# Agent versus Self-Publishing



## Kyle R (Aug 6, 2015)

"Explaining to a friend why I don't recommend self publishing your first novel. Exceptions, obviously, but...."







 — _Fantasy Faction_ via Twitter (https://twitter.com/FantasyFaction/status/628549320124592129)

What do you think?


----------



## Terry D (Aug 6, 2015)

I think the column on the left still hasn't reached the 'published' phase yet. Getting an agent doesn't mean the book has sold. While the author on the right will already be making money, and working on his/her next book.


----------



## Schrody (Aug 6, 2015)

And don't forget about total creative control over your work (self pub) - no covers you hate, no text you have to remove (even though it's good and adds to the story), no giving away your exclusive rights, you can price it as low or as high you want, and it's never out of the stock. Yep, success doesn't come over night, but then again, publisher can't guarantee it either. Amazon successful self published story is Hugh Howey and his novel Wool (among others). Not everyone will be able to replicate that success, but there's no harm in trying. I'm not saying trade publishing is bad, I'm saying having an agent/editor/publisher isn't equal to an easier way to became a best selling writer. Hard work, a lot of sweat, blood, tears, and sacrifice is what makes a good author worth reading, and an author like that will rise no matter was he trade or self published.


----------



## shadowwalker (Aug 6, 2015)

Schrody said:


> no text you have to remove (even though it's good and adds to the story), no giving away your exclusive rights,



First a couple misconceptions to be corrected:

If you're dealing with a reputable publisher, you do not have to remove any text unless you want to. Their editors will make suggestions, but it is always your choice to make the changes or not.

You do not "give away" your exclusive rights. You assign certain rights to publish (and these vary based on the contract you read and fully understood before signing) so they can legally publish your work and deal with other venues for your work; any rights you do not assign are yours.

Now, as to Hugh Howey and other very successful self-published authors, it's great to point them out. But we could just as well point to Stephen King as a reason to trade publish. Exceptions can keep the hopes alive, but they don't mean much more than that because they are _exceptions_. 

Re: the OP - unfortunately the route on the right is the way far too many writers go. They completely ignore what being their own publisher means - "I got rejected, screw it, up it goes on Amazon!".  The route on the left is, of course, overly simplistic, in that it doesn't go into the many, many reasons a book gets rejected, and those are important to understand.

The reason I would tell someone not to self-publish their first book? Because they haven't researched publishing overall, haven't learned how be a publisher, and aren't willing to put in the work required to be their own publisher.


----------



## TJ1985 (Aug 6, 2015)

There's another side to this few realize. When I wrote my western novel, I didn't realize it. I put my novel together, was proud of it. Made my own cover and was proud of it too. I didn't even "waste time" with an agent or a publisher because of a few opinions I had then. I went to createspace and did the whole deal. I even paid $39 to buy the upgraded plan through createspace for a higher royalty cut. I, at the age of 26, was a published author with a title on Amazon. Before the big release, I ordered 25 copies to comp to friends. The first day I had 7 sales! To me, that was the first trickles of water over the dam: I was going to succeed. 

I spent the next week "autographing" my comp copies and mailing them to friends. I wanted to help them be financially secure. I mean, what would be more valuable that an autographed copy of the first edition of the first novel Stephen King wrote? I had no clue how my work would perform in the market, but everybody told me I was a great storyteller, so it was worth a few bucks worth of comped copies. I never forced 'em on anybody, if they wanted one, I gave it to 'em. I had a couple who bought copies, but wanted them signed. Cool deal, I sent 'em a signed one of my comps. They'd already bought it, right, and my comps were sooo cheap. 

Over the course of the next year, I sold precisely 4 copies, bringing my running tally up to 11. I've forgotten how much I had earned, aside from knowing it was well short of the threshold amount where createspace would release payment. I do remember that, all told, the book process cost me $87. To many, that's nothing. To me... if I'd known it was money I was throwing away, I'd have thrown it away at a strip club, or turned it into a profit in a pool hall. Self-publishing does give the author 100% control, and when the money rolls in there are fewer pockets it is divided among. There are also fewer people to blame when it dies an agonizing death. You're the advertising team, and the PR team, and the person who feels pathetic when a year of your life amounts to 11 copies sold, and 17 copies comped. 

In the time it took to fiddle with tuning the cover, adjusting formatting, and other mundane elements of the project, I decided to write a part 2, 3, 4, and finale to my novel. I had a cliffhanger ending idea for #2, a major swerve for 3# (hadn't decided on the cliffhanger ending there), a major life-changing event for #4, and bringing it all to a neat resolution in #5. Novel one was 187,000 words. I could easily get there with the other four, and all five volumes together would allow a reader to follow my MC from his first important life event to the last time he drew and fired his 1858 Remington Revolver. 

They will never be written. I won't put myself through the hell and dejected rejection of selling fewer copies than I gave away again, but I also won't put up with busting my hump for a year to be told that westerns (despite having bought 15+ already this year) are not commercially viable. Self-publishing can work, but it's all on you to make it work. I didn't have the network of friends to work, and I ended up throwing money away. A local writer told me that I would have succeeded if I'd had $10,000 to really give the book the publicity it needed to be put in the public eye. I told her the truth: if I had ten grand to drop on any one project, I'd rent one of the cheap one-car garage spaces in town, move my tools in there, and make my money back in three months. Self-publishing can work, but there's nobody to help you make it work unless you just want to throw money at it. I didn't have money to throw, lol. 

I'm not advocating to go through the process of "tradpub", I know for a fact I'll never succeed in that world. What I am advocating is to forget what you think you know about self-publishing. I hear a lot of people saying that a good novel will sell itself... That's horse (beep). A good novel helps, but there's a lot of other things you need to do to help it along. Don't walk in thinking that writing was the hard part. For me, writing was the easy and fun part. Everything else sucked. 

Oh, my novel? After 14 months of constantly being reminded that I'm a worthless failure at the one thing I thought I was good at, I pulled it. A person can only read "You sold 0 copies this week" so many times before it seems like a great idea to go walk around in rush hour traffic.


----------



## InstituteMan (Aug 6, 2015)

I think that the practical application of each column is roughly the same: few to no sales. You are more likely to win the lottery than you are to make a fortune (or even a living) as a writer, and that applies to both routes.

If you write, it had bettered be for a reason other than money. I'm cool with self publishing. I'm cool with the traditional publishing route (although I do question its future for new writers). Whatever route you pursue, just don't quit your day job.


----------



## Schrody (Aug 7, 2015)

I see a lot of members here are disappointed with the self-pub thing, but no one said you're gonna be magically famous just because you published. It takes a lot of work, promotion, building connections. Yes, you have to do it all alone, and that's why people should research about self pub and how it works. If you expected the same treatment as with the trade pub, sorry, but you're not even close. 

That being said, TJ: did you try with Facebook, Twitter, Goodreads, blogs to promote your book? You don't even have to get up from your comfy chair, the digital world is right in front of you. Make them speak about you! Of course, I never said a good story isn't necessary, we witness a lot of smut this days being famous, but that can't hold for too long.  

And another thing: business differentiates from publisher to publisher; I've read a lot of stories where authors weren't satisfied with the made changes (cover, deleting text, and yes, some will ask you to delete if they think it's unnecessary or too long - just google about King's first book and how much he had to throw out), and yes, some do ask for exclusive rights. Of course, you don't have to be a schmuck, so read the contract and if you don't understand the terms ask or hire a lawyer. 

Again, I'm not against trad pub, nor I'm in favor of self pub, I'm just trying to show that having a trab pub doesn't mean instant success, or any success at all, and self pub is not just publishing and thinking you're a new King, while you do nothing to get things going.


