10 Shocking Truths about Book Publishing

[Cathbad]

Ewww... non-fiction. Ewww

 

[tinkerdan]

Amish Romance?

 

[Jo Zebedee]

Ewww... non-fiction. Ewww

I'm quite partial to a good management theory book as it happens...

Amish Romance?

I own up! I nicked that from @Parson

 

[Phyrebrat]

Don't forget Tudorpunk!

pH

 

[AlexH]

True, but the question is whether the proportions between dross and good stuff are the same. Is there more good stuff coming out that doesn't make it because there's too much of it, or is it just a case of a whole lot of people deciding they can write when they can't?

I read and write more short stories than anything else, and I think there probably is more good stuff these days. Because the competition is so tough, the standard needs to be higher in the professional markets.

More voices are getting a say too, which must help. As I'm here, you won't be surprised to know I read mostly SF & Fantasy - SF in particular was dominated by white males in the past. I only noticed recently that all of my favourite short stories pre-90s are by male authors. Post-90s, over two-thirds are by female authors. There are some female pre-90s authors I'm yet to read (such as Olivia Butler), so hopefully that balance will redress slightly. And maybe one day soon I'll have a favourite from someone who doesn't identify as male or female. I went to an exhibition of African artists in Paris recently, and it was brilliant - each artist was unique, and most of it was different to anything I've seen before. So authors from different countries and backgrounds getting a voice, will also help to raise the quality in my opinion.

As the barrier to entry for publishing is now lower, there is probably more dross too. So the proportion of good to bad is probably exactly the same as it was 20 years ago!

 

[Justin Swanton]

It occurs to me, more and more, that there is need for a weeding process, something that may unfairly cut out a few budding writers who get discouraged too easily, but one that definitely eliminates the wannabes.

Problem of course is that the submission history of nearly every single bestseller proves that hardly anyone has an idea of what constitutes a potentially successful book before it actually gets published.

 

[Overread]

Justin that's very true, however a basic weeding process can at the very least sweep out those which have clearly not been properly proof read and edited. Where spelling and grammatical mistakes are rampant or where the writing quality is very distinctly poor. If its digital publication then there might be more chance for the "JK Rowlings" to get through as when print publishers are looking for a book to publish they have to consider costs to publish as well as the chance for sales; which means new or different things might not make it through the process.

Where digital is essentially free and where you're already weeding the books through the process there's more chance for new authors to get through as the system weeding them hasn't got to invest so significantly in them.


At present I think Amazon reviews and Good Reads are doing a decentish job of weeding; but its highly suseptable to only a handful of reviews being from friends/family/paid. Which harms new authors who need to get at least 30 or so reviews to have people actually take notice that what they've written is good.

 

[Nick B]

I must be in the minority then - I read sff, crime, thriller, general fiction, biographies, the back of the cereal packet, YA - all sorts, magical realism, Irish, the postcode book, non fiction, horror, Amish romance

I might have lied about one....

Me too, Jo. In fact, I may read more non SFF than SFF overall. I only recently thought about the fact that while I mostly write military sf, I hardly read the sub genre at all.

 

[thaddeus6th]

I have a pretty even split in history and SFF when it comes to reading, but almost never (Space Captain Smith aside) read comedy.

 

[AlexH]

Problem of course is that the submission history of nearly every single bestseller proves that hardly anyone has an idea of what constitutes a potentially successful book before it actually gets published.

These authors (The Bestseller Code) think their algorithm does...but most of the reviewers don't seem to agree. My memory is a bit foggy, but I read a summary of the book, and it seemed to be mostly standard stuff like relationships help. Crime does well etc. There was also something about particular words used - if some are overused, that doesn't help, and vice-versa. A regularly used word that points to a potential bestseller is "need".

 

[Toby Frost]

I think it's important to make a clear distinction between bestsellers and books that sell decently but aren't "phenomenons". To my mind, one is not an extension of the other.

A bestseller can be utter rubbish, not just in literary terms but in basic functionality as a novel, but it will still make huge amounts of money due to marketing and hype. It doesn't have to be sold on quality. I suppose that's good news if you are a bad writer, but nobody wants to be a bad writer and the chances of being chosen for bestseller treatment (especially since there doesn't seem to be a way of predicting what will be chosen) are vanishingly small. It's probably quite like someone seeing you in the village amateur dramatic group and making you a Hollywood star.

A mid-range novel does have to be good, because it sells on its content to genre fans who know what they're doing. It used to be that a genre author could make a decent amount of money putting out a succession of pretty good novels that were either similar or in a few settings (Anne McCaffrey, say). It is here, unfortunately, where the real quality tends to end up (that you and I will find out about), where it won't be ludicrously overhyped but will have a degree of editing/polishing by a publisher who at least doesn't want a reputation for putting out junk. This is getting harder and harder to do, and in 20 years' time may not happen at all. The middle-range is steadily being squeezed out of existence by the top and bottom - at least in terms of being able to use writing as a profession, even a part-time one. I hope it somehow remains.

 

[Justin Swanton]

These authors (The Bestseller Code) think their algorithm does...but most of the reviewers don't seem to agree. My memory is a bit foggy, but I read a summary of the book, and it seemed to be mostly standard stuff like relationships help. Crime does well etc. There was also something about particular words used - if some are overused, that doesn't help, and vice-versa. A regularly used word that points to a potential bestseller is "need".

I think it seriously naive to try and reduce what the reading public wants to a series of numbers. Meself I see it as a reflection of the shifting popular imagination: Tolkien hits it big with mediaeval fantasy (its war theme struck a chord in a post WW2 and Cold War world) and then JKR hits it big with fantasy in a contemporary setting that a new generation of readers - who don't really identify with the social norms of a mediaeval setting - can relate to more easily.

