# Does indie have any special appeal?



## Guest (Jan 10, 2012)

Sometimes I hear about people who absolutely love their indie bands. Being indie grants the music some extra appeal or authority that mainstream/commerical musicians just can't match. I'm wondering, do indie authors or publishers ever get anything similar?

I've only had my kindle for a few days, but as I've scanned Amazon, it seems like a lot of the indie covers are pretty weak. I haven't read the books yet, but I was wondering what others thought.


----------



## J R McLemore (Apr 2, 2011)

Hi Devon,

I have to agree that there are a lot of weak covers out there for a lot of indie books. However, I would justify that by saying that indies are responsible for every single stage of the creation process. Most of these people aren't graphical artists so their artistic skills are very lacking, therefore their story may be passed over because the cover doesn't convey what lies beneath. Their true talent should be the words that tell the story within.

There is a sense of accomplishment that indies experience by delivering a product to the masses simply by running the gauntlet of producing a finished work of art (let's face it, like music, creating a book is an art form). Having done everything yourself is very gratifying. Especially, if readers enjoy it, discuss the work, and share their opinions with the creator.

Happy reading!


----------



## GGKeets (Jan 2, 2012)

Like indie music there is a lot of sewage to wade through. The problem with writing though is that it's not so obvious. It may take a bit longer then ten seconds to realize you've got a stinker. 

Nevertheless the gems are out there. As the other poster said, many of the indie authors take complete control of their work. That could be great! However the problem is most people simply don't have the skills or patience to wear multiple hats. My advice is to find the more established indies first and don't hesitate to sample.


----------



## DH_Sayer (Dec 20, 2011)

The great thing about indie authors, like indie bands, is that there were no gatekeepers preventing them from getting their stuff to the audience. That can also be the bad thing about them.

But plenty of bad stuff gets published, too, and considering how hard it is to write a book, the good/bad ratio is probably the same. Just have to keep your eyes open for the good stuff.


----------



## history_lover (Aug 9, 2010)

J R McLemore said:


> Hi Devon,
> 
> I'm an indie author and I have to agree that there are a lot of weak covers out there for a lot of indie books. However, I would justify that by saying that indies are responsible for every single stage of the creation process. Most of these people aren't graphical artists so their artistic skills are very lacking, therefore their story may be passed over because the cover doesn't convey what lies beneath. Their true talent should be the words that tell the story within.


Indie doesn't automatically mean self published. There are plenty of independent book publishers who hire professional graphic artists to do their book covers. Indie is not excuse for amateur work in my opinion - even if one is self published... invest in a graphic artist, there are plenty of students out there willing to work for a small fee. Or use something like http://99designs.com/book-cover-design where you can get lots of options and pick your own price. If you want readers to take you seriously, you have to come across as professional, whether self published or not.


----------



## Ben White (Feb 11, 2011)

Not yet. Maybe in a year or two.  Right now the whole thing's still too immature.


----------



## Owen (Aug 24, 2011)

For me buying indie books is all about finding those hidden gems. There's a lot more poor quality stuff to wade through because pretty much anyone can publish to the kindle store, but when you find one of the good ones it will often be so wonderful that it was worth the search.


----------



## BTackitt (Dec 15, 2008)

I have been reading about 90%  self-pubbed/indie authors for over 2 years. I have found some great new authors out there. It does take time to "sift" through and find gems if one were to do it via Amazon. I prefer to do it by searching sig lines here on KB. It makes things MUCH easier, because most authors here are willing to put the time required in to give a polished finished product, great covers, edited & proofread work, and compelling, intelligent stories.


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

To me, no.

If anything it's a mild deterrent.  A published book has been vetted by the publishing house for quality, received professional editing etc.  So I view them as a tad less risky than an indie book, and much less risky than a self published book.

And part of that is just that reading is down my hobby list a bit, so I'm not really willing to put in the extra time to research and vet indie books very often when I have so many published books from established authors on my to be read list.  Including lots of books by authors who's work I love and just haven't had time to read all their books.  If I ever get caught up on all that stuff, then I'll probably give indie books a chance more often than I do now.


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

The best thing about self-publishing is that anyone can do it.
The worse thing about self-publishing is that anyone can do it.


----------



## Guest (Jan 10, 2012)

Krista D. Ball said:


> The best thing about self-publishing is that anyone can do it.
> The worse thing about self-publishing is that anyone can do it.


Hey, that's MY line!

Indie authors are not the Second Coming, nor are they the Anti-Christ. It is just a different route to publication. No more, no less. All books are judged the same when I decide to buy. Maybe a friend recommended it. Maybe I caught a review somewhere. Maybe I see the cover in the bookstore. I read the description. Check out the blurb. Read a sample. Either the book makes me want to spend money or it doesn't. Doesn't matter if it is an indie author I never heard of or Stephen King (and I love King. I use to buy every book. Then I read Insomnia...or tried to...and I don't automatically buy every book anymore).


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

You were busy scaring away little kids.


----------



## S Jaffe (Jul 3, 2011)

In addition to writing, I co-host and produce a podcast.  I have to sift through hundreds of indie songs to find the music for each show, and over time I've gotten to the point that I can tell within the first few notes if it's a song worth downloading to listen to further.  While I'm not at that point with indie books, I have found that within a few pages of the samples, I can determine if an author's writing style is a) at a professional level and b) something I want to check out further.  I still get some dogs, but I also have found some gems.

And, actually, I should take the word 'indie' out of that last bit because this same skill we're all learning (reading e-samples) has helped me with traditionally pubbed stuff too.  Remember, traditional publishing isn't primarily interested in what's well-written, but rather they're interest is in what's marketable on a mass level.  If it's well-written, that's a big bonus and, obviously, readers generally prefer well-written material.  However, marketability trumps all for the big publishers, which is why we end up with stuff like Dan Brown -- poorly written but extremely accessible, fun, light, and marketable.


----------



## Debbie Bennett (Mar 25, 2011)

Krista D. Ball said:


> The best thing about self-publishing is that anyone can do it.
> The worse thing about self-publishing is that anyone can do it.


So true. But a lot of traditional authors are now choosing to self-pub their backlists onto kindle. Writers whose contracts never mentioned e-rights because they hadn't been invented and whose books are often now out of print but who want to find a new audience. Check out www.authorselectric.co.uk for a whole stack of professionally-edited books.


