I’ve receieved a number of emails lately inquiring about the validity of self-publishing. It’s a well-worn topic and my personal perspective isn’t much different than everyone else’s. In the right conditions, handled properly, with realistic attitudes, self-publishing can be a viable business decision for certain people. But I don’t believe in resorting to it just because you think the mainstream publishing industry is comprised of meanies who aren’t smart enough to comprehend your art.
In addition to these queries about the validity of printing your own books, a handful of the emailers also wanted to know why self-publishing is so reviled. I think there are a couple of factors that contribute to the negative perception. First, there are undoubtedly snobs who look for a chance to sneer and chuckle. Elitist assholes exist in every industry so it’s absurd to think there aren’t folks in the publishing biz who love nothing more than an opportunity to pooh-pooh the self-published hoi polloi. Second, not every one, but some self-published authors invite the very ridicule they hate.
You remember Bobby? That weird kid in high school who went out of his way to wear plaid pants, day-glo sneakers, a green mohawk, maybe a little goth makeup, and sucked on a pacifier all day? Bobby spent more time planning his anti-conformity outfit (because, “you know, he just does his own thing, he’s such an individual“) every morning than Jenny the Cheerleader dedicated to her hair. But then he always bitched and moaned about how Pam the Prom Queen ignored him. Some self-published authors are the same way. They act like idiots and then wonder why they face such disdain.
Not Just an Author, but a Published Author!
I’m lucky enough to spend a fair amount of time in the company of writers. I’ve been around bestsellers and the most beloved literary icons. And not once, not ever, have I heard these people introduce themselves as a “published author.” They meet a non-bookish person and they say “I’m a writer.” They don’t ever feel the need to include the published qualifier.
In 1932, when Clark Gable famously asked Willliam Faulkner “Oh, do you write?” Faulkner responded with one of the best zingers in the history of literature. He did not respond with “yes, I am a published author!”
However, the type of person who gives self-publishing a bad name adores that phrase. These misguided folks thrust business cards that proclaim ”Joe Blow, Published Author.” Mr. Blow strong arms the local bookstore in holding a signing and he takes out an ad that entices readers to “come meet published author Joe Blow!” He talks about how “they” can focus their efforts on stealing an athlete’s championship memories or a country boy’s high school diplomas, because he’s a published author and ”they” can never take that away from him. Joe Blow gets a PUBLSHD1 vanity license plate on his 1984 Plymouth Reliant K and he pre-orders his tombstone that reads:
Here lies Joe Blow, Published Author,
Ignored by the Industry, in all their hauteur.
Since he lacked a famous last name,
editors wouldn’t play his game,
but his writing meshed, and for all eternity
he will remain, forever Pub-lished!
For the people who invite the derision, their obsession with the ”published” tag makes all the difference in the world. And they don’t seem to realize how it’s a meaningless title when you bestow it upon yourself. If I go down to the YMCA and play a round of pickup basketball, then pay myself afterwards, does that give me the right to claim to be a professional athlete? If I form my own team, can I insinuate to friends that there’s no difference between me and Kobe?
I’ll Just Create My Own University!
The current mainstream method of selecting books for publication, editing them, and distributing those texts is archaic, ineffecient, ineffective, often ill-informed, and frequently unfair. I won’t deny that. But, it remains the system that we have. Does that system pump out horrendous books that are the literary equivalent of roadkill? Absolutely. Does that system overlook and ignore worthy authors and genius books in favor of celebrity crap? Definitely. Nevertheless, it is still the system we have and the system we all understand.
When you self-publish, or go with one of the more questionable print-on-demand services, you are essentially going around that system. You’re taking your ball, going home, and making up your own game in the backyard. Your game might be fun, it might be valid exercise, it might be the perfect thing for your situation, but it’s not the same way all the other kids play. And to pretend otherwise is to invite scorn and derision.
It’s probably safe to assume that virtually all of this website’s readers graduated from either high school or college. Maybe a few of you had to repeat 4th grade a few times, but that’s okay, I did the same thing with college algebra. I was in that class so many semesters in a row that the professor said to me, “You sure are small to be a football player.” The key here is that you made it, eventually, out of either high school or college.
Now, when someone says they are a college graduate, we know what that entails. They had to take standardized tests, write essays, gain admission, complete required courses, accumulate a certain number of hours, pass final exams, and maintain a certain GPA in order to graduate. You might have gone to Harvard, Indiana University, or Northeastern Southern Central Nebraska A&T State at Lincoln but regardless of the rigor of your school, you had to meet these same basic requirements. Everyone understands, roughly, what it means to be a college graduate.
We also know people who are intelligent, hard-working, determined, and valid contributors to society who didn’t graduate from college. Bill Gates, F. Scott Fitzgerald, and Frank Lloyd Wright are but a few icons of this society who didn’t finish higher education.
Now, let’s say that Rejected Rob applies to every college in this country and they all reject him. His GPA isn’t good enough, his test scores are poor, and he smells bad. Or maybe they just don’t understand a truly individual brand of personal genius. Not a single college or university admits Rejected Rob.
“What do those people know?” he rants. “Bill Gates didn’t finish college, big deal! Plenty of intelligent people fall through the cracks and don’t get in while legacies and rich kids are welcomed with open arms. Who are they to judge me? Once I get into the work force, I’ll succeed or fail based on my own merits. All I need is a chance!”
So, fueled by his rage at being excluded by higher education in this country, Rejected Rob decides to form my own college. He incorporates the name Rob’s Kick Ass Institute of Learning and print his own diploma. Not content with a dot matrix diploma, he orders a bunch of business cards that read “Rejected Rob: College Graduate.” He places advertisements in the local newspaper to “come down on Saturday and meet college graduate Rejected Rob!” He tells people at the local coffeeshop that his achievement is just as impressive as that of a M.I.T. graduate. He appears at job interviews that require have a college degree because, you know, he deserves a shot just as much as all you elitists who went to fancy schools. And whenever Rejected Rob faces any criticism, he chalks it up to the fact that all you bigtime college graduates are snobs intent on protecting your priviledged position.
Naturally, everyone would be scornful and dismissive of his delusions about the prestige of a Rejected Rob Kick Ass Institute of Learning.
The same thing is true of the crazed self-published folks.
Not all self-publishing proponents fall into this trap. Most of them understand their position in regards to mainstream publishing and they realistically and objectively make their publishing choices. They are living proof that self-publishing, in and of itself, is not a bad thing. On the contrary, it can be quite effective and lucrative.
Unfortunately, these reasonable self-publishing advocates suffer the indignities brought on by their obsessed “published author” colleagues.
I’m not going to tell the people who emailed me they should not, under any circumstances, self-publish. I’ll just warn them about being realistic, objective, and honest. I’ll encourage them to focus on sales and quality of writing if they choose that route and not to lean back and applaud themselves for being a “published author.” Self-publishing is not necessarily better or worse the mainstream book industry, but it’s definitely not the same.
Remember, self-publishing doesn’t embarrass people. Idiotic, delusional self- “published authors” embarrass people.
great commentary. as you say, self-publishing isn’t a bad thing. it’s just the few nutty authors who give it a bad reputation. thanks for a balanced, fair discussion.
Good piece! I appreciate that fact that you don’t blast self-publishing or POD itself. I chose to go with a POD option for my book and I’m proud of it and I’ve done well. I understand that it’s a different route than mainstream and I don’t get all crazy about calling myself published. I do believe POD will revolutionize the industry eventually, but for the time being, I’m not going to pretend my experience is the same as Stephen Kings or Jonathan Safran Foer.
“So, fueled by his rage at being excluded by higher education in this country, Rejected Rob decides to form my own college. He incorporates the name Rob’s Kick Ass Institute of Learning and prints his own diploma.”
But this is not Rejected Rob’s real alternative. That would be to educate himself and forget about the false standards applied by the institutions he doesn’t really respect anyway. This would be closer to the actions taken by self-publishers who don’t want to fool with the “book business.” Your cautions to be aware of the consequences of this are entirely valid, however.
What was Wm. Faulkner’s response to Clark Gable? Inquiring minds (or at least one of them) want to know.
“But this is not Rejected Rob’s real alternative. That would be to educate himself and forget about the false standards applied by the institutions he doesn’t really respect anyway. This would be closer to the actions taken by self-publishers who don’t want to fool with the “book business.” Your cautions to be aware of the consequences of this are entirely valid, however.”
I disagree. 99.999% of self-publishers all tried to go the normal route. They just couldn’t cut it there. We all have our quibbles with the publishing industry and we all know it has problems (like anything else), but we all recognize that there is plenty of validity in its methods and models as well.
So do the self-publishers. So they really do respect, for hte most part, the standards and goals of the publishing industry, they just failed at it so have to use a plan B.
The guy who applies to all the Ivy Leagues and is rejected can later come up with a rationale to allow his ego to cope, but he still respects the Ivies deep down (or he wouldn’t have applied in the first place). Same here.
buuuuuuuut… more to the point, I think the article’s metaphor is a good one. Mainly because of this: When someone says “i’m a published author” the info being implied is much more than mere techincal publication. The implication is that the author has had his work go through the process of the publishing industry, had it be edited and reviewed and judged worthy by others and had others decide that the work was worth a financial risk. (it also, therefore, implies a level of quality)
Self-publishing, especially POD, doesn’t imply any of that. Any tripe can be made POD.
Its like trying to compare “having magazine plublications” (meaning pieces in the New Yorker or Paris Review that were accepted from a competative pool by an outside source) to “having magazine publications” (meaning making 10 copies of your “chap book” at kinkos and passing them out to friends)
His reply was:
“Yes. And what do you do, Mr. Gable?”
When Clark Gable asked Faulkner who the best living writers were during his ill-fated stint in Hollywood, Faulkner replied: “Ernest Hemingway, Willa Cather, Thomas Mann, John Dos Passos, and myself.”
Google: I’m feeling lucky. (your search took approximately 0.02 seconds)
“we all recognize that there is plenty of validity in its methods and models as well”
Who do you mean by “we”?
i think that the problem with a lot of self-publishing, is when writers assume that it only takes one person to write a book.
It doesn’t.
It takes an author, yes. But it also takes a publisher, editor, designer, copyeditor, proofreader and typesetter.
Too often have I put down a self-published book that is physically difficult to read because of narrow margins and gutters, bad fonts and too many typos.
LS: Any honest writer with half a brain.
Your argument is fine as far as it goes, but it would be a lot stronger if it dealt with the increasing tendency of the major publishing houses to substantially wall themselves off from emerging writers. This may not justify the increasing trend toward self-publishing, but it helps explain it.
I recently ran an SF con here in Dublin. As a courtesy, I provided a table for authors to bring copies of their books to sell to the attendees, which is usually attached to one of the secondhand book tables. One American lady fantasy writer brought her Celtic fantasy novel, as well as several anthologies she appeared in, all POD. Any time one of the attendees went anywhere near the table of books, she immediately came up to them, offering to sign a copy for them, and generally browbeating people into buying her books. I am convinced that she badly damaged any chance any of the other writers (all mainstream-published, and all prepared to leave the bookselling to the booksellers) had of selling their books, and it is only the fact that I was too busy running the con that prevented me being fully aware of it at the time, and doing something about it. However, I had several complaints about her behaviour from the booksellers, as well as some of the other writers, and even some attendees. Suffice it to say that she won’t be asked back to anything I ever have anything to do with, and I’ll do everything I can to make sure she never gets asked to anything in Ireland ever again. It has also, of course, made me deeply wary of any self-published or POS authors.
Generally, I agree with the commentary, although it sounds like of a “straw man” argument to me. How many self-proclaimed “published authors” of the kind described here really exist?
This kind of comment above is ill-informed: “99.999% of self-publishers all tried to go the normal route. They just couldn’t cut it there.” My partner and I used POD not because we had been rejected by mainstream publishers, but in order to get their attention. We had a product (Harlequin-style romance novels for gay men) that we believed would be better pitched as a concept than any individual book. Thus, we created the website, brand, four novels (POD), and a marketing plan. Only then did we pitch agents (got one) and find a publisher (Warner Books). I know from my experience with other authors in a online writers group I belong to that this approach is not unique. So the commentator’s 99.9999 figure is silly and betrays a disrespectful and assured-of-my-own-preconceived-beliefs-and-damn-the-truth attitude that is irritating at best.
Moreover, major publishers are often unwilling to take risks for certain niche markets (e.g. GLBT) and the few GLBT-specific houses are often too small and underfunded to take on all worthy books and, more important, help market them. Thus, for an entrepreneurial gay author, POD CAN make eminent sense. Thus our current publishing system may systematically underserve niche markets; it’s not a question of “not making it.”
All that said, we would be the first to agree that self-publishing is not for everyone. In our first books, we committed some of the sins above, especially with regard to inadequate proofing. Moreover, if you are the type of author who is not willing to do marketing, then self-publishing is certainly not for you. (Of course, there is the problem of overly aggressive, actually physically abusive marketing described by the Irishman above… sad for that woman and sadder for the brush with which she has managed to paint other sane self-published folks.)
At Romentics.com, we are equally proud of our self-published work as well as our Warner Books-published work. And we do not believe that we constitute .001% of our colleagues (assuming I did the math right).
I’ve worked in the POD industry since its inception. I have been a literary agent and a POD author. Does that make me less of an author? Doubtful. In fact because of the platform I’ve built for myself my books have just been picked up by a mainstream publisher. The point here being that if you do your homework and realize that you’re facing an industry that publishers nearly 500 new books each day you’ll be well on your way to building a solid career – no matter *how* you decide to publish.
I disagree with the author who says that self-publishing is for those who “couldn’t cut it” – let’s face it, 99% of what any agent or publisher gets is rejected, those are just the odds. Publishers are no longer willing to take risks on untested authors. Self-publishing is a means to get your book out there and if you work hard enough you might get it noticed too.
I always tell authors that there’s nothing wrong with self-publishing as long as your book doesn’t look self-published. Save the science projects for your kids and remember, your book is your resume. Make it perfect.
Wishing you publishing success,
Penny
Author Marketing Experts, Inc.
http://www.amarketingexpert.com
99% of what agents and publishers get they reject. Sure.
The same is true of literary magazines and MFA programs (well, maybe more like 96% there).
But at the same time, at least 90% (and maybe as high as 98.9%) of what they get is crap. Ever worked for a literary magazine? I worked for a small one once and it was amazing how horrible the work was. It was a real challange just to scrape enough decent material together for a 100 page issue twice a year.
There is absolutely no doubt that good work falls through the cracks at literary magazines, MFAs and publishing houses. And probably more at the publishing level. But I do think its important to keep in mind that most of it is trash that gets rejected. The really steller quality work that gets rejected from everywhere is a tiny fraction of that and its a lot less likely to get rejected than the total crap.
No doubt the publishing industry sells a lot of crap, but its mostly crap they know will sell. Crap by celebrities, crap with a gimmick people like, crap by perviously succesful authors, etc.
Basically what I’m saying is that publishing is hard, but people who have quality work shouldn’t be totally discouraged. I know young writers who so scared of rejection and of the odds they don’t even submit to magazines, not realizing that if their work is good the odds aren’t as horrible as everyone says.
Reminds me of the New Yorker article about Brandenn Bremmer, the super-high I.Q. kid who apparently committed suicide. The mother, as I recall, wrote mystery novels and published them herself, because (I couldn’t find my Jan. 16 issue, so I am paraphrasing) she didn’t want an editor placing boundaries on her creativity.
I am not poking fun at her, but I wondered if she realized that editors can actually be helpful, that they are not all misguided know-it-alls intent on undermining others’ work.
There are a lot of people out there who want to be writers. Who want to call themselves writers, I should say. But I think, in terms of self-publishing, the outlandish phonies with the tacky business cards are indeed a minority within a minority. They manage, however, to thoroughly inferiorize the whole sector. Mr. Pomfret’s post was spot-on and reinforced Rob’s main point: self-publishing works best when the author has a plan, particularly on the business side. Pomfret also illustrated that for him, POD was more or less a means to an end, not the end itself.
I don’t like rejection letters. But of the major literary magazines and reviews in this country the vast majority publish worthwhile material. Gardner makes it very clear in The Art of Fiction that anyone who puts in the time will, eventually, get published. Right?
Very interesting discussion. The question of publication vs self published to me comes down to what you want to accomplish. If you self pub because you speak and want to sell your book great. If you want to write down your memories and pass them on to the grandkids -nice idea. If like the comment above you want to blaze a new trail with something new like gay romance I say go for it. (great idea by the way) If however you self pub because you want to feel that you have “arrived” and that you are sticking one to the man who didn’t recognize your gifts. You are fooling yourself.
Very interesting piece, but I think publishing options are best analyzed as business decisions, as opposed to issues of prestige or social acceptance. Self-publishing would be seen as a respectable alternative if more authors actually found a way to sell books this way. The opinions of those employing competing models would mean little in the face of substantial sales.
Now it does seem to me that some progress has been made in this regard. I myself have put out a novel through a POD service and enjoyed some modest success. I suspect many authors could do far better (and indeed a few have) were they to develop realistic marketing and promotional plans. After all, promotion is the principle role of the publisher in a world where printing is a commodity business and few readers actually buy a book based on the name of the publisher. That process of marketing is a daunting one, and many authors have neither the skills nor resources to engage in that enterprise with any rational expectation of a positive outcome. Yet as some experiment with the kind of models that POD and the Web make possible, viable business models may be emerging. If this happens, more writers will try those models, not to “stick it to the man” but simply to make money, like anyone else in business. But they will not be able to find freedom from the approval of traditional publishers without securing the approval of actual customers. Until that happens, there will be those who will contend that no one will read something that has not been blessed by an established gatekeeper. But the very fact that you’re reading these words in a self-published blog informs against that line of reasoning.
And, as regards the academic analogy, I’m a graduate of MIT who also attended Yale and holds a PhD from the Wharton School. I can assure any interested party that there are those bearing even the most prestigious of institutional imprimaturs who recognize the potential value of book dissemination outside of accepted publishing channels. There is much to be said for the embrace of prestige, but nothing convinces one of the value of freedom from the establishment like making one’s way within it.
I deal with consignment books at an Independant bookstore and therefore see self-published authors all the time. The biggest problem they face is a lack of distribution. The only stores that will carry their books are the stores they can physically get to to request it. POD titles, while they have wider distribution will generally not be stocked by bookstore unless they are specifically requested by customers because the books are non-returnable. Neither of these limitations should necessarily stop authors from self-publishing but for the most part they should acknowledge that they are publishing primarily for themselves. With a few exceptions they will barely make their printing costs back, nevermind make much money from their books. I understand the frustrations of these authors and do what I can to keep their books in the store for as long as sales can justify it but I am one store and the work on the part of the authors is huge. (Unfortunately I also have to acknowledge the self-published authors whose books have been rejected by mainstream publishing because they’re bad. Editors are very helpful.)
I think Elissa’s post points out a key fact about POD self-publishing: it is of necessity a creature of the Internet. True POD is supposed to match supply with demand on a book by book, just in time basis with no need to retain inventory of any appreciable size. This is ideal for “stackless” online retail, for which the issue of non-returnable inventory is a non-issue. Unfortunately, physical bookstores may not be a distribution channel conducive to POD in its present form. Without the ability to do returns, the risk may simply be too high. Of course, this also constitutes a competitive disadvantage that has allowed online booksellers to prosper at the expense of physical bookstores.
As for the value of editors, some authors do indeed need an editor as a content collaborator, and others cannot be saved even with such assistance. Neither type is a likely candidate for self-publishing. Proofreading aside, however, it would be a stretch to argue that all authors are incapable of producing quality work without the guidance of an editor. For those who can create in an independent manner, POD holds promise beyond mere self-indulgence, as a small number of authors have begun to prove.
This may be apples and oranges, and perhaps a bit off topic, but the derision aimed at the self-published author has always confused me — because in the music world, owning your own label and publishing rights and basically putting out your music when you’re ready to do so is considered to be noble, and in some ways a goal for independent artists. You may not sell much, but you control and own your work. So why do you suppose the two art forms engender such different reactions when their practitioners strike out on their own?
As I said on Bookninja, I think you are incorrect about self-publishing in music.
There are a few subgenres where owning your own record label is a fine thing, mainly DIY punk/hardcore, but even there the focus is more on independent labels, not your own label.
When you see someone ont he subway trying to sell you a CDr of his rap group (Print-On-Demand), does anyone not assume its crap? I think we all do.
In the music world you have two kinds of self-published work.
a) Local, small bands who want something to sell at shows and are probably trying to use to get on a bigger label
b) A big indie band where one member happens to own a big label (say Fugazi and Dischord for example)
a) is what most self-publishing is. As long as people, like some commentators here, realize they are using their CDrs or PODs to try to get somewhere else and dont’ pretend that printing their own CDR doesn’t make them in the same league as Radiohead, everything is fine. People don’t really look down on either, though people assume (rightfully 99% of the time) that the work won’t be as good as work of the same genre on a real label.
So I dont’ think there really is much of a difference between the music and publishing here.
B) Has an analogy in the publishing world too. It is a publishing house like McSweneey’s publishing one of Dave Eggars work. No one looks down on this, and no one looks down on Dischord and Fugazi.
