A question for those who are self-published

[Ian Whates]

I published my first book, Time Pieces, as a fund raiser. Not sure if it qualifies as 'self-published' though, since I twisted the arms of a few friends to write me new stories especially for the occasion. So as well as my own stories, the book features originals from the likes of Stephen Baxter, Ian Watson, Jon Courtenay Grimwood, Liz Williams, Mark Robson and Steve Cockayne (not to mention original cover art from Hollywood conceptual artist Chris Baker, which went on to win the BSFA award for best artwork).

However, every aspect of the book, from the 'commissioning' of work (all stories and artwork were gifted to the project), to the sourcing of the printers, the editing, proof-reading, etc, was down to me (with assistance on the editing from Ian Watson and help and advice throughout from Mark Robson) and I had never done anything of the sort before.

Not meaning to sound too immodest, but the resultant book was of very high quality, both in terms of production quality and content (or so I've been assured by many others). So self-publishing does not have to equate with inferior product.

 

[SpaceShip]

I haven't been down this road, but I have read self-published novels and I have to say that I understand why they're self-published, if you know what I mean.

I've been down that road Marky and I reckon my reason was that I was running out of cash for postage as I lumped it around the agents/publishers who kept saying "no". The reason I self-published was because so many of my friends that had proof read it reckoned it good enough to do so - so I did. I am quite pleased with the comments I've had (some on Amazon, some even from members of the Chrons who've read my work) and so I'm pleased to have done so. Not made my fortune yet but then who knows!!!!

On the reverse side of your comment Marky, I've not finished some very professional books by some so-called "famous" writers that should never have been published and, if it wasn't for the fact that we might get sued, we could have a "rubbish published books" thread (that is, if there isn't one already)!

 

[daisybee]

Do it. Lulu.com is perfect for that sort of small distribution product. I published a book of poems via lulu.com and have no regrets.

Oh thanks, I'm sorting my poems at present. Have you sold any from the Lulu marketplace site? Not altogether sure about having my collection on there-but if I do it well I guess it wouldn't hurt!

 

[DMatusik]

It's good to see people coming out in support of self-publishing. It also helps independent publishers, like myself, by breaking down the stereotype that good literature can only come from the big-name NYC publishers.

With Lulu and others, it's easy to revise your work and continually improve it. When you sell a dozen or so copies and need to make some changes, it's not a big deal because there aren't that many copies "in the wild." It's much more difficult to do that with a traditionally-published book, even though it does occur often.

An excerpt from Orson Scott Card's introduction in his latest edition of "Ender's Game:"
"And yet when a novel goes back to print . . . there ought to be something new in it to mark the occasion (something besides the minor changes as I fix the errors and internal contradictions and stylistic excesses . . ."

 

[Rik Roots]

Oh thanks, I'm sorting my poems at present. Have you sold any from the Lulu marketplace site? Not altogether sure about having my collection on there-but if I do it well I guess it wouldn't hurt!

I don't want to come across as a rabid lulu.com fan, so I'll try to limit my comments ...

You don't need to "publish" the book if it's just a few copies for a few friends. Check the lulu website for details.

If you're thinking of making the book available to anyone who wants to buy it, then make sure you've done the research and you're sure the services that lulu offer are the best fit to your desires and requirements for the book. I can't emphasise enough that people should research all the options open to them before choosing the self-publishing route, either with lulu or any other self-publishing firm.

For instance all my poetry is available to browse on my website. I only published the book of poems because people kept asking me if they could buy a book of my poems. Self-publishing the book with lulu suited my requirements - other people would have made a different choice, no doubt.

Sales? Last time I checked, I'd shifted a few dozen - not bad for a book whose content is already available for free on the 'net and which has not benefited from any marketing whatsoever ...

 

[Balthazar]

We all have dreams of being published, by a mainstream publisher, and yes, some of us here have seen that dream come true. I'm putting the finishing touches on Draft Zero (that's what Garth Nix calls the first draft) of my YA fantasy novel. In a few months, I will send some queries and hopefully get some good responses.