----------



## MariaESchneider (Aug 1, 2009)

I just like good books.  I wouldn't say the indie movement has any special appeal.  I think it did at first.  People were happy to try books especially if they were inexpensive.  The tide seems to be the other way at the moment, where there's a bit of a resistance to indie books.  I still shop the way I always have--by description, by genre, by recommendations from the book friends and book groups I'm in.  I'm pretty careful about trying to sample.  I hate doing it because it's time-consuming, but I keep getting burned when I don't sample.  Just the other day, I came across this GREAT review of a book.  It was a trad book on sale for 1.99 ... I snapped it up.  Turns out it was a Christian "choose God in real life" type of book.  (Nothing against any type of literature here, but from the review I thought it was romance.)  

Luckily I was so enthused after reading the review, I started the book right away and so was able to return it.  I THEN checked the Amazon reviews.  See, I could have saved myself trouble had I done this all the other way around.


----------



## Jeff Shelby (Oct 2, 2011)

As Maria states above, I think people just like good books.  I'm not sure that readers necessarily care how they were published - they just want engaging stories with interesting characters that are told in an accessible way.  I don't think they say I'll only read this kind of published book or that kind of published book.  If the story is well-written, a reader will dive into it, regardless of how the book came into being


----------



## CDChristian (Jun 4, 2010)

I mostly read non-fiction (traditionally published), but when I read fiction it's primarily dark romance/erotic romance/erotica. Of the fiction books I read, 99% are indie books. The reason being is I've found indie writers can push boundaries or approach tried and true story lines from a different angle that I don't find if I read, for example, Sherrilyn Kenyon or Christine Feehan. They're able to take chances that a traditional writer might not be able to. For me, that is the main appeal in reading indie.


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

Just an FYI - it is rather disingenuous for indie authors to say indie authors are special


----------



## Nicki Leigh (Aug 25, 2011)

Indies appeal to me about the same at traditionally published. One thing folks have to keep in mind is the word 'indie' first came around for small, legit publishers. Self-published authors have 'adopted' the word, clustering themselves with publishers such as a small press. So, it all depends on who published the work--the author or a small press.

As for me, I'll read just about anything, so long as it grabs my attention and the sample isn't littered with errors. I've read quite a few poorly writing books from big houses, and I've read poorly written books by self-published authors. In the end, it all comes down to what you're looking for, if you can find it and if the quality is still there. Luckily, I've picked more 'high quality' pieces of self-published authors than I've bought from 'low quality' ones.


----------



## Carol (was Dara) (Feb 19, 2011)

The only factors drawing me to indie books as such are low prices and/or some interest in the author, if I've met them. I'm not bored with or unsatisfied by the offerings of traditional publishers and am reassured by their familiar formulas. By that I mean I like knowing when I buy a book of a certain genre that it must fit the expectations of the genre and the publisher won't have allowed the author to deviate too far from the expectations of the readership.  

So I'm not attracted to any outside the box appeal of indies, I'm simply a cheapo who flinches at the $9 and up price tags when there are comparable cheaper titles. I don't view indie books as special or better than others, just another option for someone like me who has a small book buying budget or who has a voracious appetite for books of a certain type and has trouble finding enough of them.   

ETA: On the subject of indie covers being weak, I have to say (at the risk of appearing very self-serving) that yes, I believe indie covers in general are very weak. But I have seen improvement lately as I think more authors are getting proficient with design programs.


----------



## 41419 (Apr 4, 2011)

I think the price certainly does. My wallet is enjoying that over half my purchases since I got my Kindle were indie books (and the rest mostly backlist stuff from older favorites).

There certainly is a cachet of sorts to "indie" in music that hasn't yet, perhaps, translated over to books. I do think that indies have a more diverse range of voices, but that may take some time to establish itself.

I haven't stopped buying any of my old favorites, but I've stopped buying any of the stuff from the big publishers that I was on the fence about. All those dollars have gone indie.


----------



## BrianKittrell (Jan 8, 2011)

DevonMoroi said:


> Sometimes I hear about people who absolutely love their indie bands. Being indie grants the music some extra appeal or authority that mainstream/commerical musicians just can't match. I'm wondering, do indie authors or publishers ever get anything similar?
> 
> I've only had my kindle for a few days, but as I've scanned Amazon, it seems like a lot of the indie covers are pretty weak. I haven't read the books yet, but I was wondering what others thought.


I've always thought that I've enjoyed indie music because it was good. The same applies to everything else "indie": if it's good, it has appeal. People who enjoy indie books don't enjoy them because they're trying to make a point about publishing. They don't enjoy them because they, too, are rebels against the system. They read and like them because they're good stories.

So, like indie music, I like indie books when they're a good read.


----------



## MLPMom (Nov 27, 2009)

I think they have a lot of appeal. They are like finding hidden buried treasure.

I have several authors and series that I adore that are from indie authors.

I don't know what genre you like to read but if you are looking for something specific let me know, I am sure I can recommend a few.


----------



## HeidiHall (Sep 5, 2010)

I'm with Dara in that I love gorging on books and self pub/Indies is a great way to get my fill inexpensively. But I'm also extremely picky, so I sample, sample, sample. I, too, have my old standbys, but while I wait for them to come down in price, I've discovered many new favorites (most from KB!).


----------



## Beth Dolgner (Nov 11, 2011)

S Jaffe said:


> In addition to writing, I co-host and produce a podcast. I have to sift through hundreds of indie songs to find the music for each show, and over time I've gotten to the point that I can tell within the first few notes if it's a song worth downloading to listen to further.


I work for an indie record label. You aren't kidding about having to sift through a lot of songs and artists to find a few gems! Indie authors are the same way but then, so are traditional authors. Just because an author gets a publishing contract doesn't mean I'm going to like what they write. What I like about indie is that you can find books that are edgy or aimed at a small readership: stuff that traditional publishers wouldn't have touched and wouldn't have seen the light of day otherwise.


----------



## StephenEngland (Nov 2, 2011)

You should NEVER buy indie without reading the sample. If you do, I don't care what the reviews said, you're going to  be in trouble. There are a lot of good independent authors out there--there are also a lot of charlatans who have managed to leverage fake reviews and marketing to get their misspelled, poorly-plotted novel onto the lists. That's life. Read the sample.


----------



## Tony Richards (Jul 6, 2011)

DebBennett said:


> ... a lot of traditional authors are now choosing to self-pub their backlists onto kindle. Writers whose contracts never mentioned e-rights because they hadn't been invented and who want to find a new audience.


This is absolutely right. But a lot of Kindle owners out there don't seem to realize this, and tar all 'indie' authors with the same bad brush.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

StephenEngland said:


> You should NEVER buy indie without reading the sample. If you do, I don't care what the reviews said, you're going to be in trouble. There are a lot of good independent authors out there--there are also a lot of charlatans who have managed to leverage fake reviews and marketing to get their misspelled, poorly-plotted novel onto the lists. That's life. Read the sample.


FWIW, I don't buy many books without sampling. . .no matter who publishes them. If it's new to me, I'm a sampler.


----------



## Beatriz (Feb 22, 2011)

Krista D. Ball said:


> The best thing about self-publishing is that anyone can do it.
> The worse thing about self-publishing is that anyone can do it.


I couldn't agree with you more, that said, you can tell right away by sampling a product if it's worth your time or not.


----------



## Colin Taber (Apr 4, 2011)

Sampling is your answer, that and perhaps getting some recommendations. 

I hope you discover some gems!


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

Ann in Arlington said:


> FWIW, I don't buy many books without sampling. . .no matter who publishes them. If it's new to me, I'm a sampler.


Agreed. Though I do agree with the poster you quoted that it's even more crucial for self published books. If it's published (big publisher or indie house) you can at least have some confidence that it was professional edited for typos and grammatical problems. At least for new books. Lots of older bucks have tons of OCR problems as publishers just scan them and put them up to make a quick buck.

I don't have a lot of tolerance for typos and grammatical mistakes in published work, so I definitely sample all indie/self published stuff first even if I've read and liked a prior book by that author, to make sure the book was well edited for mistakes.


----------



## QuantumIguana (Dec 29, 2010)

If your tastes aren't necessarily shared by the great multitude, there might be an indie book out there for you, as indie authors are able to appeal to smaller markets. I rarely find a book in the Supermarket bookshelf that has the slightest appeal to me. But I don't think anyone will read an author just because they are indie authors, just as people won't listen to just any indie band.


----------



## red (Jan 11, 2012)

DevonMoroi said:


> Sometimes I hear about people who absolutely love their indie bands. Being indie grants the music some extra appeal or authority that mainstream/commerical musicians just can't match. I'm wondering, do indie authors or publishers ever get anything similar?


I think it's coming. I grew up with indie rock. It was everything to me. Everyone around me was somehow involved in it and when I thought of the music or the bands I would think, "These are my people" . . . not so with books, although it didn't help that most of the books I truly loved were old. But now that 'indie lit' is finally becoming a meme, I've been thinking that this is finally the time. In the 90s there was a mechanism in place for indie music, and although that mechanism has completely changed into something else entirely, it's still there for music (and is even better now). But nothing was available like that for literature then, only zines . . . photocopied and computer-printed pamphlets had extremely limited distribution (most often distributed at indie shows). It just wasn't possible to be an indie author or publisher then. Now, finally, we do have something in place for indie lit and, yeah, I'm thinking of it now in the same way I did with indie rock.


----------



## John Blackport (Jul 18, 2011)

Ha! I remember zines.  

They used to mountain up over every inch of table space in the nightclub right before a rave.


----------



## red (Jan 11, 2012)

John Blackport said:


> Ha! I remember zines.
> 
> They used to mountain up over every inch of table space in the nightclub right before a rave.


And every one of them had a list of other ones they liked, sort of like blogrolls ... except you'd send away a dollar and your address to get a copy in the postal mail.


----------



## Todd Thorne (Dec 28, 2011)

S Jaffe said:


> Remember, traditional publishing isn't primarily interested in what's well-written, but rather they're interest is in what's marketable on a mass level. ...


I like Stuart's point here. The publishing houses are following a formula. Which dictates what choices you get to pick from.

I would expect that many indie authors are following their heart. So you get a greater diversity of choices to consider. Then it's just up to you to find the authors who are able to execute that passion well.


----------



## LisaBlackwood (Jan 12, 2012)

Ben White said:


> Not yet. Maybe in a year or two. Right now the whole thing's still too immature.


Yes, I have to say I agree. I've read a few indies that are, IMHO, just a professional as books published by the big New York publishers. On the other hand, not all indies are created equal. I suppose it depends on how much work goes into it. Myself, I don't claim to write anything as good as the big New York publishers put out. 

As a reader, I'm still new to the indie reads and am always on the lookout for new authors to read.


----------



## ValeriGail (Jan 21, 2010)

My tastes in books have always been a bit to the left or right of what mainstream "best sellers" or marketable reads said it should be.  I could never find a book I wanted to read with out searching libraries, thrift stores, and other crazy places where unknown mostly unread books were.  I didn't have book discussions with friends, because we never read the same things.  Even here, I can't participate in a good majority of the threads because i don't read the popular mainstream books.  They don't appeal to me, they bore me.  i find their "structure", what others actually rely on, to be frustrating.  But, I love finding good books.  sometimes, I'm actually shocked to find that in a traditionally published work..but I was not shocked to find it in indie work.  I was ecstatic!  It was like striking gold on my kindle.  I am one of those that went in head first, totally in love with indie puplishing on the kindle.  Yes, I do have to search through, but I've always had to do that.  Its getting easier to spot the gems.  Sampling helps.  Familiarity helps.  falling in love with a few authors definantly helps.    

I think the main difference is what kind of reader are you, and what are you looking for in a book?  My reading preferences set me up to fall madly in love with self published authors.  I was primed and ready to discover, and keep discovering the treasures here.  But other's might not, and that is ok.  We've all got different tastes and needs when it comes to our reading, I believe.  I'll let you all have the mainstream best sellers! HAHA


----------



## Not Here (May 23, 2011)

Niche is the key with the appeal of indie in just about every market. I love that I can get access to just about every type of book now, all thanks to the success of indies and e-books. For instance, I love zombie books. Not popular by any stretch, despite a minor trend up. Are all of them great? Nope but at least I have a choice where I didn't before. I guess it all depends on what your reading choices are.


----------



## mscottwriter (Nov 5, 2010)

John Blackport said:


> Ha! I remember zines.
> 
> They used to mountain up over every inch of table space in the nightclub right before a rave.


Ah zines...how I've missed you 

So what do they do at raves now...exchange blog information?


----------



## Guest (Jan 12, 2012)

Todd Thorne said:


> I like Stuart's point here. The publishing houses are following a formula. Which dictates what choices you get to pick from.