For one thing, both Fugazi and Eggars SELL, they actually ahve fans and demand.
On the other hand, most self-published authors do not. In fact, most self-published authors have even less demand than your random local band, who will probably still sell a fair amount of CDs at their show.
The post picks out the figure of the self-proclaimed “Published Author” – a person who I think is equally onerous whether self-published or with publisher book contract in hand. Is this person, some “Jon Doe, Ph.D.!!,” unique to or largely predominant in self-publishing? I’m not sure….
At any rate, many of the right issues are raised here. Yes, the vetting and editorial process is often immensely valuable. Yes, the claim to published status sometimes represents a kind of social benchmark (although this may be changing), so people playing by other rules should be honest. “I’m a self-published author” would seem to cover it, and of course “I write” is always appropriate.
The general idea however that writers either play by the rules or try to and fail (thus most non-contracted writers are failures) seems… off. Put another way: the publishing industry has been around for a while now. Historically, how many poets, essayists and novelists have created works of lasting value that were originally distributed privately or not at all? Not just the big names, but what proportion? Looking over my bookshelves, and looking over my blog feeds, I think if there will ever be a first era of 99% professional publishing, this one doesn’t look like it.
Actually there are a fair number of bands with limited but loyal followings that put out their own MP3 and CDs, and the film world obviously embraces indie production far more than publishing. I suspect books are a different matter precisely because they ask so great a commitment in time from the reader, as opposed to the five minutes it takes to listen to a track or the two hours needed to view a film. Its an act of arrogance for any author to ask his or her reader for the time needed to absorb a book, and to do so without others saying that investment is a good idea strikes many as doubly outrageous. By the same token, the solitary nature of writing makes many authors crave the kind of up-front official and social acceptance corporate publishing offers, a need which does not well serve anyone proposing to follow the essentially iconoclastic path of the entrepreneur.
Now I would question whether publication by an established house really gives the reader that much reassurance – its true much indie stuff is junk, but then so is the bulk of what is sold by corporate publishers. I haven’t met many people outside of the industry who really care who publishes a book per se; rather, they are concerned with what they’ve learned about the book from reviews and publicity, which established houses are in a position to facilitate. One should not confuse the ability to generate buzz with the production of actual quality – just look at many of the works discussed on this blog. Corporate publishing can claim an advantage marketing power, but a boast of having discerning taste or even special insight into what will actually sell is far more dubious. On that last point, if these houses really knew what would sell, booksellers would not be so concerned about the ability to return unsold inventory.
Actually there are a fair number of bands with limited but loyal followings that put out their own MP3 and CDs, and the film world obviously embraces indie production far more than publishing. I suspect books are a different matter precisely because they ask so great a commitment in time from the reader, as opposed to the five minutes it takes to listen to a track or the two hours needed to view a film. Its an act of arrogance for any author to ask his or her reader for the time needed to absorb a book, and to do so without others saying that investment is a good idea strikes many as doubly outrageous. By the same token, the solitary nature of writing makes many authors crave the kind of up-front official and social acceptance corporate publishing offers, a need which does not well serve anyone proposing to follow the essentially iconoclastic path of the entrepreneur.
Now I would question whether publication by an established house really gives the reader that much reassurance – its true much indie stuff is junk, but then so is the bulk of what is sold by corporate publishers. I haven’t met many people outside of the industry who really care who publishes a book per se; rather, they are concerned with what they’ve learned about the book from reviews and publicity, which established houses are in a position to facilitate. One should not confuse the ability to generate buzz with the production of actual quality – just look at many of the works discussed on this blog. Corporate publishing can claim an advantage marketing power, but a boast of having discerning taste or even special insight into what will actually sell is far more dubious. On that last point, if these houses really knew what would sell, booksellers would not be so concerned about the ability to return unsold inventory.
No-one has mentioned the burden self-published authors place on libraries. Generous self-published authors offer them as “donations” to libraries and are deeply offended when we reject them, explaining that we use the same standards we would for books we actually select and buy. “But they’re free!” they cry, ignoring the cost of cataloguing and processing their gems. We receive hundreds of copies of self-published books – poetry, cookbooks, inspirational, and copiously illustrated odes to dogs. Up to now we look at each title but the volume has become so great that we’ll have to stop and just reject all unsolicied works. It’s a shame because we do occasionally find a good and useful books (usually local history if you self-publishers ar reading this, but not of your house and please, please not genealogy).
I think this was a fair assessment of the situation. As a realistic self-published author (I prefer Independent) I often wonder if independent publishing will ever reach the apex of acceptability that independent films have. Suddenly, within the last 10 years, it’s ‘in’ to be an independent filmmaker.
Wouldn’t it be nice to see a platform (like Sundance) arise and catapult indpendent publishing into the mainstream. There’s definitely room.
Maybe we should start a Sundance Book Festival!
Again, independet publishing already widely exists. There are lots of indie publishers.
Self-publishing is not necessarily indie publishing in the sense of indie music or indie film (though it can be in some cases).
When we say “indie music” we mean small to large non-corporate labels like Dischord, Matador, etc.
We do not mean random person X record his vocals over bad rap beats and burning them onto a CDr.
Sadly, most self-publishing seems to be more like the latter than the former. But when it is like the former, no one disses it.
I’d like to address the comment by Scott Pomfret above: “Moreover, major publishers are often unwilling to take risks for certain niche markets (e.g. GLBT) and the few GLBT-specific houses are often too small and underfunded to take on all worthy books and, more important, help market them.”
First, one might argue that without promotion a book might as well not be published — I’m not sure that’s quite what you meant — but that’s only if you depend entirely on the publisher for promotion. I think most new authors do a lot of their own promotion; relying on the publisher is usually an exercise in frustration.
More importantly, your statement ” the few GLBT-specific houses are often too small and underfunded to take on all worthy books” — well, perhaps it’s true they won’t take on “all worthy books.” But I know that publishers who address the LGBT niche crave good solid fiction and most of them say there are very few really high quality gay-themed novels every year.
This can be confirmed by looking at the Lambda Award nominations each year. How many of the nominees are really extraordinary books?
In fact indie does equal self-publishing for some people in music and film. For example, the maker of Primer self-produced and distributed his Sundance-winning film, and the band Widespread Panic puts out it concert CDs entirely on its own. The later has the option of producing a studio album through Columbia but has declined to do so for five years and is said to intend never to go this route. These are not the largest enterprises in content, but they are successful and apparently unencumbered by any self-publishing angst. Its odd how, in a culture that so embraces entrepreneurship, only writers seem to nurture such fear and hostility toward independence. One thing’s for sure: this is an attitude that must please the established publishing industry.
As I said, it equals it in some cases, but in many other cases it does not.
Again, when we talk of “indie record labels” we mean record labels not affiliated with a major corporation. These labels range from small to large, but normally they mean labels that actually produce a fair amount of music and actively try to distribute them.
99% of music published on what is normally meant by “indie labels” is not “self-published”…. it is publisehd by an indie label. Which is to say, the majority of an indie label’s roster is not the label head’s band.
You might argue on a techincality that any music, from a dubbed 8 track cassette tape your 8 year old makes to the latest Def Jux release is “independent” but that seems like a pointless semantics game.
I’m not really sure what Widespread Panic has to do with this. They aren’t encumbered by “self-publishing angst,” but as a band that has released over a dozen albums on major labels, why on earth would they?
So they put out their own concert bootlegs in addition to their corporate CDs? That’s like Stephen King having “self-publishing angst” if he decided to self-publish a little chap-book of poetry.
If there is self-publishing angst it seems to me it would be some combination of 1) Not being validated by an outside source 2) not knowing if your work will sell and worryign about yoru financial risk and maybe 3) worry your work will be dismissed since you have no previous credit to your name.
Widespread Panic have been validated by a ton of outside sources, including labels that distribute their music, they have no financial risk (as they have built up a huge fan base by now, sadly AFAIC) and they have no risk of being dismissed, after all their accomplishements, just becasue they self-publish some bootlegs.
“Its odd how, in a culture that so embraces entrepreneurship, only writers seem to nurture such fear and hostility toward independence.”
No one is insulting authors who successfully self-publish. Agian, no one would insult Dave Eggars for “self-publishing” with McSweeneys. People are just justifably weary of random authors with POD books (just as they are of people selling CDrs on the subway or artists who sit by the movie theather downtown trying to sell paintings for 5 bucks a piece). If said author has good entrepreneuarial skills and sells a lot of books, would anyone look down on him? I don’t think so.
One other comment. Several people have talked about indie movies self-publishing.
I’m not sure how accurate this is. Film is different than print, but I think a fair generalization would be that in print the publisher has two main functions
a) Financial backing (the cost of printing the book)
b) distrobution (and we can lump marketing in here too)
Film is very expensive and every indie filmmaker I know personally or have read about gets financial backing. Often they cobble it from random places and maybe we can still call that self-”publishing,” I’ll buy that. However, none of them rely on themselves for distrobution. It would be extremely hard. They all constantly are trying to get another company to give them distrobution.
Basically, no one would see a movie that didn’t have distrobution. Movies that don’t get outside help there tend to be ones carried by the filmaker from one small fest to the other then abandoned.
Nothing wrong with that, of course, but like “indie labels” I think the kinds of movies most people conjure to mind when hearing “independent film” have outside distrobution.
I have to say I’ve developed what is probably prejudice against self-published authors becaues I’ve come across so many websites of wannabe authors who’ve self-published, and the samples they posted are all crap or completely uninteresting. It’s worse if the work is self-published, and they try to hide the fact. When you look through all the hype, hiding that fact, there’s no substance.
In music there is of course the story of Gary Wilson (sixpointfour.com) who has only recently received the recognition he deserves. His LPs in the 70′s were all so-called “vanity pressings” but based on these LPs floating around there he developed a small cult following which included some very prominent musicians: Matt Groening, The Residents, Beck and others. But back then no record company would talk to him. Now he’s been released by various indie labels and it’s a happy end.
What would be some examples of self-published books that have later been recognized for their greatness? I can only think of titels that had been rejected numerous times and later become enormous successes, Harry Potter, of course, and Confederacy of Dunces. In Germany there was book “Schlafes Brüder” (The Brother of Sleep?) which was rejected again and again but when published at last became a bestseller and was then made into a movie.
Good article – it prompted me to write an account of my experiences with self-publishing. It’s on my blog (link above) if you want to read it.
Self publishing can be fun as long as you don’t take it too seriously. It’s also become comparitively cheap now, with new print and software technologies. From my blog: “my brother spends more on Guinness and tobacco in six months than I spent publishing those two books.”
Where’s the harm in that and why is everyone so bothered?
It’s not the case that all indie films have outside investors, not do all of them have distribution deals. “Primer” had neither – its maker put up the money and distributed the film himself, arranging limited runs at art houses. There are quite of few other filmmakers who’ve done the same – I was just chatting with one who’s work was featured at the Tribeca Film Festival, and while he certainly looks for distribution, he generally shows his work at many art venues prior to making such a deal (and he has found distribution). As for the Widespread Panic point, as I noted, they have not put out a corporate disk in years, nor do they distribute through a label. Now perhaps some view anyone who ever did business with a corporation as forever forfeiting a claim to self-publishing (that would apply to Eggers too, I suppose) but my own view admits the possibility of emancipation. In any case, there are plenty of bands making at least part of their living through self-produced album sales.
I agree with the statement “If said author has good entrepreneurial skills and sells a lot of books, would anyone look down on him? I don’t think so.” However, among writers and publishing house employees, there’s a very different attitude toward an attempt at author independence, far more hostile that what one finds among people in music and film. That said, I don’t think most reader really know or care who publishes what the read. It’s just a question of whether the author can produce marketable work independent of a publishing firm, and whether he can find a way to get his work noticed on his own.
Further to this point, it’s been interesting to watch the changing attitude towards another form of self-publishing: blogs. While a lot of people in traditional media initially scorned them, lately they’ve been sourcing them as well, for everything from news to fiction. Most of these have little or no outside financial backing (a few have raised money as they’ve grown). And now we have an emerging trend toward turning blogs into books (s-called blooks or bloogs – sigh). The point is once a model begins to work, which is to say attract an audience and display the potential for profit, respectability tends to follow.
Of course this respect is based on sales, not some abstract concept of quality. The angst of solitary writers seeking third party validation is one thing; for many publishers, however, anything that sells commands respect, and anything with unproven marketability is dubious at best. This goes some way to explaining the latter’s antagonism toward something so financially uncertain as self-publishing.
Lovely essay. Thank you for writing it.
All good comments. I decided to toss my hat into the self-publishing ring recently. I think my novel is good, but I have a distant cousin who is self-published (4 novels) and, judging by the one he fosted off on my dad, he should have stayed home.
The bottom line is that anybody can go to the beach wearing a Speedo. Some (most?) people shouldn’t. The ones who shouldn’t get remembered.
I live in a small and somewhat arty — but not big-name arty — town. I recently attended their art / book show, hoping to find soemthing interesting. It was nearly all self-published poets. Also self-published self-help authors. The better self-help authors had made it into the commercial press. Self-published New Age authors. All trying to get you to buy their books, thin PBs that often cost as much as a trade PB. It made me very depressed, and now I understand why.
I do not believe that this town is full of lunatics, so I think the show attracted the lunatics from the larger matropolitan area.
“What would be some examples of self-published books that have later been recognized for their greatness?”
This is probably the crux of the issue.
Putting aide my disagreement that POD/Self-publishign is comparable to “indie film” or “indie music,” the reason those things are respected is because they have produced lots of work that has been declared great. Resevoir dogs, Clerks, Fugazi, Cannibal Ox, etc.
I’ve yet to see a self-published or POD book be respected on its artistic merits yet. It might happen, but I think a more likely scenario is inide publishign will grow.
“Now perhaps some view anyone who ever did business with a corporation as forever forfeiting a claim to self-publishing (that would apply to Eggers too, I suppose) but my own view admits the possibility of emancipation.”
That wasn’t what I was saying. I’m saying a band that has, in its genre (a genre I personally despise, but whatever) has been widely acclaimed and validated at every level including the corporate level is hardly going to have “self-publishing angst” on the level of a musician who has never gotten anyone to use or distribute their work.
They aren’t comparable at all in my mind.
“However, among writers and publishing house employees, there’s a very different attitude toward an attempt at author independence, far more hostile that what one finds among people in music and film.”
Well, I think the attitude is fairly similar. In my experience, totally self-published work in music and film (or print) is just ignored. It doesn’t factor into the literary world or the general film world (with a few possible exceptions).
I sound liek a broken record here, but again, people like McSweeneys, which are really what is more comparable to indie films or indie music, aren’t looked down upon… at least I haven’t experienced it (Well, certain people hate McSweeney’s, but for other reasons)
“It’s just a question of whether the author can produce marketable work independent of a publishing firm, and whether he can find a way to get his work noticed on his own.”
Agreed. The day someone sells as many POD books as Franzen (or better yet Steele) no one will insult them.
Also, Gerrib, I love the speedo analogy.
“Your argument is fine as far as it goes, but it would be a lot stronger if it dealt with the increasing tendency of the major publishing houses to substantially wall themselves off from emerging writers.”
I hear this a lot, but I never see any statistics. And if we’re trading anecdotal evidence, I can, without even thinking very hard, name half a dozen writers of my personal acquaintance who’ve had a first novel published by a major house in the last couple of years. What gives?
For what it’s worth, the YA fantasy novel Eragon was originally self-published before being picked up by Knopf. Apparently, Carl Hiaasen’s stepson read the self-published version, loved it, and word eventually worked its way back to the powers at Knopf. Commerciality ensued.
I’m not sure it’s widely recognized as great, but it seems to be quite commercial.
It has also, of course, made me deeply wary of any self-published or POS authors.
I am loving this typo, if typo it is.
Love the essay too. It makes me more sympathetic to the more sensible self-published folks. As a vegetarian who’s been tarred with the same brush as PETA and other “fluffy-bunny” vegetarians, and a Wiccan who rolls his eyes at the “ooga-booga” witches in their black robes (outdoors! in summer!) and their scary eye makeup and their piles of silver jewelry (sufficient to guarantee they’d pass the Salem Float Test), I understand what it’s like to be embarrassed by the behavior of wackos with whom I nominally share a category!
Don’t judge the garment when all you’ve seen is the fringe, say I.
“I’m saying a band that has, in its genre (a genre I personally despise, but whatever) has been widely acclaimed and validated at every level including the corporate level is hardly going to have “self-publishing angst” on the level of a musician who has never gotten anyone to use or distribute their work. They aren’t comparable at all in my mind.”
Personal taste aside, the more one achieves the more one has to loose, and I’m not at all sure institutionally recognized success attenuates the fear associated with going independent.
“In my experience, totally self-published work in music and film (or print) is just ignored. It doesn’t factor into the literary world or the general film world (with a few possible exceptions).”
No one is arguing this is easy to do, but as with many emerging business models, initial success tends to be the exception rather than the rule. This is not in itself a reason for rejecting a new model.
“The day someone sells as many POD books as Franzen (or better yet Steele) no one will insult them.”
That’s setting the bar a bit higher than that by which house-published work is evaluated; otherwise so few books would be considered successful that I doubt we would have a publishing industry. But the comment does illustrate my point; while I won’t wade into the debate on whether Frazen has genuine literary merit, I’d hope most would agree that Steele’s commercial success demonstrates a certain decoupling of sales from artistic brilliance. When we speak of respect here, we are speaking of it as it applies to economic success and not some subjective assessment of creative achievement. No one should kid themselves that what’s being praised or derided has much to do with art, and those that care about art might consider whether their view on self-published works is colored by a lack of interest in anything that is not massively remunerative.
Meh… one one level, the more you have the more you have to loose. On the other, more realistic level, the more you have the more secure you are. Widespread Panic KNOWS they can sell their work themselves. They have basically no risk involved. Not very similar to a lonely P.O.D. author.
Also, Widespread is safe because, even if they didn’t know if their new model of selling would work, they know they could quickly go back to a big label with no problems.
David Moles: in terms of your response to my comment (I’m pasting in the exhange below), I guess we’re talking across purposes. If you define statistics narrowly, no, I can’t offer any. But if you’re talking about factual proof — yeah, I can offer that. Major houses are walling themselves off by not accepting unsolicitied submissions. (I’m defining a major house as one that publishes literary fiction as well as non-fiction and mass market fiction and has money to spare.) Some houses will be upfront about this policy on their webpages, others have gotten into the annoying (and somewhat creepy) habit of not stating their policy at all while providing no contact or submissions link. You should visit a few sites to see what I mean.
But then maybe what you’re talking about is writers who are agented. But even here, writers aren’t necessarily being as well treated as they might hope: having an agent doesn’t guarantee acceptance by a house, and acceptance by a house doesn’t guarantee career success.
Incidentally, the situation you describe re: your acquaintances is, ah, unusual to say the least. Maybe you could offer more detail.
I wrote: “Your argument is fine as far as it goes, but it would be a lot stronger if it dealt with the increasing tendency of the major publishing houses to substantially wall themselves off from emerging writers.”
David wrote: I hear this a lot, but I never see any statistics. And if we’re trading anecdotal evidence, I can, without even thinking very hard, name half a dozen writers of my personal acquaintance who’ve had a first novel published by a major house in the last couple of years. What gives?
I have occasionally thought of self-publishing, which for me meant, like, hand-binding five or ten copies of something, because I like making things. I think of the early Hogarth Press, Virginia Woolf covered in ink, working the tiny tiny press in their basement or wherever, running off Vanessa’s prints and T.S. Eliot’s poems. I think making your own stuff is awesome, as are, for example, rappers with their own sucky CD-Rs, or their 80s analogue, the sick teenage DJs selling their homemade mixtapes on the street. Despite the disdain with which self-published (by which I mean, dude and his boombox and the high-speed-dubbing function) music is held by some around here, I raise my skinny fist for such cockroach ingenuity/power. As everyone knows, the best noise music in Japan was put out on tiny tape labels, and so on. Also, I would like to give a shout-out to the dude with the green mohawk and the pacifier, yessir you are beautiful, keep it up please.
However as is dissected with cruel precision above, if someone is publishing becuz they have some weird idea of being a PUBLISHED AUTHOR then I don’t really have sympathy for them. This comment is not contra the original post, just sticking up for kids running off CDRs/cassettes/mp3s on myspace (I grudgingly include), of which I have been and will again be a member.
If you want an example of a self-published—>successful book, how ’bout The Education of Henry Adams, or The Seven Pillars of Wisdom by Lawrence of Arabia?
“For what it’s worth, the YA fantasy novel Eragon was originally self-published before being picked up by Knopf.”
Um, yes and no. The author’s parents owned and operated a small commercial publishing company for a number of years before the book was written. So it’s only “self” published because the author is related to the owners.
Finn:
I believe you missed David’s point. I think everyone knows it is hard for a new author to get published and many publishing houses are walled up. The part David was questioning, I think, was the “increasingly” bit. At least, this is what I’d like to see statistics for.
Yes, it is hard to publish a first novel… but is it harder than in 1996? Or 1976? or 1946? Is there any evidence it is “increasingly” getting harder?