----------



## TJ1985 (Aug 7, 2015)

Schrody said:


> That being said, TJ: did you try with Facebook, Twitter, Goodreads, blogs to promote your book? You don't even have to get up from your comfy chair, the digital world is right in front of you. Make them speak about you! Of course, I never said a good story isn't necessary, we witness a lot of smut this days being famous, but that can't hold for too long.



Excellent point Schrody. I hadn't yet heard of all those outlets as being viable marketing sources. It was a few years before I came here, and long before I realized that the writing was the easy part, lol. I was bitten by two separate and dooming bugs: 1, that Amazon would push my book as their blurbs in Createspace at the time promised, and 2, the false belief I'd picked up which said that the writer was responsible for writing and little else. In truth, I'd be safe to say that even at the highest level of traditional publishing, the author is responsible for pushing the project personally. Going to signings, public appearances, etc. It doesn't change that I was a rotten failure, but knowing why I was a rotten failure does help, lol. 

It's certainly not an easy industry to make money in, and I suspect it'll get harder. When a dweeb such as myself can, for a time, masquerade as a skilled writer with his name on the cover of a book, the situation is dire. Looking back at the situation honestly... I've reread that manuscript every time the itch finds me that maybe I could write another story and get it in print. The same realization strikes me each time: my story was flawed, my natural manner of writing is massively wordy, and my tone is inconsistent. With that in mind, I don't blame anybody for not recommending my book to friend and kin. I've been here for seven months, and I wouldn't ask any of you guys to read it because I like all of you!  

My biggest flaw: I entered a process without knowing what it entailed. Even now that I know things I didn't know I still wouldn't pull the trigger. My network of friends are small, and their budget isn't much better than mine. I highly recommend, whether it's self publishing or traditional, anybody contemplating the process should do their homework and ask the right question. Who's doing the publicity, cover art, design, format, editing? I'm quite ashamed to have wasted an ISBN number without knowing those things.


----------



## qwertyman (Aug 7, 2015)

I am fine with self-publishing. I am not fine with self-publishers describing themselves as 'published authors'.  This isn't about quality; it doesn't mean your book is no good or badly written, it is about deception. 

Claiming to be a published author is acquiring a title one isn't entitled to.  It infers  someone in a long established industry has  selected your work and is willing, at his own expense, to promote and publish your book, which is false. 

What harm does it do? Very little. What does it say about the person? A whole lot. Just call yourself 'self-published author'...problem solved.


----------



## Schrody (Aug 7, 2015)

TJ1985 said:


> Excellent point Schrody. I hadn't yet heard of all those outlets as being viable marketing sources. It was a few years before I came here, and long before I realized that the writing was the easy part, lol. I was bitten by two separate and dooming bugs: 1, that Amazon would push my book as their blurbs in Createspace at the time promised, and 2, the false belief I'd picked up which said that the writer was responsible for writing and little else. In truth, I'd be safe to say that even at the highest level of traditional publishing, the author is responsible for pushing the project personally. Going to signings, public appearances, etc. It doesn't change that I was a rotten failure, but knowing why I was a rotten failure does help, lol.
> 
> It's certainly not an easy industry to make money in, and I suspect it'll get harder. When a dweeb such as myself can, for a time, masquerade as a skilled writer with his name on the cover of a book, the situation is dire. Looking back at the situation honestly... I've reread that manuscript every time the itch finds me that maybe I could write another story and get it in print. The same realization strikes me each time: my story was flawed, my natural manner of writing is massively wordy, and my tone is inconsistent. With that in mind, I don't blame anybody for not recommending my book to friend and kin. I've been here for seven months, and I wouldn't ask any of you guys to read it because I like all of you!
> 
> My biggest flaw: I entered a process without knowing what it entailed. Even now that I know things I didn't know I still wouldn't pull the trigger. My network of friends are small, and their budget isn't much better than mine. I highly recommend, whether it's self publishing or traditional, anybody contemplating the process should do their homework and ask the right question. Who's doing the publicity, cover art, design, format, editing? I'm quite ashamed to have wasted an ISBN number without knowing those things.



You're not a dweeb, TJ. That could've easily be me, and I would be fine with it (after some time). It's important to learn from your mistakes. You were probably proud (and you should be) you completed your first novel and you wanted to publish it. Thing is, writing isn't the end of the journey; it's a beginning. With editors, cover designs and promoting, you're constantly fighting for your book, and that's what a lot of young authors doesn't know. That's why we're here - to help each other with experience and advice. It's not a shame to not know something, it's a shame acting like you do. 

I know some of our members first self publishing was a disaster, but you know what? They rose from the ashes of failure, and you can too. How? By learning. I've been here for two years and I already learned a lot, and will continue to learn. Read, educate, ask questions and listen to advice. We're supposed to evolve as authors, but you need to let changes happen. It won't happen over night, but when you read some old texts you wrote and start smiling and laughing at them (like I do with my old novels), you'll see your style has changed too, and every other change is an upgrade to the previous one. It might sound like a philosophical rant, but with writing it's the same like everything in life: without hard work you can't expect success and feeling of an accomplishment. 

If you're unhappy with your published novel, remove it from Amazon, re-write it and publish again. If you're satisfied, market it.


----------



## TWErvin2 (Aug 7, 2015)

If I were to write the flow chart, I would write "Submit to Agent*s*" and working on the next novel while that's happening.

As has been pointed out, just because you find a reputable agent, doesn't mean a novel will find a publisher. And even if it finds a good publisher, doesn't mean it will be a success.

Similarly, as has been discussed in this thread, just because a novel is self-published, doesn't mean it'll find readers (or readers will find and enjoy it).

While having a really good novel will benefit either route taken, there is a whole list of factors involved in the quest to achieve success (however you want to define that), including at least a little bit of luck.


----------



## Terry D (Aug 7, 2015)

qwertyman said:


> I am fine with self-publishing. I am not fine with self-publishers describing themselves as 'published authors'.  This isn't about quality; it doesn't mean your book is no good or badly written, it is about deception.
> 
> Claiming to be a published author is acquiring a title one isn't entitled to.  It infers  someone in a long established industry has  selected your work and is willing, at his own expense, to promote and publish your book, which is false.


 

I believe this to be out-of-date thinking, the concept of 'publishing' being defined as works contracted for printing and distribution by a select few businesses is changing rapidly. Does it make any difference that most of Charles Dickens' work was 'self' published? Walt Whitman? Ben Franklin? William Blake? Jane Austin? What does your definition say about _them_? The list goes on-and-on but we've gotten so use to the 20th century concept of publishing that we don't remember. Don't get me wrong, I would love to write a book that conforms to some book-keeper's idea of 'publishable', because it's the risk/reward equation that drives publishing (it is a business after all) not good craft, or art. If at some point I write a book which fits the trade publishing idea of 'publishable', great, but just because the books with my name on the spine that you can get through Amazon, B&N, or a local bookstore, weren't run through the meat-grinder of a traditional 'publisher' doesn't make them less published, or of less quality.



> What harm does it do? Very little. What does it say about the person? A whole lot. Just call yourself 'self-published author'...problem solved.



Actually, I'm afraid it says more about you.


----------



## Caragula (Aug 7, 2015)

It goes around in circles this debate, but I've learned one thing.  It is my opinion that your book will never be as good as it could be without an editor.


----------



## Terry D (Aug 7, 2015)

Caragula said:


> It goes around in circles this debate, but I've learned one thing.  Your book will never be as good as it could be without an editor.




Yes, editing is good.


----------



## Sam (Aug 7, 2015)

Caragula said:


> It goes around in circles this debate, but I've learned one thing.  Your book will never be as good as it could be without an editor.



Without an edit, you mean.