Yeah, as opposed to the five hundred thousand YA paranormal romances self-published. They don't follow formula AT ALL.

Sorry, couldn't resist.

Actually, no, not sorry. I shouldn't apologize for speaking the truth.

Come on, folks. I read and buy plenty of indie books. But the indie community is not putting out highbrow literary fiction. The most successful authors are genre authors, and all genres have their own tropes and formulae. And while great writers know how to take those tropes and play with them to make them original, they still follow the norms of their genres because readers would be upset if they didn't. Try marketing a romance novel that doesn't have a HEA and see what the romance community does to your book.


----------



## BrianKittrell (Jan 8, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Yeah, as opposed to the five hundred thousand YA paranormal romances self-published. They don't follow formula AT ALL.
> 
> Sorry, couldn't resist.
> 
> ...


LOL! Yes, Stephanie Meyer came out and probably more than half a million people tried to replicate that success. Even the traditionals aren't putting out as much high brow as they once did (i.e. Twilight), or should I say that their big hits of late aren't really high brow stuff on the average?

Edit: OMG, I said "they're" instead of "their". I'm preoccupied, but damn! Unforgivable.


----------



## tamaraheiner (Apr 23, 2011)

Being indie published is very difficult.

A lot of people are calling self-publishing indie-publishing, but I think there's a difference. My publisher is a member of the Independent Publishers Guild (or something like that), so they are an indie publisher. Mostly the only stores interested in carrying my book are indie bookstores, and then only if I march myself in there and give them my book on consignment.

I don't feel like my cover is very strong, the marketing is 99% me, and trying to get bookstores to pay me is a pain in the rear.

There are some benefits. Self-publishing still scares me, as inviting as it sounds to have the control and make all the profit, a part of me is just not ready to make the leap yet.

What I'm shooting for with future books (not this series) is getting an agent. The marketing is the hardest part for me. I'm NOWHERE except where I've put myself (and often paid) to be.


----------



## Mike D. aka jmiked (Oct 28, 2008)

DebBennett said:


> So true. But a lot of traditional authors are now choosing to self-pub their backlists onto kindle.


Yep, and those are the only self-published books I consider. I consider the likelihood of a self-published book by an author who has not been 'traditionally' published to be appealing to me as pretty much zero. There may be a few out there, but the effort to find them is outweighed by the number of others I know about that I already don't have time to read. 

I read mostly (but not exclusively) traditional mysteries and traditional SF. Neither of these genres are well represented in works not traditionally published.

I agree with several of the other posters... the term 'indie' is being (incorrectly, IMHO) used these days to mean self-published instead of work from a small independent publisher. I support the small publishers and purchase both printed books and ebooks from them.

Maybe we need a new term for self-published works from authors that have never been traditionally published.

Mike


----------



## tamaraheiner (Apr 23, 2011)

Thank you, Mike, I agree with that. We need to have a different term. Grouping small presses with self-publishers isn't the same.


----------



## Debbie Bennett (Mar 25, 2011)

tamaraheiner said:


> Thank you, Mike, I agree with that. We need to have a different term. Grouping small presses with self-publishers isn't the same.


Except that there an awful lot of small-press outfits who exist purely to publish the books of their owner. Whether that is so that the publisher can more easily obtain ISBNs, for tax purposes, or simply to give their books an air of "respectability", I don't know.


----------



## Mike D. aka jmiked (Oct 28, 2008)

DebBennett said:


> Except that there an awful lot of small-press outfits who exist purely to publish the books of their owner. Whether that is so that the publisher can more easily obtain ISBNs, for tax purposes, or simply to give their books an air of "respectability", I don't know.


There's already a term for them... vanity presses. 

Mike


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

Folks. . . just a friendly reminder. . . .this is the Book Corner so please address the topic from the point of view of you as READER and not from your point of view as a writer -- if you are one.  Thanks.


----------



## Tony Richards (Jul 6, 2011)

StephenEngland said:


> You should NEVER buy indie without reading the sample. If you do, I don't care what the reviews said, you're going to be in trouble. There are a lot of good independent authors out there--there are also a lot of charlatans who have managed to leverage fake reviews and marketing to get their misspelled, poorly-plotted novel onto the lists. That's life. Read the sample.


I find it hard to believe, but lots of people don't bother to sample. Why? You can even do it on your PC, by finding the right book and using the 'Look Inside' facility.


----------



## LisaBlackwood (Jan 12, 2012)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Yeah, as opposed to the five hundred thousand YA paranormal romances self-published. They don't follow formula AT ALL.
> 
> Sorry, couldn't resist.
> 
> ...


Yes, I have to agree....as a reader I rather like my genre norms. I'm not saying I don't want something that's at least a little new and original, but if it is too 'different' or suddenly changes direction in a surprising (bad--doesn't make sense) way then I become annoyed. But that's true for both traditional and indie books.


----------



## Tony Richards (Jul 6, 2011)

LisaBlackwood said:


> Yes, I have to agree....as a reader I rather like my genre norms. I'm not saying I don't want something that's at least a little new and original, but if it is too 'different' or suddenly changes direction in a surprising (bad--doesn't make sense) way then I become annoyed. But that's true for both traditional and indie books.


There's a great big difference between 'norms' and hackneyed cliches/over-used plot devices. And all books, even wild fantasies, have to have some kind of internal logic, so if a book suddenly doesn't make sense, that's plain bad writing, indie or otherwise.


----------



## Darlene Jones (Nov 1, 2011)

I've found some great reads because of relationships I developed with the author on Twitter - books I wouldn't have found or read otherwise.


----------



## KristieCook (Jan 25, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Indie authors are not the Second Coming, nor are they the Anti-Christ. It is just a different route to publication. No more, no less. All books are judged the same when I decide to buy. Maybe a friend recommended it. Maybe I caught a review somewhere. Maybe I see the cover in the bookstore. I read the description. Check out the blurb. Read a sample. Either the book makes me want to spend money or it doesn't. Doesn't matter if it is an indie author I never heard of or Stephen King (and I love King. I use to buy every book. Then I read Insomnia...or tried to...and I don't automatically buy every book anymore).


