Small and Independent Press Books discussion
General discussions
>
Why don't the Brits like indie writers? (or is just me?)
You're not being a grumpy old woman. My husband and I have found that the UK attitude towards publishing is Dickensian. We are in the 21st century but try telling that to a UK audience. I know of several British authors who are making a name for themselves in the US because the UK won't give them the time of day.It's their loss, IMO, but my husband and I will keep trying to crack that nut and keep publishing.
Oh man, I just this instant joined and here I am already getting myself into trouble. Big breath, here goes. I'm a Canadian author and in my opinion it's the same in my fair country. Publishing options here are very limited, both in print and online. I've turned to the US and while I'm not famous by any stretch, I'm at least learning and being published.
But, here goes, I've also joined a British based e-publishing house and I'm really happy with them. Total E-Bound is fairly new, but again in my opinion a real up and comer. The owner is British but the staff comes from all over as do the authors.
I've also got to say, when I took my book into the local bookstore to see if they'd put it on their shelves, the only way she'd take it is if I supplied them. The owner of the book store refused to deal with 'self-publishing' which is what she calls Phaze. Yes, it's mostly e-publishing, but they have many books in print and more are coming out all the time. It's the print on demand that seems to be the issue. I don't know why, but she couldn't get it through her *&%$# head that if the books didn't sell, she could return them.
All righty, jumping off the soap box and diving under it.
Jude
Hey Jude! Glad to see ya!A friend of ours self-published her book (through Author House) and was able to establish some good relationships with bookstores so we've been picking her brain to see how she did it. She's now free from AH and plans to re-release her book.
We're hoping to go and get our books in the bookshop at the Edinburgh Book Fair later this year.
But returns is an issue. We'd rather they send their returns to us (in saleable condition) rather than destroying them and expecting to get their money back.
Phaze, which is where this particular book is published, now has a contact person who will supposedly deal with difficult bookstore owners. It was incredibly frustrating trying to get it through her head that I wasn't self-published and that Phaze does have a return policy allowing books, in salable condition, to be returned. I didn't growl, but it was a close thing.You know, it sounds like the UK and Canada are so backward compared to the US about this.
Indie writers/publishers are the garage bands of the book world. I think that says it. There are so many amateurs making noise, and that's bound to have an effect on general perceptions about quality. Some people don't want to make the effort, would rather be told what to like rather than put up with the occasional disappointment.Gerald.
http://www.boychiklit.com
Nope. The US is just as backward. It's the "traditional" publishing system itself that's backwards with the system of printing and returns and payments, etc. I don't think that anyone outside of the industry really understands how wasteful and nonsensical the publishing industry is when it comes to producing books.
Gerald wrote: "Indie writers/publishers are the garage bands of the book world. I think that says it. There are so many amateurs making noise, and that's bound to have an effect on general perceptions about quali..."That's true. But readers are smarter than they give themselves credit. They may not be able to identify a split infinitive (some authors and editors don't, either!) or other grammatical trivia, but they know what they like and why.
Like anything, there's good stuff out there if you look for it. I can't tell you how many "best sellers" I've read from major publishers that were rubbish.
The music biz is ahead of the curve of Net evolution for a number of reasons, but it is the de facto model for how publishing, movies, and TV will be transformed. There are quite a few successful bands now that don't have agents or contracts with record labels - distribute directly and take bigger percentage. Pink Martini is one, has its own label and books world tours.
Some of the big print houses are opening up too. Harlequin has an ebook section, others too. I do think in time, ebook publishers as well as the small print presses will gain the respect they deserve. Gerald, in many ways you're right, we're the garage bands of the print world. LOL The amateurs and those who give their work away make it doubly hard for those of us who are serious about the business. The next 20 years is going to be very interesting
Well, I'm glad it's not just me! I do agree the music biz is way ahead of the curve here - but that's partly because its instant. You can get together and play music and if folk like it they'll listen, and when folk listen, eventually someone might even pay you to play...(I speak as a semi-pro musician for the past twenty-one years!)It's so much more difficult with books - until you've read a book, you don't know if you're going to love it or hate it. This is why I find the prejudice against author promotion so frustrating. We're not marching anyone to the checkout desk and forcing them to buy a book they don't want - just asking to be considered alongside commercially published books. The latter are often sold on the author's name not on the merit of the story or the writing, so are no guarantee at all of a good read.
