Was just gonna make a small note here and leave the old one archived here for historical purposes but I guess I can make a little educational lesson out of this.
I was never quite satisfied with the description for my book; I'd iterated on it a few times until I had something that kinda did the job, but truthfully, all the external factors surrounding the book were the last things I thought about.
The marketing and networking on my part has been admittedly scant, and the sales have reflected as such, though not to suggest I'm disappointed; the fact I moved any copies at all was a pleasant surprise
But either way, the hobby has had a business aspect stapled onto it, and it's an aspect I ought to treat with the respect it deserves.
Therefore, I'll present both the original description and what I replaced it with in the following screenshots.
Now, this isn't to say I'll be extending this revision to the physical manuscript; I've enough on my hands as it is without having to dig up some GIMP files and edit text and realign it and find some godforsaken way to convert it to some obscure image format and that whole song and dance and piss and whinery. It's not like it's being sold on store shelves so the description on the physical book is more than likely being read by people who already bought it and were sold on it through some other means.
But enough of that, time to share some insights I've picked up on during and before the process
1. This one is so obvious that James Krake pointed it out to me on a livestream the first time he'd heard me discussing the book, but the quote crowning the original description is very easy to interpret as a grammatical error. It's intended to come about due to the character's dialect and his age but obviously that doesn't translate well to showing it to a potential customer devoid of context. My own intimate understanding of my text clouded my judgement of how an observer would see it. It happens, but it also feels comically obvious in hindsight.
2. Being more overt about a few details, such as the main character's actual name and his specific goal; the dood's name is Vega, he wants to go home, and there's some evil bastards standing between A and B. I think the old description overdid it with trying to preserve the mystery, and ends up overly vague and unclear as a result. I think the initial reticence came from the fact that most of the story actually takes place building up to his abduction, and the main journey of the overarching narrative only really gets started near the end, continuing into the next part. But my goal here isn't just to sell this one part of the story, it's to get my foot in the door for the whole thing. Hopefully this first part hooks people to carry on, so it's not fair to keep the overarching narrative so in the dark before you have to lay down dosh.
3. It more clearly sets the tone. Earlier parts of the story are more light-hearted, bordering on comedic at times, but the bulk of the narrative will be taking itself mostly seriously and bears real stakes for its characters. Being wishy washy and grandiose makes it sound like a dumb ghost story. Being explicit about the threat not just to Vega but also to his lifelong home sets up off the bat what's on the line, and what complicates it. But it also doesn't delve into despair porn either; it also illustrates the help he has in his plight. If you get the impression of "the world is weighing down upon him but he's not alone in lifting that weight" or something along those lines then my mission is accomplished.
And uh... that's all I have to say really. This has been a nice excuse to write words. I've been very lazy the past few weeks but a first draft by month's end is possible if I buckle down. Seeya!