After having read through a number of them, I have come to the conclusion that I am turned off by third person bios from indie authors. To me, writing something in third person implies that it is not written by the person in question, but someone else (a third person if you will).
Now knowing a thing or two about indie writers (by knowing indie writers), I'm about 101% sure that most of them are writing their own bios. Unless they have yet to contact me, there are no author bio fairies who do the work for you. Isn't it weird to write about yourself from that perspective? You're not fooling anyone, and perhaps this is a cultural thing, but it comes across as vain to me. Whenever I read a third person author bio from an indie writer, I am reminded of Julius Caesar in the Asterix and Obelix comics.
In recent(ish) years, it has also become fashionable to be personable and a little quirky in your author bios, which I personally like. Most bios nowadays are not just listings of what the author has written before, but also give insight into their lives and their personality, usually with a self-deprecating tone about how mundane it really is (less fond of this, but points for being honest and authentic). Read through a few and most will read something like: "Jack London writes books about dogs, tropical voyages and the rough wilderness. He is a prolific writer who loves going out into the woods, drinking a pint and snuggling up with his dog Buck."
But that brings us back to the problem with third person. I can suspend my disbelief when it comes to an indie author supposedly having an imaginary someone else write their bio, but when someone adds this much flavour to their bio it becomes even less believable than it was before. When the names of the author's pets and their favourite tv-shows pop up I'm left to ask: "Who is this weirdo that knows all the quirky details of your life?" and the follow-up "Should I call the police?"
Pet peeves rant over. What are your thoughts, and how insignificant is this issue?
Now knowing a thing or two about indie writers (by knowing indie writers), I'm about 101% sure that most of them are writing their own bios. Unless they have yet to contact me, there are no author bio fairies who do the work for you. Isn't it weird to write about yourself from that perspective? You're not fooling anyone, and perhaps this is a cultural thing, but it comes across as vain to me. Whenever I read a third person author bio from an indie writer, I am reminded of Julius Caesar in the Asterix and Obelix comics.
In recent(ish) years, it has also become fashionable to be personable and a little quirky in your author bios, which I personally like. Most bios nowadays are not just listings of what the author has written before, but also give insight into their lives and their personality, usually with a self-deprecating tone about how mundane it really is (less fond of this, but points for being honest and authentic). Read through a few and most will read something like: "Jack London writes books about dogs, tropical voyages and the rough wilderness. He is a prolific writer who loves going out into the woods, drinking a pint and snuggling up with his dog Buck."
But that brings us back to the problem with third person. I can suspend my disbelief when it comes to an indie author supposedly having an imaginary someone else write their bio, but when someone adds this much flavour to their bio it becomes even less believable than it was before. When the names of the author's pets and their favourite tv-shows pop up I'm left to ask: "Who is this weirdo that knows all the quirky details of your life?" and the follow-up "Should I call the police?"
Pet peeves rant over. What are your thoughts, and how insignificant is this issue?