I have to say I have more sympathy for bookshops. They have to take a commercial decision about giving shelf space to something that may not sell.
Anyway, glad to find some solidarity here, chaps and chappesses. I wish there was some way we could jointly push back against the discourtesy shown to serious writers just because they are not considered "commercially viable."
>The next 20 years is going to be very interesting If only interesting meant profitable!! Current business models for charging for content on the Net frankly suck. I'm not a believer that everything should be free. People are paying for access, after all, but none of that money is going back to the creators. This must change. The Electronic Frontier Foundation position (if it still is) that we should go to a patronage system (aristos sponsoring artists) is b.s.
Gerald wrote: ">The next 20 years is going to be very interesting If only interesting meant profitable!! Current business models for charging for content on the Net frankly suck. I'm not a believer that everyth..."
Unfortunately, I can only agree. Look what the myth of "cheap food" and "cheap fuel" have done to the environment to see what "free intellectual property" will do to creative talent.
I agree with SA completely. Hi SA. hehehe =) As an American self-published person, I can honestly say I have mostly made sales based solely on my self-promotion abilities. I read about how Borders and Barnes & Noble have taken a big hit in the economy.. geez.. I can't even find books by authors that *I* read in those stores half the time. Uh.. we don't stock that.. punks! It came out last year! Bookstores are nice.. but I actually dread going to Borders right now. My point is, work the system and find places where books are welcome. People are having to be creative.. I know I have had too. =)
Bradley wrote: "I agree with SA completely. Hi SA. hehehe =) As an American self-published person, I can honestly say I have mostly made sales based solely on my self-promotion abilities. I read about how Borders ..."Too true, Bradley. I've often wondered when the mega chains would realize that by gobbling all the niche and mom-and-pop chains would make it impossible for them to keep up with what readers want and what authors produce.
There used to be an awesome store in Dallas that only sold mysterys and thrillers. When the owner retired, they left a huge gap that not even Barnes & Noble or Borders could fill. If you're lucky, maybe Amazon had what you wanted--or eBay.
Brad - all power to your elbow!!Self-promotion is the only way to go for self-published and independently published authors at present.
What I'm trying to get the big wide world to understand is that this not only does writers no favours, it does readers no favours either. It doesn't encourage good writing. In fact in many ways it discriminates against good writing.
THE LITERARY ESTABLISHMENT AND THE PUBLISHING INDUSTRY ARE FAILING BOOK-LOVERS RIGHT LEFT AND CENTRE!
Amazon, for all its faults (and Amazon is nothing if not commercially-minded!), at least recognises this. Narrow-minded individuals who turn up their noses at something that doesn't have the mainstream publishers seal of approval are part of the problem not part of the solution.
Rant over. I have always been a back-bar revolutionary.
Speaking as a small press editor/author/publisher, poor quality from small/indy press is a problem. We've made it known that we rather produce quality vs. quantity so we pay attention to editing and cover art, etc. I'm also lucky to associate with other small/indy press owners who feel the same way. HOWEVER, there are those who just crank out the crap. But I think even those people are starting to realize that if you want to be taken seriously--and therefore make some kind of money--you need to take a lot more pride in your work and what you produce.
I agree that the small/indy press - and writers - need to focus on quality. Publishing indiscriminately just because you can do it (comparatively) cheaply simply floods the market with poor quality stuff: making it impossible for the poor reader to distinguish the gems from the crud.The problem is that the system doesn't allow it. Where is the process for discovering and nurturing new talent? Where are the good editors of yesteryear? How does the average wannabe author access them? How does the average wannabe author learn to produce quality material?
Commercial publishers don't publish good books. They publish books that will sell. Big difference.
If, as in my case, you know you don't have a book that has great commercial potential, the choice is to keep it in the cupboard or fund the publication in some way. I chose to put mine out in the world for the select bunch of readers who appreciate it to find, if they could. My books would be better if I could have worked with a good editor before releasing them to the public. But that choice is not available to me.
