Yes. I reblogged a post by that title…
I pulled it. It’s an interesting viewpoint, but coming to think of it, why should I blog the opposite of my own thoughts?
In summary, “Catherine Caffeinated” (google her if you want to find her blog, it’s okay, I’m not re-reposting the link after pulling the post as I’m too busy submitting things to Amazon and including new stuff in our own website) says that a book that is rated “good” and “well-written” doesn’t necessarily get the sales while one that is schund might be a runaway seller online.
Of course she is right observing these statistics. (Apart from that I use pink to punish students who are slow on the uptake in their violin lessons.)
Why would a book fail to sell? Why would a book sell well? Two words: Promotion and publicity. Does “word of mouth” ever do it? In today’s world where everyone is trying to outpunt the next guy? I have my reservations.
My theory is simple: The one with the biggest megaphone gets the most ears.
Does it matter if the book is “good”? Oh for heaven’s sakes. Of course we don’t want pathetic literature out there! It doesn’t matter if some people can scream themselves to the top despite a lousy opus; it’s totally regardless. It is our mission to bring good stuff to the reader.
Does it matter whether your book is good (“has appeal” and is well written) when you submit it to P’kaboo?
Well, no. You’re welcome to submit whatever you like. Just don’t expect us to take it, if it’s sub-standard. If you’re an author who believes you don’t have to produce quality in order to sell, we don’t have space on our shelves for your stuff. Go punt it yourself and get rich quick online, see?
That ought to disambiguate any questions that were raised by my reblogging her post. I’m quietly convinced that she, too, might end up agreeing with me. (And somehow I have the suspicion that her book happens not to be sub-standard.)