<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: In Defense of IndieReader.com</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.selfpublishingreview.com/blog/2009/05/15/in-defense-of-indiereadercom/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.selfpublishingreview.com/blog/2009/05/15/in-defense-of-indiereadercom/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 19:00:18 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: IndieReader &#171; Craig Lancaster &#124; A Mind Adrift in the West</title>
		<link>http://www.selfpublishingreview.com/blog/2009/05/15/in-defense-of-indiereadercom/comment-page-1/#comment-909</link>
		<dc:creator>IndieReader &#171; Craig Lancaster &#124; A Mind Adrift in the West</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Jul 2009 18:36:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.selfpublishingreview.com/?p=1998#comment-909</guid>
		<description>[...] site, which did a soft launch a couple of weeks ago, has been met with well-reasoned criticism and equally well-reasoned defense. As I make the decisions for my titles and my titles alone, I figured the vetting fee for placement [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] site, which did a soft launch a couple of weeks ago, has been met with well-reasoned criticism and equally well-reasoned defense. As I make the decisions for my titles and my titles alone, I figured the vetting fee for placement [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Espresso Book Machine Comes to Vermont &#124; Self-Publishing Review</title>
		<link>http://www.selfpublishingreview.com/blog/2009/05/15/in-defense-of-indiereadercom/comment-page-1/#comment-906</link>
		<dc:creator>The Espresso Book Machine Comes to Vermont &#124; Self-Publishing Review</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2009 04:48:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.selfpublishingreview.com/?p=1998#comment-906</guid>
		<description>[...] new paradigm has come to Vermont - and no, SPR is not tired of the term new paradigm.  For publishing it is very apt.  The news from Vermont:  The publishing world is [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] new paradigm has come to Vermont &#8211; and no, SPR is not tired of the term new paradigm.  For publishing it is very apt.  The news from Vermont:  The publishing world is [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tom Dark</title>
		<link>http://www.selfpublishingreview.com/blog/2009/05/15/in-defense-of-indiereadercom/comment-page-1/#comment-914</link>
		<dc:creator>Tom Dark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Jun 2009 17:02:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.selfpublishingreview.com/?p=1998#comment-914</guid>
		<description>Is anybody as weary of seeing the phrase &quot;new paradigm&quot; as I am?  New paradigms have been proliferating in the past 40 years to the point they&#039;ve become an intellectual traffic jam; too often they&#039;ve proven to be the same old breeding rabbits.  I&#039;d like to suggest a more apt term:  &quot;pachinko.&quot; Self-publishing is now a pachinko of activity.

&quot;Gatekeeping&quot; as a term for filtering out literary wheat from chaff is new to me, and a little troubling. It sounds more like a fashion of moral do-gooding than gut literary criticism.  That eerie side of it would, I hope, be prevented by a pachinko of altruistic critics, namely, ordinary readers.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is anybody as weary of seeing the phrase &#8220;new paradigm&#8221; as I am?  New paradigms have been proliferating in the past 40 years to the point they&#8217;ve become an intellectual traffic jam; too often they&#8217;ve proven to be the same old breeding rabbits.  I&#8217;d like to suggest a more apt term:  &#8220;pachinko.&#8221; Self-publishing is now a pachinko of activity.</p>
<p>&#8220;Gatekeeping&#8221; as a term for filtering out literary wheat from chaff is new to me, and a little troubling. It sounds more like a fashion of moral do-gooding than gut literary criticism.  That eerie side of it would, I hope, be prevented by a pachinko of altruistic critics, namely, ordinary readers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Introducing: Backword Books &#124; Self-Publishing Review</title>
		<link>http://www.selfpublishingreview.com/blog/2009/05/15/in-defense-of-indiereadercom/comment-page-1/#comment-917</link>
		<dc:creator>Introducing: Backword Books &#124; Self-Publishing Review</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 01:28:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.selfpublishingreview.com/?p=1998#comment-917</guid>
		<description>[...] even bother coming out defending it?  Because if the reaction to Indie Reader is any indication, people hate the gatekeeping process in any form whatsoever.  I don’t.  [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] even bother coming out defending it?  Because if the reaction to Indie Reader is any indication, people hate the gatekeeping process in any form whatsoever.  I don’t.  [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Carol Buchanan</title>
		<link>http://www.selfpublishingreview.com/blog/2009/05/15/in-defense-of-indiereadercom/comment-page-1/#comment-915</link>
		<dc:creator>Carol Buchanan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 May 2009 23:18:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.selfpublishingreview.com/?p=1998#comment-915</guid>
		<description>Whether Indie Reader will work out or not, whether self-publishing is the wave of the future or merely a passing phenomenon, whether the traditional publishers will figure out a better method of selecting books than buying what people bought last year -- all of this remains to be seen. But, to state the obvious, we live in a fascinating time for writers. We have lots of precedents for self-publishing, and we&#039;re free to pursue it if we wish. I find it tremendously exciting to be in greater control of my own writing future than with my three traditionally published nonfiction books.