For me, success is not about numbers. It is about the fact that my book connected with other individuals. Someone else enjoyed reading it as much as I enjoyed writing it. The best review I ever had was from a 14-year old who said Cloak of Magic "took her into a different world" - made her laugh, cry and care about the characters. That was what I loved about books at 14, too. If I've passed that love on to just one other person, I am content.
Sue
S.A. wrote: "The problem is that the system doesn't allow it. Where is the process for discovering and nurturing new talent? Where are the good editors of yesteryear? How does the average wannabe author access them? How does the average wannabe author learn to produce quality material?..."Many of them are working for or with the small/independents. One independent publisher says that their editing standard is higher then NYC's because they've developed a detailed process for editing and proofreading.
A lot of people are aware that "mainstream" publishers aren't up to scratch anymore. Even if the books they read aren't high-brow literary. I've always said that readers are smarter than they give themselves credit. They may not know what it is that's affecting their reading pleasure, but they know it's something--right or wrong.
And a good review is a good review! ;)
Very informative.. but we have to browbeat those readers into liking our stuff. =) I have found myself transported by the quality coming from independent books personally. =)www.twitter.com/orcish_dreams
I am so glad to have found this group! I'm a Brit and I know only too well the prejudice that exists against self-published authors over here. Goodreads is based in the US and is so much more friendly than similar sites based in the UK. I joined a similar site which is run by a UK publiser and on their forum there was a topic entitled "Petition to Ban POD books from this site" - someone was asking for all independently and self-published & POD books to be taken off the listings on the site!!! And, lots of people were agreeing with him!! Somehow people are brainwashed by the big publishers and believe that if something is not published by a traditional publisher then it's no good.Since joining Goodreads I have connected with many US & UK authors who have self-published and have read many of their books and these have been some of the best books I've ever read!
In reality I believe that the future of publishing will be that authors will only self-publish and this is what all the big publishers are worried about - they won't be getting their share of the profits and so they have to give us a bad name and stop people buying our work - it all comes down to money with them.
That maybe so, with big bookstores hard up.. I suppose it is up to us to make up the gap. =)
Maria wrote: "I'm a Brit and I know only too well the prejudice that exists against self-published authors over here. Goodreads is based in the US and is so much more friendly than similar sites based in the UK. I joined a similar site which is run by a UK publiser and on their forum there was a topic entitled "Petition to Ban POD books from this site" - someone was asking for all independently and self-published & POD books to be taken off the listings on the site!!! And, lots of people were agreeing with him!!..."Hi Maria,
I'm a Yankee living in the UK and I can't agree with you more. I don't know what it is with the UK audience that they are so behind the times when it comes to technology like POD. Millions of people read things on their iPod (e.g. ebooks) but they can't get past their prejudice of POD publishing?! Actually, it's not the reader's fault, it's the fault of UK "traditional" publishers and their ilk poisoning the rest.
Readers don't go into a bookstore saying: "I only buy books printed by XYZ Publisher." No. They look by author or by subject/genre.
I hear it all the time from UK authors I've talked with that they have made a name in the US but not the UK because of this prejudice. It's like the UK insists on being out-of-step with the rest of the world and are content in "discovering" something "new" after it has been around for a while.
Let the big houses be afraid. People coped fine before the big houses and will do so again. Maybe self-publishing in the US is more acceptable because there are high-profile examples of it throughout American history ever since the revolutionary, Thomas Paine, self-published his "Common Sense" leaflet.
Is that group still around, Maria? And, reading Bradley's comment below, it IS an excellent time for small/independent/self publishers to fill in the gaps.
I'm sure the prejudice is worse in the UK, but it's only recently begun to thaw over here in the US--back in 2000 or so the animosity was so great that Harper's magazine published a hit piece on self-publishers saying that they were "trying to destroy whatever remains of a genuine literary culture" in the US. Really nasty, insane stuff (of course it was written by a book editor for a ruh-SPECK-tubble publisher). Agents still won't consider you, and the double standard for big publishers is absurd on the face of it: we're constantly lectured to by publishers and agents about how "quality" is their only consideration, but have you ever gotten into negotiations with them? They'll tell you unless you've sold like 30,000+ on your own don't even talk to them...and yet they sign fresh kids out of writing school with zero readers every day.
