# Self-published works?



## Varelin (Aug 20, 2009)

_Not sure if this is the right forum for this question, my apologies if it has to be moved.
_ 

Would any of you consider buying self-published (fiction) books?

Does anyone know of any self-published success stories?

I was considering doing something along those lines and wondered if anyone knew of any writers who had produced something viable/readable that you would expect to find in a traditional book store _(not that they aren't often repositories of literary suppositories \\/ :-\")_, or do you view it all as poorly written rubbish that would be the first thing you'd use as toilet paper after the bombs fall?

I've heard of some successful, or at least well regarded self-pub books: The Arc, by Boyd Morrison (apparently got a traditional publishing deal out of it), a friend read and liked The Karamaz Tomb by some scottish guy he found online, but beyond that... I haven't heard much (or not much good anyway).

If you use music as an analogy, unsigned acts often get "discovered" by releasing their own works... so I guess my main question is, do you think that translates to the literary world? Does the art transcend its manner of delivery? Can self-published works of fiction be successful and more importantly, would you buy one?


Thanks for any responses  :smile:


----------



## ThatWierdGuy (Aug 20, 2009)

> Can self-published works of fiction be successful and more importantly,



I think you answered your own question with The Arc. ; )

After good word-of-mouth and some online reviews, I would probably buy a good self-published novel.  Haven't bought one yet though.

Personally, I am weary because self-publishing many times means a traditional publisher didn't want their work.


----------



## BoredMormon (Aug 20, 2009)

If its on the shelf at the bookstore and it catches my eye I don't care who published it. And most readers won't. If its not on the shelves it won't be brought. Thats all it comes down to. Marketing is also critical, but is a moot point if I have to go looking for the book.

Eargon (Christopher Paloni) is another example of a best seller that was originally self published. It appears to have workied in limited cases.


----------



## Baron (Aug 20, 2009)

It's worked in lots of cases. John Grisham originally self published. "Watership Down", "Chariots of Fire", "Jonathan Livingstone Seagull" and "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance" were also originally self published before becoming bestsellers in the mainstream.


----------



## Aoshi213 (Aug 20, 2009)

BoredMormon said:


> If its on the shelf at the bookstore and it catches my eye I don't care who published it. And most readers won't. If its not on the shelves it won't be brought. Thats all it comes down to. Marketing is also critical, but is a moot point if I have to go looking for the book.
> 
> Eargon (Christopher Paloni) is another example of a best seller that was originally self published. It appears to have workied in limited cases.



Yeah, I agree with this. If it's on the shelf and the story looks good, I'll get it. If I have to go to some special website, punch up the author's name, and go through some type of deal like that, then there's no chance.


----------



## Selorian (Aug 21, 2009)

Have a look at this thread...
http://www.writingforums.com/writers-resources/103182-self-publishing-really-so-bad.html

A few of your questions are answered in it.


----------



## Varelin (Aug 24, 2009)

Excellent, thanks a lot for the responses and for the link Selorian (an interesting, if unnecessarily combative thread).

Makes you wonder how those select few "made it", though it seems quality will out. Like Grisham and Adams - i didn't know they initially self-published.

Though the fact that Eragon was self-pub also answers some questions... as it's a good example of a sub par book that made it to the mainstream by virtue of a solid marketing hook (the age of the writer). So I guess that is often what it comes down to... same thing with whether or not it's on the shelves - regardless of the quality of writing, it seems access to a paying audience is the big difference. 

Plenty to think about, thanks guys.


----------



## StephenP2003 (Aug 24, 2009)

The self-publishing successes are exceptions to the rule, but at least it means it's remotely possible to get noticed and make money with self-published fiction. The Eragon kid's parents had money and marketing savvy. They were able to fly him to cities all over the country to self-promote in book stores, if I remember correctly. 

Anyway, I'm a word-of-mouth reader. Between working my day job, taking care of my family, and building my writing career one grain of sand at a time, I don't really have much time to "discover" books. When I'm reading, I'm reading in my genre, and I'm reading the stuff that won or was nominated for Hugos and Nebulas and Locuses. But if, during my occasional Google search for something relevant to my current project, I come across a book that more than a few people like, I'll probably buy it. I don't really pay attention to publishers, just reviews. Excluding required reading in school, I can count the number of books I've read and disliked on one hand.

And, off topic, I read the Dangerous Days of Daniel X on airplane last week and it was the worst piece of crap I've ever read.


