Absolutely true, Dave.  I just finished reading a book that, while the story 
wasn't bad (more of an entertaining, fun read for me), but I found more errors 
than should have been there, some of which a good editor should have caught.  
Mot glaring example: "wreck havoc" instead of "wreak havoc"

Rick Taubold
www.ricktaubold.com


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Dave Henn 
  To: [email protected] 
  Sent: Friday, February 12, 2010 11:18 AM
  Subject: Re: It's Not Too Late!!!


  I'm afraid I am short on time, but I wanted to add that today's editors don't 
appear to be doing the job that they are "supposed" to be doing. Some of what 
comes from some of the big houses these days is disappointing to say the least 
in writing quality and story quality. I thought editors were supposed to work 
with the authors to improve the submitted work so that the published work was 
of better quality generally. But so many of the works I've "read" (audio) are 
soap boxes for political commentary, social commentary, etc., with a million 
infodumps and POV changes that it's hard to believe the editors are anything 
more than filters for marketability based on concept. And if that's the case, 
coming to them with a fan base can't hurt, a la Sigler, Hutchinson, et al.


  David


  On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 9:02 AM, Jonathan Sherwood 
<[email protected]> wrote:

    In the past, I would have argued alongside Rob, saying that readers depend 
on editors to select only what's worth reading, but there are enough examples 
of authors going straight to the audience and the audience responding well that 
I think it's fair to say that there may be another model rising.


    We all know that editors are subjective, and they're much more likely to 
buy a story from an author with a good track record than buy the exact same 
story from an author with none. The editor is depending on the audience to do 
some selecting for them. There are clearly examples of authors who have 
podcasted their novels, gotten a considerable following, and attracted the 
attention of editors who would have otherwise ignored them.


    The way it works right now is that we submit to an editor on the hopes that 
the editor believes there is a market potential for our work. But it makes 
perfect sense to provide an editor with actual proof that your work is 
marketable. More and more these days, that's possible to do.







    On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 7:08 PM, Sal Armoniac <[email protected]> wrote:

      Ooooh... Then go join the list of over a hundred responses to Rob's 
remark.  He'll fight you tooth and nail on that one.  Can you give statistics 
about the publishers that are picking up books after self-publication?  Not 
that I want to "validate" Rob's attitude, but I'm somewhere in the middle here. 
I had thought of posting a comment that not everyone needs to be in a 
conventional, marketing midlist, but thought naaah, I'm wasting my breath.  He 
listens only to those who agree with him and sharply refutes anyone who doesn't.

      You weren't rolling on the floor laughing at the literally phallic duel?? 
 The junk I see at Borders is proof in a pail that markets will sell TOTAL 
dreck. I wish I had written down the name of the book that was one long account 
of a woman getting her rocks off by a man biting her nipples.  Full of terms 
like "pebbles." So to speak.  

      Sarah


      On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 7:15 AM, Alicia Henn <[email protected]> 
wrote:

        I remember after reading Riverworld, racing to get my hands on any 
Farmer I could find. I ended up with a book, was it Lord Tyger? in which men 
dueled with crossed erections. There is a lot of expectation that goes into the 
impression of a book. It certainly wasn't what I was expecting and I was 
disappointed. 


        As far as the self-publishing bit circumventing validation, that was 
true in the past, but a lot of publishers are picking up books after they've 
been self-published and have started to sell. It's the selling it yourself part 
that can be the validation now.


        Alicia





        On Feb 11, 2010, at 12:10 AM, Sal Armoniac wrote:


          You should see the long looooooooong protracted debate on Rob 
Sawyer's Face Book page about why it is better to get publishing companies to 
print your book than to self-publish.  There are people out there who really 
believe that going through the "filtering process" of acceptance and validation 
by any press guarantees quality over those who are more "impatient."  To be 
sure, Rob's first remark was to vilify those who suggested to any author that 
they self-publish when the enterprise could come to naught (especially 
economically).

          I think the worst novel I read, next to _Woman Between the Worlds_, 
was Jonathan Carroll's _Sleeping in Flame_.  Touted all over as the next best 
thing to sliced bread in the realm of intellectual fantasy. 