Tim wrote: "we're constantly lectured to by publishers and agents about how "quality" is their only consideration, but have you ever gotten into negotiations with them? They'll tell you unless you've sold like 30,000+ on your own don't even talk to them...and yet they sign fresh kids out of writing school with zero readers every day..."My day job is at a university that has a postgraduate creative writing program. I've had a chance to speak (briefly) to a few of the students. Even though this program has produced some notable names, students are geared to enter the MFA program, then go into the PhD...and then teach.
Nothing wrong with teaching. But why emphasize a program where all you're doing is creating another way to enter teaching...rather than the practical BUSINESS that IS publishing.
I wish these programs would teach more about the practicalities of the writing life and not just the creative side. Now, I haven't had the chance to hear a lecture by a "name" author who may be giving a course, so I'm curious if they really go into how demoralizing it can be to get published and how sometimes it's who you know and sometimes it's just LUCK.
BTW, I got my B.A. in English/Creative Writing.
Would I like fries with that?
Would you like fries with that?
Would they like fries with that?
Would we like fries with that?
Hi all. I'm a self-published American poet who also runs a small press, so I can participate from both sides of this coin. I've just started using POD last year, but have been publishing a small chapbook series for over ten years. Since my involvement in the small press (about 16 years ago), I have come to the conclusion that the whole stigma about self-publishing is out-dated and ill-informed. Hopefully, with the growth of the DIY movement, people will begin to see the light, when it comes to this, plus POD will finally come into its own. I have been told that as a publisher I put out a very nice book -- I just recently published a guy who used to be with Publish America and he has told me repeatedly how happy he is with the book we did.Poetry is a niche market. I know this both as a writer and a publisher. Even Larry Ferlinghetti (who founded City Lights Books) has said that it doesn't sell like it used to. Finding a way to reach the masses or at least a solid poetry audience is tricky. I'm just now experimenting with the EBook format. For me, it's a logical extension of POD, what with production and shipping costs going up. And, while I would still rather hold a book in my hands, an EBook is a simple way to get the text of a book out into the world.
As regards the points raised previously, I think that it is hard in most countries to get published if you are unknown. Few presses are willing to take a chance on an unknown (this applies to the small press as well). I believe the prejudice against POD / vanity publications is more because "legit" publishing houses don't want just anybody competing with them for sales. BUt if you use the Indie Music model, you can see how record companies have become more and more decrepit, to the point of near-extinction. Perhaps the book industry is teetering on that brink as well.
I say, bring it on. Let the chips fall where they may and may we all persevere. And feel free to stop by my website and buy a few poetry books! God bless the small press.
RD Armstrong
Lummox Press
www.lummoxpress.com
Hi Zetta, in response to your question: yes, that group is still around. The comment was on the forum of BookArmy.com - I think it's still on there. The actual website is great and I don't think that BookArmy are going to stop listing PODs or self-published as they've said that they list all books with an ISBN, so we are safe for now :)I think it was just a few individuals who had joined the site who were against self-published authors. I found them really rude and they didn't have any valid reason for their argument. I did post a couple of replies, but then I gave up as I felt like I was banging my head against a brick wall!
It is so true that not only is the prejudice against small/self-publishing rude, it's just wrong!My "to read" shelf just keep growing with the intriguing, entertaining, original offerings of indie writers I come in contact with. Yes, there is some chaff among the wheat. But any reader with half a brain can probably suss out which is which from the reader reviews.
We need to get together and make a noise about this. It is prejudice, and like all prejudice, it's unproductive.
That's why I've teamed up with a couple of fellow-authors in Kent, (UK) to launch UK Independent Authors. We're trying to find opportunities to take books direct to the reading public - at fairs, festivals etc. http://www.ukindependentauthors.co.uk.