That being said, I was interested in Indie Reader until I saw the price. It&#039;s like buying space in someone&#039;s catalog, or any marketing expenditure. Having self-published God&#039;s Thunderbolt: The Vigilantes of Montana, when it comes to spending the money the book makes for me, I use the business side of my writer&#039;s brain with another question. Is this listing the most bang for the buck? I&#039;ll wait and see.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Whether Indie Reader will work out or not, whether self-publishing is the wave of the future or merely a passing phenomenon, whether the traditional publishers will figure out a better method of selecting books than buying what people bought last year &#8212; all of this remains to be seen. But, to state the obvious, we live in a fascinating time for writers. We have lots of precedents for self-publishing, and we&#8217;re free to pursue it if we wish. I find it tremendously exciting to be in greater control of my own writing future than with my three traditionally published nonfiction books.</p>
<p>That being said, I was interested in Indie Reader until I saw the price. It&#8217;s like buying space in someone&#8217;s catalog, or any marketing expenditure. Having self-published God&#8217;s Thunderbolt: The Vigilantes of Montana, when it comes to spending the money the book makes for me, I use the business side of my writer&#8217;s brain with another question. Is this listing the most bang for the buck? I&#8217;ll wait and see.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: An Interview with Brad Grochowski of Authors Bookshop &#124; Self-Publishing Review</title>
		<link>http://www.selfpublishingreview.com/blog/2009/05/15/in-defense-of-indiereadercom/comment-page-1/#comment-913</link>
		<dc:creator>An Interview with Brad Grochowski of Authors Bookshop &#124; Self-Publishing Review</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2009 15:07:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.selfpublishingreview.com/?p=1998#comment-913</guid>
		<description>[...] the heels of the story about Indie Reader, which led to some controversy, here’s an interview with Brad Grochowski, the man behind the site Authors Bookshop – a site [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] the heels of the story about Indie Reader, which led to some controversy, here’s an interview with Brad Grochowski, the man behind the site Authors Bookshop – a site [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steven Reynolds</title>
		<link>http://www.selfpublishingreview.com/blog/2009/05/15/in-defense-of-indiereadercom/comment-page-1/#comment-908</link>
		<dc:creator>Steven Reynolds</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 May 2009 11:27:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.selfpublishingreview.com/?p=1998#comment-908</guid>
		<description>Following on from my last comment on sloppiness being the barrier, I just read this in the FAQ section of Mark Athitakis’ American Fiction Notes blog (http://americanfiction.wordpress.com/) on why he refuses to consider reviewing self-published books:

&quot;One must draw the line somewhere, and I’m drawing it there. I’ve tried, honest, but I’ve yet to encounter a self-published book that held my interest more than it loudly broadcasted its failings.&quot;

