Living in Threes, by Judith Tarr

[rachelmanija]

My quest to read more self-published books is mostly demonstrating to me that there is often no difference in quality between them and traditionally published books. In fact, in certain genres, it is much easier to find more ambitious or unusual books, of equal literary quality, in self-publishing

Comments

[megfuzzle]

Unfortunately, I must have read a lot of the cliche "omg, needed an editor!!!" Self published work. Normally the plot is okay, it's just full of weak areas that I feel an editor would have tightened up.

[rachelmanija]

I often feel that way about books in general, is the thing. See my reply to dichroic below.

[dichroic]

I've read some self-published books that *badly* needed an editor - but then, I'm read some publishing-house books that are no better. I've also read indie books that are impeccably edited; I'd love to know whether some of those authors are just really good at self-editing, have friends who do it well, or are paying professional editors. I suspect some of all three.

[rachelmanija]

I feel the same way. A lot of traditionally published books appear to have never been edited at all. Or, if they were, I shudder to think what sort of shape they were in before.

[marzipan_pig]

I have recently discovered Judith Tarr and am enjoying her books, so maybe I will check this one out!

[rachelmanija]

Just so you know, it has a major "dying of cancer" storyline.

[marzipan_pig]

Good to know!

My frend told me the whole last year she had stopped watching TV or movies b/c too many of them had 'dying of cancer' as a sub and/or main plot.

[lorata]

I think my problem is I stepped into the middle of this bizarre circle-jerk of self-pubbed YA authors who all just gave each other 5 stars and got really shirty at anyone who didn't. I read one and the first was a solid 4, maybe, then the next one a horrifyingly awful maybe-2, and the last rounding out at a solid 3. I hesitated for aaaaaaaaages before writing a review, and when I did, I found myself miraculously unfriended by several of them. So. Ha. That made me back the heck away for a while ...

But yeah, any time someone talks about the glut of terrible self-pubbed books I invite them to walk through a bookstore and just pick up a book at random. Chances are? You just picked up something terrible.

The one thing is that I've read some amazing stuff by online friends who will never get it traditionally published because it's not ~marketable, even though I know sooo many people who would enjoy it? So it's a weird kind of dichotomy.

[rachelmanija]

I too have run afoul of a strange cabal of YA authors, though I suspect not the same one. Scary cliques are everywhere!

The ideas of what is marketable seem to be getting more and more narrow. I can see why this book was deemed unmarketable, though I'm not sure that judgment was correct. But I'm reading a book now (Ankaret Wells' The Maker's Mark, adult science fiction) which was self-pubbed because she couldn't get an agent, and I find that utterly inexplicable.

It's extremely well-written and delightful space opera, absolutely in line with books which are published except for having an unusually good prose style. The only thing I can think is that maybe it was considered too fun - that is, not grimdark enough - and not male-centric enough. Or else space opera is now one of the "out" genres.

[erikagillian]

Select... ctrl-c, ctrl-t, ctrl-p, enter.

[erikagillian]

Looks like she's got a couple of deleted scenes on her website, for when you're done :) The url may be spoilery, can't tell.

For others, the kindle version is only $1.99

[asakiyume]

Dang, I commented on Goodreads but in general I like commenting here, for the conversation. Just, I was glad you reminded me of Cat in the Mirror, and your review, combined with Sherwoods discussion, have persuaded me I'd like to read this.