This was the post that was banned by another UK Good Reads group which purports to be there for Good Reads members to recommend books. That's what set me off on this rant in the first place.
The fact of the matter is that writers don't need publishers. We need someone to look after the mechanics of transferring our manuscripts into books and distribute them. We also need good editors. And we need marketers, and channels to market.
Literary snobs who think books are the last resort of Victorian heirarchy ("don't you upstart POD wallahs know your place, demmit!!") we don't need.
Wow SA, you really are having a tough time of it over there on the other side of the Atlantic? =)
S.A. wrote: "It is so true that not only is the prejudice against small/self-publishing rude, it's just wrong!..."I'm going to check out your group, S. A., but my husband and I were talking and we said that really, there is no one we are trying to impress in the UK. If the old-guard industry wants to discriminate and then brainwash an impressionable part of the reading public that this is the case, well so be it.
98% of our sales have been in the US, which is fine. One of our books is really selling over here but that's down more to the author's personality and his willingness to self promote.
I think readers should be made aware that big-time publishers and various literati snobs are trying to insult their intelligence. Who cares what company or what printing method? Is it a good read or not??
BTW, we're trying to see if they'll let our books in the Edinburgh Book Festival bookstore. Wish us luck!
I've been following this discussion for a while and I really have to take Maria and several other contributors to task for this kind of thing: "In reality I believe that the future of publishing will be that authors will only self-publish and this is what all the big publishers are worried about - they won't be getting their share of the profits and so they have to give us a bad name and stop people buying our work."Arrant nonsense. Does anyone in this forum genuinely believe that any of us here give 'the big houses' pause for thought? Why would we? We're as much threat to them as a leaf to a dinosaur.
Anything you are seeing by way of prejudice against POD or self-published work, whether it's in a forum or in a national newspaper, is purely because the author of said comments/articles resents self-published work. The fact that they may be hiding behind a giant corporation - because they happen to work for one - does not alter the fact that Random House, Time Warner and Penguin Books are under no threat whatsoever from self-publishing and, while POD is as expensive as it is, and marketing has to be considered viable only in the millions (£$), then self and small publishing never will be a threat to them.
What these I-HATE-POD-ites are is that old human standby - envy. Trying to give it some elaborate socio-economic veneer or comforting yourself that we somehow 'threaten' them is dangerously delusional, and perhaps a convenient excuse to indulge in envy ourselves.
Chancery wrote: "Arrant nonsense. Does anyone in this forum genuinely believe that any of us here give 'the big houses' pause for thought? Why would we? We're as much threat to them as a leaf to a dinosaur. ..."The world is huge and vast. No single publishing house will claim the entire audience, no matter how hard they try and how many companies they buy. But time and time again, large houses will naysay something while doing their homework in the background, only to start doing it and acting as if they invented it.
Ebooks and epublishing has been struggling for years; not to threaten print books or take over the market, but just to get a share. Big houses have dismissed ebooks and epublishing for the longest time but in the last 2-3 years, suddenly they are offering ebooks. Now, just because THEY are doing it, ebooks are now seen as more "acceptable."
OK, the big houses may not have been "afraid," but they sure were paying attention.
I can't speak for anyone but myself, but I can say that our publishing house is more interested in quality over quantity. That alone will keep us small.
Our company may be a leaf to a dinosaur, but that doesn't mean we have to allow ourselves to be eaten.
Individually, small press isn't a threat to anybody, or even to other smaller presses. But wheras one single ant may not be a threat to a picnic, an army of ants could devour it. The more successful small presses become, the more of a collective threat they will be to larger houses.
In the end, readers don't care who publishes the book, as long as it's a good read.
Hi Zetta. Do big publishing houses jump on the bandwagon of anything they think may be 'successful'? Of course they do. I have no disagreemant with that. But do we (small presses & self-published) compete with them? Absolutely not. My bone of contention is in the concept that the prejudice against non-mainstream publishing is one of threat and fear from the said mainstream. It simply isn't. The prejudice we experience is more primeval than that - 'How dare that (POD/self-publishing/independent publisher) author take matters into their own hands and break 'the rules' by getting published without the 'permission' of big publishing houses? Mummy, THEY CHEATED!' That's where the animosity and resentment lies.