----------



## Pluralized (Aug 7, 2015)

I think he meant without a professional editor.


----------



## Caragula (Aug 7, 2015)

Yes Pluralized, a professional editor.  It's just an opinion, but I could not have seen or conceived of a number of things that are now in my book without the challenges and ideas of my editors, not to mention continuity errors that I missed no matter how many times I read through it on my own.

I can't recommend finding editorial support enough.


----------



## Sam (Aug 7, 2015)

Caragula said:


> Your book will never be as good as it could be without an editor.



That's not an opinion. 

That's a statement of fact dressed up as opinion. And you have no idea how good anyone's book will or won't be, professionally edited or otherwise.


----------



## Guy Faukes (Aug 7, 2015)

Eh, it all depends how good you are and how good your editor is. Having connections with someone who knows the market and read their share of great, good and bad literature is invaluable (or having that experience yourself), but one should neither undervalue nor overvalue being calculated with their works.


----------



## Caragula (Aug 7, 2015)

Of course Sam, I shall edit my original comment to preface it more clearly.  I did wonder why so many trad published authors thanked their editors.  I no longer wonder that.  I guess it's the 'black swan' thing in Philosophy.  We need only find a significant minority of authors who have paid for a professional editor's services, or have had such services from their publisher, who believe that their book was no better or indeed was worse afterwards.  Or, more importantly, have readers who believe that the before was as good or better than the after.

It would greatly surprise me for it to be true that a significant minority of authors were told by their readers that the book after an editor had collaborated with the author on it, became worse than before.


----------



## Foxee (Aug 7, 2015)

I'm going to admit right out of the gate that I do not have a published book. However, I love to read. I've watched other authors who've went the self-publishing route so that's where my opinions come from. I have at least three self-published novels, all written by people I've met online (all of which will remain nameless at this time!), all complimentary copies. I should also note that I'm harder to please as a reader after my time messing around with writing and trying to learn it.

That said...

Of the four, the best has a great cover and is very well written, creative concept, and a genre I don't normally read. I picked up some flaws that could have been edited with one more pass by one more set of eyes but they weren't egregious errors and I was able to maintain my suspension of disbelief. It was a complimentary copy but I would have considered it a good buy if I had picked it up myself.

The next best, I'd say, is one that had an interesting concept but was confusing. That might have just been me, my husband got a hold of it and nearly finished it in one sleepless night. No huge errors in it, I just wonder if it would have benefited from some better flow. According to my hubby, though, probably not much.

The absolute worst was the first one I received, a product of NaNoWriMo. The author sent me an excerpt first, which was horrific. I spent quite a bit of time writing out suggestions and questions only to have an email hurled down my throat that it was fine and it was being rushed through the publication process for reasons that have little to do with writing or publishing. So then I got the signed copy. The slick, skinny book had a cover made with clip art. Hoping against hope that this guy had done some editing I opened it up to find...a cautionary tale about rushing self-publishing. I keep it on my shelf as a reminder NEVER to do this. The story doesn't end there. The book was listed on Amazon complete with reviews written by the author making some pretty grand claims about the book. I have no idea how many unwary people may have bought the book but I just looked and the price has not fallen, there is no Kindle edition and there is still the one review.

No...that last one did not come from anyone here. However, the author may skate by WF, who knows?

So it's possible to turn out a pleasing product if you really work at it. Also, judging by some of the threads I've seen here on WF trying to sell on Amazon is tough.

If I end up with a manuscript I like, I'm not sure yet what I'd do (other than dancing a happy dance). But threads like this are very interesting for when/if that blessed event occurs.


----------



## LeeC (Aug 7, 2015)

I think there's a lot more at play than just "Agent versus Self-Publishing," some of which is being touched on.

As an example, someone joined WF and with minimal interaction PMed me asking that I beta read their book. I told the individual to send only the first chapter so I could get a feel for whether I might be of any help. The long and short is that the book needed line by line editing and better storytelling skills before beta reading involvement, so I declined not feeling up to it. I received several more requests from the author telling me "the story gets better further on," which only added to my thinking that storytelling skills were seriously lacking. 

To me this was just another individual in a pool of too many in today's world, looking to fast-track their self-publishing effort, with dollar signs in their eyes. Something that to me creates a quagmire in the self-publishing world. Yes some good writing floats to the top, but I'd wager that a lot doesn't. 

On the other hand, the agent/publisher route necessitates (to varying degrees) better storytelling skills, but is also rife with with the subjectivity of whether a book (or maybe the author) is a viable commodity. They're mostly out for material gain also, the shorter term the better. My approach to this is to note that my primary objective in pursuing traditional publishing is the potential longevity of the underlying biocentric ideas. It certainly works to filter out many of the "sorry, not a fit for us" inquiries. On the other hand, those that are taking longer to respond (understanding enough won't even bother) gives me some hope.

Some first time authors are fortunate enough to strike a perceived need out of the gate. My daughter contributed to a book on education (her section on student centered teaching strategies) that was picked up and published by Harvard. Now, a scant year later, they have her out presenting and promoting the book to education seminars at various colleges and universities. (Forgive me, I'm proud of her).

The point being that good writing (the finished product) is important, but so is happening to be in the right place at the right time as with all things in life. If one can find an agent/publisher whose agenda in recognizing one's work helps one's own agenda, then a very difficult hurdle has been cleared in the race to the goal line. On the other hand, if one doesn't, or only pursues the self-publishing route, then their effort borders on playing the lottery to me. There are in excess of three million books published a year and the vast majority are self-published. The shear weigh of that mass creates a quagmire that all but a few never escape, and the excessive volume of self-promotion only adds to the difficuty. 

All this doesn't mean one shouldn't try. In my case I'll be content that I tried my best with the resources at hand, and in the end that's all any author can do. And yes, I also buy a lottery ticket once a week


----------



## David Gordon Burke (Aug 8, 2015)

My take on this.  And yeah, self pub largely drives me nuts ... not so much for the concept per se but for how lowlifes have perverted the concept.  However ...

The pro vs con.  Trad vs. Self Pub.

First off, the Traditional publishing world is largely reserved for those people who have access to it.  So First Worlders.  Americans have New York, Canadians have Toronto.  Surely there is a publishing center for Britian, France etc. etc.  Kind of leaves the rest of us out.

If you have access to that, it is then recommended that you conform to the most rigid story structure possible.  The closer your story resembles or follows a James Patterson story arc, the better your chances that you story will be read and forgotten my thousands .... hopefully millions.

Traditional publishing .... getting your book onto bookstore racks doesn´t guarantee anything.  How much the publisher pushes your book is most likely the key. They have a promotional budget.  No idea how that works but I´m guessing that first time writer isn´t getting as big a slice as Patterson, King et al of the promo pie.  

On the other hand.  The Self Pub world is an incredible up-hill battle.  Hey, would I prefer to have some BIGGIE take over the chore of EVERYTHING except the writing?  Of course.  That´s not going to happen any time soon.  
The advantages of INDIE are 100% control .... 100% responsability.  So succeed or fail, it falls on your shoulders.

As per the model you illustrate ... it seems to equate ´Rejected by Agent´ as being ´Not good enough´ or ´flawed.´ I reject that notion.  I do embrace the concept that the average reader is flawed and must be spoon fed a recognizeable formulaic storyline in order to distract him from the internet, his text messages, facebook etc. and if I don´t do that, I´ll have to self publish because no agent will accept my work.  

And Thank God for that.

David Gordon Burke


----------



## LeeC (Aug 8, 2015)

I respect your opinion David, and I could easily be wrong in thinking you missed my main points, but your stated perspective seems a little narrow to me. 

As far as traditional publishing being "largely reserved for those people who have access to it. So First Worlders." there is that aspect, but there are other factors such as literacy rates and limiting poverty, off the top of my head. 

