“Talkin’ ’bout Books” is a newish meme for weekly book discussions.
Each Tuesday, we will post a discussion about a book-related topic.
I apologize for this being a day late; my kids had a snow day yesterday, and I got behind on everything.
If you’re a blogger and you would like to join in on the fun, you don’t have to post about a particular topic. Just post a discussion and share your link.
My topic for this week is:
Do Indie Authors Deserve Special Treatment?
This is a topic I have wanted to talk about for a long time. I have seen posts on blogs and websites, in which indie authors claim that they shouldn’t be held to the same standards as traditionally published authors. They feel reviewers need to go easy on them because they are self-published.
Personally, I think that’s ridiculous. An author is an author. If you are putting yourself out there, claiming to be a published author, it shouldn’t matter if you self-published or were contracted by a publishing house.
While it’s true that traditionally published authors have a team of people working to improve the book, I don’t feel indie authors are excused from making sure their books are thoroughly edited and proofread. All authors, whether self-published or traditionally published, should take pride in their work and present to the public their best efforts. I understand that means self-published authors have to spend money on copy editing, content editing, and/or proofreading. But, that’s the price you have to pay if you decide to self-publish.
I don’t give anyone special treatment.
I believe everyone should be held to the same standards. If I ever self-publish, I wouldn’t want someone to treat me with kid gloves, patronizing me. While it’s true I’m not in the same league as big-name authors, I don’t want people to assume I’m inferior. Plus, if reviewers aren’t honest, how could I learn what I need to improve upon?
Along the same lines, I wouldn’t want reviewers to think they needed to walk on eggshells just because I would be self-published.