Moving on from my breakfast... ah, thingy. I found an article on Salon.com, When anyone can be a published author by Laura Miller, via Tanya Huff's Live Journal page.
The article raises some interesting points about the publishing industry and the current ease of self-publishing on the 'net. Will the expected explosion of standard-book-industry's rejected books onto the internet mean readers will have to wade through worse tripe than usual for the gems, as current editors do today?
Personally, I've tried to edit some... 'underdone' books myself; fortunately, the kernal of plot made the work worth the extra effort. I've seen some pure blech, too.
Indeed, I've posted work I'm not entirely happy with (although I'd never presume to say 'this book is perfect' for any of my work; only that I've posted the best it can be at that particular juncture in time work). I need to learn not to make deadlines unreasonable.
Having said that, I need to get back to the duology I'm editing to take down with me to Melbourne along with Demonesque. I'm hoping they'll see continuity in work ethic even as the books are two separate genres. Is three books enough? Probably. But I'll take synopsis of the others as well.