Also, one thing I've noticed in my research of late is an outreach by a fair number of agents and publishers for foreign (as in non English writers) books. Further, it strikes me that there are many famous non English writers known to the English speaking world. A very quick Google search brought up Mikhail Bulgakov, Carlos Ruiz Zafón, Gabriel García Márquez, Paulo Coelho, Rossy Evelin Lima, Homero Aridjis, and thousands of others. 

I also believe that saying "The closer your story resembles or follows a James Patterson story arc, the better your chances," while having an element of merit is overly misleading. Like everybody else in this world, agents and publishers are highly subjective in differing ways. They base their choices on guesses (individual crystal balls) as to what they think the public will buy, not just today but a year down the road (which is anybody's guess). I don't doubt that some of what they don't think will sell actually won't. You might note that many agents and publishers watch the self-publishing sales to try to get in on any good deals. The shear volume of initial submittals today is a heavy burden. 

Also depending on where one is in the equation, and our personal perspectives, we each see things with varying degrees of distortion. Rejection by an agent does not necessarily mean "Not good enough," (as in the writing skills) but at least in good part that if doesn't fit what they see in their crystal ball. Most will publish anything they think will sell well. Their perspectives are blurred by dollar signs, as well as the writer that may think their book will sell well if it has the proper exposure. And don't forget the readers which on the whole aren't that good a judge of "good" writing skills. What I was getting at is the whole stew is subjective, and there are no hard and fast aspects that guarantee success, nor is it as "personal" as some see it. 

It's late and I've run on enough. Peace and hopefully you'll find the success you desire.


----------



## Caragula (Aug 9, 2015)

"If you have access to that (trad publishing), it is then recommended that you conform to the most rigid story structure possible."

I can't agree David, on this one point anyway.  The entire genre of literary fiction does not seem much like James Patterson to me.  Authors of very challenging, highly 'arty' books can gain big advances through bidding wars between major publishers.  There's room for books of all types within trad publishing.


----------



## shadowwalker (Aug 9, 2015)

Yeah, sticking to some rigid story structure because otherwise the stupid readers won't buy it - well, I ain't buying that. I hear that kind of thing and to me, anyway, it's like saying one should self-publish because their book is sooooo much genius the general reading public won't get it. 

There are enough good reasons to self-publish, one shouldn't have to stoop to insulting the reader or trade published authors to [try to] make their point.


----------



## David Gordon Burke (Aug 10, 2015)

You guys truly amaze me in your ability to totally ignore the obvious.  There is no doubt whatsoever that within the world of commercial, paperback bestsellers there will occasionally be a great book.  Often, a writer doesn´t even see hard cover or trade paperback until they have proven themselves in the trenches of paperbacks.

So am I to believe that you are of the opinion that of the aprox. 43,000 novels (not including self-pub according to published stats) you are of the opinion that the majority is quality and the minority is pulp, commercial fiction?  I guess things have changed since I lived in the first world.  I seem to remember bookstores filled with shelf after shelf of Harlequin and their ilk plus a full gamut of knock-off detective and horror etc.  Again, seeing as it is just so common to read a post by its broad strokes, I reiterate, there are probably some good, original works within that mountain of pulp.  I´m just not interested in reading the formulaic stuff to discover the gems.  

David Gordon Burke


----------



## shadowwalker (Aug 10, 2015)

David Gordon Burke said:


> I reiterate, there are probably some good, original works within that mountain of pulp.  I´m just not interested in reading the formulaic stuff to discover the gems.



And again, you are using your own tastes in reading to condemn anything that doesn't match (as well as the readers and writers who don't read or write within those apparently small boundaries). There are certain types of books I don't care for - I accept that it's merely my preference, not that those books are crap, and I'm still open to read them based on friends' recommendations.


----------



## David Gordon Burke (Aug 10, 2015)

shadowwalker said:


> Yeah, sticking to some rigid story structure because otherwise the stupid readers won't buy it - well, I ain't buying that. I hear that kind of thing and to me, anyway, it's like saying one should self-publish because their book is sooooo much genius the general reading public won't get it.
> 
> There are enough good reasons to self-publish, one shouldn't have to stoop to insulting the reader or trade published authors to [try to] make their point.



Who do you think literary agents cater to?  When they pick a book for publication they have a ton of indicators, many of which have nothing to do with the quality of the work and everything to do with hooking the person who picks up the book.  And I have read more than once that it is the airport customer, impulse buyer that they are most interested in grabbing.  So you have a first line, first paragraph or first page to grab the reader.  That is IMHO a sad statement on the quality of literature today.

How many times did you hear, ¨If it doesn´t grab me within the first 5 pages, I put it down.¨ Nearly every Tom Clancy novel, most if not all of the classics, the Bond novels, James Joyce (which I am reading now) Garcia Marquez, Hemingway ... all of these and many more require an investment from the reader.  Being spoonfed an easy to understand, predictable tale doesn´t a reader make.  

On a personal level, I´d much rather write a flawed, original piece than succeed following a formulaic pulp fiction, literary agent approved book geared toward the average reality TV aficionado mindset and grade-level.  However, I don´t consider my work to be genius.  

"Whenever you find yourself on the side of the *majority*, it is time to pause and reflect." - *Mark Twain

*David Gordon Burke


----------



## David Gordon Burke (Aug 10, 2015)

My final contribution to this thread.  I have written about this tons of times both here and on my blog.
This site really nails it.
The Self Pub book as a calling card.

http://www.jamesaltucher.com/2012/01/self-publishing-your-own-book-is-the-new-business-card/

David Gordon Burke


----------



## Kyle R (Aug 10, 2015)

There are certainly authors who've found success with self-publishing. Hugh Howie, for example. Though, I like what traditionally published author, Carrie Vaughn, had to say:

Aim high. Keep aiming high. Query your dream agent. Submit to the most prestigious, highest-paying market first. Tackle the big project that scares you.  If you sell yourself short before you even start, you’ll never know how far you could have gone. — Carrie Vaughn
​
:encouragement:


----------



## Terry D (Aug 10, 2015)

Kyle R said:


> There are certainly authors who've found success with self-publishing. Hugh Howie, for example. Though, I like what traditionally published author, Carrie Vaughn, had to say:
> Aim high. Keep aiming high. Query your dream agent. Submit to the most prestigious, highest-paying market first. Tackle the big project that scares you.  If you sell yourself short before you even start, you’ll never know how far you could have gone. — Carrie Vaughn
> ​
> :encouragement:



That's assuming one considers self-publishing as a lesser target than subjecting one's self to the trade publishing circus. A bit condescending, IMO. I'd suggest that conforming a book to narrow agent/publishing expectations could be considered "selling yourself short" as well. Write the best book you can, get it into the best shape possible, then decide how you want to publish it. If you want to go the trade route, fine. If you want to self-pub fine. There is no "better" way.


----------



## qwertyman (Aug 10, 2015)

Fiction is about entertaining the reader, which succeeds when the reader continually turns the pages.

The level of a writer’s skill should be based on his ability to accomplish this.  Be different, be radical, but if you don't entertain you are a poor writer of fiction.



To say the first five pages must ‘grab’ the reader is common sense.  It may also be formulaic.

Making cake with flour and butter is also formulaic.  If you decide to use broccolli and steak instead, you'll end up with a cake nobody eats.* 








*_Except me, I’ll eat any old cake._


----------



## Caragula (Aug 10, 2015)

"I'd suggest that conforming a book to narrow agent/publishing expectations could be considered "selling yourself short" as well."
"Who do you think literary agents cater to?  When they pick a book for  publication they have a ton of indicators, many of which have nothing to  do with the quality of the work and everything to do with hooking the  person who picks up the book."