If not, I will keep trying the mainstream route. But if it gets to the point where I keep trying and no one bites, I might do the Lulu thing, just to see my book in print and to give to family and friends.

But I have no doubt I will be published in the traditional manner. Hubris? Me? Yeah.

 

[Balthazar]

I said: But I have no doubt I will be published in the traditional manner. Hubris? Me? Yeah.

In reflection I say: At least I sure as heck hope so.
*slinks away hoping people don't think he's some kind of over-confident jerk*

 

[Lanista]

But I have no doubt I will be published in the traditional manner. Hubris? Me? Yeah.

That's the spirit, mate - don't let the naysayers grind you down. It's not being arrogant to believe in yourself. Many people write "for themselves" and have no wish to be published. They're just happy writers, and more power to them. Personally, I wanted to see my book in print (and to be fair, it's not out yet so I still haven't!) and I don't think anyone should make apologies for admitting that that is their goal.

That said, there seems to be a sort of literary snobbery when it comes to POD/Self-publishing works. Some people look down on these efforts as though "they weren't good enough to get a real publising deal." It simply isn't true - as someone pointed out, there are plenty of traditionally published books out there that are utter rubbish - especially in the fantasy genre (which I'm coming to loathe as time goes on - why were Gemmell and Jordan taken from us? The world is a poorer place without them).

Conversely, there are some excellent self-published works...and, for a genre fan, self-published works are a source of never-ending joy. Me, I love action-historicals set in the classical period. There's plenty of trad-published (did I just make up a new phrase!?!) books, of course, but I've also spent many joyful hours reading the POD works. "Legion" by William Altimari springs to mind, "The Gladiator Isarna" by Sara Pacher, "Shades of Artemis" by Jon Edward Martin (Yay, Spartans!). All of these are POD books, all of them are excellent.

But...self-belief is essential if you're going to take up the gauntlet thrown down by trad-publishing. As discussed elsewhere in this forum, you're going to get knockbacks, rejections and you WILL suffer from self-doubt. I was going to bin my book - the day I made the decision to try to write something else and forget about "Gladiatrix" was the day I got an email from the publishers wanting to meet me. So - just believe in yourself and believe in your work. Listen to advice from other people by all means, but always remember that advice is another word for opinion. You go with your gut.

Best of Luck!

Russ

 

[Balthazar]

Great words of encouragement, Lanista!

Thank you and good luck to you, too!

 

[iansales]

This is relevant - At Last! Writer Beware Blogs! A.C. Crispin and Victoria Strauss Reveal All!: Victoria Strauss -- Lessons for Self-Publishers

 

[DMatusik]

This is relevant - At Last! Writer Beware Blogs! A.C. Crispin and Victoria Strauss Reveal All!: Victoria Strauss -- Lessons for Self-Publishers

That viewpoint seems to be a bit dated. When you're publishing through a service like Lulu (no I don't work for them and no I don't use them), what you see is what you get. There are no "shills" trying to take you for everything you've got. Most of the "publishing companies" that required you to pay them have evaporated because of iUniverse, Lulu and others who could do it better, cheaper and more honestly.

And of course, the flip side to that article would be the extremely low acceptance rate at the "traditional publishers." If you never get a story published with them, then how are you to get started as a professional writer? Sure it makes sense to submit to the traditional publishers first, but if you're not getting anywhere going that route why not self-publish and get your work in print (and make some sales)? Traditional publisher will likely take you more seriously the next time around if you say in your cover letter that you had successfully sold x number of copies of your self-published work.

 

[iansales]

I think the blog makes some valid points - i.e., if you're going to self-publish you're going to have work very hard to succeed. And even then there's no guarantee. A handful of success stories (some of which, the blog points out, are not entirely true) are bandied around so often they could persuade people that self-publishing is a) easy and b) sure to succeed.