So where is the popular imagination headed right now? If Fifty Shades of Grey and The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo are genuine pointers then I don't want to contemplate the answer.

 

[MWagner]

A bestseller can be utter rubbish, not just in literary terms but in basic functionality as a novel, but it will still make huge amounts of money due to marketing and hype. It doesn't have to be sold on quality. I suppose that's good news if you are a bad writer, but nobody wants to be a bad writer and the chances of being chosen for bestseller treatment (especially since there doesn't seem to be a way of predicting what will be chosen) are vanishingly small. It's probably quite like someone seeing you in the village amateur dramatic group and making you a Hollywood star.

Is that really how books become breakout bestsellers though - marketing? From what I understand, almost all book marketing these days is spent on established bestselling authors.

My sense is there are three ways books break out into mega-sellers.

1) The slow burn. This is where over several previous novels an author builds up an enthusiastic fanbase who generate word of mouth in anticipation of their next book. ASoIaF is a good example, with the fourth book in the series the first one to debut on the NYT bestsellers list, which in turn spurs huge sales of the back catalogue. See also Child, Lee.

2) A book wins a major award and/or gets made into a film. The Notebook, Wolf Hall, The Kite Runner, etc.

3) A book by an unknown author has a killer premise or captures something in the zeitgeist and breaks out through word of mouth. The Girl on a Train, the Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time, Harry Potter and Philosopher's Stone, Twilight, the Martian. This seems to be the most common.

I'd characterize only the 2nd as marketing or hype. And even then it's not strictly hype, as a novel usually needs some appealing quality to win an award or get made into a film.

 

[Overread]

I think the fact that book marketing is chasing already good sellers is a sign of the times as to how weak publishing is compared to some other market sectors (who have also pushed the prices for advertising up and made even more competition - whilst books only complete with books the marketing "space" competes with everyone).

Many major films and computer games have huge marketing campaigns which help ensure popularity. Call of Duty is a household name and they spend WAY more on marketing that game than they do on making the game itself. Sure marketing will only go so far; but consider that most books are hardly advertised anywhere compared to films, games, music etc.... If all they can afford to push is the book that's already selling in mass volumes then its a sign that the publishers are not as strong as other sectors.

That said I think the nature of books also makes them harder to market; especially as most fantasy books are purely text and one bit of cover-art. You might get more room to advertise some of the larger lord of the rings books which come with multiple pages of drawn art inside (at least then you can show the artwork off to entice readers in).

We are still waiting for that gate-keeper; at present I'd argue that its Amazon reviews and local stores; the latter of which only stocking very few authors of the many out there. Until we get a strong review voice or three into the market many self published will remain undiscovered as they get their handful of family/friends reviews and not much more

 

[Jo Zebedee]

As to number 1 - the slow burn. I'm reasonably well known in the writing community in Northern Ireland these days - but most of those who know me don't want to read sf (we are the land of poets, playwrights, and literary masterpieces). So, what I'm finding with Waters and the Wild is that word has percolated that I can string two words together (allegedly) AND I've finally written something with more mass market appeal. The upshot is that Waters is only in a few places online but is eagerly awaited in NI. The launch I have planned - not in Belfast, but my own small town this time - is getting a lot of interest, the cons are interested, the book festivals etc etc.

Mass market or not - all this is built on the reputation built on the earlier books. So, yeah, there is something in the concept of slow build over several books and quietly getting your name out there.

 

[Parson]

@Jo Zebedee .... I'm really happy that this is happening for you.

 

[EJDeBrun]

The only thing I can contribute to this conversation is knowledge that Big Publishers do in fact "pick" certain projects to be their top hitter each year in every genre. I know this because I've been following the blog of one such writer for over 10 years and she was "picked" to be one of those writers fresh out of the gate. Not only that, she herself didn't even write the manuscript until the project was sold! And with their marketing team they did manage to move over a million of the entire series (Penguin ended up buying 10 books in the series all together). And she only found out she was one of the "chosen" because she happened to be friends with bestselling romance writer who helped explain everything to her.

In case anyone is curious, I'm talking about Ursula Vernon and the Dragonsbreath kids series that has been out for quite a while. I'd like to point out that a lot of the success of Dragonsbreath happened AFTER Digger won the Hugo, so Digger was not the main thing that lead to her success with Penguin. They just really liked the format/story/characters etc etc. She herself will admit a lot of it is luck. The quality has to be there to sell that many copies, but it does make it easier when you have the whole of penguins children's marketing team gunning for you.

 

[AlexH]

Print book sales are forecast to increase according to this article: E-books sales to drop as bookshelf resurgence sparks 'shelfie' craze

It's the first time I've come across the term "shelfie".

The forecast is probably something the publishing industry has invented itself, my cynical self would say. Perhaps they invented the term too. I like etymology, but haven't done the research on that one.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

Print book sales are forecast to increase according to this article: E-books sales to drop as bookshelf resurgence sparks 'shelfie' craze

It's the first time I've come across the term "shelfie".

The forecast is probably something the publishing industry has invented itself, my cynical self would say. Perhaps they invented the term too. I like etymology, but haven't done the research on that one.

They've been up for a while - but driven by a. Colouring books and b. Purchases on Amazon not high street.

 

[Parson]

They've been up for a while - but driven by a. Colouring books and b. Purchases on Amazon not high street.

I believe it was 2015 when it was said that almost all the increase in "book" sales that year were a result of adult coloring books..... Sigh!