Exactly how I choose to read a book. As an indie author, I like to support my fellow indies, so I never reject right away just because they're self or indie published. I sample (love the Search Inside feature!) or if it's cheap enough, simply buy it and see how I like it. Same goes with all books, including Stephen King for the same reasons as you state - just because the book has made its way through a big publisher does not guarantee its quality or the fact that I personally will like it. But I have to say that I'm finding I enjoy the sharper edges of the indies. A lot of those by big publishers are so polished, they read like every other story with 95% of the originality shined right out of them.


----------



## Todd Thorne (Dec 28, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Yeah, as opposed to the five hundred thousand YA paranormal romances self-published. They don't follow formula AT ALL.
> 
> Sorry, couldn't resist.
> 
> ...


I certainly agree with you. Indie authors and publishers can follow the same formulas the traditional publishers push. I dare say many knock themselves out attempting to do so.

What a cool thing for readers! If we make the (bad) assumption that 100% of formulaic YA paranormal romance published by the trad houses is superb and (let's make up a figure) 10% coming from indies is excellent, readers win. No matter what, they've got more quality choices to pick from for what they like.

Now if you are a reader who prefers YA paranormal romance that deviates from the standard formula, good luck finding that from a traditional publisher. Your best hope there is probably if one of their marquee authors decides to branch out and do something different.


----------



## gramico (Dec 19, 2011)

I am not sure that a book has any special appeal simply by virtue of being indie-pubbed. Indie books, in my opinion, and -full disclosure- as an indie author, have more to prove, if anything. The fact that we have all noticed some less-than-appealing book covers, and have probably found more grammatical errors in indie books than tradi-pubbed books, means that we have to go the extra mile to make sure our work is on par with the other books out there. But that isn't enough either, is it? We have to really knock a reader's socks off to keep them coming back for our next books. To me that means 1) professional editing, and 2) a professional looking cover.

The appeal of any book stems begins with an intriguing cover, lacking word of mouth advertising, of course. That just gets the reader to open the cover, though. Then you have to keep him there with a great story and minimal editing errors.

Just my humble opinion...


----------



## soyfrank (Feb 2, 2011)

Unfortunately, kindle readers seem to avoid indie published literary and poetry books just as much as they do traditionally published literary and poetry books.


----------



## Kashif Ross (Jan 13, 2012)

I'm a fan of indie authors at times, but I hate searching for the good ones. 

The best books I read last year were indie for sure. I was lucky enough to find the two novels easily. Though one had a lot of grammatical errors, it was written so dynamically, I couldn't put it down. My wife and I read it together and really got into the story. 

Since I've finished those two, I've struggled to find another writer that gets my attention within the first two chapters and keeps me. I've started and stopped more indie novels than I can count. But at least I didn't pay over ten dollars for one. I have several published books on my shelf that I'll never finish, though I invested money in them. They started off nicely, but couldn't keep my attention. 

I'm sticking to the indie authors mainly for prices. But if I could find more authors like the two that impressed me so much, I'll never read another big house publishing book again.


----------



## Debbie Bennett (Mar 25, 2011)

I was ordering a school textbook for my daughter off amazon a couple of months back. They were offering free postage, so I added a trad paperback I'd wanted to read for a while. Big publisher, great reviews. I didn't bother sampling.

I'm reading it now. It's readable, but nothing special. I'm not fussed over the author's style or voice. Had I seen it in a bookshop and thumbed through it, read a few bits, I wouldn't have bothered.

I think I'm far more discerning now as a reader, now that I *do* have choice between trad/indie/self pub.


----------



## Lursa (aka 9MMare) (Jun 23, 2011)

DevonMoroi said:


> Sometimes I hear about people who absolutely love their indie bands. Being indie grants the music some extra appeal or authority that mainstream/commerical musicians just can't match. I'm wondering, do indie authors or publishers ever get anything similar?
> 
> I've only had my kindle for a few days, but as I've scanned Amazon, it seems like a lot of the indie covers are pretty weak. I haven't read the books yet, but I was wondering what others thought.


Hi and I hope you enjoy reading on your new Kindle!

The Kindle opened a new world of indies and small pubs to me...I had only dabbled a bit before in hard copies...Amazon and e-reading makes them very accessible.

I have tried a few in the genres I read with mixed results. They mostly paralleled my experience with hard copy indie or small pub books, with a handful of 'winners.'

I tend to 'collect' cheaper indie/small pub books that sound good that are in the genres I read....but I also look for bargains in the authors I read (or want to get to know) and in my genres. So far, mainstream (but also more familiar) are way out ahead of the smaller stuff in terms of quality but I have yet to really get immersed in the indie/smaller pubs. I have hope.

But I have enough of more familiar authors and books on my Kindle that I only squeeze in the indies/smaller pubs occasionally.

And covers have almost no influence on me at all.


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

Yeah, covers have very little influence on me as I don't really browse for e-books.  I just become aware of a book somehow (word of mouth, post on here, review or blurb in a newspaper or magazine etc.) and go get the sample.  Eventually I'll read it and if I like it I'll buy the book if the price is right.

Even with paperbooks, I usually only went to the bookstore when I had a specific book I wanted to buy.  But I would sometimes buy something else after a cover caught my eye and I skimmed through a bit of it. So covers did at least have some sway in that way.


----------



## gramico (Dec 19, 2011)

Covers serve an important purpose when I look for books. I don't generally buy a book because it has a good cover, but I will avoid one with a bad cover. I probably shouldn't do that: judge a book by it's cover, but in spite of that saying, I isn't that what covers are for?


----------



## MariaESchneider (Aug 1, 2009)

Kashif Ross said:


> I'm a fan of indie authors at times, but I hate searching for the good ones.
> 
> The best books I read last year were indie for sure. I was lucky enough to find the two novels easily. Though one had a lot of grammatical errors, it was written so dynamically, I couldn't put it down. My wife and I read it together and really got into the story.
> 
> ...


Have you tried finding a review site that covers the genre or area you love? I have a couple of favorite review sites (depending on genre). I don't know what types of books you like, but if you want to PM or ask here, I can see if I have any recs from indies. My favs as a reader are cozy mystery, some regular mystery (thriller) and urban fantasy.


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

gramico said:


> Covers serve an important purpose when I look for books. I don't generally buy a book because it has a good cover, but I will avoid one with a bad cover. I probably shouldn't do that: judge a book by it's cover, but in spite of that saying, I isn't that what covers are for?


Just depends how you shop. I don't browse books on Amazon at all. I got there when I want to get a sample, and just search for it and download it. And I hardly ever go to physical book stores anymore. If I happen to want a paperbook, I'm just going to search for it on Amazon and order it.