The phrasing just reminds me of that silly B.R. Meyers essay from 2000 whose tagline specified he was attacking an “increasing tendency in american prose” and yet his targets were people like Delillo and McCarthy who had been publishing since the 60s and 70s.
If you make a significant profit on the books you self-publish, you are an “independent publisher.”
Good article. I would probably never self publish unless it wa s for a specific reason such as sharing some idea I had that I thought it absolutely essential the public knew, if I were in some kind of missionary zeal a la Julia Cameron. . I did however have the misfortune to take the POD route, which is even more self-delusionary than self publishing. I agree that the problem with both these means comes when the author seludes herself that she can stand alongside of authors whose books have been chosen for publication by those wise enough to judge good writing. A part of me still likes the idea of going against the tide and doing my own thing via POD but I know better. I know that it is only through extensive rewriting and soul searching, if then that my work will be deemed worthy of publication. I have cancelled my comtract with Publish America for the POD novel Teacher on the Run, because I know that it was not subjected to any kind of scrutiny before it was accepted, and that the mere fact it was published does not mean it passes the standard for public exposure. It is a harsh reality but it is true. It imay be true that everybody can write a book but that does not mean that those books will be read by anybody other than their relatives and good friends.
Interesting discussion. Historical note: Walt Whitman was self-published, at least at first.
I predict POD and the net will eventually result in author associations (similar to the way lawyers form small law practices) where authors who produce like-style material will pool their resources to hire editors, marketing folks, distribution representatives, and others to improve their product and get it to the public. Authors would make partner the similar to the way lawyers do. This could probably be done for about what they are paying their agents currently and they could keep more of the profits. Might not get them into bookstores, but it would create an internet site where readers could buy POD with a real assurance of quality.
That is what self-publishing lacks at the moment – consumer confidence in quality.
Here’s a practical problem regarding self-published writers from a writer’s standpoint. It used to mean something to have a book come out. Now, the first question I get asked is, “Oh, who are you going with? I hear Publish America’s good. That’s who I’m with.”
There’s a lot of really bad writing out there. A lot. Now, with good photography and Photoshop, tons of these books are coming out, and they look just like books that have vetted, edited, and paid for. The customer doesn’t know the difference. He picks up a book that reads like crap, and he thinks the book next to it on the shelf is just as bad. You read a few of these in a row, and it’s enough to make you swear off reading completely. Now I know there are exceptions to this; that there are talented people who, for whatever reason, use POD or self-publish. But I’m talking about the rule.
It’s harder to talk to booksellers, or get booksignings. Booksellers have been burned so often, they’re wary of anybody who says he’s an “author”.
Fewer newspapers cover books. I have to wonder if the rise of POD books isn’t one of the reasons. Reviewers are inundated by slush, and some of these “published authors” won’t take no for an answer. They’re also taking over organizations like Sisters in Crime etc., so they can talk about their issues, which is mostly about how they can get distribution. Many professional organizations are now limiting members to legitimately published authors only.
If you haven’t really earned it, you’re not published. You’ve got a book. It might be the apple of your eye, but you’re not a pro.
“one [sic] one level, the more you have the more you have to loose. On the other, more realistic level, the more you have the more secure you are. Widespread Panic KNOWS they can sell their work themselves. They have basically no risk involved. ”
Well, I wouldn’t go that far. Look what happened to Prince when he started putting out his own stuff. Past success is no guarantee of the future (that’s sounds like some line from a stockbroker’s ad, but its true).
“There’s a lot of really bad writing out there. A lot.”
That’s very true, but much of it is published commercially, as a casual inspection of the shelves as Boarders will attest. Blaming POD for the decline of letters is a bit like blaming pot smokers for the deterioration of the ozone layer – the later may give off some noxious gas and some of them may be a bit delusional, but they’re not the ones spoiling the atmosphere.
“99.999% of self-publishers all tried to go the normal route. They just couldn’t cut it there.”
Hmm… I’d like to see where that statistic came from, because a whole lot of the folks I’ve met who have gone the vanity route did so because they didn’t know there was another way. They wrote the book first before learning anything about publishing, then looked around and said, “Okay, where do I send it to get it published?” They found an ad in the back of a magazine or looked up “publisher” on the web and lo and behold, there was someone who said the magic words, “We want to publish you!”
In fact, based entirely on anecdotal evidence (mostly comments and questions from people who find out that I write books), I think a large segment of the general public believes that it costs money to get published. Hence there’s no inner critic asking, “Um, why are these people so eager to have my manuscript AND my money?”
But how sad the results can be! I’ve met authors who were trying to hand-sell their hardback, vanity-published novels. After a couple of years of unsuccessful attempts, they were ready to burn their cases of books for firewood, because they couldn’t even give the books away.
I do get a bit testy when I see discussions comparing “POD publishing” and traditional publishing, because POD is a technology, not a type of publisher. POD allows any publisher, vanity, subsidy, or traditional, to produce books on-demand. I see that John Wiley, a well-respected traditional publisher, has POD services for low-demand books. Technically, the definitions are these:
Self-publishing: you take on all the expense, hire a book printer, buy your own ISBN number, file for copyright. You ARE the publisher, and that is why it is called self-publishing.
Vanity publishing: Publishers who accept just about any readable manuscript that comes to them, but authors must pay to have their books put into print. The publishers buys the ISBN numbers and distributes them to the authors, so the ISBN number is associated with the vanity publisher (which can make it hard to get picked up by a distributor).
Subsidy publishing: Small presses sometimes don’t have the funds to cover printing, and ask that the author pay part of the printing costs. Technically, the difference between the vanity and the subsidy publisher is that the subsidy publisher is selective, but you may see the two terms used interchangeably.
Why No Love for the Self Published Folks…
An interesting post at SlushPile.net about self pub.
After you’re done reading, if you’re curious, here’s the answer to the Clark Gable v. William Faulker comeback:
“Yes, Mr. Gable. What do you do?”……
I used to teach classes in how to self-publish, because I had worked for a printer and also published short runs of community anthology stuff. However, my absolute rule was that people understood all the practicalities of self-publishing – that the market for their books would be minimal and they should never think it was a way to get rich and famous.
Consequently my “students” published books that included family histories, language workbooks (for Lithuanian children), a how-to book on guitar playing, an alternative history text, some poetry collections, a short story collection – the list goes on. The point is, all of those books had viable niche markets and part of the course was about how to reach those markets. In the case of the Lithuanian language book, she was a teacher and could not find the resources she needed so wrote her own. Most people published less than 100 copies. They got their books out to the people they were targeting. They did not go around hassling other poor souls, nor did they send their books off to commercial publishers hoping to be discovered. They treated their books as products that satisfied a certain market.
But I have seen plenty of the other kind of self-publisher. In fact, I have a collection of the worst sp books – I keep those that illustrate how to make a book look awful and read worse. In my experience, the worst examples of self-publishing are usually fiction writers.
TL: Your point is well-taken, but the simple answer to your question is unfortunately, no, it’s not the same now as it used to be. I understand the point that you’re making (though I’m not sure it’s the same Dave was making, since he gave so little detail): it’s always been difficult to be a writer — so many have been frustrated by the publishing process. But back then so many things were different: more people read literary novels, for one thing. And, as a writer, you could deal directly with a publisher. That’s over now. In my opinion, big houses should be called on it. They should re-open the doors a little wider. It’s a reasonable request, because ultimately if literary fiction becomes a product funneled exclusively through MFA programs and agents, it will become increasingly plastic. (Sorry to use that adverb again, but it’s suitable.) And in the meantime, writers have to do their bit: keep trying, not become bitter, and, above all, produce good work.
By the way, if you’re interested, I’ve collected some of the comments that have interested me most at my site (www.screen-novel.blogspot.com).
Jeff:
Oddly, prince was a person I was thinking of as an example to prove my point. Sure, he might not have sold as much since he went his own way, but he still sells a lot, his albums still get reviewed in major publications and he can live of goin his own way. It is far easier for Prince to sell a self-published album on a mass level than someone with no connections or fan base from past success.
FH:
“But back then so many things were different: more people read literary novels, for one thing. ”
Did they though? I’m not sure I believe this. I might believe that a higher percentage did, but with population growth… but maybe percent is what you meant. Still… I dunno. It might seem like everyone who was anyone in Germany back in the day read Goethe, but more likely the real masses didn’t read shit.
The fact of the matter is, you can take a NYT best seller list from pretty much any year in the past and al\most all the books will have been forgotten. You are lucky to have one important literary text on a best seller list in a year. This is as true for 2006 as 1956. I might believe you that things have changed… but I’d have to see some real evidence.
Taxi:
I’ve been thinking a lot about your post, because I grew up in the DIY punk scene and have always been a fan of people doing things and doing things themselves. So why am I weary of self-published books? Or at least, much more weary than when I see a self-released CD.
I think it comes down, for the most part, to the what another poster said: “That is what self-publishing lacks at the moment – consumer confidence in quality. ”
More specifically…. despite the fact I own hundreds of DIY records, I AM weary of a random DIY music release. I’m not gonna buy a random CD if I know nothing of the artist. So when I buy one, I buty it because I’ve heard good things from people I trust, or I’ve seen the band live and enjoyed them or I’ve read good reviews in some of the thousands of DIY music zines out there.
What I”m getting at is that their is a culture and community there that works, on some level, as quality control for DIY music. It doesn’t exist yet in books. I don’t see self-published authors read, there aren’t important and quality magazines that review and cover self-published books, etc.
Part of this is inherent to books of course (very few people regularly see writers read and most who do mostly go to see writers they know. You can be pretty assured a concert will be fun if you like the type of music generally, yet sitting still listening to a horrible poet read isn’t a risk most want to take).
Likewise, books are such a time investment most people don’t want to take risks. I can listen to a full album in 30 mintues or I can go to a band’s website and check out all theri songs on MP3… nothing really similar goes on with books.
bravo. well-written, informative, and entertaining.
Good editors matter.
POD and self-publishing will only make good editors MORE important and in demand.
Let’s start by taking self-publishing for granted, OK? It’s not going to go away. So where do we take it from there?
A whole new sub-industry of publishing should (and probably will) emerge: Editors hiring their services to self-published authors. High-profile editors will get star status. Authors will buy EDITORS WEEKLY instead of PUBLISHERS WEEKLY.
I anticipate a development where editors will get back the status they lost to publishers’ accountants in the last few decades — and then some.
(if this comment contains typos or mispellings, it’s cos i’ve been up for 30+ hours running on coffee and lipton brisk iced tea, okay?)
Good article. I myself have SP’d some books but only after going through heavy editing and getting others to read the novel at hand for comments and critisizing before sending it off to the printers! The red pen is your friend. You’ll thank it later. ^_^
Finn: I’m a science fiction writer, so my circle of acquaintances includes an inordinate number of science fiction writers, and maybe it just happens to include an inordinate number of lucky science fiction writers, but here’s a list: Elizabeth Bear (Random House/Spectra), Toby Buckell (Tor), Hal Duncan (Macmillan), Justine Larbalestier (Penguin/Razorbill), Tim Pratt (Random House/Spectra), John Scalzi (Tor). Yes, I’m pretty sure they’ve all got agents, and most of them probably had agents before they were published, but they’re all emerging writers and they’ve all sold first novels to major publishing houses; if the houses are walling themselves off, they don’t seem to be doing a particularly effective job of it.
Understand, I’m not saying you’re wrong, I’m just saying that from this emerging writer’s point of view the publishers don’t look much like they’re trying to publish fewer emerging writers. (They may be trying to read less slush, but nobody who’s read slush could really blame them for that. Luck is involved in getting published, yes, but it’s not really a game of chance.) If the claim is that it’s harder for a new writer to get a good book published than it used to be, I’d like to see some numbers — for instance, has the percentage of first novels among the novels published each year declined? If so, how substantially? Emerging writers want to know.
Really the problem isn’t self-publishing so much as the people who are self-publishing. Most of them have big egos with irrational expectations of immediate grandeur. They don’t do the work required that would give them a shot at being successful, rather they rest on their laurels and wait for the world to worship them.
If the world doesn’t notice, they will hold book signings and attend writing groups (especially mine) where they will ignore all feedback on any work they submit because, well, they’re real writers and real writers are too good for critique. They also go to book conferences, where they think self-publishing gives them carte blanche to give bad advice to the ‘unpublished masses’ and corner agents/editors/pro-authors in a misguided belief that they care what these people have to say. I have seen this over and over again.
It’s the behavior of the authors that gives self-publishing a bad name. Self-publishing itself, I think, is a viable option in the publishing industry, but due to the way the self-published authors behave, it’s become synonymous with ‘I’m clueless’.
And yes, I have met exceptions, there are always exceptions–Eragon comes to mind, or even the GLBT romance writers that posted in this comment thread. I love the exceptions, they’re awesome, they’re using self-publishing the way it should be used. BUT the vast majority of the self-published are as I described.
They seem to have forgotten respect is earned, not given simply because their name is on a book cover.
M
Demented Michelle, you nailed it!
Falkner’s real reply: “Up yours Gable! I’m traditionally published, which makes me better than some self-published jerk! I have an agent and editors like me and I get free food at published authors night at Applebee’s. Your a dumb actor and you didn’t get a publisher to like you like I did – so, eeeeeaaaat meeeee!”
more or less
“Oddly, prince was a person I was thinking of as an example to prove my point. Sure, he might not have sold as much since he went his own way, but he still sells a lot, his albums still get reviewed in major publications and he can live of going his own way. It is far easier for Prince to sell a self-published album on a mass level than someone with no connections or fan base from past success.”
Well, this just goes to show that success is a relative thing – in the industry, Prince’s decision to go his own way is generally viewed as a commercial failure. Obviously, anyone with resources (from publishing or any other source) is in more of a position to take risk than someone starting out on his own, but that does not mean there’s no pain to a loss. (Hey, you should hear the screams in Redmond when Microsoft misses an earnings number.)
TL: I don’t know very much about Germany, but I doubt it was the same even when you take percentages into account. Think of Britain from the Elizabethan Period to the Victorian: think of the wide variety of social classes in the audiences for Shakespeare’s plays; think of the greater popularity of poetry; think of the great Victorian novels that were serialized in magazines. All these differences are qualitative, even when you take into account the people who didn’t (or couldn’t) read. I think you’re more on target about the differences between consuming music/movies and books. People need to talk about this more because it really gets to the heart of the matter. A lot of commentary on “the state of the novel” assumes people read in a more-or-less static manner across the ages. I don’t think this is true. My own feeling is people are so influenced by image-based media that we’ve all become similar to directors in our imaginations. (It was when I realized I often did this in my own mind that I got the idea of writing fiction in the form of a screenplay. I don’t know if it’s going to do my career any damn good, but it’s been liberating to sometimes write in this style.)
David: I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree on how much publishers are walled off these days or if they’re walled off at all. ONe thing is for sure: it was different as recently as a decade ago. Maybe some big SF publishers are more open to work that comes over the transom, but the big lit houses have become as sealed as forts … and agents hold the key. There’s such a range of agents that it’s impossible to generalize about them. But the number who are both “established” and interested in literary writing is pretty small. If nothing else, it creates an enormous bottleneck.
p.s. I enjoyed the work you posted on your site.
Thanks for a good attempt at a balanced approached. It’s the best I’ve seen yet. I do disagree, though, with the statement that the traditional publishing system “is the one we have,” implying that it’s what writers in this day and age have to live with. I’ve read too many terrific self-published books (and seen too much traditionally published crap on mainstream bookshelves) to buy into that limiting belief system or accept somebody else’s notion of what makes a good read. Writers who believe in their work and want to share it no longer need the blessings or the assistance of old-school publishing houses. And that really seems to eat at some people. Go figure. Aren’t there bigger things to get upset about? Like people who are making bombs instead of books? I suspect that the people who get hot and bothered with those who want to make their own books are really blocked creatives who identify with the “crazy self-publishers” more than they’d like to admit.
Thanks, Finn; glad you liked it. Maybe it’s different in lit-fic; I only know one or two people who’ve gone that way, and I don’t really know whether the traditional-seeming road they’ve taken (MFA school + agent + short fiction = two-book contract for a collection and a novel) is old enough not to count as “these days”. At any rate, I’ll agree that the bottleneck has moved — or maybe been replaced by several different bottlenecks, in series (which is pushing the metaphor about as far as it will go, I think); I’m just not sure whether it’s effectively any narrower, and I really do wonder, if it was, how would we tell?
You fail to note the long and valued tradition of self-published works in America. I feel POD has further tarnished the self-published route, because it requires little or no financial investment. You also assume an author can’t be both self-published and published by traditional publishers, as I am.
Who, exactly, are you addressing DH? And what is the “long and valued tradition” exactly?
SOmeone way back mentioned needing a Sundance Festival to separate the self-published wheat from the chaff. There are a couple of relatively well-known contests that put self-published, small press and university press books together. One is the Foreword Magazine Book of the Year Award and the other is the Independent Publishers Book Awards (IPPY) both of which hold their award ceremonies during Book Expo America. There need to be more ways to vet POD, self-publisher, whatever, books for readers, booksellers and libraries. Disclaimer: I’m self-published and up for awards in both contests.
Self-publishing? We’re banking on it. We’ve started a magazine called A Novel Way (www.anovelway.com) that attempts to combine published, self-published and “just writing for now, but will soon become famous” into one homogeneous enterprise. From our perspective, the main thing separating self-publishing from published work is advertising. For clarity, let’s consider the same situation outside of the publishing world.
You’re an inventor. You’ve invented a fantastic product. You’ve scraped some money together and made a prototype and now have a factory set to mass produce it. So what? It does you absolutely no good in terms of selling your product to have a million of these ingenious products lining your home because no one even knows it’s there. To sell it, you need to – ADVERTISE! Now if you’re part of a well-known company (fill in a well-known company name here), they have the money to hire a PR firm to concoct a pitch and then BUY media time to get the message out. When the general buying public sees a product on TV, INSTANT VALIDATION! Why? Because it’s a recognizable form of how and where they make their buying decisions. And the products on TV? They can be crap when you get them home, but it matters not because they SAW IT ON TV. So the name of the inventor doesn’t matter, credentials don’t matter, the advertising medium matters because the audience knows and recognizes commercials as valid. Therefore, the product becomes valid. The same holds true for publishing. If you are not advertising in the EXACT same way and in the same recognizable form as published authors, your customer notes a difference. And the truth is that customers that buy published books DO NOT click through endless websites, maneuvering through a maze of book titles to find one they like! Take for example asking directions to take you to your favorite restaurant. You first need to know the restaurant is there before you ask directions or take to the road. People just don’t drive aimlessly for miles and miles hoping they’ll find something they like. Doesn’t happen in the world of restaurants or in the world of purchasing books.
Now let’s take publishing, in becoming published you have the publishing group behind you and are part of a team. In self-publishing, you have to go it alone – reinventing the wheel or inventing it entirely. Because of this, a single author’s budget doesn’t stretch that far. Or it’s lost in a sea of high-powered, probably much more professional ads. That’s where we come in. We hope to end this short-coming by consolidating self-published efforts. In this way, people are no longer going it alone. They become part of a community in much the same way published authors are. Further we plan to advertise published, self-published alongside up-and-coming author’s works so that the audience – your customer – does NOT discern a difference between any of them. All they see is that all of them are side-by-side in one convenient recognizable form – a magazine. They’ve made purchases from this medium before and they will again. They trust it. In creating a community, we make a powerful connection that puts information directly into the hands of customers.
Needless to say, we’re very excited about the self-publishing trend and hope to encourage it. We feel that ultimately it’s the customer that decides what it is they like and what they don’t like – and that’s just the way it should be.
““What would be some examples of self-published books that have later been recognized for their greatness?””
Hundreds, including Mark Twain, Walt Whitman (who stayed self-published his entire life, as far as I know), Anais Nin, The Joy of Cooking…and such modern-day bestsellers as Eragon, Mutant Message Down Under, and The Christmas Box.
Is there a lot of crap being self-published or subsidy published? Yes. But there’s also some truly great stuff. As a publicity and marketing copywriter/book coach working with many self-published authors, I an fortunate to see a lot of the good stuff. And some of it is far, far better than what I see coming out of New York.
Many of these authors chose self-publishing with their eyes open, for assorted valid reasons. Some of them didn’t even try the traditional route, because New York gives so little support to its authors that they may as well get the financial reward for doing nearly all the marketing.
As the poster with the series of GLBT books points out, there are even valid reasons (sometimes) for gong with a subsidy publisher–please let’s not call them POD, which is a printing process that can be used by traditional, self-, or subsidy publishers (in fact, I’ll be using on-demand printing for my self-published seventh book, Grassroots Marketing for Authors and Publishers–even though I have published three books with “legitimate” houses and could get a publisher if I wanted to). But if you don’t own your ISBN, you’re not self-publishing, no matter what anyone says.
BTW, I have a lot of resources for authors and publishers at http://www.frugalmarketing.com , especially in the Tipsheet Archives and Down to Business magazine.
I will agree and disagree. I got my first book deal last year with an enormous publishing house. They encouraged me not to get an agent because “an agent can’t get you a better deal…” What an agent could’ve done was make sure they didn’t completely ruin my marketing, which they did, and my book failed. I had a total of two book signings. I would’ve had three but my publicist accidentally booked my flight out at a time earlier than my book signing that day.
I’m a published author and, yes, I tell people I’m a published author. What you fail to acknowledge in berating people who do this are the years I spent struggling as a freelance writer when people berated me and belittled me when I’d say “I’m a freelance writer.” Any variation of “I’m a freelance writer,” “I’m a writer” or “I’m an author” and people just look at you like dirt. But then when you whip out “I’m a published author” they think you’re a conceited jerk. What does being a “published author” really translate to for me? It means I finally have the qualifications to get a day job paying as much as anyone with a business degree got their first year out of college. (you know, those people who acted like I was a loser when I said I’m a writer). Perhaps this just means I need to leave Kentucky, but I think you’re being a bit insensitive in your analysis of what some of these people you perceive as snotty pricks go through. I like being a published author because it means that, for one bright, shining moment in my life, I was — undoubtedly — better than these bastards who have tortured me since I was very young. Whatever they might say about my awkward social habits, or my glasses, or my beliefs, I can look at the vast majority of them and know that I am worth more to society than they are.
Nobody wakes up wanting to be an asshole. It happens as a response to their environments. Meet enough scumbags, and you become an asshole. Have enough people look down on you, and your whole life becomes a struggle for some kind of validity. Being a published author, or a medical doctor, or a lawyer, or a successful business owner becomes the one license you have to feel worthy of any of life’s rewards. That’s what happens when you live at the bottom of a pile of society’s bullshit — you want to dig your way out by any means so you can fill your lungs with something other than excrement.
In any event, I am now thinking about publishing my own fiction (my non-fiction is optioned by the same house that annihilated my first book). Do I think publishers are meanies? No, they invited me to publish my first book when I was only 26. But I do think they failed miserably, and I want another outlet that offers me more control over my work and its marketing.
I have really enjoyed reading the initial posting, as well as all of the comments following. As I read, I kept jumping up with a response, only to find it covered a few posts later; especially the comparison to the indie music and film worlds (a comparison that I believe to be valid and have made many times).
I do have two things to add.
In operating AuthorsBookshop.com, I have come to know a great number of indie-published authors of many different stripes. Self published, subsidy published, vanity published and small and micro presses as well. The one thing I can say about all of them is that there is not one thing you can say about all of them. I have read a lot of generalizations about the self-published author here. I would caution that there are many paths to getting a book into print, and many motivations for wanting to do so. Some are better than others at different times and different circumstances.
Considering the collection at AuthorsBookshop.com as a sample, I can demonstrate that there are some very very fine books independently published (I use this phrase in what seems to be the more liberal sense – a book published independent of the traditional publishing machinery) and some not-as-excellent. But please consider that even those that are not in the top tier are often well worth taking a look at, well worth give a shot at reading.
The second thing I would like to add is that this very discussion is evidence that attitudes toward self (and subsidy) publishing are changing. I think 5 years ago, this discussion would not even have taken place. Self-publishing was considered indistinguishable from vanity publishing. At least at this point we are willing to discuss and debate the merits openly and intelligently.
If you are looking for a good “filter” for finding quality subsidy press published books, you might give PODdy Mouth a visit: http://girlondemand.blogspot.com/
She seems to mislabel subsidy published books as “PODs,” but then who doesn’t.
By the way Bryan – there have been mornings when I have woken up wanting to be an asshole… but then I realize how much work it is and give up.
What concerns me most about the original post and the following comments, is that no one seems to be addressing the issue of creativity. The initial post flogs the lengthy and complex process of gaining social acceptance within the established publishing industry, likening the self-published author to some loser-type who rejects the status quo and sets up his own system of one-thing-or-another. Sounds kinda like what creative people are supposed to do. Isn’t that what sets them apart from the hacks who just fill in the blanks on the pre-printed form? (Or grind out formulaic genre fiction on command.)
I’ve been a writer and editor for 25 years, watching the book publishing industry degenerate from producing the likes of Faulkner to comic books. Is that what’s happened to American culture? Perhaps the establishment-as-it-is is so preoccupied with the bottom line that it’s tossed out the baby with the bath water. Just a thought.
As I said, I didn’t notice (though maybe I missed it) anyone here concerned about art, creativity. Only protecting the status quo. At some point, you’ve got to consider, Is the status quo worth protecting? Who does it serve anymore, apart from the shareholders?
Do believe something like 5 international conglomerates now control about 90% of U.S. trade publishing. Think about that a while.
As a writer, and a conscientious one, with considerable respect for the language and the art, it’s insulting to see all the crap that’s published by the best houses. Sure, people buy it, but their choices are limited by the selections made by a relatively small group of people in New York, who berate the quality, yet admit (and whine about) rejecting better manuscripts.
I routinely discourage aspiring young writers. They’re pathetic, like innocent ghetto kids with big dreams of getting into the NBA. I mean, what are the chances? Do believe the energies of the starry-eyed and talented would be better spent feathering their own nests than propping up the pompous delusions of an exclusive subset of the intelligentsia. I mean, where the heck would publishers be without the writers?
And I suspect the industry doth protest too much about self-publishing. What do they care? They own the distribution, as one poster pointed out. Self-publishers really don’t have much of chance. The powers-that-be appear more and more to be fixated on suffocating anyone they don’t control.
“Do believe something like 5 international conglomerates now control about 90% of U.S. trade publishing. Think about that a while.”
I thought about that when I was trying to get published. I thought, If that’s the case, I sure better try to get published with one of them. It will give my book the best chance of being read. So I queried an agent, who took me on, and shopped my book around, and it was bought by Simon and Schuster. Not -quite- that complex a process after all.
The industry, from what I have noticed, in terms of editors and publishers, doesn’t complain about self-publishing. They don’t care about it at all. The people I see complaining about vanity (more than self) publishing are bookstore managers who are deluged with requests for signings and stockings for books no one will ever buy, librarians who have to turn down requests to catalogue books no one will read, and other writers, who are tired of having people come up to them and say, “Oh, you’re published? I’m published, too, with Xlibris. We should blurb each other!”
As for comic books, there is nothing wrong with a good comic book. People who claim that the publishing world used to produce geniuses like Faulkner and now produce only drivel tend to forget that while Faulkner was being published, so was a lot of drivel. And so are a lot of good writers being published now, among the current drivel. The drivel tends to keep the money coming in so that the industry can afford to take a chance on good new writers. Which, time and again, they do.
Bill Smith,
You said: 99.999% of self-publishers all tried to go the normal route. They just couldn’t cut it there. I don’t think that is entirely correct. I am a self published author, but…before I went this route I was published by a traditonal publisher. I chose self the second time around because I want to be in control of my book(s).
After what I learned and experienced in the publishing biz, I would never go that route again. Why would you when you can have your cake and eat it too?
I know maybe a half-dozen people who have self-published, and have never encountered ANY of the bullying, obnoxious types you describe. The only one I even know of was some lady who published a cook book of some kind, then made some kind of an ass of herself promoting it at a book show, and was picked up by traditional houses as an author truly dedicated to sales and worthy of publication.
And, as a poster pointed out above, the traditional houses publish loads of drivel. So what really sets them apart from self-publishers? Certainly, it isn’t quality. They control the distribution channels. That’s about it.
This whole argument sounds like a sour grapes thing to me. Like those published by tradtional houses upset that they played by rules and these snotty upstarts (to one way of thinking) found another way.
So what’s the real problem? That they DARE put themselves on the level of being “published authors”?
I suppose people have been shot for lesser offenses…..
Great discussion. Someone called “a reader” posted on April 21 that it takes more than one person to write a book. I’ve found that this is especially true in proofreading. Many people don’t realize that when authors miss typos & other errors, it is not simply from carelessness. Here is something I actually learned in college: When you read something you have written, your brain already expects it to say what you think you wrote, and “tricks” you into believing that you read it again. Another person will always catch mistakes that even the most careful self-editor will miss.
“Is there a lot of crap being self-published or subsidy published? Yes. But there’s also some truly great stuff. As a publicity and marketing copywriter/book coach working with many self-published authors, I an fortunate to see a lot of the good stuff. And some of it is far, far better than what I see coming out of New York.”
As a reader who has seen the level of literary ambition decline during my lifetime, I agree. It’s no secret that the big publishers don’t want to take risks on new authors or innovative literature. I’m not claiming that every self-published work is a masterpiece, but I have to wonder how many recent offerings publishers have rejected because of unfamiliar content or style rather than any literary shortcomings.
As far as an example of a talented writer who has chosen the self-publishing route, I offer Jonathan Bayliss, a novelist from Gloucester, Massachusetts. This is no Joe Blow, as described in the article above. Educated and erudite, Bayliss has self-published all three of the novels in his expansive Gloucesterman series (the fourth and final installment is in progress). In 1999 the Boston Globe called him “one of the great self-published authors of our time.” At the Gloucesterman website (www.jonathanbayliss.com), there is a forum for the appreciation and analysis of his challenging fiction.
I admit I was amused by the portrayal of hopelessly benighted writers and their bad behavior, but there are self-published authors who don’t fit that description at all.
Cheers,
Steve
Not my list, so I cannot speak to the accuracy of the information; but nonetheless an impressive list of self-published authors who have seen acclaim and success.
http://www.bookmarket.com/selfpublish.html
What of the day when you walk into your favorite Brick and Mortar bibliostore, you walk around looking at covers and synopsis of books on 6X9″ LCD displays–not a book in sight. You walk up to a counter and hand the cute biblioclerk a card you swiped in the reader in the dark fantasy section. You wave your hand over the scanner and your selection is paid for based on the information on the micro-chip implanted in your wrist. Eight minutes later you have your book, still warm from the printer/binder in the back of the store where the book storage area USED to be. Then you realize ALL authors are P.O.D. authors, and you shudder.
RE: WHY PEOPLE HATE SELF PUBLISHERS
Actually they love to hate them. Rejected Rob is a straw man easy to knock down and kick in the ribs. He’s a social idiot who fails at editing, swoons at the sight of his name on a bookcover, and has zero publicity, distribution, or marketing. He is a stereotype, but yet the hatred for him hurts me. I am an independent publisher.
Ten years ago when I learned that major houses considered my 640-page historical novels too much financial risk for a new author with “regional” appeal, I went ahead and printed the first title myself. Later, after sales were beyond regional and distributors came knocking on my door, several of those same publishers lined up to bid on reissuing that title under their imprint, as well as my unfinished MS. I refused a contract. So I was not rejected, they were.
My main beef with your piece, however, is that it bolsters the view that a book can be judged by the size of its publisher. Ideally, books should be judged by a panel of objective critics who don’t discriminate against, sight unseen, books published by small houses. Failing that, the standard ought to be a combination of number of books sold and sales income. Other industries use those standards. The book trade should too.
FALLACIES OF THE BEST-SELLER AS CURRENTLY DEFINED. The New York Times Best Seller label is misleading. Well over half the titles published in the U.S. are ineligible to compete because they refuse to limit sales to distributor channels. Small publishers don’t want all their eggs in one basket. We sell to diverse markets, including direct to readers, and we sell through stores outside the book trade (not counted in the NYT process). I sold an entire first printing (3000) of my 2nd novel through pre-paid orders mailed straight to readers. Those sales don’t count. Often my authors purchase their books wholesale and sell them outside of bookstores. Those sales don’t count. Even if our titles sold 100 times more than NYT Best Sellers, we can’t use that fact. The big houses did a great job marketing the concept of a NYT Best Seller, and of course they limit eligibility. Of course they use the easiest method of counting sales – distributor figures. But the latter might be the rosy view. In reality it appears that some NYTBS get that designation before a single reader has bought a single book. Even granting the rosy view, however, only a few weeks of sales are counted. Marketing departments know how to generate a quick sales bubble, with NYTBS part of the strategy. In the launching frenzy actual sales numbers are likely to be irrelevant. When money is at stake, corruption exists in all unregulated systems.
The print media routinely checks Amazon sales numbers to judge whether a book is worthy, but for many titles, those numbers represent a tiny portion of sales. Not all small publishers are versed in the tricks of online marketing – I’m not. The internet is another unregulated game.
An objective best-seller process needs to be established, one that reflects real sales, over time, in all venues, with proof of print runs and other evidence. This system would be a challenge to devise, but well worth it to small houses.
LOW SALES STANDARDS OF MAJOR PUBLISHERS. I was stunned to discover how few books need sell to satisfy a major publisher. A Simon & Schuster editor on a writer’s conference panel looked at my first novel (printed) and told me an acceptable sell-through if produced by them would be about 4000. That would recoup costs and garner acceptable profit, including paperback rights. I asked whether the reps of the other 5 houses agreed. They nodded. Marketing departments of large publishers pre-plan sell-through. When the money budgeted for marketing runs out, the books vanish from the shelves, usually after a few weeks. It’s curtains for that title unless the paperback rights were sold. But independent publishers keep on going. That paperback title of mine has now sold over 20,000, and is still my best seller after 10 years – my profit on average 70%, not 6%.
THE AUTHORIAL MYSTIQUE. A lot of writers are saying, “I would never publish my own book because I’m more talented than Rejected Rob, and I don’t give a hoot about money or sales.” Or, “I would never soil my delicate literary hands with crass business.” They are standing on a pedestal engraved: The Authorial Mystique. That pedestal protects publishers from their authors, their most serious competitors. How the big houses must love the mystique! Mark Twain soiled his fingers with plenty of printer’s ink, and a better salesman has rarely been seen. Huckleberry Finn is still a household word after more than 100 years. Twain was no Rejected Rob. Nor was he a self- publisher. He published books written by others in addition to his own.
THE TERM ‘SELF PUBLISHER’ MISSES THE MARK FOR MANY. My company has 5 titles in print – books written by me as well as others. I pay all costs. My books are distributed nationally. I hire professional editors and graphic artists. I use offset printers, not POD (used it once but the inflated price/unit hurt sales). My income after expenses is far more than most mid-list novelists in big houses. I spend beaucoup on printing and reprinting, but I’ve been in the black since the first six weeks. I employ an associate to handle much of the business. Despite these costs, a substantial savings CD informs me that readers like my books. To my other writers, I am a publisher (are they supposed to say, “I’m published by a self publisher?”—that would mean themselves). After I launch the 3rd novel in my trilogy, Bridge House Books will continue to publish fine literature.
OTHER COMPENSATIONS FOR INDEPENDENT PUBLISHERS, BESIDES INCOME. Most mid-list novelists for big houses work day jobs; I’m at home doing what I love, writing. My books will stay in print as long as I wish. A writer friend of mine is under pressure to produce a title each year of the same genre, with the same main character (he’s so sick of his hero he could “puke”). I take as much time as I need, and write what I want. Mid-list authors have zero control over book covers and marketing. One error can spoil sales – a slight problem to a giant publisher, devastation to the author. That happened to another friend.
CONCLUSION. If the Authorial Mystique helps salve the psychic wounds inflicted upon writers by their impotence and peonage within the book trade, good. But stop kicking Rob. He’s just an enterprising guy learning the ropes. If you’re a published writer, odds are you’ll dirty your hands with sales too, regardless of the size of your publisher. Go in peace, but remember: every publisher started with one book.
Naida West
http://www.bridgehousebooks.com
RE: WHY PEOPLE HATE SELF PUBLISHERS
Actually they love to hate them. Rejected Rob is a straw man easy to knock down and kick in the ribs. He’s a social idiot who fails at editing, swoons at the sight of his name on a bookcover, and has zero publicity, distribution, or marketing. He is a stereotype, but yet the hatred for him hurts me. I am an independent publisher.
Ten years ago when I learned that major houses considered my 640-page historical novels too much financial risk for a new author with “regional” appeal, I went ahead and printed the first title myself. Later, after sales were beyond regional and distributors came knocking on my door, several of those same publishers lined up to bid on reissuing that title under their imprint, as well as my unfinished MS. I refused a contract. So I was not rejected, they were.
My main beef with your piece, however, is that it bolsters the view that a book can be judged by the size of its publisher. Ideally, books should be judged by a panel of objective critics who don’t discriminate against, sight unseen, books published by small houses. Failing that, the standard ought to be a combination of number of books sold and sales income. Other industries use those standards. The book trade should too.
FALLACIES OF THE BEST-SELLER AS CURRENTLY DEFINED. The New York Times Best Seller label is misleading. Well over half the titles published in the U.S. are ineligible to compete because they refuse to limit sales to distributor channels. Small publishers don’t want all their eggs in one basket. We sell to diverse markets, including direct to readers, and we sell through stores outside the book trade (not counted in the NYT process). I sold an entire first printing (3000) of my 2nd novel through pre-paid orders mailed straight to readers. Those sales don’t count. Often my authors purchase their books wholesale and sell them outside of bookstores. Those sales don’t count. Even if our titles sold 100 times more than NYT Best Sellers, we can’t use that fact. The big houses did a great job marketing the concept of a NYT Best Seller, and of course they limit eligibility. Of course they use the easiest method of counting sales – distributor figures. But the latter might be the rosy view. In reality it appears that some NYTBS get that designation before a single reader has bought a single book. Even granting the rosy view, however, only a few weeks of sales are counted. Marketing departments know how to generate a quick sales bubble, with NYTBS part of the strategy. In the launching frenzy actual sales numbers are likely to be irrelevant. When money is at stake, corruption exists in all unregulated systems.
The print media routinely checks Amazon sales numbers to judge whether a book is worthy, but for many titles, those numbers represent a tiny portion of sales. Not all small publishers are versed in the tricks of online marketing – I’m not. The internet is another unregulated game.
An objective best-seller process needs to be established, one that reflects real sales, over time, in all venues, with proof of print runs and other evidence. This system would be a challenge to devise, but well worth it to small houses.
LOW SALES STANDARDS OF MAJOR PUBLISHERS. I was stunned to discover how few books need sell to satisfy a major publisher. A Simon & Schuster editor on a writer’s conference panel looked at my first novel (printed) and told me an acceptable sell-through if produced by them would be about 4000. That would recoup costs and garner acceptable profit, including paperback rights. I asked whether the reps of the other 5 houses agreed. They nodded. Marketing departments of large publishers pre-plan sell-through. When the money budgeted for marketing runs out, the books vanish from the shelves, usually after a few weeks. It’s curtains for that title unless the paperback rights were sold. But independent publishers keep on going. That paperback title of mine has now sold over 20,000, and is still my best seller after 10 years – my profit on average 70%, not 6%.
THE AUTHORIAL MYSTIQUE. A lot of writers are saying, “I would never publish my own book because I’m more talented than Rejected Rob, and I don’t give a hoot about money or sales.” Or, “I would never soil my delicate literary hands with crass business.” They are standing on a pedestal engraved: The Authorial Mystique. That pedestal protects publishers from their authors, their most serious competitors. How the big houses must love the mystique! Mark Twain soiled his fingers with plenty of printer’s ink, and a better salesman has rarely been seen. Huckleberry Finn is still a household word after more than 100 years. Twain was no Rejected Rob. Nor was he a self- publisher. He published books written by others in addition to his own.
THE TERM ‘SELF PUBLISHER’ MISSES THE MARK FOR MANY. My company has 5 titles in print – books written by me as well as others. I pay all costs. My books are distributed nationally. I hire professional editors and graphic artists. I use offset printers, not POD (used it once but the inflated price/unit hurt sales). My income after expenses is far more than most mid-list novelists in big houses. I spend beaucoup on printing and reprinting, but I’ve been in the black since the first six weeks. I employ an associate to handle much of the business. Despite these costs, a substantial savings CD informs me that readers like my books. To my other writers, I am a publisher (are they supposed to say, “I’m published by a self publisher?”—that would mean themselves). After I launch the 3rd novel in my trilogy, Bridge House Books will continue to publish fine literature.
OTHER COMPENSATIONS FOR INDEPENDENT PUBLISHERS, BESIDES INCOME. Most mid-list novelists for big houses work day jobs; I’m at home doing what I love, writing. My books will stay in print as long as I wish. A writer friend of mine is under pressure to produce a title each year of the same genre, with the same main character (he’s so sick of his hero he could “puke”). I take as much time as I need, and write what I want. Mid-list authors have zero control over book covers and marketing. One error can spoil sales – a slight problem to a giant publisher, devastation to the author. That happened to another friend.
CONCLUSION. If the Authorial Mystique helps salve the psychic wounds inflicted upon writers by their impotence and peonage within the book trade, good. But stop kicking Rob. He’s just an enterprising guy learning the ropes. If you’re a published writer, odds are you’ll dirty your hands with sales too, regardless of the size of your publisher. Go in peace, but remember: every publisher started with one book.
Naida West
http://www.bridgehousebooks.com
More POD authors, lets flood the market. (Avoid Lulu though at all costs)
And put an end to the literacy mafia who have dictated for decades about what crap gets published.
We can only wonder at what other talent has never made it to print, in the distant past.
Thank you helping me decide. Previously, I was leaning towards getting my story self published. Having read your views, I totally agree with what you said and will give the traditional system a try in the first instance.
Great advice!
xx
KS
Great comment from Naida above. Way to go.
It’s not easy to make a living selling a novel, regardless of its merit.
The prejudice against a writer who dares take the initiative with his book after a thumbs down from folks who never read a line of it also makes selling self-published books and small press books difficult.
Naida is right. The system is corrupt as is the world. Merit has nothing to with what is published. After spending a year sweating blood to write a novel, tossing it into a sock drawer isn’t easy if you know it’s good.
I published my own novel years ago and have since published two hundred books by other authors. It’s been a great adventure and I’m always looking for new writers to read and publish.
Wow, what an exhausting exchange. It sounds like if your book is worthy, the key is that it be properly marketed to the appropriate audience. A mainstream publishing deal is no guarantee of anything except that you have that status in life. Self publishing may be more rewarding ultimately, and people are finding more and more creative ways to do it. Don’t be so sure that the small press book you have in your hands is anything but the publisher’s own life work!
Very interesting article. I don’t really have a problem with self published writers who are serious about their craft and strive to create something genuinely readible. It’s the ‘authors’ that publish unadulterated crap that are more concerned with stroking their own deluded egos than concerned about the reader.
A recent expierance was of a local ‘author’ who had a book signing at our local bookshop-(no one bar friends turned up at this signing.) I was interested, due to knowing this author when younger, so purchased his book. There is a blurb on the front advising that this was an ‘Outstanding debut’. It isn’t, it is in fact almost unreadable. There is no plot, no narrative flow, unrealistc characters and above all, no talent on show. It was so awful, that i could only read a couple of pages before taking a break.
POD and self-publishing are destroying the publishing industry and while the publishing industry needs a comprehensive retooling, the wholesale destruction of an industry that provides a selective mechanism is destabilizing the publishing world. Any system that allows anyone and everyone to publish anything and everything is a destructive system. There are only so many dollars to be spent by the consumers of literature. The pie can only be split so many ways. The market is being flooded with a lot of junk that consumers simply aren’t willing to wade through. And we wonder why so many people watch TV and go to the movies rather than read. With TV and movies there is still a selective mechanism in place. Does crap get through? Sure it does. Plenty of it. But only so much of it. There is a limit on how many crappy films and TV shows will be put out this year. Why? Because there is a system in place that only allows for so many TV shows and movies to be released. POD and self-publishing removes those bonds and allows the market to be flooded which makes it even more difficult for authors to earn a living. Every day a torrent of new POD and self-published titles make there way into mix, reducing the slice of the pie. Do I dislike POD and self-publishing? NO! These new formats will force the publishing world to change. But how will they change? Will the publishing world get better because of the introduction of POD and self-published titles? I’m afraid it won’t. I’m afraid that it will only force the publishing conglomerates even farther into their shells. I’m afraid they will reduce the number of authors they will publish, sticking even more with only those authors they know they can make money on, because it’s going to be a matter of survival. The only real solution to the problem would be the introduction of a true critical mechanism. Critics hold the key to solving the problems we face with the publishing conglomerates and new POD and self-publishing avenues.
Kevin, I just have to disagree.
POD and self-publishing aren’t destroying publishing, because the marketplace is ignoring them. Bookstores aren’t flooded with self-published books — you’d be hard-pressed to find a self-or-vanity published book on the shelves in any bookstore you cared to enter.
Publishing has a lot of problems, and making a living as a writer has never been easy, but POD isn’t the reason why.
One example of what self-publishing can do for literature is Tolstoy’s novel “War and Peace.” Compare this work with Dan Brown’s “Da Vinci Crap” and ask yourself if mainstream and art are compatible. POD is just an extension/improvement of self-publishing technology. Why cut down a beautiful tree to shove it down the public’s throat? The problem with conventional publishing industry is that it is overwhelmed with all sorts of literary parasites who cannot draw the line between litarature and Spiderman. POD is here, and it will grow like ivy chocking the old useless tree. Most people do not relize that this generation grwong with computers and computer games will never pick up a book to read.
Please excuse my poor spelling. I am a real writer.
For non-fiction books with a well-defined target audience, self-publishing may be the best and most profitable way for a writer to go, especially if that target audience is not large.
Self-publishing fiction faces greater hurdles, unless–as in the gay romance category mentioned above–there is a logical, indentifiable, underserved target audience.
“Readers of fiction” does not qualify as an underserved target audience.
If you made it this far reading this nonsense your a better man then i am.
There is nothing worng or incorrect and no one should be feeling bad or guilty of self publishing.
All you are doing is takeing control of your own product. Yes if you self publish you are just a valid writer as all other writers living or dead. Publishing is publishing, just because somone from a large company tells your your a writer does not mean you are one.
So do what you do and get yopur art out there. I dare you to google a list of selpf published writers . Start with Ben Franklin.
You could stock a superb college library or an incredible bookstore just from the books written by the some of the authors who have chosen to self-publish: Margaret Atwood, L. Frank Baum, William Blake, Ken Blanchard, Robert Bly, Elizabeth Barrett Browning, Lord Byron, Willa Cather, Pat Conroy, Stephen Crane, e.e. cummings, W.E.B. DuBois, Alexander Dumas, T.S. Eliot, Lawrence Ferlinghetti, Benjamin Franklin, Zane Grey, Thomas Hardy, E. Lynn Harris, Nathaniel Hawthorne, Ernest Hemingway, Robinson Jeffers, Spencer Johnson, Stephen King, Rudyard Kipling, Louis L’Amour, D.H. Lawrence, Rod McKuen, Marlo Morgan, John Muir, Anais Nin, Thomas Paine, Tom Peters, Edgar Allen Poe, Alexander Pope, Beatrix Potter, Ezra Pound, Marcel Proust, Irma Rombauer, Carl Sandburg, Robert Service, George Bernard Shaw, Percy Bysshe Shelley, Upton Sinclair, Gertrude Stein, William Strunk, Alfred Lord Tennyson, Henry David Thoreau, Leo Tolstoi, Mark Twain, Walt Whitman, and Virginia Woolf.
While it may be true that many self published authors embarrass themselves and many others by their behavior, the fact is the term “vanity press” was invented by existing publishers in the early 1900s to discourage the competition of self-publishers. The stigma of being self-published was created for financial reasons by the industry. Painters, sculptors, and other artists have no problem putting their work before the public, but because publishers need writers to depend on them, they have worked hard to perpetuate the myth that writers are unable to judge their own work or to make it available to readers without their stamp of approval.
Hey,
This was a very good article. I enjoyed reading it. I wonder how may self published authors feel the need to create a fake publishing name or even a real publishing house to remove themselves from the stigma? If you start out self publishing believing that it’s a dishonour, then you shouldn’t be self publishing.
Check out Bridge House Books submission policy; sounds like you’ve become part of the very system you circumvented. Interesting.
Cheers,
Ian
POD has some good uses, but I don’t think having large sales is one of them. Self-publishing (not POD) separates the chaff from the wheat as they say. Anyone who believes they have a good book and is willing to invest their own money in printing and marketing costs is not your average POD author.
I have self-published two books (again, not POD). Having boxes of books lurking in your basement or spare bedroom is great incentive to market like crazy. In the end I make a few thousand dollars from my efforts and ended up with a publisher to boot. The funny thing is that I make more money from my self-published books than I have from my publisher. He has sold more books than I ever dreamed of, but the royalties per book are small compared to what I make on my own. He is quickly catching up with my original sales income so I probably won’t be able to make that statement much longer.
Don’t pick on self-published authors because they believe enough to take major financial risks. Pick on the POD authors if you want, but keep in mind that most of them really have no aspirations of making it big. They just want to see their name and their hard work in print.
Jesse
That was a wonderfully told article, but there is too much talk about being labeled as a “published author.” Although I have been “published” for many years, that certainly does not mean that I go around telling others the above statement, and you’re right; most people are “revlied,” but I believe that most individuals who carry this incredulous sentiment and old boorish maxium, are not open minded about the very realistic truth and fact involving the writing INDUSTRY. Meaning, although many fellow writers out there either become showered with fame or not, this does certainly not negate the truth or the fact that peoples’ works have been “published,” also the equally truthful fact that money is now a tremendous factor which incriminating obsticle which keeps we fellow authors from being truely see and heard, etc. However there exists one thing amidst this conversation that you forgot; “Just because one is a “self-published” author, does not at all mean their works are not good, or at times, even brilliant.’ I am a Professor of religon with two Doctorates, one in Divinity, and the other in Sacred Theology. I am also an ordained woman of God, but because of a lifelong in-born disability, and now with the inclusion of having two terminal illness, I have no tangible money. What do you say to ANY fellow ‘published author” who had no other choice in the matter, when money is always an issue?! STICK THAT IN YOUR INFERNAL PIPE AND SMOKE IT!
The Most Venerable Lama Rimpoche/Catholic
MILKWEED L. AUGUSTINE Ph. D H.H.
I’m student at Northern Michigan University majoring in business entrepreneurship. I’m learning about book creation, publishing, marketing and distribution both in class and on my own for a business consulting course.
Your article was very funny and enlightening. I’m working with a self published Author and it’s very hard coming up with strategies for a marketing plan. I’m learning a lot really fast but the only thing that seems to be going for this authors business is her enthusiasm. The book’s not great and the message is mediocre. the illustrations
are real though.
Does anyone know where I can go to get some advice to help this person? (It’s not me)
all of this has been very interesting.
Marco, I understand your frustration thats why I created a website like http://www.vois.com which is a social commerce or scommerce website. Self published authors can sell their books on our site and its great for distribution.
I get similar questions myself on a regular basis, and recently published a blog post on why trade authors, in particular, hate self publishers. Part of it is sincere in the sense that they are trying to prevent people from getting ripped off by author services companies, but a lot of it has to do with the belief that self publishers haven’t earned the right to call themselves “authors”.
I’ve done both, and self publishing is more work and often more rewarding than being a trade author. Everybody needs some lucky breaks along the way for either career. Too many trade authors come to believe that they could start over tommorow with another name and no phone numbers or e-mails of editors and agents, and be right back on top in no time. They forget that timing is everything and times change.
I’ve read you’ve a 1 in 15,000 chance to get published on submitting manuscripts. Pay your dues. I did, and you’re certainly no better than me or any published author! Every rejection slip gets one that much closer. Money doesn’t buy happiness (self-publishing) route. Never stop writing. Never!
POD proves only one thing, mainstream lit is so totally elitist. Think about the fact that the mainstream book is not really the work of the author but a work of the editor and whoever else is involved in making it publishable. At some point, the editor becomes the coauthor, the text becomes the labor of many people. Sure, in the absence of an editor, the pod author’s work is hard to read and filled with problems, but have any of you ever read a book by a mainstream author that has not been edited? I wonder what would happen if such a manuscript was published raw, with no editing, no polishing, and no editorial guidence.
I’m sorry about how you feel about self publishing route but I happen to know if I wait for the regular route it’ll take years to get published. Facts are facts not everyone is willing to go down this route finishing their manuscript and then sending it in just to get it rejected. Rejection after Rejection I don’t think I could go down that route. I agree with some of you that some of these that get published by these companies don’t pay any attention to their editing. I thought Iuniverse did it but no you have to pay extra for it. Money that I don’t have. So I’m mixed on this issue. I don’t hate them nor do I like going down the line of possible rejection slips.
I stumbled upon this post today after I began looking for articles pertaining to legal discrimination against self published authors in literary organizations. For example, you may join RWA (published or not as they say) as long as you maintain a dedicated effort to the cause, face the challenges and do the work. However, if your publishing house is not listed on their list of “recognized houses” they will not classify you as an author despite any reviews, awards, etc. you have received.
I am completely aware of the “system that we have”. My sister is published with Simon & Schuster and after two weeks with a high price agent (meaning his percentage of my sales) in San Francisco and an editor who wanted to completely overhaul the ending of my first manuscript for marketability (and neglecting the responsibility of delivering the truth behind Anorexia, an illness I have managed for 27 years) I chose to leave the traditional world. Good books fall through the cracks because they want books that sell, sometimes no matter how irresponsible the content is. I’ve seen a lot of people sell out their passion, the entire purpose behind picking up a pen or keyboard “just to get published traditionally”. I chose to do this on my own for reasons other than agent/house rejections or fame.
Independent film makers are applauded for their unique and individual efforts, their lack of conformation to standards that become monopolized by big business and their unique approach to art. I applaud self published writers for doing the same. One man’s treasure is another’s garbage – old cliche but true. We only feel negative about our choices when we allow others to define our feelings. If you work hard, meet the challenge of putting together your own piece of art (I believe creative writing to be an art) then you are the only person who can allow that to be taken away from you.
Many self published authors have had a third person/party screening. Many have paid editors to help them. Many have paid graphic artists for quality cover designs. The last 5 books I have read from Best Selling authors of the past I have put down for good after a few chapters because their commercialism and mass quotas are showing sadly in their work. But their name sells so oh well right?
I am posting this to encourage the independents in this world, whatever industry. I know for a fact that my “little self published title” has saved at least a dozen teenagers in the perils of a potentially fatal disease and that means more to me than anything.
Be true to yourselves and fate will be true to you – no matter how difficult it might seem on any given day. And I am not sure who said it in here earlier about the “published author” phrase vs. the legends of humility – I dare anyone to truly name any author in history who wasn’t ecstatic to find out he/she was published. There is a big difference between pride in accomplishment and ego.
Dory
It’s not the self publishing, it’s when someone writes a poor quality novel, self publishes it and then goes around celebrating the fact they are now a published author. I’ve read some good self published books, but also some awful ones. Remember, like any industry, the publishing industry has some excesses, but there’s also plenty of people in the publishing industry who do know the difference between a novel that is very good and deserves to be picked up and a novel that isn’t good enough to be published. Sometimes self publishing is good for business or personal business, but often writers who are turned down by the major publishing houses shouldn’t rush to self publish but take the experience to better their craft and keep working till they hit one.
I work as the marketer for a very small scholarly press. We primarily publish regional non-fiction history and culture. I read most of the books we publish raw, as they were received, and very few manuscripts are publication-ready. Even when the writing is excellent, the books are still improved through the editing process and collaborative effort. Our editor brings decades of experience to the table. It is extremely difficult for many authors to view their own work in an objective manner. If self-publishers want to have more credibilty, then they must make the effort to produce the best book possible–using professional editors, designers, and illustrators–resources a conventional publisher would invest. Many do not, and the poor results are rampant in self-publishing. Until that changes, don’t expect distributors and booksellers to take the risk.
Further, there is no motivation for any publisher to turn down a manuscript in their genre if they believe it will sell. We actually have a difficult time finding worthy manuscripts in our niche, and some we agonize over. We are only human, and we do make errors in judgment. Yet for each book we print, we accept a substantial financial risk. And if we lose money, we won’t be going back to the author to request the difference.
Some of the common reasons we issue rejections include: a topic outside our scope of publishing, poor writing and/or research, too narrow a focus, no apparent audience, and subject matter that has already been thoroughly covered in other books. I can also understand why many publishers have stopped accepting unsolicited manuscripts. If you want fewer rejections, pay attention to the submission guidelines. Each year my press receives literally hundreds of manuscripts that have clearly ignored ours. It is a colossal waste of time (and thus, money) on all sides. Apparently, these writers think their book is so great, we will surely make an exception in their case. Yet regional history, pre-history, and culture is the area in which our editor is a true expert. He would not be qualified to correct anything more than grammar and spelling in many other subjects. In addition, our distribution channels, our marketing and publicity contacts, etc. are all geared toward the genre in which we publish. It would take a tremendous amount of additional work to succeed outside of our niche–something we are not willing to do for an isolated title–no matter how good it is.
We have also had authors who were unwilling to accept the changes we wanted to make to their writing, or felt our publishing timeline was too long, and decided to self-publish. Some I have regretted losing–especially since I believe the self-publishing process did not produce as good a book as we would have. I can think of one in particular I thought could have been a regional best-seller.
All that being said, whether a book has been published through a traditional publisher or a “vanity press,” a strong self-promoter can have an immensely positive impact on sales, so in either case, if you want to see your title sell, be prepared to invest the time and effort. That, even more than writing a great book, may be the reason some authors are picked up by major houses after successfully self-publishing–their ability to generate sales has now been proven. Or, they may have revealed the potential of an underserved market.
Best wishes to all you self-publishers out there.
I think POD publishing is just not a smart move. As long as a self publish author hires a great editor, not just edit themselves and also a great cover designer, with great promotion your novel can be a great success. But because your fronting the entire bill, you tend to short cut some corners that dont need to be short cut.
When POD publishing is concerned, they only print book by book which is hitting your proift big time. Print a min of 2k books @ $2.50 per book and I guarentee you profit will increase. Doesnt that sound much better than POD printing at $10 per book?
I’ve never even attempted to submit my work to one of the “big houses” not because I am a nutty, egotistical hack with access to a dream, a computer and a bootleg copy of InDesign. I didn’t bother because life is short, I had a good story and I wanted to see it in print, plus I enjoy book making and promotion. My income was secure long before I set out on this journey, and before I did step into the self-publishing wading pool, I told myself I would be happy if I sold 500 – 1000 copies total.
Here I am 2 years later and I have sold 5,252 copies of my book – not bad, and I have been contacted by one of the big houses. I am mulling it over but I think I will say no, because I enjoy being the master of my own work, and I am not crazy about all the potential hijacking of my copyrights by this particular publisher. 99% is a high figure to pull out of the air and claim as representing the bulk of self published people…and I’m sure the author did his “research” when dropping that factoid. Right.
So far as I know George Eliot, Thomas Carlyle, John Ruskin, Marcel Proust, etc, etc, etc didn’t rely on “editors”—and would never have gotten where they were, if they had. When you have been writing for twenty or thirty years, are you really going to listen to the moronic opinions of an “editor” just out of college? Not likely. Rather, the commentator who said that so much of notoriety these days is a matter of luck and taste was entirely correct.
Our question is: If one never bothers to read self-published works on a regular basis, how can they be qualified to say how much of it is crap — or genius? How often do YOU give them a break — and fork over a few bucks to find out?
We think indy and self publishing are becoming new models of normalcy. We don’t support the ‘non-electable’ sort of argument. “I want to vote for him, but he won’t get elected.” . If those people went out and voted for him, maybe he would!
We hold to the belief that is still a free country, where people can read and buy what they choose; or actually like what they choose to like. If they find they like the works of an author, they will not care who sold the work to them.
There are countless stories of people flocking to holes in the wall to eat because the food served in the hole is a ‘triumph’ of cooking.
We believe that people who make a distinction in the publishing method are being as untrue to the writing as the writer who doesn’t write from the heart and soul. What are you, the reader in it for? The mass-market appeal? Are you the mass market? Or are you a free-thinker who can spot a great story no matter who packages it?
One more thing: for every jaded intellectual who has read everything and seen everything, there are ten, fresh, new 18-year old minds being introduced to the world of commercial book traffic for the first time. They will not know of the hierarchy in publishing which had exsisted in their parent’s time. Just ask the parents — who are still trying to find something to play their vinyl album collection on.
NOT THE SAME GAME THE OTHER KIDS PLAY
Recently, another author suggested that self-publishing should not be regarded as a business. In fact, authors should choose between being an artist, and being a professional, if they want to succeed. In addition, those who choose to become self-published authors do not play the same game that other kids play.
While I do not agree with the first two statements, I do agree that self-published authors do not play the same game the other kids play. Talk about hitting the nail, right on the head. I have often said this, but I do not want to be a follower and play the same game the other kids play. I want to be a leader and create my own. Why not? Self-publishing is just as much of a business, as anything else – sometimes even more.
We are not sitting in our back yards, twiddling our thumbs, waiting for something miraculous to occur, because we chose to self-publish. No, we are hustling our rears off, because we have a lot more work to do, being independent artists. I am my own entourage and do it all. As a result, I have to do my homework to figure out how to reach my objectives, because I do not have anyone to do the work for me. I write my own ad copy for all off and online materials. I create and assemble my own media kits. I do my own graphic design. I designed and I maintain my own web site. I make and answer my own calls. I set up my own interviews, speaking engagements, and solicit my own reviews. I write my own press releases, monthly newsletter, and any other correspondence. It appears that I am my personal assistant, publicist, and more. If that is not a business, I do not know what is.
Yes, as a writer, I am an artist. With that said, I totally agree that in this industry, a writer must be a professional too. However, balance is the key element. I do not believe you should stop being one, to be the other. Traditional, e-pub or self-pub – you must find the right balance between selling yourself and your product, with being an artist. You can apply the artist within you, along with your own style and individuality to an appropriate level of professionalism. In turn, you can use both elements to achieve success, in leaps and bounds.
Self-publishing is an innovation in our field. As with any innovation, it takes time to grow, evolve and become part of the mainstream. The steadfast traditionalists deny and denounce it. However, I embrace it, and I cannot wait to do it again. I do not believe one publishing route is better than the other is. Instead, I firmly believe that we writers must do our homework and thoroughly research all of our options. It is important to make informed decisions. However, the most important decision belongs to the writer, while choosing the route that best suits his or her specific needs. For those of you who do not know me – I am a control freak. I am happy to admit it and I am happy to do the work it takes to reach my objectives. I am not waiting for a decision maker to decide for me. Why can’t we take our ball home and make up our own game? Writers of yesterday created their own game, generations before us, so we would have something incredible to read today. Writers of today, have the same option. We can play ball in someone else’s game, or we can create a few games of our own. I can only hope that the writers of tomorrow will find what we write incredible, as they find their own voices and games to play.
A title is a designation to signify an individual’s professional role. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the title, Published Author. When having a conversation with another – if you indicate that you are a writer, the first question the other person asks is if you have published anything. When you say that you are a Published Author, the other person knows right away and does not have to ask the question. They can move on to, “What did you publish?” or “What is the name of your book?”
In addition, have you heard of Emmy and Oscar Award winners? Many introduce celebrities with those types of titles included. They have earned it.
Would you refer to every Marine overseas as just a soldier? Each have earned the title of his ranking, whether it is Captain, Brigadier General, Lieutenant General, Lieutenant Colonel, or Major.
Would you call a Brain Surgeon, just a Doctor? He is a doctor just like the Doctors who work in psychiatry, dermatology, hematology, or cardiovascular medicine.
You must have heard of the titles, Special Prosecutor, District Attorney, or Assistant District Attorney. They are all lawyers. Are they obsessed with their titles? Do we ever question that?
Would you think less of a “school” Nurse because she only takes care of the kids in school, as opposed to a nurse who works in the ER?
Just because you do not personally approve of the author’s choice for a publishing route, does not detract from his or her professional achievement. There are different types of authors. Anyone who has written anything is the author of that material. The designation of Published Author is not an obsession, nor is it with any other profession. A professional title is an earned achievement.
Hey Rebecca,
I have to agree with you on that. Initially, I was one of those guys who criticized authors for calling themselves Published Authors. But I kind of get the point. After reading some of the most recent posts on this forum, my eyes have been opened up.
I think many of us tend to speak about topics we know little about. We judge people for following paths that we haven’t traveled ourselves, which makes it kind of tough to offer accurate viewpoints. I admit that I have been guilty of this and even though I was just reading through these posts, I think I’ve learned a BIG lesson that will help me in the rest of my life. We shouldn’t judge people and we should question how hard people work, when apparently some work really hard. There are bad apples in every bunch, but that doesn’t mean the whole bunch is bad.
I’m catching onto the fact that self-published authors are just like indy musicians, working their butts off to reach their goals. Who the heck are we to question any of that. Everyone who has a title earned it with blood, sweat, tears, heart, time and hard work.
None of us who do things different have the right to criticize them for picking their own paths. I am guilty of judging people too much in my life and not realizing the harm I’ve caused. Maybe if I was more supportive, I could have helped someone I care about reach their dreams.
Maybe when so many of us judge people who are just working hard to make their dreams come true, we make it even harder.
I plan to do some changing. Now I get what my wife has tried to explain to me, and I missed the point because I wanted to be a knucklehead. I get it now.
I think authors who are published should yell it from the rooftops with pride. You have earned the right to be called published authors.
Thanks everyone for helping me learn something important. We are never too old to learn.
You know what? I’m thinking a bunch of authors I know personally are choosing self-publishing right off. They aren’t choosing it because they were turned down by big publishing houses. They are choosing it because they want to. Why not? I have read so many posts in writing groups and blogs of people who are quick to assume that writers only choose self-publishing because their work is targeted for a niche market or that they couldn’t get published otherwise. That is a bunch of malarky.
It is fascinating to see how many people write statements about things they don’t have verified. The fact is that I know people personally, including myself, who have chosen self-publishing for a variety of reasons, such as having control and producing work that hasn’t been drastically changed by some overworked editor who is only trying to mold the work to fit that publisher’s current market trends.
I get what the goals of the big publishing houses are but we don’t have to have the integrity of our work compromised by a red pen, if we can produce quality work, edit it appropriately and be professional in the process.
I have been published traditionally and it wasn’t a huge deal. They loved my work, they published me and gave me a modest advance. Whoopee. It isn’t like I was the only author they had to market. At least when I decided to do it myself, I got a lot more done, because I was only marketing myself.
I just wish people would quit commenting about things they can’t verify. It sure is easy to make assumptions but that is why our world is in such trouble. People do judge like Jon said and jump to the wrong conclusions. It isn’t helping each other, it is hurting each other. What kind of human beings are we if we can’t learn how to love each other and quit cutting our neighbors to shreds because we don’t like how they mow their lawn.
I say we pick our own mowers, whether it is a push mower, a gasoline mower, a tractor mower or a landscaper to do the work and we should be proud of the work we do on our own lawns, respect the work our neighbors do on their lawns, whether we like their choices or not, and move on.
Oh, and I also agree about titles. Titles are earned and no one should be ashamed of using their titles. And like it was said in an earlier post, we don’t question the use of titles in other people like celebrities, the medial field, legal or military fields. It seems like the only ones question the use of titles are the ones who evidently have an axe to grind with people who are strong enough to do it their own way.
I have had more success and more sales with my self-published work than I did with my traditionally published work. What does that tell you? You bet I am a published author and proud of it.
Okay, I read Tasha’s comment about “short-cutting” corners, because we are footing the whole bill as self-published authors. Maybe some cut corners, but what many don’t understand is that we can’t afford to cut the corners. When we have to do it ourselves, we have to cover every level of production, advertising and marketing, to succeed.
It really bugs me how many people who don’t self-publish jump to all kinds of conclusions about how we do it, how the process works and why we do it. The assumption that we don’t have any writing skills because we self-published or traditional houses turned us down and we had to self-publish or that the quality of the final product is less because we self-published is so wrong.
Like Ava said, many of us choose self-publishing because it is our preference to choose self-publishing … our first choice. Because we have a few more challenges in that choice, we have to work twice as hard. We are doing much more on our own and we cannot afford to cut any corners if we want the job done right.
Of course, some people cut corners, some people are rejected and choose it as a last resort, and yes, some printers produce low quality material. But that is just a generalization and often not the case at all.
We Indies stick together. We aren’t busy trying to compete with each other because we don’t have to. We work hard and understand each other’s level of commitment and effort. We support each other and we know each other’s challenges and benefits.
Like someone else said, we have to become our own staff. I know I had to be my own administrative assistant, learn how to do graphic design, learn how to build a web page, create an effective press kit, do the filing, handle the billing, chase down reviews, set up interviews, and there is a lot more to it than that, but you probably get the point.
Self-published authors using services that include POD can benefit. I don’t have to keep 2000 books in my place or stacked in my garage and I don’t have to knock on doors like an Avon Lady. Who wants to do that? POD keeps the costs lower for the printer and self-publishing, vanity press or small press. It isn’t cutting into my profits. I am getting my royalty check no matter what.
Maybe I had to pay to be published, but I still have to do the work. There is no getting around the work that has to be done, in order to make back the money I spent and make a profit. I have done that and I’m still doing more.
Cutting corners will not bring about success, regardless of your chosen career. There will always be someone who cuts corners. Some will produce bad quality material, and some who will generally make other people look bad. But, the other side of the coin is that we can’t let our lives revolve around those people and what is not working. We can’t put all of our focus on the negative, because then we become paralyzed to positive change. We miss out on the chance to make things happen in life.
I used to feel ashamed of saying I was self-published in the beginning, because a couple of people, traditionally pubbed of course, verbally knocked me down over it. I managed to twist myself up and gave my power away to people who have nothing to do with how I live, write or succeed in life. How stupid was that?
Then I started to notice that my audience, my readers, and my fans did not care one bit how I was published. It was my work that captivated them. I’m sorry, I’m not trying to brag but I have done well with my work. People have purchased my book, enjoyed it, and have gone out of their way to send good feedback to me. I’m not talking about people I know like family or friends, but real people in the street, strangers who don’t know me from Adam.
Some say that a big house won’t look at us because we self-published. Some say that editors or agents won’t give us the time of day. From where I stand, that isn’t much of an issue, because the readers are the important people in this equation. They are the audience and it is up to them. If I do a bang-up job on my marketing, enough to reach my audience … then it is up to them to decide. Their decision has nothing to do with the publishing house, the editor, or the traditional elitists who are against my method of publishing. The readers decision is dependent upon their reading preference. We need to give more credit to our readers and people please, quit making assumptions about us. I know many self-published authors who don’t sleep much because of the ridiculous hours, and the mounds of work. Give us a little more credit and if you don’t know us or know how much we have to do every day to make our dreams come true, then don’t say something that isn’t true. Just ask us, we’ll tell you the facts about what our lives are like and what hills we have climb. And if you are still against us, please just focus on what it takes to be successful on your own climb. I think that if we all just focused on climbing our own ladders and not knocking people off their ladders, we would all be a little more successful and a lot happier.
“Hate” is such a strong word to use in description of an author trying to make his or her way in the literary world. The dogged disdain doesn’t make any sense. Every time a “hater” dimisses another writer because he or she self-published, the hater has not achieved anything worth mentioning, other than hurting another human being, often a fellow writer. The world needs less hate and more camaraderie. It doesn’t matter if a writer chooses self-publishing as a first or last choice, because the industry through traditional means does not crack the doors open for many. It rarely is based on merit or writing skill. This is comparable to a modeling agency searching for a particular look in models to represent the audience they are catering to that particular season.
The remarkable thing is that the look changes from season to season, cycling from past to future and back into the past again. When choosing a model for a client, it has less to do with the model’s ability to produce in front of the camera and more to do with the look that they seek.
The same thing applies for anything in the entertainment industry. Publishing houses choose different audiences each season, and the authors they choose are those who present a modicum of what they wish to present. The rest is up to the editor to mold the work into the final product.
Record labels do the same thing. It is about trend, fad, vogue and what is currently fashionable in life, music, couture, and the literary. None of this has anything to do with the writer, why or how they published or the reader. It is just about what is “in” for the season.
Picking on self-published authors might make a traditional author feel better, but only on a superficial level, because the traditional author has many struggles to overcome as well. The battle is not and should not be between the authors, because like it or not, the authors are all on the same side, working toward the same goals and reaching for the same stars. Hampering a fellow author takes time away from both authors. Nothing is gained in that situation. The battle does not exist. It is being created unnecessarily. Stop the fight, stop the hate and stop to help your writing neighbors along. I guarantee you will both get there much quicker, if you are holding hands rather than stopping to throw stones. Just a thought.
Rebecca,
You miss a key point… the titles and achievements that you mention are all bestowed upon the individual BY SOMEONE ELSE working within the confines of their chosen industry.
Earlier this week, the Today Show referred to an upcoming segment with “Oscar winner Halle Berry.” Yeah, they can use that title because the industry gave her that award. She didn’t just film her own movie and then declare herself an Oscar winner. Well all know the problems of Hollywood and its shortcomings and awful choices. But it the industry that awards the Oscar winner title. It’s not a person who independently makes their own film and annoints himself an Oscar winner in a vaccuum, without any industry judgment (however questionable that judgment may be).
Captains, colonels, majors…. those are all titles bestowed upon a soldier by his military organization. A buck private can’t just walk around and say, “well, the military is full of beauracracy and it doesn’t allow opportunities for new soldiers so I’m going to fund my own army and so I’m going to call myself a 5 star general.”
A lawyer who normally handles mortgages and divorce can’t just say, “those courts are inefficient and I’m going a different route. From now on, I am a District Attorney and I’ll prosecute criminal cases in my backyard.”
The achievements you list are the same way. You can’t just decide you’re going to do brain surgery, open a hospital in the garage, cut someone’s head open and then declare yourself a brain surgeon. If you do manage to find someone willing to let you slice open their skull, then is that “achievement” the same as a doctor at Cedars Sinai? If you preside over a high school student council disciplinary panel, is that the same “achievement” as sitting on the Supreme Court.
Go back to the original post: Self-publishing is not necessarily better or worse the mainstream book industry, but it’s definitely not the same.
Moraldes,
I understand what you are saying, but I have to disagree. An author is not just aannointing him or herself as a published author. The industry is doing it for the author. When an author’s book is published, with a copyright, LOC and ISBN, and the book is on book shelves, on Amazon.com, on B&N, in books in print, being distributed and being purchased, while the author receives a regular royalty check, the author does book signings, is featured in the newspaper, interviewed by the media and reviewed by professional reviewing agencies — he or she is a published author. That has absolutely nothing to do with being self-published or traditionally published. No, one is not better than the other, as they are different publishing avenues. However, being different does not make one more valid than the other. When an author does the work, from the writing to the marketing, to the depositing of the royalty checks — that author is published and has more than earned the title of published author. That is an industry designation simply by the process itself.
Now, if you want to refer to the guy sitting in his basement, writing anything and everything he can, never publishes, never releases his work to the public in any form and calls himself a published author — then your comparison to the guy who opens a hospital in his garage is accurate.
But you can’t take away the accomplishment of the ones who have done the work, climbed the ladder to get there, and have all of the documenation and certification necessary to back it up — in other words a published book selling and earning royalties.
Both my books have been published by upcoming book companies, so I don’t qualify as a self-published author. But I found this essay to beat around the bush on this topic that seems to raise the fur of many folks in my industry. It also stated towards the end that there are exceptions on folks or companies, who self-publish, because many of them do it right. They know their market and focus on proper outreach there.
I’m not sure which people hate self-published authors, but I’m not one of them. There are many reasons people do it. Some of them self-publish as a means to start their own book company. And those are people I respect, and–if I really like what they’re doing–have no problems with them publishing a future book I write!
The creativity of my more enterprising colleagues in this world, even this industry, might be limitless.
Well, I certainly would reject the author of the original article if I was a publisher – the same example is repeated twice in different ways.
I publish my own books with POD. I create non-fiction large format niche works and the intended audience worldwide probably amounts to no more than a few thousand. No traditional publisher would produce such books, unless they were prepared to take a financial hit. It’s a case of using the right tool for the right job, and POD is the right tool in my case.
I also use POD because it’s fun. I’ve done a book through a large publisher but, to be honest, I found the experience to be less satisfying than doing it all myself.
So what if a Author chooses to self publish their own work, those that are good and talented will eventually be recognised for it, and those who are self absorbed big noters with no talent will be banging their heads against a wall miserably, and will never be respected! Isn’t this enough to satisfy everyone?
I am involved with a book publisher in Australia, and they receive so many manuscripts that half of them get binned before they are even read! This specific publishing house only chooses about 5 items per year to publish out of about 1200 manuscripts, and I can guarantee you that a small number of the rejected manuscripts do contain some impressive writing. This is in Australia, a much smaller country where writing isn’t even really considered by many as a career choice, not as much so as the likes of the United States anyway.
If a truly talented writer (especially a new unestablished one) is falling through the cracks, and decides to publish their own work that is then enjoyed by readers, that does not make them any less talented than anyone else. A small group of people deciding that someone’s writing is ‘not worthy’ of publishing is hardly a minority opinion.
Leave talented writers to write, arrogant writers indulge themselves, and publishing houses to pick and choose.
Anyone with half a brain that has read books their whole lives can spot, and tear down a self indulgent, talentless writer. They are a detriment to themselves, not anyone else, and certainly not to self publishing.
The true success of a piece of prose is something that is measured by the enjoyment of the reader, and it does not matter if the book that the reader is holding is Mainstream published or not.
Summations Views on POD, Print on Demand Technology
By Michael Lee Johnson
I used iUniverse Publishers, http://www.iuniverse.com/ for my adventure with my book of poetry, The Lost American: From Exile to Freedom, by Michael Lee Johnson.
I started out attempting to contact traditional publishers of chapbooks and small press publishers specializing in poetry, and other non-main street venues. I soon found out that most were associated with contests once a year to generate funds for the one publication printed per year; or no real interest since poetry as a general rule doesn’t generate the publisher money. It appears that self-help books and the occasional novel stand a better traditional chance of selling and making profit. Since I’m 59, soon to be 60, I didn’t want to invest more time into seeking out the slim hope of finding a traditional publishers, so I looked to POD, “Publishing on demand. “ The key feature of POD, is they print only orders as they have been ordered, when they are ordered. The wholesale cost is higher than a traditional publisher, but you are not stuck with inventory under your bed. Prices and services vary greatly from one POD publisher to the next; but most have a format or procedure they follow and most provide a rudimentary distribution process through wholesalers to get your book at least listed with some key players like Amazon.com, Barnes and Noble, Target.com, Baker and Taylor, Ingram, etc. But with out the author self promoting himself with his own efforts, the book is likely to die on line without sales. With POD, you must market yourself right from the start if you have any hope of limited sales, especially on your first book as a relatively unknown author. One could write a book on POD, one key benefit is the author keeps control over his work. Some POD publishers are Author House, who recently merged with iUniverse, Book Surge. A more complete list with pricing and comparison of services can be found at: http://booksandtales.com/pod/index.php Overall, POD suited my needs to get established, retain ownership, with a quick, and easy procedures to follow to get the book published and assigned with an ISBN book number which is critical for creditability.
Written by,
Michael Lee Johnson, Author of:
The Lost American: From Exile to Freedom
http://www.iuniverse.com/bookstore/book_detail.asp?isbn=0-595-46091-7
EBook also available at iUniverse at: http://www.iuniverse.com/bookstore/book_detail.asp?isbn=0-595-90391-6 The ISBN # IS: 0-595-90391-6 Author Website: http://poetryman.mysite.com/
Now Listed at Amazon.com http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_gw/104-0303976-5247968?initialSearch=1&url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=The+Lost+American%3A++From+Exile+to+Freedom
Author Website: http://poetryman.mysite.com/
Michael Lee Johnson is also the editor/publisher of two websites for poetry, both open to submissions:
http://www.poetriclegacy.mysite.com/
http://birdsbywindow.blogspot.com/
Very interesting article.
I read every comment, absorbing and evaluating the different comments, and didn’t see any mention of podcast novels. Don’t laugh; this form has taken off in the past 2 – 3 years (Scott Sigler? JC Hutchins? Mur Lafferty? Podiobooks? Any of these names ring a bell?)
Anyway, I took this route to “publish” my novel. I used quotes because this book is a “Live Novel,” a book in progress that I publish as I go. As of today, I have 18 chapters available as audio episodes 30 min. or under, listed at Podshow, iTunes and my website. So far I’ve amassed well over 10,000 total downloads, which translates to over a thousand readers.
Ok, I’m only posting here to say that I’ve looked over many writers forums and blogs discussing the topic of “self publishing,” and rarely find podcast novels mentioned. I don’t know why. This has developed into quite the nifty marketing tool, and an excellent way to leverage interest in an agent.
One more thing – this audio version of my novel has no effect on publishing rights for the eventual manuscript version I will submit to agents or publishers. I’m not crazy about all the hard work involved in the DIY route (though POD is a definite option), but, because my novel is my own blend of Horror, SciFi and Erotica, and because I happen to be a black writer (O Lawdy!), some form of indie publishing may be my best option to get exposure and attention…
BTW, the book is “Banjo Strings,” an epic and graphic tale of antebellum ghosts, ancient scandal, supernatural spies, and a den of iniquity amid the Red Maple and Magnolia trees. Check it out…
In my opinion, a person is much better off self-publishing poetry if they ever want to see it in book form. If one looks at the publishers of books submitted for review to, say, Poetry Magazine, they will see scores of small presses nobody has ever heard of. What exactly is the difference between a small obscure outfit and a self-published book? Are there that many fantastic editors and poetry experts out there? I doubt it. I would guess that with so small a market and so many poets it is only good business for the big houses to disregard anything ‘unproven’. Hell, they can barely sell what they publish now. Few read poetry these days. You will also notice that when major awards like the Pulitzer or Book Critics Circle Award are given out they almost always go to the major Houses (google ‘Silliman gang of eight’ and read how the big guys dominate the poetry market).
My point is that you can submit your work for twenty years, finally get someone to publish it and then be completely ignored by the Poetry ‘establishment’ anyway or you can just publish your own work with the same result. At least you have something you can be proud of (and maybe sell).
And speaking of that…I’m at all the usual places: amazon, barnesand noble, booksamillion, etc. Shameless, I admit, but I couldn’t resist.
After reading all of the comments on this topic, there is not much that I can add that hasn’t been said. My point of commenting, however, is to correct a comment made about the music industry and the self-publishing that goes on there. Some of the most influential musicians, particularly in the metal genre and subsets, self-publish. They have created their OWN companies so they do not have to compromise and some have even started taking on other talents. Neurot Recordings is one that started so they would not have to compromise. I know this because I have interviewed them and we have discussed this. They have been together for over twenty two years.They once were signed to an Indie label and it was a very bad experience. Another musician that is probably one of the most influential musicians that span over metal, industrial, shoegaze, and nu metal is Justin Broadrick. His career spans over a decade and a half. He was with a major label and left because he was unhappy. Now he only produces his own stuff on his label Avalanche. He has a very, very loyal following and I would say he cares a hell of a lot more about music than a lot of the mainstreamers because he is doing it all on his own because of the pure love and need to create. Phil Petrocelli has his own label for his own music. There is Jarboe. There is the Lloyd Dobler Effect that recorded their own stuff to get the music out there. I just wanted to correct the whole DIY equates Hardcore or being associated with a bigger label comment earlier.
I am thinking of self publishing because I have something to say that only I can say. From what I’ve seen of memoirs being published by the traditional publishing houses, they SAY they want something original, but if you try to give it to them, they balk and say they can’t sell it. I have so many people I know from all walks of life that would read my book. It tells about things that the politicians won’t ever tell you – what REALLY goes on in the homeless, welfare,public housing world. And I was a very unlikely candidate to experience this world. Those two things combined should spark interest. But it doesn’t. And two chapters have already been recognized – one nominated for Pushcart Prize and one won a literary non-fiction prize. These things should help too, but they don’t. Yet over and over they crank out memoirs about addictive parents and abusive parents, but again, NOT the way my parents were abusive, they have their own category. So, I have something to say, something to tell the world and I won’t be silenced. Homeless people are not just addicts and the mentally ill.
Genuine offer – the market is there, one just must never give in!
Priory Publications GB Limited has secured an excellent booth at the Los Angeles book fair, Booth 5720. We are offering to share our booth with other self published authors in order to share the exciting potential of the American Market.
This will be our third exhibition and we are well supported by Reed exhibitions.
If you are a self published author and have books that will interest the American market this could be an opportunity for you. We would have to limit our offer to 5 authors and our preferred, though not excusive, genre is children’s adventure, children’s history/religion.
Authors would be responsible for providing stock and promotional material for despatch to the US of A and contribute a fully inclusive fee of £250 to secure a place in booth 5720.
Enquiries can be made direct to Claire Burden, Company Secretary, Priory Publications GB Limited at enquiries@maranatha-puzzle.com
Places will be allocated on a first come first served bases.
This has been an interesting topic. One that obviously strikes a chord with many of us wannabe authors.
I first checked in on this topic a year or two ago and I drop in every few months to read the additional comments. It’s great to see people chucking their 2 cents in on the conversation.
I’m currently in the middle of writing (I use this term loosely as the process has been more research, hair-pulling and angst. You lot know what it’s like?!) a novel that will be self-published … but I’m not exactly looking forward to the process of printing and distributing the bastard when it’s done.
The publishing game is tough work. I used to publish a small niche magazine (www.capeyorker.com) that was distributed nationally in Australia. I can tell you honestly that I found the entire process to be one that can shatter your dreams on a daily basis. Writing, editing, design and printing are only part of the game.
Distribution is the killer.
Magazines get a decent percentage split on sale price for the publisher … books , however, are an entirely different story. Actually books really suck.
Firstly, the big boys of distribution won’t touch a self-published author. You will have to search for an Indie who takes on single titles to have any chance in the open market. This will take you three to six months – submission, approval etc.
And here’s the king-hit: Expect to lose 65% of your retail price when you go on sale in a bricks and mortar store. 40% to the retailer and 20-25% to the distributor – ie, you get $7 for each sale of your $20 book!
Enjoying the story so far?
Wait till you smack your peepers on the next chapter…
Printing: Take out at least 10% for your print costs – that is, if you are printing over 5000 copies in a low-cost manufacturing country like China or India.
Take out a further 10+% if you’re printing domestically and in runs less than a few thousand units.
POD: oh, man … I’m not even going down this path.
It’s starting to read like a friggin’ tragedy isn’t it?! Wait until you get the returns (unsold copies). It’ll bring tears to your eyes.
Also, don’t forget that you have to fork out for a good story editor too. This should set you back a few hundred and possibly even a thousand bucks. And no, editors are not a luxury for self-published authors (actually ANY author) … they are a necessity. I can guarantee that I’m not the only writer with exclusive rights to crap spelling/grammar and implausible outlines filled with numerous plot holes and blatant exposition.
Of course, self-publishing is not always done for monetary return. There is an undeniable joy and a real sense of satisfaction when you create a tangible object like a book.
That said, if you are like me and you want to make a living out of this gig so you can feed your kids, pay off the mortgage or not have to head off to some horrible job lifting bricks then I suggest that you prepare for a whole host of battles. The downside is that you will be risking your own cash (it is, after all, a business), the upside is that you retain total creative and business control of your product. I say ‘product’ and not ‘book’, because you really have to step into a business person’s shoes once the creative stuff has finished.
And to succeed?
Well, the product better be damned good and it better have a ready market – mainstream or niche. If it doesn’t, then you will have a business failure that will have cost you a fair whack of green. This outcome may seem harsh especially if you feel that your work is a creative success.
The reality: if you don’t want to run a business selling a product to the average punter on the street then it is probably best to leave the manuscript on the hard-drive. The fact that it isn’t published won’t reduce it’s creative importance. Hell, a book sitting on a store shelf with your name on the cover won’t make the story any more pertinent. If you enjoyed the process that’s all that should matter – that feeling alone is worth more than a million bucks.
Just my 2 cents…
I’ve heard recently that prostitutes are starting to ‘self-publish’ themselves in lieu of going with the traditional pimps, who take a substantial cut and really inhibit personal freedom of expression. Honestly, is the point of writing to make money? Enjoy, make the money, die happy. I self-published because I have a crazy idea that God wanted me too, and that what I wrote might actually be of benefit or comfort to those whom I love. It saddens me that the creative gifts and talents of so many people are under the control of the almighty American Dollar (which, by the way, is losing value….maybe I should charge Euros for my book….) Please write well because you have a voice to be heard, not bills to pay.
I am a collaborative writer with 30 books that carry my credit line (13 of them put out by major publishers including several that are very successful) plus 30 or 40 more that I don’t track because they omitted my credit line due to their primary authors’ ego problems. This second book group were all self-pubbed by their primary authors.
I find this excellent article somewhat incomplete because many self-publishers have ways to sell their books and as a result their self-pubs are about ten times as profitable. Ordinarily, trade pubs pay about 7 1/2 percent of retail; self-pubs who sell their books “back of the room” at their workshops and other events pocket up to 100% of their selling price less expenses:
1. Whatever they pay the person or people collecting the money and handing over the books in the BOTR.
2. Freight to books shipped to the event.
3. Per copy cost of the printed book.
I certainly don’t think anyone “hates” self published authors. I had an experience of self publishing myself which would have been “fine” for me because I see now that there wasn’t a place for me in the “Main Stream”. Unfortunately I didn’t see it then and I fell into the trap of “listening” to the advice that you get from “self publishing” sites and consultants that “encourage” spending money on things that don’t serve in the long run. There are contracts that tie up intellectual property and many times major publishers don’t want to deal with these entanglements. I have been working as a personal assistant to someone who represents a “major” publisher and I have learned SO much about the industry, the pitfalls etc. There are consultants out there who can be extremely helpful to people who are considering “self publishing” or mainstream publishers BEFORE they go forward. Private Consultants who REALLY know the industry that can give REAL advise based on their experience in the industry. The problem that I see isn’t self publishing or not; its the false claims that are encountered by the internet. Sites that promise “best seller status” from people who DO NOT have an real familiarity about what that means or how to get someone there. I made the mistake of listening to people who couldn’t get themselves there…why did I think they could help me? I would recommend that anyone who is considering self publishing look closely at WHO is giving advise always look for “consultation” with someone who really is an insider in the industry. Sometimes self publishing is the right track for some people especially if they have a “niche” way to sell their books and aren’t looking to get on “Oprah”. People who have such high aspirations of NY Times Best Seller Status at least have to “check” in with someone who has been a part of helping people get there. There are consultants out there that can bridge the gap and be truly helpful.
Ava Sakowski
Media Consultant
ava@wavecable.com
Oh my god I love this. FANTASTIC article, I am going to print it out and carry it with me to cons and trade shows everytime someone accuses me of looking down on self publishers. I’ve always been a live and let live person but you know, but some people get so god damn defensive about their status as a “published author” I just say “I’m a freelance writer.” some people are nuts.
GREAT ARTICLE!!!!
This is an excellent article. And I love this site. You must have gone to my high school, because I knew Bobby. I always got stuck working on a group project with Bobby, a football player, and the girl who smelled really bad.
I have always wondered about self publishing. Thanks for the lively and informative read.
We don’t hate self-publishers. At PublicLiterature.org we actually have many self-published authors as contributors and they offer a ton of literature that is received well by the reading community.
I see the position many take on self-published authors but many don’t have the time, money or patience to deal with publishers.
-Jack
publicliterature.org
My daughter (who is an avid reader) has three book-shelves in her bedroom crammed with an assortment of books aimed at her age group. She is 10. I would say, with the exception of possibly 3 or 4 books, all are a pile of crap. They may be beautifully illustrated and the stories I could write myself (and I can’t write anything except a shopping list). And yet ALL of these books sitting on my daughter’s booksheves are published by traditional publishing houses – Anderson Press, Orion, Bloomsbury, Panmacmillan, Random House to name but a few. In theory these authors did not have their manuscripts rejected and the publishing house deemed their writing elible for printing and circulation.
I did not know what self publishing even was before I googled Authorhouse. Because last week we visted the public library and Scarlet chose a book from the bookshelf. She doesn’t care about authors name or publishing houses. At the end of the day anything pink and pretty will suit Scarlet fine. We brought the home and the story was captivating from beginning to end, professional written, fab illustrations throughout and a pleasure to read. Since then I’ve bought the book for her on Amazon and its now become a favourite. Its published by a self publishing company called Authorhouse.
I’m not involved in the book world in anyway other than reading stories to my 10 year old child – and, hopefully, watching her read books that interest her. But what I would say to all those shitting on self-published authors – get a life! Who cares if they’ve thrown money at their own venture, good luck to them. I had no idea who Authorhouse was (and to be honest don’t really care) is but one thing is for sure they printed a book by a great writer. I’ll look out for her again.
I would like to be one of the very few to actually be able to share a success story as a so-called “self-publisher.” (this is my story, by the way…)
After graduating from the top visual arts school in the country, Rhode Island School of Design, (alma mater of Seth MacFarlane, creator of “Family Guy”) Vuthy Kuon taught art and photography before starting his career in children’s books. He studied under award-winning illustrators, David Macaulay and Barry Moser, who guided him through the completion of his first book, based on the Humpty Dumpty nursery rhyme, in his senior year of 1994.
Several companies were interested in fully illustrated manuscript, but Kuon decided to bypass the traditional publishing route through the influence of his brother-in-law, who offered him this challenge. He said, “You know this book is profitable (by the overwhelming interest AND pre-orders from friends, family, and strangers alike) so why would you want to give all the profits to someone else?”
He continued with, “If you start your own publishing company, I will give you $10,000 to help produce your first book!” With such a generous offer, Kuon could not turn it down. He quit his teaching job and independently published his first book entitled “Humpty Dumpty After the Fall,” at the age of 24.
Because of his strong creative arts background coupled with his innate Chinese sense for small business, Kuon was able to sculpt a plan for getting large quantities of books sold in short periods of time. He autographed every single one of the 2,000 first-run books and even numbered them 1 of 2000, 2 of 2000, all the way down to the 2,000th copy. This idea came from seeing Thomas Kinkaid’s Limited Edition prints. Kuon knew how special these books were to him and wanted to make sure this feeling was transfered to the public.
He had a book release party, took hundreds of pre-orders, talked to neighbors door-to-door, recruited cousins to sell books, and even left books on consignment at all the donut shops owned by his relatives. There was no idea beneath him to try! Before his first shipment of books ever arrived, Kuon was already preparing to go into a second printing. After the books arrived, he filled the orders, gave back the $10,000 to his brother-in-law, and ordered an immediate 2nd printing… this time of 3,000 copies.
The next year, he ordered a 3rd printing of 5,000 copies… then another 5,000… then another. After the first 7 years, “Humpty Dumpty After the Fall” had already gone into it’s 7th printing. In addition to that, Kuon continued to work on more book projects and after 12 years has over 30 books published!
Keeping to his “outside the box” thinking, Kuon has tried to break convention and experiment with as many new and creative ways of getting published: as an author, as a free-lance illustrator for other publishers, and also as a publisher of other writers and illustrators. Through much experimentation and research, Kuon discovered the SECRET to the children’s book business, which is… “to sells lots of books!”
—- I HAD a publisher interested in publishing my book, but I TURNED THEM DOWN! I can’t tell you how great it feels to say that! I actually can’t stand the arrogance of “traditional” writers who want to see their name in lights! At least the “self-publisher” is taking action to attempt to make his dream happen! Yes, most the stuff is crap, but I give much more respect to someone who tries and does a sub-par job than someone who does nothing but mope around all day about all their rejection letters. So to all my “Independent Publisher” comrades out their… “More power to you all… and continue improving your product! Sell tons of books & let the results speak for themselves.”
As a word of encouragement, I started “self-publishing” 12 years ago and almost immediately was able to gross $100,000 a year. Nowadays it’s closer to $200,000 per year. This has opened doors to me to get into real estate investing. My first new construction project made me a profit of over $100,000 in a little over a year for doing almost nothing except qualifying for a half million dollar loan!
Anyway, thank you all for having this forum for us to vent! If you want to see my books, it’s on ProvidencePublishing.com. Contact me if you want some encouragement!
Thank you! I am self published author and am very proud of what I have created. Thank you for not blasting us all. I feel like this is my piece of the American dream. That I can put together something that I personally can be proud of and fulfill as a dream. If along the way, I strike a cord with kids in my series thats great. But other than that, I have done something on a bucket list that means the world to me. Thank you -Deena
What does anybody bitch about self-publishing? Look at the bilge that does get published, usually with “I’m the next Stephen King!” displayed shamelessly on the cover.
Maybe so much effort should go in to trying to find ways to get people to pick-up and actually read books again. I don’t believe people read less today, just a lot fewer books than they once did. I read somewhere recently that less than 5% of Americans will purchase a new book this year. Another story discussing the most modern new libraries showed off their beautiful architecture, huge structures and the very obvious fact they contain only a few actual book shelves mostly for reference books or special finds.
I have a gallery/gift shop and carry several self-published books in an effort to try to support regional authors and customers will seldom even bother to pick-up a book and look at it, much less buy it. No matter how well they are displayed or the fact that we provide a monthly catalog of books in stock.
Some predict the Internet highway will become a toll-road in the future, maybe then books will come back in fashion but right one is hard pressed to even give a book away and it really doesn’t make any difference if it’s good, bad, self-published, mid-stream or main stream.
Find a way to widen the consumer base and there will be more room for everyone.
Dude.
I self-publish because it’s FUN.
I’m not out to make the $$$ or be famous or bully people into buying my books or to appear on talk shows squawking about how I’m a published author or what have you. I just do it because I like making stuff.
It’s ok to do things for fun.
I don’t even profess to know how to write — but I will tell you that at least I can claim discretion over the coin in my wallet. MY coin goes to the self/ indy/ POD publishers! I mean, they let me post feedback on their websites; sometimes they even write back! They make all sorts of creative videos; they let me download free excerpts; I’m even getting into reading books on my mobile phone! I work on a shift — so when do I have time to really read a huge, hardcover, anyway? PLUS — have you seen the price of a hardcover from the big publishers lately? By the time I drive to the bookstore to buy the expensive book, I can’t afford the gas to get home! I think small press and independent writers rock! Who cares if the writing is good or bad? People buy wines from basement wineries all the time — and they don’t cry about the lousy way a grape was pressed until they — at least — shelled out some dough for the bottle and drank a bit, to find out. I can tell you that my favorite book right now is HANDLE TIME by LiNCOLN PARK (ISBN-13: 978-0615215181). If you read that book, you will know IMMEDIATELY that the big publishers wouldn’t touch it — but she got 4465 Press to put it out. I can tell you right now that HANDLE TIME is the ONLY book they are talking about on my job! Noone can put it down! So what I’m trying to say is,all you writers and indy publishers — WRITE ON! I, for one, will keep taking the chance on you!
Kristin,
I agree with you on two points. first that HANDLE TIME is amazing! The guys on my job don’t even read books and you are starting to see copies of it on more and more people’s desks. It’s a GREAT book.
Second, it’s true. The price of food and gas can really change the way you look at spending on recreation; whether it’s books or movies or game downloads. I found out about HANDLE TIME at the LULU BOOK REVIEW. ere is the review URL:
http://lulubookreview.wordpress.com/2008/07/25/review-24/
After I read HANDLE TIME, I thought, maybe I would give more small press books a try. I went back to the review to learn about more books I could read. I like Shannon’s opinions, now. does anybody know if any POD or self-published books have gone on to become movies? Maybe indy movie producers could find a lot of new material if the got together with indy authors and publishers. That’s just my opinion.
Urk. Well. This afternoon a house editor scolded me for not mentioning my client’s self-publishing website. He hadn’t sold a thing; decided to go the “straight” route with an agency and somebody big, if possible. Hadn’t shut his site down. Leave it up, I told him, could be useful sometime. The lady’s objection seemed quite petty, somewhat paranoid. But I do hear that publishing houses do squint at previously self-published work. What if, indeed, the author is double-dipping? Still, for a chuckle, imagine this suspicion applied to any of the 22,351,661 poets in the U.S. Yes I made that number up. Poetic license.
Stats last year for the publishing industry: new sales were at .03%. The average industry-official author, from the zillion-to-zero sellers, sold 500 books. Lots of people are nervous.
A lady’s book sat on lulu.com for 2 years, sold nothing, got 8 reviews, seven obviously from friends, was picked up by a major house, 250,000 books printed and distributed at all outlets within 4 days, in time for the lady to appear on Oprah, which was kind of a fluke; she was a bad writer but a good showman on an internet show; she’d been picked up by Oprah for showmanship, if selling faulty ideas about the brain and consciousness. She also got into Time magazine and various other like items. It was a huge blitz. Must have cost millions.
8 weeks later a publisher who had access to the real numbers told me only 7,500 of those 250,000 books had sold. That sounded about right to me, it was that kind of book. They’re going at it again this month. They’re still stuck with tons of unmoved product. Marketing, which seems to be driving the industry more than ever, seems to think concepts sell over content. Editors are rejecting quite good material because the marketers don’t like the concept. Seen it first hand, two monumental cases in the past year.
Ye who claim people aren’t reading are grumping out of your butts. What’s happened is most people aren’t reading crap, as usual. Got a letter from a soldier in Iraq last week. Please send books. Only one of the 5 authors he requested hasn’t been dead for decades (Cormac McCarthy). I saw this every day at a local coffeeshop. Kids reading like crazy, and not because they had do. Authors long dead, ‘cuz almost nothing is as good currently. There was crap back when Twain was alive… but you read it now and it really ain’t too bad. Ephemeral stuff isn’t always crap. Who here said Twain was a “salesman”? Ew! Look, he would’ve died a pauper if he hadn’t married rich. But he knew and so stated his stuff would still be around in 100 years.
Am a writer myself, but no thought to self-publish. A brother and a cousin have done that. The cousin says she’s up to 4000-something on Amazon.com
But don’t be fooled by that or the NY Times best seller list. Can’t confirm it from here, but it looooooooks like they’ve started doing what the music biz started doing: reporting how many books (CDs, in music) were contracted to booksellers (record stores), not to the public. The vendors lose their asses for having locked into a bad bargain. I know it’s a music biz thing for a fact. A producer friend had a 2-man act on an album that “sold 3 million.” One wound up working in a 7-11, the other in jail unable to pay traffic tickets. The company SHIPPED 3 million. Nobody bought ‘em.
Anyway, if the Big Guys don’t like my stuff, I still don’t mean to self publish. I’ll just write it to people one at a time. I like that a lot better. Unflattered fan mail is a LOT more interesting. Have had the other kind. Still get it, sometimes.
The lady some dozen postings back was right, creativity is going begging in this discussion. Labeling yourself “published” or “self-published” isn’t creative. All the self-publishers listed who are now historical figures (add Percy Bysshe Shelley and Thomas Paine too) were immensely creative individuals. If you’re not, even if you produce 3 million copies in titanium, readers will feel that and your stuff will just clutter up the place. If it isn’t fun, don’t do it. Yearning after prestige or an artificial self-respect isn’t fun. Doing it for money alone is as mind-numbing as any repetitive chore.
If you write to make a difference in life, don’t take it to the people who don’t care whether anybody makes a difference in life, who just wanna sell something. Just start at home and go from there. Works for me so far. Aaaaaaaaand there are editors at the Big Guys who do indeed care about making a difference in life. They’re likable people. I hope some manage to get around the marketing Nazis.
But marketing Nazis are YOUR fault, you cynical public, you. What was that movie about the quiz show? “People don’t watch for the questions, they watch the money!” Well, maybe that’s not quite as true for Jeopardy, where they like to show off at home.
Writing this while waiting for a Twilight Zone to load on YouTube. Took long enough. Heavy day today.
Oh — PS. I ALMOST sold a movie out of a self-published ms a couple years ago; the guy had been dead for 7 years tho’, and it was a fluke. A movie almost like it came out and was the hit of the season, “Pursuit of Happyness.” Quit worrying about getting yourselves made into a movie, people. One of my old clients hate, hate, hated it, and SISSY SPACEK played her.
Ihave never been rejected by a big house but that’s bbecause i never submitted. I guess I am fortunate not having the need to put my sense of self worth on the line I do not have the need to flaunt the “Im a published author” not out of bitterness but out of practicality. I only print one book for sale because each book is different its a novalty item In fact I think of myself as being further down the food chain, using the self publishing venue to publish my custom children’s books allowing me to bring my illustrations with my stories. My problem is just where do I belong in the market place not with the big house publishers not with the independent self publishers Im not a craft according to alot of festival applications am I a toy? A book? When you are tossing around a newer idea the doors to publishing clicks don’t open too quickly not because they don’t like you they just don’t know what you are either:) I love this site by the way
I won’t mince words. I am a writer and I have one book published. And yes, I went the self publishing route.