Much as I would love to agree with you that "readers don't care who publishes the book, as long as it's a good read", that simply isn't true either. Many readers are failed/aspirant writers themselves and they loathe anyone going the self-publishing route - be they small or large, inept or efficient. You'll find that the most vociferously anti-POD critics always have a wannabe writers lurking under their outraged exteriors.
I'll go so far as to stick my neck out here and say anyone on this forum who has met with hostility to self-promotion, or even the act of having published at all, found it most among those very same "readers" who were less than honest in their reasons for despising said "self-promotion". The worst animosity I have ever met - and I've met a lot - has been from other authors - including Nora Roberts - and they were all "keen readers" crawling all over readers' forums and with book lists that would frighten the French.
It's envy, and it will always be envy as long as people fear you have something they don't.
Chancery wrote: "Much as I would love to agree with you that "readers don't care who publishes the book, as long as it's a good read" that simply isn't true either. many readers are failed/aspirant writers themselves and they loathe anyone going the self-publishing route - be they small or large, inept or efficient. You'll find that the most vociferously anti-POD critics always have a wannabe writer lurking under their outraged exteriors. ..."Howdy, Chancery!
Yes, I'm from Texas, and NO I didn't vote for "him" lol.
I agree with you that many of the critics are failed or wannabe authors. And yes, I've met with hostility from other authors. Envy may very well be the root of it.
However, I've enountered many more readers who aren't concerned about the publisher or method. They enjoyed the read--or not. These are people, readers, with no connection to the industry in any way. They may be well read or not, but I love hearing from them. Frankly, if a failed writer is going to criticize my work because we're a small press and use POD--I hope they paid for it first! LOL
When it comes to competition, we do not see our publishing house in direct competition with anybody. In fact, we've found the small/independent press community to be very supportive of each other.
Personally, I think it's important not to let someone's envy or hostility or whatever discourage you.
There was a news story in the UK the other day about Blackwells bookshop installing a machine in one of their shops where anyone could go in, load their manuscript, and walk out with a POD published book.Now, if this is not the future of the book selling industry I will be very surprised. In time, I see all books being POD - literally, print on demand. Customer goes into shop, views samples, or catalogue, or on-screen selection, maybe looks through an e-book to get a better idea if they're going to like it - then orders and purchases their hard copy book from the print machine. Just like a machine selling chocolate bars, except that you don't even need to stock it, except with digital info.
What price "major publishing houses" then? The digital age is here.
S.A.,There is such a machine available right now, but the price is insane. Small bookstores would be hard pressed to even own one, but I can definitely see this in the future. I can also see a time when print books will be incredibly rare. Why waste the paper when you can have the book, along with a gazillion others, on your reader?
Jude
Jude,I personally think there will always be a place for a "real book" just as there will always be a place for live music. Though maybe the electronic readers will get to look so much like real books I'll be proved wrong!
At the moment the "instant POD machine" I was referring to is a gimmick. But in 10 years time...5...?
Just before I left work in 1982 to look after my first child, I had a little dabble on the first and I think only word processor in BBC radio, where I worked at the time. While I was away from the workplace and busy having babies, a revolution occurred. And my babies have grown up with it!
Zetta wrote: "When it comes to competition, we do not see our publishing house in direct competition with anybody. In fact, we've found the small/independent press community to be very supportive of each other."
I find this to be true.
To be honest, the big conglomerate hostility is their problem and makes them look incredibly foolish. Not only are they screaming at the wind, indie never set out to destroy conglomerate publishing. We do our thing, and they do theirs. Indie film hasn't destroyed MGM or Universal, has it? And MGM and Universal aren't screaming about it.
No one "steals" sales from someone else. The readers buy what they buy. The fact that indie is inventive, responsive, requires a lower return on investment (which makes us able to take on projects NY isn't confident will work for THEM)... Those draw readers that want both the new and the continuation of things NY has abandoned.
