Depressing trends in writing/publishing

[Jo Zebedee]

So, are you suggesting self-publishing is the way to go, or what?

I ask out of ignorance,

K2

What it’s suggesting - to me - is that there are pros to self publishing that the original article doesn’t mention. Control of the product is a big one. To this day, Inish Carraig (which is the only book I originally self published) has opened more doors than the other 4 combined because I own every bit of it and don’t have to hold back and check with a publisher etc what I want to be with it.

Match the product to the platform, not the other way round.

 

[-K2-]

Match the product to the platform, not the other way round.

That first bit I understand, but, this last is a little too vague for me to sort out. Care to elaborate a tad?

Thanks for your response!

K2

 

[Jo Zebedee]

That first bit I understand, but, this last is a little too vague for me to sort out. Care to elaborate a tad?

Thanks for your response!

K2

Sure. If you have something that fits a defined market have a shot with trad. If you are happy to change it for a publisher, go with trad.

If you have something that’s harder to sell, trad will be a struggle.

But, the big one for me, is what the work means to me. Forgive me for using a personal example - not showboating, as recently suggested, but the way I think my thoughts through - but I have two new things completed.

One will go with a publisher or not be released. It is a good book in many ways but none of the themes are so central to me that I won’t change anything required. Being with a publisher opens funding opportunities to me (because Ireland is different in the funding it offers). I don’t feel a real, deep down connection to it

The second one I’m working on is a dystopia set in North Antrim which, like Inish Carraig (but, strangely, not Waters which is also set in NI), reflects my understanding of being Northern Irish. This one I will change - Teresa recently edited it, and Harebrain will maul it soon, and others I trust already have - but only in ways that deepen what I want to do. (That in no way disrespects my editor’s feedback - I asked Teresa because I knew she would be sympathetic to what I need this book to be - her feedback (paraphrased) was that I could take the book out of NI and it might be more marketable but it wouldn’t be the book I want to write) so, apart from a couple of presses (who have already rejected with great feedback) I don’t want a publisher. I want it to be totally mine, undiluted by market requirements.

So, for that one, I self publish. Because my fan base (all three of them ) will be happy that this is a very honest JZ book. And, also, because it is the book that builds on Inish (more than any sequel could) and is totally me - which I can’t get released with any publisher and stay true to it.

Does that make any sense? I’m not sure. But it’s about personal ownership and the passion that brings - and, therefore, my ability to let go of a world to a third party or not.

*(Although by indie publishing rather than trad all my worlds remain mine, if I choose to revise them)

 

[Steve Harrison]

Being traditionally published is a trade-off, but a writer basically sells the rights for a period of time, so I'm not sure that constitutes losing control of intellectual rights. It's actually a case of the writer exploiting them for financial gain.

My two book contracts cover the print/audio rights for a period of five years, at which point either party can terminate the agreement with a month's notice. I retained the screen and game rights for both novels.

I'm sure traditional publishing doesn't suit all authors, but contracts are negotiable instruments and no one is forced to sign one.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

Being traditionally published is a trade-off, but a writer basically sells the rights for a period of time, so I'm not sure that constitutes losing control of intellectual rights. It's actually a case of the writer exploiting them for financial gain.

My two book contracts cover the print/audio rights for a period of five years, at which point either party can terminate the agreement with a month's notice. I retained the screen and game rights for both novels.

I'm sure traditional publishing doesn't suit all authors, but contracts are negotiable instruments and no one is forced to sign one.

Intellectual rights expand far beyond the book now. I know publishers who acquire audio rights as standard, percentage of film rights, world rights (so anything set in that world.) you’re quite right, of course, that no one has to sign a contact - but they are tricky to check and viewed as expensive to seek advice on (anyone reading - Society of Authors do a check!)

 

[Steve Harrison]

Intellectual rights expand far beyond the book now. I know publishers who acquire audio rights as standard, percentage of film rights, world rights (so anything set in that world.) you’re quite right, of course, that no one has to sign a contact - but they are tricky to check and viewed as expensive to seek advice on (anyone reading - Society of Authors do a check!)

As it was a legal contract, I got legal advice and I would recommend that anyone considering a book deal do the same, costly or not. I'm a little wary of author/writer societies for anything other than general opinion, and prefer legal advice from a practicing entertainment lawyer.

I've noticed on a few writing forums that the subject of selling rights can cause some concern, but any publisher who makes an offer is doing so in order to exploit those rights, which, to me, is the whole point. If it works out and the book takes off, both parties benefit. If not, neither do.

And a standard contract is just a contract before negotiation starts, so I would be highly suspicious if provided with a take it or leave it initial offer. The first contract I received made me nervous, as I thought if I asked for changes the publisher might withdraw the offer, but they were very reasonable and we were both happy with the changes. After two deals, I would have no problem walking away if not satisfied with, or suspicious of, the terms after negotiating.

The important question to ask, in my opinion, is: Will selling the rights to my book to a publisher result in a better financial return and market reach than I could achieve by any other means? As I have no interest in self-publishing, the answer is always yes in my case, so then it comes down to the contract details.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

The important question to ask, in my opinion, is: Will selling the rights to my book to a publisher result in a better financial return and market reach than I could achieve by any other means? As I have no interest in self-publishing, the answer is always yes in my case, so then it comes down to the contract details.

Then you are largely operating outside the discussion here - as to whether self publishing offers different options. Contract details lie in the trad world (unless the author chooses to exploit them).