I could send him one or two books that might change his mind, but Mark&#039;s is the prevailing view.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Following on from my last comment on sloppiness being the barrier, I just read this in the FAQ section of Mark Athitakis’ American Fiction Notes blog (<a href="http://americanfiction.wordpress.com/" rel="nofollow">http://americanfiction.wordpress.com/</a>) on why he refuses to consider reviewing self-published books:</p>
<p>&#8220;One must draw the line somewhere, and I’m drawing it there. I’ve tried, honest, but I’ve yet to encounter a self-published book that held my interest more than it loudly broadcasted its failings.&#8221;</p>
<p>I could send him one or two books that might change his mind, but Mark&#8217;s is the prevailing view.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steven Reynolds</title>
		<link>http://www.selfpublishingreview.com/blog/2009/05/15/in-defense-of-indiereadercom/comment-page-1/#comment-907</link>
		<dc:creator>Steven Reynolds</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 May 2009 10:47:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.selfpublishingreview.com/?p=1998#comment-907</guid>
		<description>I’ve been thinking a lot about IR&#039;s proposal over the last few days, and I’m starting to wonder if foregrounding a book’s self-published status and trying to make it &quot;cool&quot; is really such a good idea.

In my experience, there is very little awareness of self-publishing as a phenomenon outside of the publishing industry (and I include authors and aspiring authors in that industry). The average reader doesn’t even know self-publishing exists. It’s only when you explain what it is, and why someone might choose this path (“They couldn’t find a publisher who wanted their book”) that they hesitate and start wondering about quality. Confronted with a self-published book on Amazon, or on the shelf in a bookstore, most readers would be hard pressed to tell the difference between it and a traditionally published book. One they get the book in their hands, however, it’s usually clearer. Poor or non-existent editing is the giveaway, if shitty cover design and amateurish layout weren’t enough. For me, those are the fundamental problems with most self-published books: they haven’t been through the editorial process, and they haven’t been professionally designed. (I think we often forget how many readers appreciate the book as beautiful object.)

So if someone wants to provide a real service to self-published authors, and make a pretty penny in the process, those are the services they should be offering for an affordable price: editorial assistance and design. Not “promotion” (whatever that means), and certainly not just focusing on those books that already satisfy the minimal requirement of not insulting the reader with their sloppiness. The sloppiness is the problem: that’s what needs to be fixed! Fixing it at a reasonable price would be a boon to the industry. Making self-publishing “cool” is a secondary goal, and I suspect that producing better books is a necessary step in that direction.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I’ve been thinking a lot about IR&#8217;s proposal over the last few days, and I’m starting to wonder if foregrounding a book’s self-published status and trying to make it &#8220;cool&#8221; is really such a good idea.</p>
<p>In my experience, there is very little awareness of self-publishing as a phenomenon outside of the publishing industry (and I include authors and aspiring authors in that industry). The average reader doesn’t even know self-publishing exists. It’s only when you explain what it is, and why someone might choose this path (“They couldn’t find a publisher who wanted their book”) that they hesitate and start wondering about quality. Confronted with a self-published book on Amazon, or on the shelf in a bookstore, most readers would be hard pressed to tell the difference between it and a traditionally published book. One they get the book in their hands, however, it’s usually clearer. Poor or non-existent editing is the giveaway, if shitty cover design and amateurish layout weren’t enough. For me, those are the fundamental problems with most self-published books: they haven’t been through the editorial process, and they haven’t been professionally designed. (I think we often forget how many readers appreciate the book as beautiful object.)</p>
<p>So if someone wants to provide a real service to self-published authors, and make a pretty penny in the process, those are the services they should be offering for an affordable price: editorial assistance and design. Not “promotion” (whatever that means), and certainly not just focusing on those books that already satisfy the minimal requirement of not insulting the reader with their sloppiness. The sloppiness is the problem: that’s what needs to be fixed! Fixing it at a reasonable price would be a boon to the industry. Making self-publishing “cool” is a secondary goal, and I suspect that producing better books is a necessary step in that direction.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Two Wings of Self-Publishing &#124; Self-Publishing Review</title>
		<link>http://www.selfpublishingreview.com/blog/2009/05/15/in-defense-of-indiereadercom/comment-page-1/#comment-912</link>
		<dc:creator>The Two Wings of Self-Publishing &#124; Self-Publishing Review</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 May 2009 14:45:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.selfpublishingreview.com/?p=1998#comment-912</guid>
		<description>[...] a part of more-established literary circles, this may never happen.  Steven Reynolds wrote an astute comment, saying, The parallels with independent film and punk rock don’t ring true for me. They might if [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] a part of more-established literary circles, this may never happen.  Steven Reynolds wrote an astute comment, saying, The parallels with independent film and punk rock don’t ring true for me. They might if [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steven Reynolds</title>
		<link>http://www.selfpublishingreview.com/blog/2009/05/15/in-defense-of-indiereadercom/comment-page-1/#comment-911</link>
		<dc:creator>Steven Reynolds</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 16 May 2009 15:56:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.selfpublishingreview.com/?p=1998#comment-911</guid>
		<description>Well, I notice who the publisher is. It’s never been the sole reason I’ve (not) bought a book, but it’s certainly an influencer. There are two small publishers here in Australia – Giramondo and Text – who consistently put out superior work, and I buy a lot of it. But this tendency of mine isn’t limited to small publishers: I can pick up almost anything published in Pan Macmillan’s vast Picador imprint over the last 37 years and pretty much know the kind of quality I’ll find there.