 

[Havlen]

That viewpoint seems to be a bit dated. When you're publishing through a service like Lulu (no I don't work for them and no I don't use them), what you see is what you get. There are no "shills" trying to take you for everything you've got. Most of the "publishing companies" that required you to pay them have evaporated because of iUniverse, Lulu and others who could do it better, cheaper and more honestly.

And of course, the flip side to that article would be the extremely low acceptance rate at the "traditional publishers." If you never get a story published with them, then how are you to get started as a professional writer? Sure it makes sense to submit to the traditional publishers first, but if you're not getting anywhere going that route why not self-publish and get your work in print (and make some sales)? Traditional publisher will likely take you more seriously the next time around if you say in your cover letter that you had successfully sold x number of copies of your self-published work.

False, and False.

First, there are still many different companies trying to make money off of authors and more popping up every day. While Lulu is upfront about its services, they are still in the business of making money off of would-be authors. And I have seen new "publishers" pop up that -- for a fee -- will publish an author's book through Lulu. And this isn't to say the others have vanished. They are still around, and they are still popping up, everything from standard old-fashioned vanity publishers to subsidy publishers to partnerships publishers (subsidy publishers putting a different spin on it).

Second, a traditional publisher is not going to take an author more seriously because they have self-published a previous book. All that will tell the publisher is that the author has failed to gain a traditional publisher with a previous book -- which is to say that it's probably a much better idea not to mention it at all.

Now, if you sold 5,000 copies of your self-published books, sure, a traditional publisher will take notice. But, as the article suggests, those that sell 5,000 copies are the rare exception, certainly not the standard.

 

[DMatusik]

False, and False.

First, there are still many different companies trying to make money off of authors and more popping up every day. While Lulu is upfront about its services, they are still in the business of making money off of would-be authors. And I have seen new "publishers" pop up that -- for a fee -- will publish an author's book through Lulu. And this isn't to say the others have vanished. They are still around, and they are still popping up, everything from standard old-fashioned vanity publishers to subsidy publishers to partnerships publishers (subsidy publishers putting a different spin on it).

That may be - but their numbers are dropping (the shills). Before places like Lulu sprung up -they were the only game in town. Nowadays the information and the facts are widely available. Plenty of info online at places like SFWA and this message board ...

Second, a traditional publisher is not going to take an author more seriously because they have self-published a previous book. All that will tell the publisher is that the author has failed to gain a traditional publisher with a previous book -- which is to say that it's probably a much better idea not to mention it at all.

Now, if you sold 5,000 copies of your self-published books, sure, a traditional publisher will take notice. But, as the article suggests, those that sell 5,000 copies are the rare exception, certainly not the standard.

If you self-published and sold 10 copies, then I'd be inclined to agree. However, sales in the high hundreds or thousands shows some decent potential, along with the writer's ability to promote him/her self. What's the alternative? Approaching a firm with 0 sales history and 0 experience with being published?

The idea that the traditional publisher is the be-all end-all of literature is elitist snobbery, pure and simple, and only serves to benefit the established system. Great stories are rejected every day because:
1) a certain genre isn't selling well this quarter
2) they have too many of that type of story
3) they didn't like the cover letter
4) something was wrong with the submission
5) it was an unagented work
...
Authors, agents and editors know these reasons plus the ones I didn't list.

Ultimately it all comes down to what the author wants - are you looking to be the next Stephen King? Self publishing is probably not be the way to go about it. Do you want to get your stories in print, get some experience and some exposure, then SP is great for that.

 

[Aliénor]

Of course there are the self-published books which then get 'spotted' by a publisher and picked up. That happened with Tunnels on this side of the pond, and didn't something similar happen with Eragon (opinions on that book aside)?

Opinions on that book aside , Eragon was published by the author's mum and dad, who had a small publishing house. Eragon was their third title. Then Paolini toured the country (about two hundred readings and presentations in schools), and sales were going up steady until a major proposed a contract.

I would never have the energy to promote my book from scratch, because you have to, if you want to publish along with the big boys.

 

[DMatusik]

I think the blog makes some valid points - i.e., if you're going to self-publish you're going to have work very hard to succeed. And even then there's no guarantee. A handful of success stories (some of which, the blog points out, are not entirely true) are bandied around so often they could persuade people that self-publishing is a) easy and b) sure to succeed.

Agreed - the author's experience is definitely valid here, but when you have "old guard" authors, they tend to view the publishing landscape as it was 10 or more years ago.

Their argument used to be "a self-published book isn't as high of quality as a traditional book." Advances in POD technology, desktop publishing software, etc. have nullified that argument.

Now the argument is "if you self-publish, no one will take you seriously." If you self publish AND succeed they can't ignore you AND be making a wise business decision.

No one is saying SP is a slam dunk - in fact it's the opposite. You, as the author are relegating yourself to perform all duties that a publisher would normally do (unless you are paying someone) - from promotion, design, editing, sales, etc. There's no way anyone in their right mind could think that's easier than letting a pub handle it. BUT: if you just want to see yourself in print, then SP works. If you only want (or need) to sell 100 copies (with the low cost of POD nowadays, that's entirely feasible) then SP can also work.

If you want to reach beyond SP level, try an independent publisher. If you want to go big time, well then stick with the traditional route. In other words, there are options ...

 

[DMatusik]

Opinions on that book aside , Eragon was published by the author's mum and dad, who had a small publishing house. Eragon was their third title. Then Paolini toured the country (about two hundred readings and presentations in schools), and sales were going up steady until a major proposed a contract.

I would never have the energy to promote my book from scratch, because you have to, if you want to publish along with the big boys.

Right - and I heard his folks had connections, too (which always helps)! LOL. No doubt about it - SP is very much like a grassroots political campaign - lots of thankless legwork involved.

 

[DMatusik]

False, and False.

First, there are still many different companies trying to make money off of authors and more popping up every day. While Lulu is upfront about its services, they are still in the business of making money off of would-be authors. And I have seen new "publishers" pop up that -- for a fee -- will publish an author's book through Lulu. And this isn't to say the others have vanished. They are still around, and they are still popping up, everything from standard old-fashioned vanity publishers to subsidy publishers to partnerships publishers (subsidy publishers putting a different spin on it).

Just curious - have you or anyone you know been taken advantage of by an unscrupulous publisher? I'm curious to see how widespread it still is and what the personal experiences were like. A lot of the "writer beware" links to dishonest publishers seemed to go to dead links. I'm sure the really bad ones won't give up - once you're good at a con game, you're not likely to change, right?

 

[DMatusik]

False, and False.

First, there are still many different companies trying to make money off of authors and more popping up every day. While Lulu is upfront about its services, they are still in the business of making money off of would-be authors. And I have seen new "publishers" pop up that -- for a fee -- will publish an author's book through Lulu. And this isn't to say the others have vanished. They are still around, and they are still popping up, everything from standard old-fashioned vanity publishers to subsidy publishers to partnerships publishers (subsidy publishers putting a different spin on it).

.

I also think we're talking about different things here. I take "shill" to be a publisher that "accepts" your work and offers a contract to publish and THEN asks for money from the author. For publishers that are up-front about the costs (along with Lulu) there is nothing unscrupulous with them trying to make a buck off the author - after all the author sought them out knowing who they were! That's what self-publishing is (all the terms you mentioned - self/partnership/vanity - there is no distinction).

If an author doesn't get traction with the major publishers then I always recommend trying an independent publisher before going the self-publish route. Size them up, ask questions and make sure that you're a good match before committing.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

Ultimately it all comes down to what the author wants - are you looking to be the next Stephen King? Self publishing is probably not be the way to go about it.

In fact, as a self-published author you're not very likely to even make it into the midlist -- or your books into the bookstores -- unless you are a self-promotional dynamo.

A fact which many of the people who sell their services to aspiring self-published authors conveniently leave out.

And it's not snobbery to warn people of the many pitfalls they may not know about, or to urge them to be wary in their dealings with a growing industry that makes its money not by selling books but by selling its services to inexperienced writers, often on the basis of a whole string of misrepresentations.