- Thread starter
- #41
It might garner more attention, in certain circles. There no reason to think that will lead to significantly more sales though. There are certain types of readers who care about critical acclaim and challenging preconceived notions and pretentious things like that. Most only care about a good story.
Well, I was with you until you said "pretentious things like that." It sounds like anyone who challenges the status quo is perceived as pretentious. I'm not sure I think my suggestion is pretentious.
Self-published writers DO NOT need to differentiate themselves from traditionally published writers. All writers enter the market place on equal terms now. Most readers don't care about how an author is published, many don't even notice. Readers understand that authors all stand out from each other because of their unique voice and storytelling skill, not because of how they are published.
And I don't believe all writers enter the market as equals either. A debut traditionally published author is most likely going to get more exposure than a debut self-published author.
Writing within established genre tropes is not easier than exploring new ground? What?
Yes, it's hard if not harder because you have to avoid the minefield of being cliche, trending familiar ground too much, being predictable, etc. etc. I think it's actually very hard to write epic fantasy without being too homogenous to the point in which every story stays the same. Those writing epic fantasy that I admire buck the tropes or turn them on their heads. That's why they're successful.
Then I guess I'm thoroughly confused by what you are actually trying to suggest writers should do.
I've said several times that it would just be nice to have more choices when it comes to fantasy. Self-publishers have more a chance of doing so than traditional publishers is all I'm saying because they don't have gatekeepers telling them something won't sell. It's up to them if they decide it's worth trying to sell or not.
If you pay attention to that sort of thing. Most people hear about books from natural word of mouth.
Forums factor into what I meant about advance reviews and social media, although I didn't mention that. Unless every single book you read is told to you by someone else in person.
In any case, we're talking in circles. You seem to have strong opinions on the lack of need to distinguish indie writers, while I have strong opinions that they do need to be. You think my suggestion makes no sense, so let's just leave it at that. You're not going convince me and I'm not going to convince you.
I have enjoyed trying to convince you though. I don't normally find myself passionate about anything enough to have the energy to argue it.
Last edited: