Jump to content

Self-publishing; Fad or Future?


polishgenius

Recommended Posts

Both a fad and a future perhaps. Especially since self-publishing has strengths and weaknesses that seem compatible with those of commercial publishing.

The tricky bit with any publishing seems to be discoverability, much more so for self-publishing. Which is one issue that does not seem to have an easy solution, it is just too easy to manipulate most automated systems. Just look at the hard actions Amazon has taken in recent months against reviews and labels.

An other important part, already mentioned in this thread, and an argument made by successful published writers is the expertise that publishers (and agents) bring to aspects that an author might not be comfortable in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A good example would be EL James, author of the Fifty Shades books. She self-published, the books were a wild success, and when the trilogy was picked up by a mainstream publisher she pulled the online versions...But it took Fifty Shades - which is a terrible, terrible book and has its own thread for mockery - selling like hotcakes for the big publishers to notice it. I'd say that as a rule, publishers want fresh material...

This is likely to be the model for the near future, possibly to the extent that authors sending in MS to publishers will eventually die out with publishing decisions with regards to new authors driven in part by the sales pattern of self-publishing. ie in the future the established mainstream way for new fiction authors to reach market will be by publishers taking up successful/interesting self-published works.

And really that is no more than a reversal of current practise, instead of having to read piles of submissions and guess / go by gut feeling which will tickle the fancy of a fickle public you cherry pick and edit to greater saleability those that are already doing well.

I would be surprised if the more successful self-publishers stay self-publishers unless they are writing for a very niche audience. Its maths, if your big percentage take of a small number of sales nets you less than a small percentage of a large number of sales then you are going to opt for the publisher. Equally there is prestige and pleasure in reaching a larger audience, perhaps even audiences in other languages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the above post makes a lot of sense but I think it may only work for certain genres or lowest common denominators for the near future. I think we'd need everyone to be reading heavily via ebook for a "selection of the fittest" model to work in publishing. At the moment I don't know if the readership of all genres is high enough in terms of reading online to gauge the market. I imagine fantasy and trashy romance work but maybe not so much in other areas. 10 years time? Maybe.

I agree from a publishing point of view this model appears safer as you already know you have a success. Three pitfalls come to mind though - you're not the only publisher who will notice this success so you need to decide when (probably a good thing for the author though). The second is whether the author even needs a publisher at that point. Finally, why would someone want to buy something that was free/cheaper earlier on?

In many ways now may be the best time for self-publishing but they'll have to come up with a model to solve the final issue or by the time your book is recognised as having online heat there may not be many sales left to get. This is speaking of the future where the mass for ereading is high enough for a publisher to safely gauge a book's potential. Tricky times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's say this aspiring author is a good one. One who should be published and has a great potential to be hit and a monetary success. This means that the aspiring author is good at writing. But, is said aspiring author good at promoting, marketing, proof reading, distributing, etc? Is the said aspiring author trained in contracts and contract negotiation? Is said aspiring author good at managing people, subcontractors, their finances? Etc. Etc.

Publishing houses for all their faults have professionals to fill all the roles I mention above and many more. Our hypothetical author above may be a great author, but they may not have any time left over after dealing with the proverbial bullshit to actually write. Publishers provide expertise and allow the author freedom to actually write. They make a professional product and adhere to standards that are generally known. (John Scalzi has a great post somewhere that goes into all this - he's been on both sides of the coin)

So, no, in my opionion an aspiring author is much better off with a publisher unless they the time, expertise, or support network to do what a publisher does.

The author can just pay freelancers to do all the editing, proofreading, cover work, most of the promotion and marketing stuff. He doesn't have to do it all on his own. Sure, it will cost him (though from what we've read it's hardly a huge sum) and it's risky, but it's a viable alternative given that the difference in the royalties a self-published author gets compared to the other option is huge.

How much promotion do the publishers do for most of their authors outside the bestselling ones anyway? Doesn't seem to be all that much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...

How much promotion does the publishers do for most of their authors outside the bestselling ones anyway? Doesn't seem to be all that much.

Depends a lot depending on who you listen to, but probably not a huge amount for most writers; at least in promotion towards readers, which is the one we'd notice most.

What does matter to me, as a reader, is that certain publishers (and actually stores as well) work as a mark of approval and simply that can be enough to call attention to a work. Of course for me that does not tend to work as well for the larger publishers, but a lot better for smaller specialized operations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder, without those "gatekeepers", and with a model relying on popularity for visibility, wouldn't that mean that the fifty shades-like crap would be what's actually read, and we would miss reading the Vandermeer, Duncan, Wolfe because they would be lost among the millions of unread fanfictions wannabe millionaires woul push out there?

I think at least some gatekeepers are needed, even if they are not the current publishing houses.

Yeah, looking through that forum that Larry linked, the word gatekeeper is apparently a pejorative among many indie writers. Seems to miss the essential original point of a gatekeeper. And speak to a basic misunderstanding of how 'the market' works and how if everything is equally available and promoted to everyone, then nothing is. There will always be gatekeepers from the perspective of some of the discussions on there.

It's an interesting little community that; there to be helpful and by and large seems friendly-minded in doing that, but the essentially self-promotional nature means that it's difficult for the sensible, aware ones, to separate themselves from the ones generally used to beat the scene with the mockery stick, because the wrong word in the wrong place could cripple their standing. That's just a basic skim by me though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it is inevitable that at one stage 'the next big thing' will come out of the indies. Maybe not quite yet, but I don't think it's that far off. Something I do sometimes ponder is what J.K. Rowling would have done if she'd had access to the self-publishing option after being rejected for the half-dozenth time back in the mid-1990s?

I think things will have to change a very great deal still before we get to that point, though. At the moment, we're at the stage where authors are getting noticed and successful through indie publishing, but as far as I can tell the ones who do are taking publishing house offers when they come along; presumably because while they get a much smaller share of the pie, that's at the moment more than countered by the promotional opportunities offered by a publishing house.

Yes and no. I've heard through the grapevine that at least one author who's done this - gone indie and signed up with a mainstream publisher - is considering dumping their publisher and going indie again because they made more money that way.

SE is a fairly useful illustration of the problem here: he's successful, obviously, but the Malazan series is I gather quite notable as a series of which the Internet presence is far in excess, proportionally, of its sales compared to other books and series. A self-published book could generate some sizeable online buzz without making any real dent in sales, and they need that buzz a whole lot more.

Yes. To illustrate this, it took Joe Abercrombie five books in five years to sell 1 million copies worldwide. It took Erikson 9 books and 12 years to do the same. It's still a success, but clearly not at the same level as other series.

With all that said, a big name author with money to invest and a devoted audience. Why should they stick with a publisher when they can self pub for a much higher profit?

This is why I'll be very interested if/when Goodkind releases the results of his self-publishing experiment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My question wasn't clear, and that is my fault. I will try this again. Would the fact that the book is for sale on in e-book format keep a publisher from picking up said book if it was still in their submission file? Does self-published preclude the author from still submitting the material hoping for better distribution?

I can't speak for all, but my company (the biggest self-publisher in the world- and also the biggest swindle) allows you to keep the rights for your manuscript. They want your book to be picked up by a traditional publisher almost as much as they want you to sell copies, because then they get to brag that you were once published with them.

The version of the book they create is theirs, but the manuscript remains yours. So, for example, if the company created your book cover or designed the interior, you wouldn't be able to use the cover or that specific design layout.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd write pornography and get rich, but I could never face my parents.

I'll have to wait until after they die. :leaving:

This is what pen names are for...

Your parents don't need to know how you bought a new BMW just with your current salary. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's very hard to edit your own story effectively, being so close to it. At least one reader is necessary to pick up on the gaffes, whether plot-related or typographic. Are there that many reputable editors-for-hire out there?

(mod note)

Self-publishing is a tricky subject; be polite to the other people in the discussion, even and especially when you don't agree with them.

I've often thought about how important the role of editor is. Would The Silmarillion even exist in anything like its current excellent state without the deft hand of Christopher Tolkien? And we've all seen how the lack of a judicious editor can lead an author down into a morass (cough*WoT*cough.)

An author who can successfully self-edit is rare indeed, IMHO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The author can just pay freelancers to do all the editing, proofreading, cover work, most of the promotion and marketing stuff. He doesn't have to do it all on his own. Sure, it will cost him (though from what we've read it's hardly a huge sum) and it's risky, but it's a viable alternative given that the difference in the royalties a self-published author gets compared to the other option is huge...

Yes but then the author has to find, evaluate and manage all these people, or has to find, evaluate and manage a person to do this for themselves. Essentially the author, without any expertise or interest in the matter has to reinvent the publishing house - accept one dedicated to their own work. Is the money alone worth the extra bother, particularly if you have to then bear the responsibility if it goes wrong?

And all the time you just wanted to write stories, not be a business person...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which is why I think the idea that the future is self-publishing and then getting picked up by a major publisher isn't gonna happen. I mean, there will definitely be some of that, as there is now. But alot of writers I think won't have any interest (and/or skill) at that side of the business and will just go straight to the publishers.

And browsing through self-published works is basically like going through a slush-pile anyway. Publishers are likely to just stick with the method with less contract wrangling and try and pick up any of the cream that floats to the top of the self-publishing market.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

*looks at self*

But, is said aspiring author good at promoting

In the business context, yes. I have British hang-ups with promoting myself.

marketing

I've created marketing literature, though in practice I'd pay a designer for a cover, and I've worked around but not in marketing operations. Area to work on.

proof reading

Yep, but not structural editing - I'm not bad at that, but I've never been paid to do it, unlike proof-reading.

distributing, etc?

Been paid for this bit too, in case it reaches physical rather than e-distribution.

Is the said aspiring author trained in contracts

Not this bit.

and contract negotiation?

Negotiation, I've done, though not of contracts.

Is said aspiring author good at managing people

I've led a (tiny) team and had to manage the work of people who were technically my superiors, and nothing fell to pieces.

subcontractors

Been paid for this bit too.

their finances?

Business finance, I've done.

The problem is not the things that need doing. Anyone can learn to do these things or can pay someone else for whatever specialist work they cannot do (for some this will be legal, for some this will be graphics, for me it's both of these but not proof-reading): most people in their late twenties or older who have worked in an office environment - or had experience of the back room of any bureaucracy, including schools etc. - will have had relevant experience of some or most of them. The problem is the ongoing stigma.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Without getting into the sturm and drang that often characterizes these discussions, I think that things are moving towards, and not away from, indies...or self-publishing, if one feels that "indie" is a euphemism.

I do agree, however, that a great deal (putting it mildly) of SP stuff out there is junk. Absolute, complete junk. There are, unfortunately, those who think that because they have a vision that they need to show it to the world right now, without subjecting the work to a rigorous standard of evaluation. Last spring I did a load of interviews for a blog tour, and I said several times that the indie author must be his own best friend and his own biggest critic, and I stand by that. There's simply no excuse for putting crap out there, and it only makes it more difficulty for those of us who are making a serious attempt to get our work recognized.

That being said, there's also a great deal of junk out there bearing a publisher's imprimatur...Stephanie Meyer and David Eddings*, I'm looking in your respective directions. Before I went the indie route I shopped The Duchess of the Shallows to many publishers, and even had an agent for a time, and in the process I learned an awful lot about the industry. The lesson I'd like to share here is that while the editors I dealt with, and my agent, loved the book, they kept pushing my coauthor and I towards what was already out there. In fact, I remember vividly when my agent told us our main character should be a virgin "because that's the trope." We just looked at each other, dumbfounded. Not only was a woman telling us to adhere to a sexualized view of a female character, but to do so simply because everyone else was.

The point I'm trying to make is that while indie works are often rough, sometimes unacceptably so, they have the freedom to explore new ideas the industry won't touch until someone established already has, at which time it is no longer new. Not every reader is experimental, of course, and for those you have every other fantasy novel that is exactly what you expect a fantasy novel to be. However, for those readers who like a bit of adventure in their reading, indie authors have the potential to give them what they want like the industry won't.

*Edited to correct author name.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

However, for those readers who like a bit of adventure in their reading, indie authors have the potential to give them what they want like the industry won't.
It's like the internet: potential is here, but it does not mean you will find what you're looking for, and worse, there is no google.

Seriously though: how do those hypothetical readers find their hidden gem? Are there some resources or emerging authoritative reviewers/indexers one can rely on to find what one wants?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is what pen names are for...

Your parents don't need to know how you bought a new BMW just with your current salary. ;)

You know, I actually wrote and self-published a short "romance" novel under a pen name. I'm not a good writer and I didn't bother editing it at all. I didn't make much off of it, but more than I probably deserved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

**Like** ^^

What do you think of the pros and cons of self-editing, TrackerNeil? I would think you'd have to have a friend or colleague whose taste is very discerning.

Actually, Daniel and I don't self-edit; we employed the services of a number of "test readers", among them the board's own Harry the Heir who is among the sharpest readers I know. Another is the Ph.D. chair of an English dep't at a school in New England (I decline to say which) who has forgotten more about good writing than most people will ever know. Between the two of them, plus a few others, we get excellent feedback, and I can say the book was greatly improved by their efforts. (Happily, they've both agreed to help with our second book, which should be available sometime this summer.) To respond to your question, I'd say one should always, always, always get help editing. No matter how good a writer you are, you are to a certain extent blind to your own shortcomings and mistakes - I sure am - so a critical eye is invaluable. It's believed that self-pubbers simply churn out crap and staple it together, and I am sure some do, but that's not me.

It's like the internet: potential is here, but it does not mean you will find what you're looking for, and worse, there is no google.

Seriously though: how do those hypothetical readers find their hidden gem? Are there some resources or emerging authoritative reviewers/indexers one can rely on to find what one wants?

It's tough, admittedly, since so many book bloggers are reviewing the same things. You have to get to know who is willing to take a chance and who isn't. Some examples of chance-takers are Beauty in Ruins, Melody and Words, and Pauline's Fantasy Reviews. Keep an eye on those sites and you'll get some thoughtful recommendations that aren't simply what everyone else is recommending. (I don't mean that list to be exclusive, by the by; it's all I could think of a the moment.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, what are some of the self-published sci-fi/fantasy books worth reading?

I've read the Riyria series by Michael J Sullivan (which might not really count, as it's now traditionally published) and liked it quite a bit.

I also read Blood Song, which I liked. (which also might not really count, as it is being traditionally published soon)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...