The Book is Not the Cover, and yet …

I lurk around plenty of online writing forums. I don’t contribute much because, honestly, by the time I get there, there are usually hundreds of comments before mine and so I figure that whatever point I may have wanted to make has likely already been covered in triplicate. (When do these people write when it seems like they are always online and jumping on posts in a matter of seconds?)

Anyway, the post this morning was about self-published books, and it was not complimentary. This person had taken a chance on a self-published title and then was shocked at how terrible it was. I guess a character’s name changed without warning and there wasn’t a lot of character development. And there were lots of grammar issues. The person was a little outraged that she’d spent money on the title and has now vowed to never spend money on a self-published book again. Makes sense.

EXCEPT.

Traditionally published books have the same issues. T. Kingfisher’s lovely little piece, The Wizard’s Guide to Defensive Baking, is a great book. Lots of gritty, unique magic and heart and I did tear up while reading it. But you know what?
There is a chapter in that book where the main character’s name suddenly changes from Albert to Ernest .. or was it Ernest to Albert? Can’t remember, but there it was … a whole chapter with a character’s name suddenly different.
You know who else did things like that? James Fenimore Cooper, my dears, and that’s not even the worst of his literary crimes, and yet he is still lauded as a classic author.

As to being kept safe from poorly written books just because they are traditionally published, again, it’s no guarantee. Look at The Lost Apothecary - oh my goodness, that book was dreadful. So much to pick apart in that one - not to my taste in the least. Yet it’s a bestseller and apparently getting a sequel?

And grammatical errors are just one of those things. They are impossible to eliminate, though you can tell when someone has tried. Or when they have paid someone else to try. And I have indeed put something down when the errors were so thick it was like trying to hack my way through a primal jungle just to get through the sentences, never mind having a moment to look around and notice the scenery (or the plot).

But here’s the main thing. This person is never going to look at another self-published title again because she’s suddenly thinking that they are all the same. That they will all be grammatical nightmares with no saving graces. I don’t think that books can be treated with that kind of broad dismissal.

Books are …. well, they are as unique as the author breathing life into them. And the creation of a book is a combination of so many things. Ideas, devotion, and skill, yes, but also they are a combination of stupid things like time, cowardice, luck, networking, and budget.

All books are a risk - no matter how they are published. I’ve even had a book that I loved and another that I hated that were written by the Same Person. So it doesn’t make sense to me that someone would have a not-quite-awesome experience with a book and then decide that they are going to throw all other books that fit into that broad category away.

It’s like watermelon, I guess. I like watermelon, but I struggle with always finding a good one. Sometimes they look amazing and then I cut them open and they are pulpy and bland. Other times, I’ll carve a slice of a lopsided thing and it’s delicious and sweet. I do what I can to pick good watermelons, but I’m not always successful. But even when I do get one that is not very good, I don’t automatically assume that all the watermelons are going to be like that after. I don’t stop buying and eating watermelon.

And, inevitably, when I get a gross watermelon, it’s ok, because I know a group of chickens who are going to LOVE getting that watermelon. Likewise, if I pick up a book that isn’t for me .. well, I probably know someone who will like it that I can give it to.

Then I’ll go find myself another one.