Book Blog Superlatives

SuperlativesOne of Jimmy Fallon’s regular routines is Tonight Show Superlatives. I’ve noticed that book bloggers have their own vocabulary of superlatives and other descriptors to call attention to a particular book or set of books. “Best” or “greatest” just get pedestrian after a while. Strictly speaking, a “superlative” denotes something of the highest quality or degree and often comes in the form of “most …” or “____-est” and involve the comparison of more than two things. Most of the words I’ve found book bloggers using don’t fall strictly into these grammatical forms but if you are looking for some adjectives to spice up your book blog titles, you might try some of these:

  • Must-readThis refers to a book, or in some cases a list of books, that you don’t dare exit this life without reading. The only problem I have is that I’ve seen enough such lists that I need a life span three times as long as is granted to us mortals to possibly read all these “must-reads.” Most will be “might-reads” at best. Not as superlative.
  • Freaking good. I came across this one just this week. The term “freaking” is one of emphasis, whether of anger or appreciation. It is a euphemism for a similar sounding vulgarity beginning with the same letter. Not one to use in a blog for the church ladies! As a child of the 60’s and 70’s it conjures up images of being “freaked out” on drugs. I suppose some books have that effect.
  • Standalone. I like this one! It suggests something that is not like the others. The only challenge is you can’t use it very often. Too many “standalones” no longer stand alone.
  • Rad. Frankly, I was kind of surprised to see this one still around. I understand that it traces back to Gen-Xers who used it as a shorthand for “radical”, something beyond “cool.” Good to use for a freaking-good standalone that harks back to earlier times!
  • Crazy. Another term that has the idea of “extreme,” perhaps in an off-beat eccentric way. Strikes me as a good superlative for anything written by Gabriel Garcia Marquez!

Then there are some ones that I think get over-used (and “must-read” probably could fall in this category):

  • Awesome. Seriously, I saw this just this week. Seems to be so overused. When everything is awesome, is anything?
  • Iconic. Strictly speaking this has to do with icons. Before they were ever little images on a computer screen, they were religious images in which one encountered the one imaged. The idea seems to be a book that is symbolic of its genre. This one might be over-used and under-understood.
  • Excellent. There is standard English “excellent” and then there is Bill and Ted “excellent.” This one might be tired out.

However…

  • Bodacious, another superlative from the movie just might be under-used. Apparently it is slang from the U.S. South that may combine “bold” and “audacious.” Personally, I like the idea of some bodacious Baldacci!
  • Wicked good. Here’s another regional term from New England (and maybe old England) coming into wider use. “Wicked” is another one of those terms that substitutes for “really” (which can get very tiresome) but the phrase carries this interesting contradiction, which just might also not be a bad summary of most of us humans. I like to think of the best mysteries as “wicked good” because they usually involve both a murder (and a murderer) and a sleuth committed to ferreting out evil and exposing it.

I’ve had a bodaciously wicked good time coming up with these. But I bet you could add to the list, and help me spice up my book blogs as well!

Publishing Trends: Platform and Publishing

We talked yesterday about the role of editors in acquiring good writing and identifying writers with talent. Actually, according to a recent blog on Platform and Publishing by Scot McKnight, at least in the Christian publishing world, it is increasingly not the quality of your writing and your ideas, but how many people “follow” you on Twitter, Facebook, your blog and the like, as well as how many people go to your church if you are a pastor.

I should mention that this blog is not an effort to enhance my “platform”. If it was, I’ve got a long, long way to go. However it is interesting that one source from which I’ve received some free e-galleys of new books encourages you to create a profile with much the same criteria–your blog, numbers of friends on Facebook, LinkedIn, etc. I actually get this. You don’t want to give stuff away unless it will actually be reviewed and the reviews will be seen by a reasonable number of people with similar interests to the reviewer.

The problem with this platform thing in self-publishing is that the people who self-promote well are probably not the same people who produce the great works. In fact, I wonder if they might be more or less mutually exclusive categories. It would seem to me that many great writers are those who really give themselves to their craft, and building platform is a distraction of time and energy from what they are truly great at. Consequently, a book proposal from such a writer without platform may never get looked at.

The reality behind this is that book promotion is no longer the work of publishers by and large but by authors and those who will post reviews for them on Amazon. By the way, I don’t review on Amazon for this reason. I guess I would prefer to remain “independent”, write for my friends and those who are interested, and not do Amazon’s or the publisher’s work.

At the same time, the web and social media do provide a way that good authors can find readers. It appears that part of the trick is not so much building your own platform but rather identifying online bloggers and reviewers who have a platform of followers for the genre in which you write. This Huff Post article on The Shifting Landscape of Book Reviews chronicles the world of getting your book reviewed if you are an Indie writer. Now it seems, the challenge may be getting publishers to shift from looking at author “platforms” to looking at the reviewer response to their books. Of course, that presupposes that most new authors will publish independently and hope to get recognized.

That, I suspect is still a fairly perilous enterprise, but then I guess it always has been…

Making GoodReads Better

I have been using GoodReads for about two years as a way to post reviews of books as well as learn of good books others are reading.  It serves as a kind of Facebook for book lovers.  It provides recommendations of books you might enjoy based on books you have read.  And it connects your posts easily to Facebook and other social media sites.  There are some things I wish this site would improve, now that it is funded by the behemoth of Amazon (perhaps another post on this sometime!).

1.  It would be great if the text entry box for reviews would provide the same features WordPress offers its bloggers, including easy integration of links and the ability to tag posts.

2.  I wish there were a limit on the “wants to read” posts from one person at one time–perhaps three to five–so that one’s whole newsfeed isn’t filled with one person’s posts.

3.  The search function to add titles to you “reading” list often seems not to turn up the book you want even if you’ve entered the title exactly, in my experience.  Sometimes, the only way to get this is via entering ISBNs.

4.  Currently only GoodReads authors have their blogs automatically posted to GoodReads.  It would be nice if those of us who blog on books might also have this ability without pasting in links.

5.  It would be helpful if GoodReads suggested categories for books based on publisher and cataloguing data.  I might still like to add my own categories but this might make for more systematic sorting and searching of reviews.

Finally, I don’t want my reviews posted to Amazon without my permission.  While I do want to see people read, I don’t want to be an Amazon sales person. For those of you who use GoodReads, what would make it better for you?