Now, I do find that readers are very savvy. However, they are a bit on the "path of least resistance" side. One of the reasons an indie author does well to have more than one publisher (beside the idea of risk management in your career) is that you grow your audience that way. Readers typically only buy from a handful or less of places. But, if they find an author they like, they will follow him/her to the books with other publishers, in my experience.
I'm the oddity, it seems. I'm a US author, but in addition to my US publishers, I currently have one in the UK (just because I like their style and the company I'm keeping there...great authors!)...and I used to have one in Canada. Shrug. It works for me, and my sales are certainly not hurting.
Brenna
"To be honest, the big conglomerate hostility is their problem and makes them look incredibly foolish." People keep making comments like this. Would someone care to show some proof of this "hostility"? And I don't count employees sounding off about their own opinions, whether that be in national newspapers or tiny forums. Some hard evidence please that big publishing houses have ever shown any concern about indie publishing........
Actually, the NY publishers THEMSELVES are rather open about the fact that they count on us to be their test markets. And I said that, in an earlier post. They acknowledge that we have rising markets and jump at the bandwagon. They actively recruit authors from indie press. They aren't the problem, per se.A lot of their authors and good-ole-boy clubs are the real problem. Look at the WAs (RWA, SFWA, MWA, etc.) and their very blatant anti-indie stances. Not that the UK authors have to worry about that. I hear the UK equivalent is much more reasonable. Look at the way some of the bigger NY authors act at conventions and online. The snobbery of the breed is nauseating. If you haven't been exposed to it, how wonderful for you.
Then again, there are some real sweeties out there that are big in NY...for example, Robin Owens...and all the NYT Bestsellers who came FROM indie press...like Sherrilyn Kenyon, Angela Knight, Kate Douglas, and so on. I don't discount them.
In an era where Dee Powers' yearly polling of agents and editors shows that THEY consider indie press published (with an established publisher...still no luck getting self-published recognized by them, unless you hit the sales jackpot in self), it's almost amusing that the WAs and a section of the NY core of authors are so definitively anti-indie.
Brenna
And Brenna proves the point I made earlier, it is animosity from other writers that is the problem - whether in the WA's, as she christens them - or in obscure forums. But that particular hostility is too uncomfortable to examine; far too close to the bone. Maybe because some of us have indulged in it ourselves.......
This thread started because a post I made to a Good Reads discussion group for book recommendations was removed by the moderator. I still don't know why. I assume it was because it was promoting self-published and independently-published titles (not just mine). This is the kind of prejudice and blatant discrimination that really irritates me. I don't know where it comes from. But it seems to me the Brits are particularly prone to it, since they (or at least the British media) takes the same attitude to their musical heritage. In fact as Steve Knightly of British Folk-rock band Show of Hands puts it,
"We're taught to be ashamed before we walk
Of the way we look and the way we talk
Without our stories or our songs
How will we know where we came from?"
However, I've just spent a glorious weekend at a well attended May Fair (Rochester Sweeps Festival, in Kent, UK) and I think the days of these old fuddy-duddies are probably numbered. Now, if only we can break the great British public of the habit of believing what the media tell them......
Hi S.A., still not sure if you being bumped off your original forum is a reflection of the 'British public'. One of the troubles with reader forums is that an awful lot of amateur writers are lurking on them. After all, talking about books is easier than writing them. Sometimes, in the case of the romance forum on Amazon.com, for example, it's been my experience that EVERYBODY seems to be an aspiring writer.Unfortunately, you won't always know that's the agenda. And, like anyone else exhibiting a nasty little streak, they're not about to declaim to you, "Get off our forum, I'm jealous." It's FAR easier to blame it on 'Self-published books are not real books'. I wouldn't, therefore, be too convinced about it being your self-published status - unless your book/s look and sound like crap - but more about a resentment towards self-promotion which is really, of course, a resentment towards 'She's got what I want. Cheeky cow.'
Again, in my experience, the average member of the British public does not look at who published a book, and cares even less. If it looks like the real McCoy, they think it's the real McCoy.
Chancery said, "Hi S.A., still not sure if you being bumped off your original forum is a reflection of the 'British public'. One of the troubles with reader forums is that an awful lot of amateur writers are lurking on them."...so there currently isn't a genuine group for UK GR's to swap book recommendations then?
