishing helps allow such well-written works to be made available to others.

Of course, there IS a lot of self-published dreck, but I've seen my fair share of dreck from traditional publishers, too.

[reply]
1. 1/20/08
  
  quachee
  
  hi libertine
  
  i totally agree with you that some books are in the market just because its hot.
  
  also to note, there are many authors who get rejected first before they later become big. its not because their works are bad initially, but some publishers are afraid of something new. i would say these are publishers who are mainly in the 'red ocean'... and not the 'blue ocean'
  
  on the topic on cover, yes, self published books need to brush up on that. but ive seen a fair bit of good ones as well
1/19/08

lavameanslove

I doubt I'd purchase and/or read a book simply because it was self-published, however, if the book appealed to me, I surely would.

[reply]
1/19/08

Anok

I would probably read a self published one before a giant conglomerate one, truth be told. The answer to your question though - let the book sell itself, and just don't tell people it's self published. Once they've already read it...too late to turn back!

[reply]
1/19/08

acousticguitarist

there are so many, i probably have

[reply]
1/19/08

kevingoodman

It's a mistake to tell them. The author should claim his own publishing company - even if it's only his/her own book. The publisher validates the author and you take that away by calling it self published - when it doesnt have to be.

[reply]
1/19/08

neobluepanther

I haven't actually read a self-published book, but I don't see any reason why I would not if I got the chance.

Self-Publishing is not big in India, at least not yet. Though, I have been thinking of taking that route just to test the waters.

[reply]
1/20/08

artscapes

I have read a lot of self-published fiction and poetry. I like to read so, like the others, it's about content and not who printed it...

[reply]