Click

I saw this book Click the other day in a train station WHSmith. Having just published a book on a related subject I was intrigued enough to pick it up.

The back cover blurb starts with what would normally be 3 bullet points (except there are no bullets.) They are as follows:

British teenagers furiously search for "prom dresses" and "limousines" in advance of their end-of-year school balls.

A correct prediction, several weeks in advance of the final show, that Mark Ramprakash would be the winner of Strictly Come Dancing season 4.

Internet user behaviour around visits to the Arctic Monkeys' website from social networks and search engines drive the band to the top of the album chart.

These 3 statements don't make any sense to me. Do they make sense to you? On the face of it they don't tell me anything I might not have guessed. They certainly don't tell me anything I might care about and they really don't tell me much about the book - unless the book is about conspiracies on the internet - but I don't think it is.

I'm tempted to suggest that both the book and the blurb are about keyword searches - Mark Ramprakash, Strictly Come Dancing, Arctic Monkeys and Prom (mistyped as Porn?) but who knows. I doubt the blurb was written by the author but he must have approved it. Anyway I got no further which just goes to show the importance of getting the blurb right. I think I'm probably interested in the subject of the book but already my reading experience is off-putting and I haven't even opened it yet.

I've lots of sympathy though for the poor marketing junior who probably did write this. I used to have write blurbs in the past (and occasionally still do if we're really desperate) and I am rubbish at it. However I don't think I ever produced anything as bad as this. It is a real skill and an underestimated one.

The Overlook

I don't expect to do much book reviewing on this blog. It is too much like the day job. However every now and then I hope to comment on individual books as good or bad examples of publishing or commissioning.

First of all I have to say that I am a big fan of Michael Connelly and in particular his Harry Bosch books. However I was sorely disappointed when I read The Overlook. The story itself was OK. Not one of Connelly's best but an adequate read and a must for any Harry Bosch fan. However it is short. The story itself is 290 odd pages which may seem a reasonable length but, according to my in-house design expert, it is set 10/14, basically line spacing of 1.5, thus stretching out the story over many more pages than necessary. The rest of the 337 pages are taken up with a 14 page 'interview' of Harry Bosch the protagonist by Connelly the author, and 30 odd pages of the next Bosch novel. i.e an advert.

I have since discovered that the book was written as a serial for the New York Times. This explains why it is so short and perhaps why it isn't up to Michael Connelly's usual standard. It doesn't though excuse what I think is a terrible bit of book publishing. I don't blame Connelly – he was commissioned to write the serial and did so and presumably got paid for both serial and book. However I really don't think any book publisher should have just taken the serial and published it as a book. Connelly should have been commissioned to re-write and expand the book to turn it into a proper novel. He may well have felt this unnecessary but I believe his agent and publisher should have persuaded him that it was necessary to protect his reputation.

As it is, I feel ripped off. I get a much shorter story than I expect having read the previous 12 Harry Bosch novels. I also get the Harry Bosch interview. What a piece of self-indulgent nonsense. The whole piece could appear in Private Eye's Pseuds Corner. Finally I get to pay for 30 pages of the next novel, The Brass Verdict – which I'll probably read anyway. I am not against these trailers for future books. But this one was as long as 10% of the book I had just read. Making your customers feel ripped off is not a good plan for publishers and that's why I think this was bad publishing.

p.s I see from Michael Connelly's website that he has 'interviewed' Harry Bosch on 2 other occasions. This is perhaps beyond self-indulgent bordering on the weird.

Vanity Fare

Vanity Publishing has been around a long time but modern technology has really enabled it to take off. Print on demand and ecommerce have meant companies like Lulu.com have been able to publish many books that commercial publishers wouldn't consider. Unfortunately some Vanity Publishers (not Lulu) have a terrible reputation for quality and service and many have been accused of misrepresenting the service they provide to authors.

Now colour digital printing technology has developed to such an extent that Vanity Presses like Bob Books have appeared. These aren't really publishers – they don't make your books generally available to the book buying public – but they do allow people to produce 'books' of their photographs.

I saw this advertisement for Bob Books yesterday on the station platform.

Now on their website they claim 'The thing is, we love books and we're more than a little obsessive about quality. Our books are made in Switzerland – home of really well made things™ – combining traditional book-binding craftsmanship with state-of-the-art technology.'

However, I think I'd be wary of any publisher who could design, print, distribute and display this 6 foot poster featuring this terrible typo.

What were they thinking of? This?

P.S. Apologies for the quality of the photos taken with my mobile phone in very challenging lighting conditions.