So covers don't have much chance to influence me.


----------



## Geoffrey (Jun 20, 2009)

Kashif Ross said:


> I'm a fan of indie authors at times, but I hate searching for the good ones.


I'm with you on this to a degree .... I've read quite a few indie authors - both the small press kind and the self-pub kind - and I've found some that I've then searched out the rest of their books. But, when hunting for a new indie to try, I do end up rejecting many before even sampling and then more after sampling. But, I find it's worth it as I've had some fun reads because of it. I don't hate the hunt because I LOVE Love love love love book shopping and online shopping can be just as enjoyable as book store shopping; what I dislike is wading through the drek to find the goodies.

That doesn't mean I don't read authors with the big companies, I do. But, I do find that I read more from the mid-sized and small publishing houses than from the big boys - I just seem to find more I want to read at the price I want to pay. Not counting freebies, I pay on average $5.70 per book and last year, 25% of my purchases were from self-publishers and 53% from small and mid-sized publishers.


----------



## LisaBlackwood (Jan 12, 2012)

gramico said:


> Covers serve an important purpose when I look for books. I don't generally buy a book because it has a good cover, but I will avoid one with a bad cover. I probably shouldn't do that: judge a book by it's cover, but in spite of that saying, I isn't that what covers are for?


I do this too. I know I probably shouldn't, but I do. Bad me. A 'good cover' doesn't mean I'll buy the book, I'll sample it first, but the cover is what first catches my attention. However, if I've read something by the author before and love their work, the cover doesn't matter in the least.


----------



## LisaBlackwood (Jan 12, 2012)

Tony Richards said:


> There's a great big difference between 'norms' and hackneyed cliches/over-used plot devices. And all books, even wild fantasies, have to have some kind of internal logic, so if a book suddenly doesn't make sense, that's plain bad writing, indie or otherwise.


I agree 100%. (That's what I was trying to say....you just said it better. LOL.)


----------



## MLouring (Jan 15, 2012)

There's both really awesome and really bad things about indie publishing!
It's true, there's no quality check and there's a lot of garbage getting published. Some thing that just because everyone can publish a book, it means that they don't have to work hard with proper editing, formatting and get a decent cover made. I would never personally buy a book with a cover I can clearly see is just a bad quality photo downloaded online and then edited poorly in Paint. If people won't put a little effort into their covers(I don't say they have to be professional, but at least make an effort), I won't trust them to have put effort into the book itself. 
Of course, I know that a lot of books are very well-written, even though the covers are bad, but yes, I judge a book by its cover. Guilty 

But the thing I love about indies is that you can find a lot of variety and originality you can never find in a traditionally published book. 
Publishers almost always accept only new books that they know they can sell. Which means that they always choose something that have been made before. Just look at the many books which were being published in the YA fantasy genre after Twilight had become a hit among teenage girls. All of them had the exact same plot: Girl falls in love with strange boy who turns out to be a supernatural creature.
Indies don't have to write something for the current trend to be published, so the chance of finding something new and unique is much bigger if you give indie books a go!  

I realize I'm biased, since I'm an indie writer myself, but I truly do believe that you can find some amazing books if you are able to sort through the trash which unfortunately is a side-effect of allowing everyone to publish their books...

Just remember: J. K. Rowling and many other extremely successful writers were rejected countless times, because they were offering something completely new!


----------



## Tony Richards (Jul 6, 2011)

MLouring said:


> There's both really awesome and really bad things about indie publishing!
> If people won't put a little effort into their covers(I don't say they have to be professional, but at least make an effort), I won't trust them to have put effort into the book itself.
> Of course, I know that a lot of books are very well-written, even though the covers are bad, but yes, I judge a book by its cover. Guilty


There was a survery years back regarding print books in traditional bookshops. What encouraged people to pick them up and look at them in the first place? And the answer turned out to be ... 80%, the cover. And yes, good covers do at least hint at professionalism. No need to feel guilty.


----------



## SusanKL (Sep 14, 2011)

I think the thing that appeals to me is when I find a great indie read. I feel like I discovered it, so I'm chuffed. But also, it underscores to me that there are some awesome stories out there that we're finally  able to read now that the gatekeepers can't keep these authors out of print. It's true that the amount of dreck is  daunting but I think most people can tell pretty quickly (1-2 paragraphs) if the book is for them. Like anything else new, indie literature is in a transition stage. Once the over-excited indie authors realize they have to calm down long enough to have an editor go over their work before rushing it up online, the quality will probably improve in real numbers.

Me, I support indie books. Putting it to the Man!


----------



## Selina Fenech (Jul 20, 2011)

It might just be the run of books I've managed to choose lately, but it feels to me as though published books normally fit within the adequate to good range, while indie books can be anything from awful to fantastic. I think publishers are playing it safe, with good, solid, but not too exciting stories, while the more unique and exciting stories (excellent or terrible!) are being self published. But like I said, that might just be what has been queued up on my kindle list recently.


----------



## LisaBlackwood (Jan 12, 2012)

Selina Fenech said:


> It might just be the run of books I've managed to choose lately, but it feels to me as though published books normally fit within the adequate to good range, while indie books can be anything from awful to fantastic. I think publishers are playing it safe, with good, solid, but not too exciting stories, while the more unique and exciting stories (excellent or terrible!) are being self published. But like I said, that might just be what has been queued up on my kindle list recently.


I hadn't really thought of it, but as I'm looking at my ebook collection....that's kind of what I'm seeing. I read a mix of indie and traditional published.


----------



## BTackitt (Dec 15, 2008)

Special appeal, indies are gentle on the wallet when one buys many many books every month.


----------



## Tamara Rose Blodgett (Apr 1, 2011)

I'm a passionate reader and that primary self-directive keeps me in the 90% indie readership. I simply read too many books to afford all traditionally published. And... I am always on the lookout for the non-homogenized work. One that blows away the parameters that the "genre dictates." I like a shake up, an "ah-huh" moment. When they come, they're brilliant.

Another thing that's terrific is indie authors publish faster. No more waiting an entire year to have the next installment in your hands... another plus!


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

I find some of the comments amusing, especially those saying that traditionally published stuff is somehow not as unique, or is homogenized, safe, not exiting etc. As someone that reads 100's of books a year and a large majority are from traditional publishers I say not so. Not at all. And I am a picky reader with a huge passion for books and reading. I like to be surprised, cry and laugh.