I’ve heard references to self publishing books being sub-standard in their printing methods, etc. But has anyone who picked up a self-published book or even a traditionally published book, ever thought about the blood, sweat, and tears that went into that book? The pain staking hours or the sleepless nights that author went through to put their thoughts on paper or in the word processor?
I will be the first to admit that self-publishing is everyone’s choice for getting their “art” published. But sometimes it is the best way for that author.
After I finished my book, before it was supposed to go to my editor. I sent out 25 copies of the book in PDF form to a couple of friends, offered it to strangers in chat rooms and even a couple of people at work. I was very surprised at the responses I got. Most of them were very positive.
I decided then to try an online book club. I found out that most of the people in the book club were very unprofessional about their views of self published books. They criticized my writing style, my mistakes in grammar, and so on. This of course, upset me and made me rethink the whole process of writing a book.
Was I good enough to make it out in the real world? Did my book have what it took to make a best seller?
As I pondered these questions, I ran into a fellow writer in a chat room and he gave me a famous quote to remember.
“Those who can write, do. Those who can’t, teach.”
I pondered these words for a couple of days and made my decision.
I released the book, in its non-edited form, and added a page to the front of my book which stated that I had my own writing style.
Readers will either enjoy the book, or they won’t. They will either buy it or they won’t. But the fact remains, people have bought it and have read it. I have gotten both good and bad responses. Mostly about the editing errors, but they said it didn’t affect how the book read.
A book’s quality is not in the pages that its printed on, or how it was printed, but in how the reader enjoys the story.
Take that to heart the next time you are searching the net and find a book that has been published by lulu.com or one of the other self publishing companies out there. Take to heart that some poor soul, spent a portion of their life, pouring their ideas and thoughts onto that printed page. Look past the errors, and see what the author is trying to tell you.
David Lumin
Sorry that is supposed to be “isn’t everyone’s choice.”
Very interesting article. And I can agree with some points but disagree with others (same for many of the responses). Sure there are many “rejected robs” and “joe blows” out there in the POD/Self-published world. But are we foolhardy enough to think that they don’t also exist amoungst the ranks of those who just recieved their first acceptance letter and are acting like Cinderella trying on the glass slippers? I knew people like that. They are annoying.
I agree with anyone who has said that there is just as much CRAP out there that is traditionally published as there is in POD publishing. In fact, I’d rather read a POD book by a true artist who slaved over every word, and revised it to infinity, perfecting their craft than ANYTHING written by Paris(ite) Hilton or her dog.
Yeah, the traditional publishing houses do SUCH a good job of weeding out crap, and producing good literature don’t they? *sarcasm intentional*
Likewise, it’s a narrow-minded blanket judgement that POD/Self-published/indy authors do not put their books through any scrutiny or editing before publication.
I have recently put out a collection of short stories. All except one were put through the scrutiny of online writing workshops, recieving feedback and critiques from fellow writers. I had to evaluate my content, and decide which stories to include and which not to include. There were some stories which I felt just wouldn’t make the cut–or needed further revisions before being included in any collection.
Traditional publishers (or if you prefer “commercial publishing houses”) put out worse garbage than indy writers. Like I really care about Tori Spelling’s “tell all” book. Too often it’s who you are that gets you a book contract. And, it’s a shame when publishers turn up their ugly noses to art, because “OMG Paris’ dog! That will make us money!” *rolls eyes*
Commercial publishers are just that–commercial publishers. they look at what’s going to make them money, and don’t care about upcoming writers who actually have talent. Now, if (and only if) a talented indy writer’s book sells X amount of copies, they may decide to pick up that title. But, you have to do what you can to make that story the best it can be, and market it to the best of your ability so that it does get the recognition it deserves.
[...] Website services? Insurance? If you’re a published author with any sense, your have those things already. If not, you have a position at a university or a day job. Otherwise you’re not a published author. *ducks* [...]
Publishing is a business and they’ll more than likely publish crap by a famous Paris(ite)’s of the world (brilliant KC!), than ordinary people.
But then, the ordinary people, GHOST write for the celebs (we’re good for something then…)
Self-publishing is a viable option for people who’ve been told their book is good, but too original, won’t sell, lists are full… The snobs, I believe, are really the ones who haven’t struggled as long as the ones who’ve turned into self-published.
There’s room for all. Maybe it’s the publishers who’re the REAL snobs? They’ve missed out on an opportunity? Maybe?
Look, it is difficult for brilliant people like me. My writing is so great that no editor can understand it. Because of that, I am shit poor (I would much rather sit around playing with my belly fat than work, thank you). Because of that, I can’t afford to self publish. People who have told me to get a job should be forced to pay me to publish! WHAT IS IT ABOUT THAT IS SO HARD FOR SCUM TO GET!!!!!!!
Whoa. Happy almost three year anniversary “Why People Hate Self-Published Authors!”
I don’t see anything wrong with using a POD press for new authors, unless they expect the publisher to do any legwork when it comes to marketing or advertising. Both of my books were published via a POD press that gets a lot of bad press, but I was actually very impressed with their process. And….since I’m a copy editor myself (I only charge a buck a page for basic to comprehensive copy editing if anyone needs a copy or content editor!), I enjoyed the chance to edit my own book.
I am a self published author that has has huge success 5,000+ books sold with 2 titles. I give my profit to the cystic fibrosis foundation to find a cure. I chose self pub through Authorhouse because the profit is high. I have made over $50,000 for my charity with books Kyle’s First Crush, and Kyle’s First Playdate. Messy Tessy will come out this fall. I have had great success on major networks, ABC Health watch, NBC, CBS, MY ADVICE: TAKE THE ROAD LESS TRAVELED….IT TRULY MAKES ALL THE DIFFERENCE. LEAH ORR
You know, I’ve seen this same debate all over the blogosphere, and all of the points are starting to get really stale.
POD technology isn’t going away, and neither is traditional publishing. Those on either side are arguing from their own self interests, so we get nowhere.
The strongest point I saw in these comments was about blogs. It’s interesting to note how a few years back there was a lot of whining and mockery from traditional journalists about blogs, and now that debate is largely over. While the vast majority of blogs are unreadable crap, bloggers are regularly featured on news programs and many carry as much authority as those in traditional journalism and publishing–true, many came from those quarters, but many have made their mark only in the blogosphere.
I’m sure a lot of traditional journalists/columnists would love to return to the pre-blogosphere days when they had no other real competition. Mockery, however, isn’t going to bring those days back. Traditional journalism isn’t going to disappear, but no one will deny it’s undergoing a rather dramatic transformation.
We’ll see what happens with POD and traditional book publishing.
[...] you though self-pubished books were all rubbish. Author Boyd Morrison sold two books, the first one called The Ark, to Simon [...]
[...] 11, 2009 ·Filed Under Technology News And you though self-pubished books were all rubbish. Author Boyd Morrison sold two books, the first one called The Ark, to Simon & [...]
[...] you though self-pubished books were all rubbish. Author Boyd Morrison sold two books, the first one called The Ark, to Simon & [...]
[...] you though self-pubished books were all rubbish. Author Boyd Morrison sold two books, the first one called The Ark, to Simon & [...]
[...] Powered by Max Banner Ads Powered by Max Banner Ads And you though self-pubished books were all rubbish. Author Boyd Morrison sold two books, the first one called The Ark, to Simon & [...]
[...] admin on Jul.11, 2009, under Tech And you though self-pubished books were all rubbish. Author Boyd Morrison sold two books, the first one called The Ark, to Simon & [...]
[...] you though self-pubished books were all rubbish. Author Boyd Morrison sold two books, the first one called The Ark, to Simon & [...]
[...] you though self-pubished books were all rubbish. Author Boyd Morrison sold two books, the first one called The Ark, to Simon [...]
[...] want to subscribe to the RSS feed for updates on this topic.Powered by WP Greet Box And you though self-pubished books were all rubbish. Author Boyd Morrison sold two books, the first one called The Ark, to Simon & [...]
[...] you thought self-published books were all rubbish. Author Boyd Morrison sold two books, the first one called The Ark, to Simon & [...]
[...] you thought self-published books were all rubbish. Author Boyd Morrison sold two books, the first one called The Ark, to Simon & [...]
[...] you thought self-published books were all rubbish. Author Boyd Morrison sold two books, the first one called The Ark, to Simon & [...]
[...] you thought self-published books were all rubbish. Author Boyd Morrison sold two books, the first one called The Ark, to Simon & [...]
[...] you though self-pubished books were all rubbish. Author Boyd Morrison sold two books, the first one called The Ark, to Simon & [...]
[...] you thought self-published books were all rubbish. Author Boyd Morrison sold two books, the first one called The Ark, to Simon & [...]
[...] you thought self-published books were all rubbish. Author Boyd Morrison sold two books, the first one called The Ark, to Simon & [...]
The April 4, 2009 comment is NOT from me – Nanette Rayman Rivera. It was posted by a cyber stalker who is trying to ruin my reputation. He, who never met me, seems to think he has the right to destroy me because I can’t pay my student loans. Yet he does everything he can to make sure I can’t earn a living. He is Jacob Walsh of Indianapolis – ex cult member of Holy Order of MANS. He is all over the internet posing as me, saying idiotic, racist, assinine things. He threatened to kill me, cut up my genitals and burn my nipples off. He hacked into my email, etc, and orders things and puts them on my phone bill.
PLEASE DISREGARD ANY POSTS THAT SAY THEY ARE FROM NANETTE RAYMAN RIVERA, except this one, as I am the real Nanette.
Thank you.
Nanette
I think that self-publishing makes sense if you’re going to write a non-fiction book, you’re an expert in your field and you already have a following.
If you’re going to self-publish, always hire a professional designer and an editor (you can usually get a professional on a freelance basis).
I would imagine that it would be hard to market a fiction book without the muscle of a publisher behind it. But again, if you have a great website, somewhat of a following, and the money to hire a P.R. professional, then go for it!
MJ Acharya
The Breakup Workbook
Elitism.
What you’re railing against is the Cult of the Amateur which is enabled to such a great extent these days by such things as POD, Youtube, blogging services, and other “self-publishing” outlets. You (and I agree) are annoyed by the growing number of amateurs who are able to foist their crap on us in a package that gives them the appearance of a “real writer”. But you’re wasting your time. Poor quality takes care of itself – if it’s bad, no amount of self-publishing is going to turn it into a commercial success.
I think, moreover, that you want to exclude these folks from the elite “Club of Published Authors Who Don’t Have to Mention that They Are Published”. I agree that this is an “earned” accolade, but don’t try to pretend that you’re not being elitist.
As one who enjoys reading, and has an inside look from working for a publishing company and dealing with authors on a daily basis, I’ll share briefly what I think about the self pub, traditional published route.
Bottom line is that both self pub author and the majority of traditional pub authors will have to be the driving forces behind their book, from the beginning to the very end. If not, you’ll most likely have a flop on your hands.
Traditional Published Author
A traditional published author may be able to sit back while the editorial team, and cover design team go the work, but the majority of traditionally published authors are just getting the basics in marketing from their pub house and don’t realize it.
Many major publishing houses do use third party services, the same third party services that self published authors have access to, the only difference is that the Pub House is paying the bill, therefore will most likely be keeping a good percentage of the royalties.
Self Published Author
Make sure you inquire and get in writing the details of the services you are paying for. Be picky, make sure the company your interested in is picky and has your best interest of receiving a quality final product in mind.
You may also seek services from independent publishers. Do your research and find local independent publishers willing to assist you in making a quality product. Some may even do a profit sharing contract.
If you don’t want to go with any one company that specializes in the book process, you’re a great multi-tasker, go at it and be a complete project manager by seeking services from freelance editors, freelance graphic designers, printers, and marketers. You’ll be fighting a battle on multiple fronts and you must realize the balancing difficulty you have a head of you of getting each entity to come together as one to form one final product..
If you don’t have the means for consultation or research, or the time in general because your busy writing, here are two recommendations for you, and I’ll tell you why I recommend them. http://www.booksurge.com and https://www.createspace.com. Why, because they are backed by Amazon, inc. Although a partner/distributor to major publishing houses, take note of the Kindle, and Amazon’s astounding book sales for Christmas ’08. If you can’t join a publishing company, simply beat them with their biggest competitor/partner.
There is no science behind book marketing and selling books, period. I’ve seen authors appear on major tv shows, every day of the week of the release of their book and have complete flops! Bottom line, if you’re a writer who genuinely loves what you’re writing about and “naturally” promote it, word will get around, your quality published book has a better chance of attaining good avg. sales than sales of most traditional published books and self published books whose authors do nothing to promote them or give up after a week. In a sense, your published book is almost like a business, don’t fold up shop after a couple months, even a year. As long as your book is good quality, there are people out there waiting to read it, you just have to reach them, so be the driving force.
[...] back in 2006, while Slushpile.Net can write a post entitled Why People Hate Self-published Authors, the responses to the post oddly sidestep the question of perception (which is what the post is all [...]
This is probably a dead thread, but something about your Kobe Bryant metaphor stuck in my mind, so I wanted to comment on it:
If you were able to talk people into paying to watch your pick-up basketball game, then, yes, by the only definition that matters, you would in fact be a professional athlete.
I think the greatest amount of acrimony between “real” authors and self-published authors doesn’t arise out of the truly absurd examples of self-publisher delusion you recount here. It comes from “real” authors who sell 200 copies or less of any particular title in their oeuvre every month, but who still insist that they are superior to “fake” self-published authors with higher sales figures.
The open secret is that there is not a lot of money to be made by writing, for 99.999% of authors. “Real” authors have always been able to make up for their puny compensation with the prestige that comes from being in print. They as a result cling to that prestige for dear life, and the industry encourages them to cling to it, because as the money dries up more and more every year they don’t have anything else to offer their stable of writers BUT prestige.
The best way to maintain systems of prestige is by establishing an Other who is made the object of disdain, and the Other that authors and publishers have chosen is the self-publisher.
This article hit home, I just had my novel Birthing the Lucifer star published and I am a writer of scifi and flash fiction. I tried my hand at a longer rant, I find that it’s hard to get publicity for my book although i did a release and a review here http://publishitorbust.blogspot.com/ and I set it up to give out autographed copies of my new novel. I hope I’m not hated or reviled.
D E Bartley
For me, self publishing with POD was a way to test a concept (prototype), to quickly get some books into the hands of friends and colleagues. I had learned and compiled some photographic techniques that I had been sharing with others through online forums, and compiling them into a book was a another way to explain my techniques to others. Since the vast majority of those seeking my help came through my website, POD, also made sense because the bookstore was not the primary marketing channel. I just put the POD link on the site, and those who had been asking for my techniques had a way to acquire them. Also the niche subject of the book (nude photography) made the POD route a good fit for me.
Some of the best books, music and creations I’ve found currently are those produced by self publishers. It’s naive to even draw a distinction between self-published and “publisher” published these days. Paris Hilton has a publisher. Edgar Allen Poe did not–he was self-published. Does that mean that of the two Paris Hilton is the ”real” author?
Wayne Dyer published his first book and drove the country selling it out of his trunk. Now he’s on the bestseller list. Joe Vitale and James Redfield were self published. Now they’re in every bookstore in the country. Everyone thinks of them all as “real” authors. This is the time for the entrepreneurial writer.
Contrary to popular thought writing a book isn’t that big a deal (In case you think I have no experience, I was a college writing professor for 8 years, taught at 3 different Chicago colleges/Universities. Have an MFA in writing; I was published in literary magazines, did freelance corporate publishing and even a kid’s book through a new your publisher. It’s NOT that big a deal.) Why are so many hung up on getting a publisher to give them a blessing? What is this obsession people have with giving their authority away?
We’re living in a time when EVERYONE’S got college degrees and accreditations. Who cares. What can you DO? Degrees and blessings from authorities mean NOTHING when everyone has them. These days the stuff you read on blogs is more powerful than anything in a bookstore or in newspapers. The only thing that matters is whether or not you can make an impact. I am much more impressed by the guy who publishes a book, or his own music that’s really GOOD than the self-involved “author” who’s “published” work goes straight to the bargain table because it’s crap. I still remember buying a copy of Jane Hamilton’s Book of Ruth off the bargain table of the major bookstore where I worked in the late 80’s/early 90’s. I got it for 50 cents. I remember liking it—but did it change my life? No. Can I tell you anything about it now? No. And yet, a self published book I bought recently on Chinese cooking is something I constantly use. It’s always effecting my life and the lives of my family.
Amazon, the largest bookseller in the world could care less whether you self-published or are published by someone else. They are the largest bookstore for a reason—they can spot opportunity. Funny thing–while people are sitting round debating whether or not “self-published” writers are “real” writers a new breed is emerging. A breed of entrepreneurs who can spot opportunities, seize them and use them to make an impact on the world around us. And we’re going to topple the old industry. And that just kicks ass!
[...] 26, 2010 by dlmarcus Smart, balanced commentary on self-publishing, with Day-Glo sneakers. The gist: not all self-published authors are vain, [...]
I am self published and have written a fantasy trilogy. I dislike other POD authors who push their work with false reviews from family and friends. That is really annoying as it casts suspicion on the rest of us who work really hard to get reviews. My novels in the Prophecy of the Kings series have only ever had real reviews. You can tell, as I have had some really good reviews and one or two stinkers. I would be grateful to other POD authors if they stopped this process of false reviews, talking up their own work. It undermines the rest of us.
I am a self-published POD writer whose first Christian fiction novel came out about six weeks ago. I never even tried to hire an agent or approach a traditional publishing company. Statistically, I know my manuscript for Eternity Beckons would have most likely been rejected by most publishers and quite frankly, I am too busy with the rest of my life (family, job, ministry, etc.) to spend time pursuing the “dream of being a famous author.” I just love to write creatively and share my work with others. It’s fun! I was a professional journalist and editor for many years with two college degrees (I am currently using neither). I think there is so much more to life than placing labels on people. Who cares how you publish your work? Just get it out there and let people judge it for themselves. And if you’re worried about dropping a whole twenty dollars on a hardcover or paperback book on Amazon ( which by the way is the largest bookstore in the world), many books can be purchased cheeply on Kindle or downloaded on E-book. Why is this topic such a debate anyway? Are there not far more important issues in the world right now? Geez!!!!
Once upon a time, in a land made of cobblestone streets and wrought iron lanterns, there lived a girl with magic in her hands. When she held a pen- magic was created. New worlds were born. She was a writer. In a burning passion to see her writings on shelves in bookbinding, in libraries, and most importantly, in people’s hands, she painstakingly traveled far and wide, knocking and calling out, ever-persistently she knocked on the doors of people called “literary agents” she called out from the sideways up to large houses called “publishing houses” .. day after day and night after night.. her spirit was strong and she never gave up! Months passed. And then years. Finally, a young and dashing literary agent fell in love with the beautiful young writer, took all her writings to the big publishing houses, and alas…. the writer’s dream had come true! Thanks to the dashing literary agent and the rich publishing houses who had printers.
Enter 2010. Long gone are the days when we needed to call out in the streets and knock on wooden doors and plead up towards the big grand windows of the big and rich publishing houses. Now, we can publish our writings by ourselves.
Those grand rich publishing houses of yesteryears are still the ones in power today. They monopolize the literary world and the literary industry. And now.. they are seeing and uprising. A change. Something that threatens their way of life, the the future of their last names! It is the self-published author. The modern day writer of today- who isn’t about to beg and grovel in the dust and wait for someone to fall in love with her in order to see her writings on bookshelves!
Nowadays, we have learned how to make our own selves happy. We have learned how to make our own dreams come true. And writing, being a writer, an author- is no exception!
DeBeers has been the leader in the diamond industry since people knew what diamonds were! Suddenly, some smart ones discovered a way to make equally excellent, beautiful, same exact quality diamonds WITHOUT having to wait 300 years for volcanic ash and stone and mud and hardened lava to create them thousands of miles under the earth! Some smart people found out how to make them in lab! In a fraction fraction fraction of the time! Definitely NOT thousands of years! hahahaha! And of course- what did the diamond giants like DeBeers do?? They launched a campaign to make these “synthetic” diamonds appear cheap and devalued.
Everything is just a business. And staying in business. The lab-created diamonds are not cheap. They are of no lower quality than the earth-created ones, they are of the same exact quality, beauty, and perfection. But it’s all about monopoly. And some people would actually shell out 4 million dollars for a giant diamond, when they could spend, what, 4 thousand dollars for the same one, made in a lab! It’s all to do with the influence of these giant companies, the influence they have on people and people’s thinking.
There’s no reason at all to hate, or to look down on, or to depreciate– self-published authors. In fact, I believe that anyone who does is misinformed and jealous. Envious. And probably just doesn’t have enough money to publish his book by himself!
Welcome to the modern era, everybody! We’re not walking under wrought iron lanterns and over cobblestone, anymore, people!
C
[...] and thus Boogiepop was born.” – Kadono Kouhei, creator of Boogiepop Phantom. Caryn Lawton said: “I work as the marketer for a very small scholarly press. We primarily publish [...]