Yesterday I wrote, in my naivety, that authors are publishing under new titles without properly informing readers that it is the same old book under a new cover. Feedback from authors whom I trust indicates that they are opposed to the practice but have no choice as the publisher's run the show.
There must certainly be truth in that and those who are interested should read the comments on yesterday's blog. If there are any other readers out there who have bought a book, thinking it is new, only to find out that you read it before and only the title and cover picture have been changed on this 'new' book. If you have, you perhaps felt cheated and became annoyed.
Two of my favorite authors of Jane Austen related books have suggested that the best way to stop the practice is to write to those publishers who are doing this. I would suggest that book sellers also have some responsibility to know what they are selling. Thus Amazon, Powell Books, World Wide Books and others might be alerted , or any others from whom you purchase books. .
There is strength in numbers!
Showing posts with label publishing the same book under a new name. Show all posts
Showing posts with label publishing the same book under a new name. Show all posts
Friday, October 15, 2010
Thursday, October 14, 2010
CAUTION: AUTHORS PLAGIARIZING THEMSELVES
Addenda from Yiayia...Apparently readers failed to see my 'tongue in cheek' use of the world plagiarize. Obviously one cannot plagiarize one's own work and I publicly apologize to authors who may have misunderstood and taken offense, especially to the wonderful author.made visible by the book covers since she is one of my favorites and I heartily recommend her books to anyone who loves this genre as much as I..
Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice was such a favorite of mine that I have been buying most all new versions of it (and sequels) I can find.. One I refused to read was: Mr. Darcy, Vampyre. I really thought that was just too insulting to Austen's original..
It is easy to understand why a new version requires much of the original dialogue at times. I recently ordered a book whose title I did not own though I had read that author before and liked her. When the book arrived, I eagerly started to read it and wondered at its familiarity. Since I often read the few pages Amazon provides, to review, I hoped that was what I was remembering. However, it became just too many pages. Having liked the original, Impulse and Initiative, I read, on as I frequently like to relax re-reading when I know I don't have to worry through the suspense. I thought I had missed something when it didn't seem to be as I remembered it. My count of such books is currently 82 so I read on, thinking that I must have skipped what I was now missing.
Nevertheless, being obstinate, I compared the books paragraph for paragraph for several chapters. The author had changed 'knocked' to 'rap' in a later version and a few words here or there were slightly different though the meaning and general story stayed the same. However, the new version, To Conquer Mr. Darcy was not easily associated by me with Impulse and Initiative. In the newer version, the paperback, the author had left out a whole sub-plot which made Caroline Bingley a worse conniving villain than her usual cattiness and attempt to disparage Elizabeth. It didn't essentially change the story, it simply removed a piece of it.
However, it made me wonder. What are the rules of selling a book without telling the reader beforehand that it is simply a rewrite of a previously published book with little change? I don't know what publisher's rules are but I can certainly comment on the view as a reader. The seller should make it possible for me know if I might already have bought a copy of this book. Before I buy, I check my database to see if I already own it. When I don't see it there, I read the blurbs the seller has on the book. Having done this, there was nothing to connect the two since most of the sequels have the same characters and many don't deviate that far from the basic premise of the original Pride and Prejudice. Only when I received the book, read it, and checked the very fine print on the bottom of the Copyright page did I learn it had previously been published in 2008 by Sourcebooks Landmark as Impulse and Initiative. Amazon showed it as a 2010 book.
Addenda from Yiayia...Apparently readers failed to see my 'tongue in cheek' use of the world plagiarize. Obviously one cannot plagiarize one's own work and I publicly apologize to authors who may have taken misunderstood and taken offense.
Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice was such a favorite of mine that I have been buying most all new versions of it (and sequels) I can find.. One I refused to read was: Mr. Darcy, Vampyre. I really thought that was just too insulting to Austen's original..
It is easy to understand why a new version requires much of the original dialogue at times. I recently ordered a book whose title I did not own though I had read that author before and liked her. When the book arrived, I eagerly started to read it and wondered at its familiarity. Since I often read the few pages Amazon provides, to review, I hoped that was what I was remembering. However, it became just too many pages. Having liked the original, Impulse and Initiative, I read, on as I frequently like to relax re-reading when I know I don't have to worry through the suspense. I thought I had missed something when it didn't seem to be as I remembered it. My count of such books is currently 82 so I read on, thinking that I must have skipped what I was now missing.Nevertheless, being obstinate, I compared the books paragraph for paragraph for several chapters. The author had changed 'knocked' to 'rap' in a later version and a few words here or there were slightly different though the meaning and general story stayed the same. However, the new version, To Conquer Mr. Darcy was not easily associated by me with Impulse and Initiative. In the newer version, the paperback, the author had left out a whole sub-plot which made Caroline Bingley a worse conniving villain than her usual cattiness and attempt to disparage Elizabeth. It didn't essentially change the story, it simply removed a piece of it.However, it made me wonder. What are the rules of selling a book without telling the reader beforehand that it is simply a rewrite of a previously published book with little change? I don't know what publisher's rules are but I can certainly comment on the view as a reader. The seller should make it possible for me know if I might already have bought a copy of this book. Before I buy, I check my database to see if I already own it. When I don't see it there, I read the blurbs the seller has on the book. Having done this, there was nothing to connect the two since most of the sequels have the same characters and many don't deviate that far from the basic premise of the original Pride and Prejudice. Only when I received the book, read it, and checked the very fine print on the bottom of the Copyright page did I learn it had previously been published in 2008 by Sourcebooks Landmark as Impulse and Initiative. Amazon showed it as a 2010 book.
Addenda from Yiayia...Apparently readers failed to see my 'tongue in cheek' use of the world plagiarize. Obviously one cannot plagiarize one's own work and I publicly apologize to authors who may have taken misunderstood and taken offense.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)