I read many many fantastic, exiting, fresh, unique stories. But I do see these comments a lot, usually from self publishers. Here is the thing, they are all authors, period. Just because someone happens to have a contract, does not make them somehow some slave to anything. They write with just as much passion as a SP. 
And I as a reader am not somehow settling with going trad published for most of my reads. 

Indies aren't re inventing the wheel here. And pretty much everything has been done before, its all in the way its being presented and the journey the author takes me on. If a SP writes in a genre, they will follow what defines that genre, or they aren't writing in it.

Some authors will do it better than others, and it has nothing to do with if they put it out themself, or if they have a publishing contract. Or had one, as I put back list re released by the author in the trad category if it has been published as such.


----------



## Beatriz (Feb 22, 2011)

BTackitt said:


> Special appeal, indies are gentle on the wallet when one buys many many books every month.


you can say that again. a few of the books I sample cost 14.99 or so and that gives me pause.


----------



## MariaESchneider (Aug 1, 2009)

Atunah said:


> I find some of the comments amusing, especially those saying that traditionally published stuff is somehow not as unique, or is homogenized, safe, not exiting etc. As someone that reads 100's of books a year and a large majority are from traditional publishers I say not so. Not at all. And I am a picky reader with a huge passion for books and reading. I like to be surprised, cry and laugh.
> 
> I read many many fantastic, exiting, fresh, unique stories. But I do see these comments a lot, usually from self publishers. Here is the thing, they are all authors, period. Just because someone happens to have a contract, does not make them somehow some slave to anything. They write with just as much passion as a SP.
> And I as a reader am not somehow settling with going trad published for most of my reads.
> ...


I gotta say I totally agree with most of this. BUT, there are particular authors that I think get branded into a niche and they aren't allowed to break away from it--their publisher won't let them (Janet Evanovich I'm looking at you. Although she may be there by her own choice too. Patterson to some extent, although with others "writing for him" as the rumor has it...)

As someone who reads quite a few cozies, I think getting cornered is fairly frequent in trad publishing. If an author writes a successful... say "Cat Who" series, she is not going to be encouraged to go off and write "Dogs" or "Tea" or thrillers. And as a writer, I think a lot of us probably have a few genres in us. There's a love of exploration that I think gets shut down to some extent after a certain level of success is reached especially in the trad world. I hear cozy readers gripe and moan and complain if an author takes her characters outside the beloved location (be it Maine or Britain or wherever.) They want the FULL experience in each book and that often means the same characters, the same seaside, homey location and by God, just bring in someone else to murder no matter how improbable it is that a small town has already had 30 people die by the hand of...30 different perps!

The publishers know this and they aren't going to encourage (and often refuse to publish) anything different from that "brand." I've heard authors complaining about it (trad ones, not indies.) They have a book sitting there ready to go or maybe two or three--but the pub will not even consider it. Or the give it lip service consideration and then say, "We'd like you under contract for 3 more..."

So while I completely agree that there are fresh voices, fresh stories and great stuff in both realms, I do think that as a whole the industry could do a better job "moving" the brand to new series and also taking a chance on letting a known author try something new.


----------



## Selina Fenech (Jul 20, 2011)

Atunah said:


> I find some of the comments amusing, especially those saying that traditionally published stuff is somehow not as unique, or is homogenized, safe, not exiting etc. As someone that reads 100's of books a year and a large majority are from traditional publishers I say not so. Not at all. And I am a picky reader with a huge passion for books and reading. I like to be surprised, cry and laugh.
> 
> I read many many fantastic, exiting, fresh, unique stories. But I do see these comments a lot, usually from self publishers. Here is the thing, they are all authors, period. Just because someone happens to have a contract, does not make them somehow some slave to anything. They write with just as much passion as a SP.
> And I as a reader am not somehow settling with going trad published for most of my reads.
> ...


I'm sorry my meaning wasn't clear. I certainly didn't mean that self published authors write better work than traditionally published authors. More that what the agents and publishers are choosing to put out seemed to me to have a smaller range. But like I said, that might just be what I've managed to pick up recently. First it was the range of books from publishers trying to get in on Twilight success, now it's all dystopian (I'm reading a lot of YA books). They publish what seems to be popular at the time, and among that it's rare to find a novel in a genre or style that publishers don't think the mass market is currently into. But indies can, and will publish anything, which, as I said, can be good or bad.


----------



## jumbojohnny (Dec 25, 2011)

Ultimately, the answer is yes and no, but seeing as there is a yes in there, then that has to be the priority answer. I think the appeal, whether an indie author wanting exposure, or a reader wanting something different is, the formulaic limitations are not there. Now to be fair to the mainstream / trad industry, they are in business and they want and need to be successful so risks are not something they undertake lightly. But in this world of new methods of publishing, the indie can do what the mainstream cannot, not just because it's shackle free, but because the risks are not as great, you can start with ebooks or POD printing from an outlay of zero if you like, and build from there. Now that's the business and the technical, but the art also plays its part. Vagueness re genres, readerships, categories, a big problem for the mainstream, no problem at all for the indie. If someone wants to write a book about a Monday to Friday burger flipper in Driffield, Yorks, England, who spends his weekends yodelling on top of Mont Blanc apart from the odd Sunday when he referees bouts of wrestling fishwives from Felixstowe, then the indie can easily do this, he or she may not make a single penny, but he or she may make a million. And it is this latter aspect most of all which can be appealing to those willing to give indie authors a chance, not yodelling and wrestling fishwives, (although if that's your bag. . .), but the lack of formulaic constraints.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

Selina Fenech said:


> I'm sorry my meaning wasn't clear. I certainly didn't mean that self published authors write better work than traditionally published authors. More that what the agents and publishers are choosing to put out seemed to me to have a smaller range. But like I said, that might just be what I've managed to pick up recently. First it was the range of books from publishers trying to get in on Twilight success, now it's all dystopian (I'm reading a lot of YA books). They publish what seems to be popular at the time, and among that it's rare to find a novel in a genre or style that publishers don't think the mass market is currently into. But indies can, and will publish anything, which, as I said, can be good or bad.


I don't read YA, so you know more about that genre. But I have to say I see plenty of YA indy stuff popping up that sounds and looks just like Twilight stuff. Indy's jump on the bandwagons just as much, if not even more as there pay off is more.