I note a new group, UK Reading Group. I suggest we take the debate there!
The issue on Goodreads isn't really whether authors are self-published or not, it's how people go about promoting themselves, whether they make a pest of themselves.For example voting your own books onto "best of" lists, writing puff pieces about your friends' books, adding friends and then immediately recommending your own book to them, spamming forums with your events, adding dozens of friends but never rating any books - stuff like that is all going to put people off you and your books.
The best way to promote yourself on Goodreads is by participating, by reading books, writing reviews, and so on. If people read and enjoy your reviews they'll look at your profile and read about your work.
The key for authors here is promotion by participation.
You need to know your place sniff sniff..wait until you're invited...that it Steve? And after 100 years someone will notice your work? In the meantime established publishers do favours and deals for friends, publish their own coterie of books..encourage reviewers that do favours. Oh sorry, I forgot, established publishing is all about publishing honesty, the best books only being put out, getting the attention..Same logic as only the Prince of Wales is allowed to intervene ad hoc on architecture, culture, climate change, amateur on virtually everything that he is...Back to working the common for the serfs..Self-published, know this - you are in the most select group of writers which includes Shakespeare..No one told him what play to write or put on. He was a major shareholder of his own theatre company, a good reason why a play of his appeared on average once every six months.
More ... http://elephantearspress.com
Stephen wrote: "The issue on Goodreads isn't really whether authors are self-published or not, it's how people go about promoting themselves, whether they make a pest of themselves.For example voting your own bo..."
Undoubtedly all true. But depressing for those of us who have a demanding day job which pays the bills, and would still like to share our writing with Good Readers.
This is in fact the kind of prejudice that dismays me. Any reader can see if a book recommendation is coming from an author and treat it accordingly. It doesn't mean the book isn't worth looking at, and I don't understand why people feel offended, or that their privacy is somehow invaded, by self-promotion (Using perjorative terms such as "spamming forums with their events" for instance. Announcing an event about books to a forum devoted to books and reading is spamming....how, exactly?)
The problem is if self-published and independent authors don't promote their books, no-one does.
So, if an author's time for reviewing and participating in discussion is limited - and in fact attempts to do so only lead to accusations of "spamming" - what are we to do?
Writers are sensitive souls. It hurts to meet such extreme and incomprehensible resentment to our attempts to share our pleasure and enjoyment in our writing with others.
Sue
Forget all the tosh about self-publishing, breast-beating self-recrimination, should I dare? Focus on what is wrong with established publishing.Tuesday, May 12
Rupert Murdoch Has Plans for Sarah Palin
In November 2008, when Radar floated the imaginary news that failed Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin was on the brink of a $7 million book deal, we predicted: "Palin's best chance for a book deal might come from the Christian publishing market, which would no doubt welcome a memoir about how [her:] faith and family led her to[,:] and guided her through[,:] her historic moment in the spotlight... but we can't remember when any publisher there paid that much money for a single book."
Now tell me..does anyone need this book? And what does it mean for publishing in general? The answer is easy. We are all on the road to book extinction.
We need the equivalent of a French Revolution in publishing. In effect it is there waiting on the doorstep - the combination of easier access to traditional techniques, new media technologies and the self-publishing instinct.
Do either of you actually think my advice was bad?
Louisiana wrote:We need the equivalent of a French Revolution in publishing. In effect it is there waiting on the doorstep - the combination of easier access to traditional techniques, new media technologies and the self-publishing instinct.
I will be knitting by the guillotine, Lousiana!
You are so right. That is the point everyone seems to keep missing in the petty arguments about the etiquette of self-promotion.
Small and Independent Press Books
Books mentioned in this topic
Cloak of Magic (other topics)Staff of Power (other topics)
I am continually baffled by the prejudice against independently published and self-published work, and against authors self-promoting. Are those who take this attitude incapable of making up their own minds on the merits or otherwise of a book?
Or is it just me being a grumpy old woman....?
Sue
S.A. Rule Author, Cloak of Magic and Staff of Power