It remains to be seen if IndieReader is going to inspire the same kind of confidence in anyone. The parallels with independent film and punk rock don’t ring true for me. They might if self-publishing were full of challenging, experimental, non-commercial books breaking new artistic ground; books that were being resisted by risk-averse mainstream publishers who were too conservative or too stupid to see a new kind of literature blossoming around them. But is self-publishing really like that? Honestly? In some cases it is. But the majority of self-published books were aiming squarely for mainstream commercial success and just didn’t make the cut. Is paying $149 to a website going to change anything for that kind of book? Is it even going to change anything for the experimental book? I think IndieReader needs to be a lot clearer on precisely what you’re getting for your money.

I like the idea of trying to make self-publishing “cool”; make it less about vanity and rejection, and more about freedom, creativity and choice; make it anti-corporate, grass-roots, more ‘real’; pitch it to readers as a way of sidestepping the corporate filter and connecting directly with writers. But I don’t see how IndieReader will achieve that. On the face of it, they sound like just another publisher: they vet your work according to some undisclosed standard, and they might choose to take it on and promote it. The only difference is you pay them to. How is this cool?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, I notice who the publisher is. It’s never been the sole reason I’ve (not) bought a book, but it’s certainly an influencer. There are two small publishers here in Australia – Giramondo and Text – who consistently put out superior work, and I buy a lot of it. But this tendency of mine isn’t limited to small publishers: I can pick up almost anything published in Pan Macmillan’s vast Picador imprint over the last 37 years and pretty much know the kind of quality I’ll find there.</p>
<p>It remains to be seen if IndieReader is going to inspire the same kind of confidence in anyone. The parallels with independent film and punk rock don’t ring true for me. They might if self-publishing were full of challenging, experimental, non-commercial books breaking new artistic ground; books that were being resisted by risk-averse mainstream publishers who were too conservative or too stupid to see a new kind of literature blossoming around them. But is self-publishing really like that? Honestly? In some cases it is. But the majority of self-published books were aiming squarely for mainstream commercial success and just didn’t make the cut. Is paying $149 to a website going to change anything for that kind of book? Is it even going to change anything for the experimental book? I think IndieReader needs to be a lot clearer on precisely what you’re getting for your money.</p>
<p>I like the idea of trying to make self-publishing “cool”; make it less about vanity and rejection, and more about freedom, creativity and choice; make it anti-corporate, grass-roots, more ‘real’; pitch it to readers as a way of sidestepping the corporate filter and connecting directly with writers. But I don’t see how IndieReader will achieve that. On the face of it, they sound like just another publisher: they vet your work according to some undisclosed standard, and they might choose to take it on and promote it. The only difference is you pay them to. How is this cool?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