I think that is of course one of the best things about self publishing, most of the money goes straight to the author. And they can be more flexible with publication dates and such. 
Of course that might not always be a good thing as a SP in many cases does not have anyone telling them its not ready or never will be ready, it just goes out.

I just don't think that Indy's are any more inventive or imaginative, than an author with a contract. And I assume that ever signed authors situation is different. Are some unhappy? Of course, but then there are unhappy indy's that now struggle to get editors and covers.

Popular tropes, are attractive to both kind of authors. Both want to be successful and get readers.

I just never get this "one or the other" kind of views. Just seems like to elevate Indy publishing, one doesn't have to denigrate signed authors. I just sense that tone sometimes. Not your comment in particular, just in general 

As a reader that reads ebooks only, I want both to succeed and provide a healthy and competitive environment. Books are precious to me, so I want good ones to be written


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

MariaESchneider said:


> I gotta say I totally agree with most of this. BUT, there are particular authors that I think get branded into a niche and they aren't allowed to break away from it--their publisher won't let them (Janet Evanovich I'm looking at you. Although she may be there by her own choice too. Patterson to some extent, although with others "writing for him" as the rumor has it...)
> 
> As someone who reads quite a few cozies, I think getting cornered is fairly frequent in trad publishing. If an author writes a successful... say "Cat Who" series, she is not going to be encouraged to go off and write "Dogs" or "Tea" or thrillers. And as a writer, I think a lot of us probably have a few genres in us. There's a love of exploration that I think gets shut down to some extent after a certain level of success is reached especially in the trad world. I hear cozy readers gripe and moan and complain if an author takes her characters outside the beloved location (be it Maine or Britain or wherever.) They want the FULL experience in each book and that often means the same characters, the same seaside, homey location and by God, just bring in someone else to murder no matter how improbable it is that a small town has already had 30 people die by the hand of...30 different perps!
> 
> ...


I wonder if Evanovich is quite happy where she sits, she seems to sell like hotcakes and now a movie . I only read the first so I don't know how the later ones are.

I wonder if in the future, traditional contracts will evolve. As in, more options for authors, pen names for other works, etc. I see in my reading quite a few trad authors that write under very different names and write various genres and sub genres, so some publishers are already letting their authors try different stuff.

I am just a reader, so all I want are good and great books to read. And mostly I do achieve that, even with it being mostly traditionally published stuff. This Indy (SP) stuff is fairly new to my reading life.

And I am just ecstatic about all the back list stuff being put out now. It has for me the advantage that it has been formally published, so it fits in my vetting process, and I get to save some money 

I think growing has to happen on both ends and in between.


----------



## red (Jan 11, 2012)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> But the indie community is not putting out highbrow literary fiction. The most successful authors are genre authors, and all genres have their own tropes and formulae.


Until recently, yes -- but I see that changing quickly. Indie as a 'genre only' phenomenon already feels 2011 to me!


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

Atunah said:


> I wonder if Evanovich is quite happy where she sits, she seems to sell like hotcakes and now a movie . I only read the first so I don't know how the later ones are.


Yeah, I'd have to think a lot of successful authors are very happy to just keep writing the same kind of things as it's easy for them to do (as they have the formula down pat) and it's making them a ton of money. Not much incentive to do something different which would involve more work and maybe lesser sales if it doesn't appeal to their core fanbase.


----------



## red (Jan 11, 2012)

Selina Fenech said:


> It might just be the run of books I've managed to choose lately, but it feels to me as though published books normally fit within the adequate to good range, while indie books can be anything from awful to fantastic.


That's a great way of putting it---and it again reminds me exactly of indie music. I live for the fantastic, and that's why I love it (the books & the music).


----------



## MariaESchneider (Aug 1, 2009)

Atunah said:


> I wonder if Evanovich is quite happy where she sits, she seems to sell like hotcakes and now a movie . I only read the first so I don't know how the later ones are.
> 
> I wonder if in the future, traditional contracts will evolve. As in, more options for authors, pen names for other works, etc. I see in my reading quite a few trad authors that write under very different names and write various genres and sub genres, so some publishers are already letting their authors try different stuff.
> 
> ...


Sadly, the most common reason for a pen name is to hide sales of previous books/series and to try to break an author into debut sales records and the like. A pen name is most often a 'new start" not publishers actively letting or wanting authors to try something new. I read that Nora Roberts was asked to use a pen name in case the J.D. Robb series failed and that it wasn't until after the first printing that the books mentioned her as Nora Roberts writing as..." I do not know if that is a true story or not.

Publishers do often suggest an author try a new start with a different series--they like the work overall, the sales have been decent, but just not good enough to extend a contract for a particular series, and the publishers are willing too look at something new. That is generally the case with a series that is doing so-so--NOT one that is super successful.

I"m sure Evanovich is pretty happy where she is. Although I don't know how she can keep writing that series. It's got to be a lot of work and less fun now.

I'm pretty excited to see the backlist available as well. There were some series that I didn't even know had books out because in the old days if you didn't happen to see it in a bookstore when it was out--it was there and then gone. I could have tracked down used copies on Amazon, but never knew they existed! WIth the backlist coming out now, I have heard of two series that I didn't know had more books!


----------



## LilianaHart (Jun 20, 2011)

I agree about the covers. That should be the first thing that grabs your attention. The second thing is the blurb, and that'll make or break my decision to buy at that point. 

A good story is a good story, no matter where it's published from. I've read a lot of great indie books this year. And I've read a few not so great. Just like with trad pubbed books.


----------



## Steven Stickler (Feb 1, 2012)

I feel about indie books the same way I feel about indie music: some really do it for me, but many don't. The attraction is finding that one true gem that only a few others know about...


----------



## Lursa (aka 9MMare) (Jun 23, 2011)

Atunah said:


> I find some of the comments amusing, especially those saying that traditionally published stuff is somehow not as unique, or is homogenized, safe, not exiting etc. As someone that reads 100's of books a year and a large majority are from traditional publishers I say not so. Not at all. And I am a picky reader with a huge passion for books and reading. I like to be surprised, cry and laugh.
> 
> I read many many fantastic, exiting, fresh, unique stories. But I do see these comments a lot, usually from self publishers. Here is the thing, they are all authors, period. Just because someone happens to have a contract, does not make them somehow some slave to anything. They write with just as much passion as a SP.
> And I as a reader am not somehow settling with going trad published for most of my reads.
> ...


Well said.


----------