The work of Mark Danielewski, the recent book by Paul Kingsnorth 'The Wake', Thomas Pynchon's almost anything, 'City of Saints and Madmen' by Jeff Vandermeer, the work of Cynthia Ozick; there are any number of unforgiving, obtuse and thrillingly written books that are not aimed at the airport reader, that are not ready for film, that *do* have literary agents and publishers squabbling over them and offering them fat advances.  There are non fiction books that have some of the best writing I've ever read, but are books about country walking or training animals.  These gain critical acclaim, but will not sell a great deal.  Publishers will of course not survive financially on a diet entirely made of such things, but they cannot be accused of narrowness for that reason.

Literary agents are looking for quality because quality sells - the multiplying factors to profitability regarding quality being trends and genre - but make no mistake, these are _multiplying_ factors.  Agents want to know whether you can, basically, write really well.  The rest is negotiable.  My agent has a couple of authors without deals, but he loves their work and believes in their work.  He hasn't binned them off; their journey, like mine with him, is a journey, not purely an economic transaction.  Sure he wants a return, we all do, but it begins with a love of the writing.  It's a strange faux-paradox, that what motivates an agent is partly about what will sell, but also partly about selling something they already love because they believe it's going to make a lot of people as happy as its made them.


----------



## Pluralized (Aug 10, 2015)

Seems to me far too easy for the dreamer to self-publish their half-cooked work and live in a cloud of delusion. Submitting to publishers and the subsequent rejections can disabuse us of grandeur which, in my opinion, weeds out many who might otherwise self-publish. I guess people will say the market decides that, but I'd argue proponents of self-publishing have to acknowledge the sea of refuse into which they're setting sail by sheer volume of self-published works.


----------



## LeeC (Aug 10, 2015)

I think Pluralized (in his distinctive way) gets at the balance of objective thinking I was trying to bring out. 


1) Dealing with agents/publishers can be a frustrating can of worms. They're the gate keepers with their own agendas and human fallacies. There are well over a thousand of them though (my own accumulation of relative potential interests exceeds three hundred), maybe more, and if an author's work is reasonably good enough there is a possibility of a match out there. As with all things in life though, regardless of how good one's work is there is an element of being in the right place at the right time. 


It's a far from fair and perfect system though, that leaves many authors disillusioned.


2) On the other hand, removing all the restraints with the ease of self-publishing (which a good number of businesses have found a profitable niche in promoting, playing on other's dreams — it's the capitalist way) has led to a quagmire in which few good writers float to the top given the sheer volume of wannabes. Even the self promotion airways are so clogged that little credence is given anymore. Oh yes, a few have succeeded, but I'd wager there's many many reasonably good authors that never see the light of day. 


So self-publishing is in a sense its own worst enemy, and arguably no better than traditional publishing anymore if that.


-------


In a perfect world there would be a middle ground, but this is a human world ;-)


----------



## Arthur G. Mustard (Aug 10, 2015)

Writing, becoming that household name, becoming an author is a tough, self disciplined, lonely, but highly rewarding "game" to be in; requiring imagination,  creativity and enthusiasm.  Everyone dreams of been on the bookshelf and in a bygone day this might have been limited to a certain few. 

     Publishers and agents can be hard to please and are plagued by the masses.  We all just need that one chance, that one winning lottery ticket; but it won't come to all of us.

     With outlets such as amazon, Facebook,  kindle,  createspace etc, we can all "get out there", get noticed and maybe sell a few copies along the way. But better than that, we can bring enjoyment, imagination,  laughter,  tears,  new worlds and fabulous new characters to people's living rooms. 

     We write because that's what we do, we are authors.  Both platforms, publisher or self publish, are a channel to express ourselves,  with good and bad within both. So whilst your waiting for that six figure advance from Harper Collins and Johnny Depp is lined up to play the lead in the film adaptation,  get out there in whatever shape or form you can, shout loud, promote yourself ' cos no one's gonna ring you up and say that they'll do it for you.


----------



## Terry D (Aug 10, 2015)

Pluralized said:


> Seems to me far too easy for the dreamer to self-publish their half-cooked work and live in a cloud of delusion. Submitting to publishers and the subsequent rejections can disabuse us of grandeur which, in my opinion, weeds out many who might otherwise self-publish. I guess people will say the market decides that, but I'd argue proponents of self-publishing have to acknowledge the sea of refuse into which they're setting sail by sheer volume of self-published works.



But even going the agent/trade publishing route a new author is still competing with the same "sea of refuse" only it's called the slush pile. An agent, speaking to a writer's conference I attended this past spring, told us that each agent in her office receives between 4,500 and 5,000 queries per year, while accepting 10 to 15 authors for representation. Yes, a self-published author is in competition with vast quantities of garbage, but so is an author following a more traditional route. The difference is the self-published author is competing for _readers_, not just the next step on a shaky ladder.

I am not advocating self-publishing over trade publishing, all I'm saying is that the difference is smaller than most seem to think.


----------



## InstituteMan (Aug 10, 2015)

Terry D said:


> But even going the agent/trade publishing route a new author is still competing with the same "sea of refuse" only it's called the slush pile. An agent, speaking to a writer's conference I attended this past spring, told us that each agent in her office receives between 4,500 and 5,000 queries per year, while accepting 10 to 15 authors for representation. Yes, a self-published author is in competition with vast quantities of garbage, but so is an author following a more traditional route. The difference is the self-published author is competing for _readers_, not just the next step on a shaky ladder.
> 
> I am not advocating self-publishing over trade publishing, all I'm saying is that the difference is smaller than most seem to think.



If there was an "amen" button I would have clicked that.

It's all well and good to think about how the literary world ought to be. I am pretty sure that each and every one of us would prefer for our favorite genres to be more celebrated and higher compensated than they are now. I'm sure we all would prefer to have less competition in the marketplace than we do. 

We are all functioning in the literary world as we find it rather than the literary world as we would like it, however. As one of the many writers struggling to get out of various slush piles, it seems to me that sufficient skill will improve one's chances of getting somewhere, be that skill in writing or skill in self-promotion; best yet is some skill at both, but even that only improves one's chances. 

Even the greatest writers with the most talent and skill need a break, a lucky chance. My theory is that the more times you roll the dice (even if those dice each has a thousand sides) the more opportunities you have to get that lucky break. So I write as best as I can and I promote my own work as much as I can stand. I submit to traditional routes and I self-publish. Will it turn me into a best selling author? Probably not. I know that not trying won't get me there, though.


----------



## Pluralized (Aug 10, 2015)

> Even the greatest writers with the most talent and skill need a break, a lucky chance.



Right, and you guys make great points. I'm just saying there's a built-in threshold for quality when the gauntlet involves a competent editor whose analysis of the work at hand is based upon years of professional reading and editing versus someone whose ability to click through KDP is the only thing standing between themselves and being 'published.'

Luck is one thing; hard work, knowing how to write great stories, and actually writing well are important. I guess that's my main quandary with self-publishing.  More power to those self-published and making the bucks. We live in a weird era.


----------



## Kyle R (Aug 11, 2015)

Terry D said:


> That's assuming one considers self-publishing as a lesser target than subjecting one's self to the trade publishing circus. A bit condescending, IMO.


In defense of Carrie Vaughn, I don't think she meant to say anything negative about self-publishing (so perhaps my quoting of her, in the context of this thread, was misleading). She strikes me as the kind of writer who entered the world of fiction before self-publishing was really a valid option—so when she talks about things, it's from the perspective of one who's only really dealt with the traditional approach: write, submit, get rejected, try again. 