          On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 6:42 PM, Dana Paxson <[email protected]> wrote:

            35 years or so ago I was driving my family through the Adirondacks, 
and to keep the kids entertained, started making up a song about the Adirondack 
Shark.  I guess I was just participating in some silly cosmic freshwater 
resonance. 


            Eric Scoles wrote: 
              Are you sure he was serious? (Then again, if I have to ask...) 


              When I was younger I thought it would be fun to write a novel 
about a giant muskelunge eating swimmers in Lake Michigan. Thought it would be 
fun to see if people took it seriously. Somebody else suggested, 'why not just 
make it a gigantic bass and set it in Long Lake?'* Then someone went and made 
_Champlain_, which I'm told was about a gigantic alligator terrorizing swimmers 
in Lake Champlain, and I realized that the world had moved on without me.  




              --
              *My brothers & I spent hours one weekend catching and re-catching 
(and re-re-catching) undersized smallmouth bass on Long Lake. One of our 
running jokes had to do with crossing them with piranha. So, there's another 
idea. 



              On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 4:15 PM, Jonathan Sherwood 
<[email protected]> wrote:

                Sorry to digress slightly, but the absolute worst case of 
collaboration was a book my dear wife bought me for a beach read. It was by 
Piers Anthony and some other guy. It's called "Spider Legs," and holds my 
personal record for worst book ever read. It was so bad I had to finish it just 
because it was hard to believe it was ever put into print instead of sent back 
to the depths of Hell by the publisher.


                It's basically "Jaws" but with a giant spider crab. Why do good 
authors do that?


                
http://www.amazon.com/Spider-Legs-Fantasy-Piers-Anthony/dp/0812564898



                On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 4:07 PM, Sal Armoniac 
<[email protected]> wrote:

                  Asimov also declined.  I can't stand his later novels. 
Clarke's quality dropped because he started collaborating with less skillful 
writers.  It bothers me, even, that he wrote his two novels 2001 and 2010 in 
collaboration with filmmakers. Kubrick's film is far better, and has reached 
more people than Clarke's novel, which is a let down after seeing the film. I'm 
having a hard time teaching him.

                  Sally

                  On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 1:48 PM, SteveC <[email protected]> 
wrote:

                    Blather. Most of the writers at the high age range of that 
chart
                    started publishing many years before such a thing as a Hugo 
Award for
                    novels existed. Make 1955 your base line (when the Hugos 
started being
                    awarded annually) instead of first published work and the 
whole chart
                    shifts downward.


                    --
                    You received this message because you are subscribed to the 
Google Groups "R-SPEC: The Rochester Speculative Literature Association" group.
                    To post to this group, send email to 
[email protected].
                    To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
                    For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/r-spec?hl=en.



                  -- 
                  You received this message because you are subscribed to the 
Google Groups "R-SPEC: The Rochester Speculative Literature Association" group.
                  To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
                  To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
                  For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/r-spec?hl=en.



                -- 

                You received this message because you are subscribed to the 
Google Groups "R-SPEC: The Rochester Speculative Literature Association" group.
                To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
                To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
                For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/r-spec?hl=en.



              -- 
              You received this message because you are subscribed to the 
Google Groups "R-SPEC: The Rochester Speculative Literature Association" group.
              To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
              To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
              For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/r-spec?hl=en.



            -- 

            You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
Groups "R-SPEC: The Rochester Speculative Literature Association" group.
            To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
            To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
            For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/r-spec?hl=en.





          -- 

          You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
Groups "R-SPEC: The Rochester Speculative Literature Association" group.
          To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
          To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
          For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/r-spec?hl=en.




        -- 
        You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
Groups "R-SPEC: The Rochester Speculative Literature Association" group.
        To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
        To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
        For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/r-spec?hl=en.




      -- 

      You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"R-SPEC: The Rochester Speculative Literature Association" group.
      To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
      To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
      For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/r-spec?hl=en.




    -- 

    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"R-SPEC: The Rochester Speculative Literature Association" group.
    To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
    To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
    For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/r-spec?hl=en.




  -- 
  You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"R-SPEC: The Rochester Speculative Literature Association" group.
  To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
  To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
  For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/r-spec?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"R-SPEC: The Rochester Speculative Literature Association" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/r-spec?hl=en.

Reply via email to