How much do tpyos bother the average reader?

[Cathbad]

And I dumped a book the other week because on page one the police were, apparently, investigating a series of 'grizzly' murders.

Dadgum murderous bears!!

 

[Boneman]

I've no idea if I'm an average reader, but I read all sorts: SF, Fantasy, Crime, Biographies, Romance... The odd typo is forgiveable (my fingers often type form when I meant from) and understandable. I hate to see them in my own work, and I'm not that upset to see a few in an other author's book. But when the 'few' gets to be 'more than a few', and then 'quite a few', I lose interest in the book itself. I can't believe a writer would deliberately put out shoddy spelling over and over again, even if they felt by writing a busload of books with mistakes they'll get by, because the production process can be overlooked in the name of quantity. Give me quality any day. It's downright laziness to put out a book that is rife with typos. They are unwitting errors, and easily dealt with - most word-processing programmes pick them up (forgiveable and programmes are both highlighted in this post, because spell-check is set to google's standard) and yes, they won't pick up 'form', when I meant 'from'. I pick those up myself, by careful reading - I read the book backwards so I don't get involved in the story and it's kinda easy. And yet, I'll still miss a few and an editor/copywriter will pick those up for me. Every writer is judged by their work, and I want to put the best out. Every time.

 

[Ursa major]

because the opening quotation marks telling the reader that it is dialogue are missing.

Is this the only missing quotation mark? I only ask because some writers, as a matter of style, deliberately don't use them in (some of?) their work.

For instance, I know Ian Sales doesn't in his Apollo Quartet short stories.

 

[JunkMonkey]

No, it was missing. There were closing marks but not opening ones.

 

[Foxbat]

Personal and professional pride should be enough to make a person attempt the best they can no matter what line of work they're in.

 

[Stephen Palmer]

But the original poster isn't talking about creating art.

I just couldn't resist...

 

[Tirellan]

The book in my avatar was published earlier this year. I can't tell you how many people read it before it was published (but it was a lot) and still half a dozen typos got through. It is damn difficult to eliminate all of them.
But still, a significant level of typos is often accompanied by other errors and that speaks badly of the author's professionalism.

 

[Kerrybuchanan]

I am firmly in the camp that believes an author should make their book(s) as good as they possibly can before release, and I can rarely bring myself to read a book if it has multiple typos/errors in it.

Having said that, I think writers who read can be much more critical than readers who don't write. There are a few books I read and enjoyed in my pre-writing days that I can't stand now -- I struggle to finish the prologue in some. I'm guessing that's where the writers who produce stories in bulk, skimping on editing, find their market.

I do get the impression that quality has deteriorated in recent years though. I try very hard to support indie writers, but the sad truth is that traditionally published books, and those self-pubbed by perfectionists, are head-and-shoulders above the majority of work out there currently. It's not only typos, but massive plot holes, info-dumping, poor characterization and repetitiveness that stops me finishing a book as often as not.