Mostly, what I like about her quote is not that she's saying to pursue traditional publishing, but that she's saying: aim high with your writing. Swing for the fences. I think it's a mindset that both traditionally published and self-published writers can benefit from. :encouragement:


----------



## shadowwalker (Aug 11, 2015)

I think the biggest problem any writer has with publishing of any sort is that they don't truly educate themselves about publishing. Oh, they'll glom onto blog posts and he said/she said, mainly because those sorts of things tell them what they want to hear. But they don't sit down and objectively learn how publishing works. And let's face it - publishing, no matter which route you take, has _business aspects_ one has to know about. The writing is done - publishing is all about the presentation of that writing in order to get people to read it. One has to understand the components of publishing in order to have any kind of success, again regardless of the route taken. The writer hat has to come off, the business hat has to come on - and you damn well better know how to wear it.


----------



## Ibb (Aug 13, 2015)

Saying you're a 'published author' and only later admitting that you're self-published is deception. There's a reason announcing that you're published is met by gasps and congratulations. You've broken past a threshold that demands scrutiny, analysis and, at its culmination, acceptance or rejection. It doesn't matter if this is outdated thinking or not--when you announce you're published, you know exactly into what atmosphere of expectation you're making the announcement. Omitting 'self-published' is indicative of what qwertyman suggested. Everyone's being way too nice about that. You're not a published author. You're a self-published one. There is a vast difference between the two, and the only person who would suggest otherwise is the self-published author himself. Success or eminence as a writer is a completely different topic.


----------



## sportourer1 (Aug 15, 2015)

Most of us have no choice


----------



## shadowwalker (Aug 15, 2015)

I don't really care if a person says they're a pubished author and they're "only" self-published. To me, it's like distinguishing between someone published in the _New Yorker_ and someone published in _The Cossack Review_. One needs to look at the work, not the method.


----------



## Terry D (Aug 15, 2015)

Ibb said:


> Saying you're a 'published author' and only later admitting that you're self-published is deception. There's a reason announcing that you're published is met by gasps and congratulations. You've broken past a threshold that demands scrutiny, analysis and, at its culmination, acceptance or rejection. It doesn't matter if this is outdated thinking or not--when you announce you're published, you know exactly into what atmosphere of expectation you're making the announcement. Omitting 'self-published' is indicative of what qwertyman suggested. Everyone's being way too nice about that. You're not a published author. You're a self-published one. There is a vast difference between the two, and the only person who would suggest otherwise is the self-published author himself. Success or eminence as a writer is a completely different topic.



How do you know how other writers are presenting themselves? And why do you care? I can tell you from experience that readers don't give a damn about the difference. They care about the work. And just to set the record straight, I've never made claim to being a 'published' writer, self or otherwise. I tell people I'm a writer, or that I've written two novels. I do that just so narrow-minded elitists can't say I'm deceiving anyone. 

I don't care if any other writer chooses to follow the path of trade publishing, or not, and I'm not going to insult them for that choice. I do often wonder, however, why so many of those writers get antagonistic about those of us who self-publish. It doesn't effect them in the slightest. I find that telling.


----------



## Schrody (Aug 15, 2015)

Oh Terry, it's nothing new. I guess trad published writers are intimidated by the self pub authors, mainly because they regret they did a trad pub. I'm not saying every trad pub author is like that, but, speaking from experience, they'll do anything to poop on your publishing choice, trying to make you feel less worthy. It's work that matters, if you're great, you'll be great whether self or trad published.


----------



## TKent (Aug 15, 2015)

There are just so many different reasons people write. I can't imagine there will ever be one course that is right for everyone.


----------



## krishan (Aug 26, 2015)

I agree with the sentiment of the original post. To me, there's some value in simply writing a better book, whether or not it ultimately sells more copies / finds a publisher.


----------



## bestseller (Sep 20, 2015)

A literary agent surely is a great asset. With all the experience and expertise, a literary agent brings out the best in the writer. An agent helps with the areas of the marketing so an author can focus on his or her craft. Of course these days authors need to ensure they take part and help the marketing.


----------



## shadowwalker (Sep 20, 2015)

bestseller said:


> A literary agent surely is a great asset. With all the experience and expertise, a literary agent brings out the best in the writer. An agent helps with the areas of the marketing so an author can focus on his or her craft. Of course these days authors need to ensure they take part and help the marketing.



Um, not sure an agent helps with marketing - that's up to the publisher. Unless you're talking about the handful of agents that work with self-publishers as well as trade published authors, it's not what agents do. And authors don't _have _to help with marketing - again, that's what publishers do. A bit of publicity here and there, but ...


----------



## bestseller (Sep 22, 2015)

Oh....yes of course neither agents nor authors have to help with the marketing - but marketing is always good and doesn't hurt sales. I guess it is about personal choices. I love marketing my works!



shadowwalker said:


> Um, not sure an agent helps with marketing - that's up to the publisher. Unless you're talking about the handful of agents that work with self-publishers as well as trade published authors, it's not what agents do. And authors don't _have _to help with marketing - again, that's what publishers do. A bit of publicity here and there, but ...


----------



## popsprocket (Sep 22, 2015)

Kyle R said:


>



I wish I could draw little arrows as perfectly as you Kyle. I'm so jealous


----------



## Kyle R (Sep 22, 2015)

Lol. I didn't write that paper Pops!

But rest assured, _had_ I wrote it, it would've become an instant bestseller! :icon_cheesygrin:

It also would've read more like:

Write a novel --> Send to Agent --> Werewolf crashes through front door --> Grab a crossbow --> No arrows in sight --> Werewolf bites you --> Kill werewolf with kitchen knife --> Google "werewolf bite" --> Learn that you have seven hours to find a healer before the lycanthropy sets in completely --> Stagger into your car with the local healer's address --> But the car is out of gas and already your canines and fingernails are growing . . .


----------



## popsprocket (Sep 22, 2015)

Kyle R said:


> Write a novel --> Send to Agent --> Werewolf crashes through front door --> Grab a crossbow --> No arrows in sight --> Werewolf bites you --> Kill werewolf with kitchen knife --> Google "werewolf bite" --> Learn that you have seven hours to find a healer before the lycanthropy sets in completely --> Stagger into your car with the local healer's address --> But the car is out of gas and already your canines and fingernails are growing . . .


 --> Remember the acid you dropped --> Worst trip ever...


----------



## RikWriter (Oct 14, 2015)

I had an agent back in the mid 90s.  Established agent, very good at her job, assigned me three ruthless editors and really tightened up the two science fiction novels I'd finished.  They taught me to avoid falling in love with my writing and to treat it as a job.
She still couldn't sell my novels to a publisher.  
Fast forward to 2011.  The books had been sitting on my hard drives for years, gathering cyber-dust, only read by a few close friends.  Someone tells me about self-publishing on Amazon for Kindle.  I'm hesitant at first, as self publishing back in the 90s meant vanity publishing and was seen as the last resort of a loser, someone who couldn't accept they weren't good enough.
But then I figured, what the hell?  At least someone I don't actually know might read my stuff.  Maybe I could at least get an idea of what I need to work on from the reviews.  I put both books on Amazon at 99 cents each, with what I realize in hindsight were slapdash covers (created from photographs I'd taken) and minimal formatting.
In the first year they were on Amazon, they sold over 30,000 copies between the two of them.  The more popular of the two was in the top 100 of e-books sold, briefly.  
Since then, I've written two sequels to the more popular of the two books and a sequel to the other book as well (I'm currently working on a second sequel to that book) and while there's no danger of getting rich from what I've made writing, it's been a nice little second income and I've certainly made much more than I'd ever expected to from it.
That said, the novels I've written are science fiction---military SF and space opera/cyberpunk specifically---and that is a niche market that does very well for self-published authors on Amazon.  The same can't be said about other genres and sub-genres.  Romance, SF, post-apocalyptic fiction, yes.  Mainstream fiction, mystery, western, not so much.  
So whether or not you should self-publish depends, IMHO, on what sort of writing you do and what your goal is.
Me, I wish I had self-published earlier, because I wouldn't have wasted over 10 years not writing anything because I thought no one would ever read it.


----------



## Linton Robinson (Dec 29, 2015)

Matter of fact, publisher DO require removal and alteration of writing, happens all the time.
Better than "agent rejected, to amazon" would be "START with amazon.  See how it goes."


----------



## Gavrushka (Dec 30, 2015)

From my perspective, the affirmation of an agent is the acid test as to whether my work is suitable for publication. - I think part of the problem I see is that a writer is seldom objective when they deem their novel ready. - Of over a 100 attempts, I've only ever found 1 self-published book I read and enjoyed (author is active on this site). - Of the 1,000s of traditionally published books I've read, there were less than a half dozen I didn't enjoy. - I see the self published market as a cauldron of very enthusiastic and talented people who simply didn't let their words mature for long enough before releasing them.


I am sure there are plenty of exceptions, and I mean no offence to anyone who has self-published, none of whose work I've read.


----------



## Caragula (Dec 30, 2015)

"Matter of fact, publisher DO require removal and alteration of writing, happens all the time.
Better than "agent rejected, to amazon" would be "START with amazon.  See how it goes.""

Do you wonder why they want things removed, added and altered?  If you think it's solely so that the book becomes more commercial then I'm afraid you're mistaken.  It is usually, in my limited experience, to improve the book.  In my case, it dramatically improved the book.  I don't think any of the changes made the book more commercial, except insofar as I believe they made it a better book to read.


----------



## W.Goepner (Jan 20, 2016)

I will jump in here with my 2 cents.

I am a hopeful, I hope to publish, I hope to have my first works edited and on the way soon. I feel I need A whole lot more eyes to check it over first though. 

I fear agents, maybe due to too many bad autobiographies, and Hollywood film stories, but I fear the control and push for more and more publicity. I keep seeing the Chipmunks and Eian Hawks, every time I think agent. It is my opinion, that is what went bad with Justin Beber, (sorry if I flubbed the spelling) too much grand slam, in your face, and party social life. The press for bigger, better, or even more, More, MORE! Which I fear an agent would do simply because they work for their cut, not the betterment of the write.

Self publishing to me is a, well... a fast way to attempt fame. I realize I am more than likely wrong, because I simply do not have any idea how any of it works. I realize it takes dedication, first to write the story then to edit, then to cultivate it into what should be a readable copy. Then to push for the best and most efficient way, of advertising and marketing. As a self published person should realize they need to get the book/story out in the eyes of the public and not simply on the shelf. I as a reader first use the cover to determine the genre, western, romance, literature, drama, or fiction science or otherwise. Then I look to the back cover for the excerpt, does or did that blurb of the story there give me a desire to read on? Then to the inside of the book to see what else is or was written by this author, in hopes I recognize one or more of their works or if this is the first or third in a number of sequels. 

All of those things are what I intend to take into account, when or if I make it to that stage. This is why places like Dorrance Publishing do the business they do and the way they do it. I would have had to pay around $22,000.00 For my story to go through editing, copy write, publishing, and marketing. With the possibilities of more financing to cover reinserting it in the market if the book/story went below what they wanted it to. So yes, I agree with some of the others who feel it was or is not worth the trouble to publish, because to go into debt when you have No finances to begin with, is ludicrous in the least. These are the reasons I sought out these forums, I know I need all the help I can get to even get my works to a plausibly readable state. Though I am disheartened, due to the apparent lack of interest in my writing. I still am working on my second in the series. Now at 35447 words, a long way fro the 245721 words of the first piece. I am in hopes the second makes it to two thirds the first. 

Yes I am shamelessly putting a plug in here for help as I have in most any discussion I feel it might pick up the notice of someone.


----------



## Schrody (Jan 20, 2016)

Never pay the publisher.


----------



## W.Goepner (Jan 21, 2016)

Schrody said:


> Never pay the publisher.



I would agree with that, except Dorrance is editing, copywriter, promoters, and agent, all rolled up into a neat ball, along side publishing. Also, most any Publishing companys will shamelessly take anything and print it for you if you pay them. Even if I were not to market my story I could pay a publisher to print say 50 copies and they would be mine. As long as it is known that they are not publishing for sell. Though most are all too busy to bother and we need to go to the smaller back street publishers of the neighborhood. 

I was given a breakdown of everything Dorrance does for the money they ask for up front. It is a fair cost for services rendered. 

I checked with an independent editor, as one can see below, the costs to have all that Dorrance does for the writer, to include marketing, is not overly priced. I believe, Dorrance did say all rights stay in my hands though.

 "Kristen Corrects" is the company I looked at before I joined the WF. We corresponded for a bit, I could not afford it and did not send anything to her. Please Do Not! get me wrong, These are *not* plugs for Dorrance publishing or Kristen Corrects. These are only examples of the costs of getting it right if you can put out the moneys for it. Examples of what it can cost you, if you want the help of those who do it professionally. 

*This is a price quote she sent me for one service:*
If you are unsure of the quality of your manuscript, she offers a service called manuscript review, in which she reads over your entire manuscript, then write an 8-10 page report that details any issues she saw in several aspects, including the quality of your writing, plot, character, setting, etc. This is one cent per word.

If I add up the cost for her simple service, at one cent per word, 245721 words comes to, more than I can afford. being $2,457.21 for the piece. That does not include edit.

*Here is what she sent me for edit costs and another service;*

Her editing rates vary based on what type of service you'd need. Most of her clients require either a copyedit or a final proofread. Even though you’ve proofed your manuscript several times already, she would still likely recommend a copyedit, but it would be beneficial for her to see a sample of your writing before she'd sign you up for any editing services. 

At 1.4 cents per word, copyediting focuses on sentence structure, content, consistency, and clarity. (To find out a rough estimate of how much your manuscript would cost at 1.4 cents per word, simply multiply .014 with your manuscript’s word count.) For example, copyediting ensures that each character has consistent actions, or that the spelling of a name or place doesn't change. If something is muddy or hard to understand, she will ensure it is clear and reads easily. Copyediting also formats your manuscript to be ready for publish as an e-book (formatting for a paperback book is different; if you’re interested in that, please let her know and she can determine a separate fee). Copyediting does wonders for raw manuscripts, and the vast majority of the time, she recommends copyediting as the first step in the editing process. Copyediting does not, however, necessarily look at the spelling, grammar, or word choice—that is under her “proofreading” service. She generally recommends authors to have their book proofed a final time after copyediting and before publishing.

Proofreading is the last step in the editing process before publishing. It focuses mainly on word choice, punctuation, spelling, and grammar, and is basically a final read-through to make sure your book doesn’t have any surface errors. Proofreading is one cent per word. 

If you are interested in signing up for copyediting as well, she offers a discounted rate. Instead of paying 1.4 cents per word for copyediting, then one cent per word for proofreading, she is able to do both for two cents per word. This option is entirely up to you, but would be the cheapest rate if you are looking to publish your book immediately after she is done editing.

With all projects, she has both parties sign a contract as well as requires 50% upfront, 50% after delivery, but with larger projects she is happy to work out a payment system that breaks payments into more manageable sections. The process generally takes her 3 to 4 weeks to complete.


----------



## Gavrushka (Jan 21, 2016)

If you can't yet produce work of a standard suitable for an agent, wait until you can. Perceived shortcuts such as you're considering are little more than exploitation, in my opinion.

You're not ready, and this offer to teleport you beyond the hard graft other writers must wade through is going to be to your financial cost, and nothing more.