Also you are fortunate to be so savvy about contracts. Many are not. Nor do they have access to a contract lawyer. Thank goodness for places like SOA for their support and their great contract review (which I’ve never used, also lucky enough to be savvy and have options but others have and have been very glad of)

 

[Steve Harrison]

Then you are largely operating outside the discussion here - as to whether self publishing offers different options. Contract details lie in the trad world (unless the author chooses to exploit them).

Also you are fortunate to be so savvy about contracts. Many are not. Nor do they have access to a contract lawyer. Thank goodness for places like SOA for their support and their great contract review (which I’ve never used, also lucky enough to be savvy and have options but others have and have been very glad of)

I jumped in to respond to the intellectual property/trad publishing comments, which became part of the discussion. And I'd say, from my exposure to this board, that the vast majority here are savvy enough to seek legal advice before signing a contract. Affording a lawyer is another matter entirely. But my view is that it's much cheaper than the costs involved in self-publishing

 

[Jo Zebedee]

I jumped in to respond to the intellectual property/trad publishing comments, which became part of the discussion. And I'd say, from my exposure to this board, that the vast majority here are savvy enough to seek legal advice before signing a contract. Affording a lawyer is another matter entirely. But my view is that it's much cheaper than the costs involved in self-publishing

Yeah it was late and I was snippy - my apologies.

But for £70 quid to join the SOA offer a load of services including the full contract check (from a legal point of view). The general advice on boards is not to use a general lawyer for publishing contracts as they are quirky but to use publishing specialists instead.

 

[Serendipity]

Intellectual property is a general term covering anything from ideas to a unique production of something new. The legals of intellectual property are tricky at times, but fortunately when it comes to written stories, very clear. It comes under the copyright laws. Anything using the written stories e.g. audio books comes under the derivative copyright laws.

(Patents cover inventions that the holder is actively working on to bring to market - notice the caveat. What is not covered by intellectual property laws are ideas. They are a lot of times far to nebulous to capture sufficiently precise definitions for the legal system to be able to handle them.)

The only reason writers can make any money is because of the copyright laws. Otherwise they would have to become publishers i.e. produce the books etc to sell in the market place and there is nothing to stop anyone copying the work and selling it in the market place next to the stall you work at.

The intellectual property rights were first produced in ancient Greece about 500B.C. In a town in southern Greece, cooks liked to make up new recipes to entice people into their restaurants / eateries. The trouble was that as soon as a new recipe had been served, a rival cook could and did copy it. This meant that the return for the effort of coming up with a new recipe was not worth it. So the cooks stopped coming up with new recipes. This made the people very unhappy - they liked their food. End result was that a law was passed to say if a cook came up with a new recipe, he or she was the only one allowed to offer that recipe for a year to the public after he first introduced it. Everyone went back to being happy foodies.

The reason I dug up this history is to point to the fact that the copyright laws are not working well enough for a lot of writers. I think those writers lucky enough to make a living out of writing are doing so despite the copyright law e.g. they have publishers with clout behind them.

So it is not surprising that writers have when possible been experimenting with other outlets for their writing. The recent burst of self-publishing on platforms like Amazon attest to that. But as many have found, this is not the answer to making a living out of writing.

Which is why we're in the situation that it is still difficult for writers (other than the lucky few who have a significant sponsor behind them) to make a living in writing. Me thinks the first step should be to review the copyright laws to see if they can be improved.

But I'm no legal-beagle. Someone else with more knowledge would be better placed to advise on that.

 

[Stephen Palmer]

I like what's been said in this discussion, and I think Jo has made a number of valid points. Some novels do mean more to the author, for personal reasons. Often those reasons will never become public.
I have only had one work rejected by Infinity Plus in six years, and it was rejected for good, solid reasons. However, I recently realised that the thing had to come out in its original form, so I may well self-publish it next year. That, as Jo says, will be for 100% artistic reasons.

 

[mistri]

I must admit after coming from the world of short stories to subbing a novel to agents this year, I was surprised at how hardly any agents sent a response, compared to most short story markets eventually sending one, even if only a form r. Of course it says something about my material . But that aside it has made me more inclined to go back to short stories tbh! Where writing is less like screaming into a vacuum.

 

[sknox]

I think mistri hits on an important aspect. With short stories, you're most commonly submitting to a magazine. The person who reads the story is the editor or at least someone on staff that is overseen by the editor. IOW, there's a strong connection between the person reading your submission and the place where your story would eventually appear. It's why editors play such a huge role in determining the character of the mag itself.

With novels it's a far different landscape. You are submitting (most times) to a freelance agent who has little attachment to a set of corporate entitites. Once the story is sold, the agent pretty much forgets about it. The agent must work across many genres just to make a living. It's all much more of just another business.

The exception, which is small, comes in small press publishers that accept direct submissions. But they're small. They can't publish as many books even though the churn is nearly as big.

We saw the same phenomenon in the music business. When threatened, the music corporations could think of nothing better than self-preservation and crush the competition. What they wound up doing was closing so many doors, artists began inventing new doors. It's harder than ever to break into the traditional music business, and easier than ever to create and publish music.

It's the nature of corporations. They can't help themselves any more than a cow can help being a cow, regardless of which field they're in.

At least musicians can still play in bars!

 

[Ashley R]

So, are you suggesting self-publishing is the way to go, or what?

I ask out of ignorance,

K2

Yes. There's a learning curve.

 

[Karn's Return]

Well, I have to say that I don't think I'll ever go with traditional publishing, and not even sure I really want to. I doubt I'll ever get anywhere financially with my writing, but hey, perhaps someday I might get a pittance or two from Amazon or some other platform if I can really get anything going.

The article was mostly depressing, though...especially since I have no way to advertise myself.