Build your own social media presence. Build a group of beta readers. Build your skillset. - You CANNOT employ others to build these things for you.

You've been sold on something you want to believe in, and it could very well destroy you. - Work at it, and you will one day end up published. - Do as you suggest, and I promise you'll spend the rest of your days looking for a shortcut that doesn't exist.


----------



## Schrody (Jan 21, 2016)

I understand your point W, but you don't understand mine. When in the process of finding publishers, you must know that the respectable publishers and agents *will never ask for money*. Their pay comes after/if they decide your work has a commercial value. All that work - editing, marketing, design cover, is what a publisher should do because they have the same interest in publishing your book as you do. If going indie, then sure, you can pay a freelance editor, but if going traditionally, never, and I say never because it will drain you financially, pay the publisher. They're vultures planning to earn some money on your dreams. Please don't go so rashly into it. I have to repeat one more time: *a real publisher will never ask for your money. *I know it's tough being rejected, but the way you chose to go is not the right one.


----------



## Aquilo (Jan 21, 2016)

When looking at any publisher/agent I recommend googling the name in question (Dorrance Publishing) and typing in Writer Beware next to it. Writer Beware look at the publishing scams out there.

Whether trade or self-published, no editor should take your money for an edit if they don't think the novel has selling potential for the author to earn that money back. The ethics behind taking on a script shouldn't be any different for trade or self-pub. I edit for two publishing companies, plus I also edit for self-published authors. Judgment remains the same: if it's not going to earn money, it's not taken on. Over the years I've edited, I've worked with only two self-pubbed authors, the rest have been via publishing companies who have already vetted the work as 1) A damn god story, 2) will earn money to cover production costs, advance etc.


----------



## W.Goepner (Jan 21, 2016)

Schrody said:


> I understand your point W, but you don't understand mine. When in the process of finding publishers, you must know that the respectable publishers and agents *will never ask for money*. Their pay comes after/if they decide your work has a commercial value. All that work - editing, marketing, design cover, is what a publisher should do because they have the same interest in publishing your book as you do. If going indie, then sure, you can pay a freelance editor, but if going traditionally, never, and I say never because it will drain you financially, pay the publisher. They're vultures planning to earn some money on your dreams. Please don't go so rashly into it. I have to repeat one more time: *a real publisher will never ask for your money. *I know it's tough being rejected, but the way you chose to go is not the right one.



Sorry Schrody, I do understand. I also understand the business side of the publishers. 

I agree Dorrance is a vanity publisher, meaning they will publish anything, for a price. I do not condone their use as a publisher because they are over priced. They take these fees and that is how they make their money along with percentage of sales, if the piece fails they still have your investment. Here is a sight I looked up recently;  http://changingthescript.com/dorrance-publishing-company-is-it-a-scam-company They lay it out in a manner I cannot. The truth is if you want to simply get published and you have the money, (which most writers don't) There is a fast way to do it. Dorrance being around for 95 years says something to their ability or tenacity.

No, I agree a real publisher will not ask for up front moneys, but unless they feel it is a block buster they will not push it as hard to get sales.

Again I am *not* saying this is the way to go, I am saying it is a alternative to the long and tedious process of the traditional. I would prefer a publisher to think I have something like Harry Potter, or Eragon, and set me on my road to a best seller. I do not think there is a writer who does not want that. Besides, if I were to hit the lottery and have the money, I still do not think I would go to a Vanity publisher, I would rather put forth the effort and work myself into a publishers good graces, thus making the best of my works. 

In my opinion, it is what one chooses, if all you want is to be published, figure out your budget and self publish. If your goal is to be a proficient and sought after writer. Take the time to become a proficient writer, make sure you have all the necessary components correctly set, Cross your fingers and apply to as many publishing firms as you can. Writing for self gratification is a reward in itself, to get accepted by a publisher, would be the cream of the crop.

-edit-

The advantage of vanity publishers, if you choose one, make sure they give you the works for your money, editing, formatting, cover art, and all that goes with the publishing processes. otherwise you end up having a story set in print and nowhere to go.


----------



## Schrody (Jan 21, 2016)

Just don't want to see you, or other members, get scammed.


----------



## Patrick (Feb 4, 2016)

Rather than rushing into anything, why not try to get a few short stories published while you go through the usual submission-rejection cycle? The pay is decent for a few magazines.

I am currently brushing up a few experimental short stories to submit to various magazines while I work on the magnum opus. Whether we self-publish or go the traditional route (the former is not for me though I've had good friends who've done it), we have to get used to frustration and the feeling of inadequacy as writers. I think a lot of writers give up because they either take rejection too personally (traditional publishing) or they get dispirited because of a lack of sales through self-publishing. You'll need an ocean of perseverance to make a success of either route, no matter how gifted you are.


----------



## iliterary (Feb 5, 2016)

It's 2016, create a website with Wordpress, install Woocommerce, setup paypal, link to site all your social media and let the world know you think you are an author.

Just remember there's a great adage that you don't become a real author until you've written over 1 Million words.

Today 70% of book units sold are eBooks and Amazon is the top seller of eBook files and books.

But it is so saturated at Amazon that a new author will never get traction without a little luck. 

My advice, create a site for your pen name and then make it a shopping cart with woo in wordpress.

Then start the ball rolling and use your social media to get readers.

I also suggest if you write fiction, do a series and give the first book away as a device to lure fans of your work to buy more books in the series.

If you want to see your words in 'print' use a POD site to sell books but the reality is eBooks lead the way today.

Have a well formatted PDF file and use the cart to acquire email addresses of your buyers since that is who will buy your future work.

A writer needs to have practiced lots of writing BEFORE they think they can write a 'book'.

Ask friends to read and note any errors you may have missed. You should also read your book out loud several times to see how it flows and also to spot errors.

If you think writing 1 book makes you an author, you're wrong, writings lots and lots and getting others to read it and critique it teaches you the craft and most established writers wrote lots of books before they actually considered themselves to be 'writers'.

If you like to write touch base with teachers you had that probably liked your writing in school if you're young enough to be able to reach old teachers.

You might want to use forums like this to put up your first chapter before you 'publish' your words.

If you think an agent and publisher is the path in 2016 to being an author go for it, but our world today is one in which an agent and traditional publisher can do little for you.

Sure an agent or publisher might get you some media attention but to get a new author on major media is almost impossible.

WRITE
WRITE
WRITE

And then WRITE some more.

The more you write the more you learn your craft and agents and publishers will come to you as you establish people will buy your words.

Don't expect Amazon to sell your books, they are saturated with garbage, most of it shouldn't even be published IMO.

Years ago new authors that gave Amazon a shot, a few lucked out and become popular Amazon authors and most are still ignored by the traditional publishers.

Once you have a site and books then try to bother larger book reviewers to read your work and even chase smaller reviewers.

If you bother with Amazon and BN do not give Amazon an exclusive, those days are long over. You need an outside boost like BookBub to push any new author now on Amazon.

Free books do not work on Amazon now, it's too late in the game, so develop your site using your pen name and get a name that the .com is available.

Create social media accounts for that pen name and try to merge your old social media into your new pen name.

A penname.com with a shopping cart means you can bypass all the systems, a new author doesn't need Amazon, they are saturated and will do nothing for you.

You make your way today by developing CONTACTS in the media and with social media and if you create it you can sell it yourself.

Sure you can put a title on Amazon but why give them 35% or more of your earnings? A new authors books will be LOST on Amazon.

As far as 'agents' are concerned, they are a remnant of the past like the Big 5 Publishers.

Amazon is done with for 'new authors' you must have a boost to do sales on Amazon and if you work on such a boost they can send users to your site and not Amazon.


----------