----------



## ThePinkBookworm (Sep 30, 2009)

I would love to self-publish my own book(once it is done), so, yes, I would love to read one.  

I am also a word-of-mouth type person, or if I browse through my local library and see something interesting.  I do not care if it was published by a huge publisher, or my the author himself, if it is good, I will read it.

Just my thoughts,

Li Li :read:


----------



## Edgewise (Oct 21, 2009)

Varelin said:


> Would any of you consider buying self-published (fiction) books?



Yes.



> Does anyone know of any self-published success stories?


The famous examples already listed.



> If you use music as an analogy, unsigned acts often get "discovered" by releasing their own works... so I guess my main question is, do you think that translates to the literary world?


Not today.



> Does the art transcend its manner of delivery?


It should, but it doesn't.



> Can self-published works of fiction be successful and more importantly, would you buy one?


Yes, but rarely, and maybe, if I've heard of it and dig the idea.


----------



## Non Serviam (Oct 21, 2009)

Other people you may have heard of who self-published include Sir Isaac Newton (who had to ask a friend to fund publication of a book called the _Principia Mathematica_, and if you aren't a scientist, you may not know how important that book really was), Mark Twain (who's famous for having self-published, but what's less well-known is that he went bankrupt doing it), and the literary executors of a certain Elizabethan playwright who, to the best of our knowledge, never actually called himself William Shakespeare, even though in the modern world we seem to have decided this is how his name _should_ have been spelled.

A person you _haven't_ heard of who's self-published is me.  I've also published via the more traditional route.  So even though I'm about to stray from fact to opinion, I'm doing so on the basis of personal experience.

The "traditional" model where you use an agent and a publisher who pays you an advance is moribund.  Ebooks and ebook readers are the future, and traditional agents and publishers have a smaller, and declining, role in their production and marketing.  The web has changed things forever.

A good analogy for this is the music industry, where the record labels are in their final death throes while anyone who can play an instrument, and many who can't, have a demo on their myspace page that you can download.  Myspace bands range from the talentless no-hopers (which is 99% of them) and the talented few, some of whom will make it big.  Because even though people download and file-share their songs for free, they're not relying on album sales for revenue any more.  The industry has changed.

Expect the same with ebooks.  They will be file-shared and you cannot stop this from happening.  No copy protection can possibly work because of a thing called the "analogue hole".  You will not be selling books in future, you will be giving them away.

What you can sell, though, is advertising space in your book, and I've found there's a market for that which is tolerably lucrative (at least by the meagre standards of the publishing industry).  And you'll also find that ebook downloads do lead to a steady trickly of print sales from your POD printer.  (I use Lulu.)
So people will download and read your ebook for free.


----------



## The Backward OX (Oct 21, 2009)

> Originally Posted by *Non Serviam*
> 
> 
> _Other people you may have heard of who self-published include Sir Isaac Newton (who had to ask a friend to fund publication of a book called the Principia Mathematica, and if you aren't a scientist, you may not know how important that book really was), Mark Twain (who's famous for having self-published, but what's less well-known is that he went bankrupt doing it), and the literary executors of a certain Elizabethan playwright who, to the best of our knowledge, never actually called himself William Shakespeare, even though in the modern world we seem to have decided this is how his name should have been spelled._
> ...


 

Bah. Humbug.

Your comments might hold true for cookbooks and dictionaries and telephone directories.

But readers of fiction want something more. Stories – with the exception of fantasy and science fiction, which could well go online - are souvenirs of the way we felt, and people will go on wanting them in paper book form. They want to be not interrupted by online media distractions such as hyperlinks. They want peaceful reading, in beds and bathtubs and airport lounges and on the beaches, and in the fields, and in the hills, and in the streets.... Paper books are here to stay. We will never surrender....

IMHO


----------



## JosephB (Oct 21, 2009)

Non Serviam said:


> OMark Twain (who's famous for having self-published, but what's less well-known is that he went bankrupt doing it)



Mark Twain made lots of bad investments and just wasn't very good with money. I believe he lost the most money investing in a typesetting technology that didn't pan out. I don't know that self-publishing had much to do with his going bankrupt.


----------



## Salamander (Oct 21, 2009)

You'll find a great variety of opinions on this, usually influenced by whether the individual making them has self-published or not! One thing to bear in mind is that the list of successful "self-publishers" is very very small, and is the exception.

The publishing sector is currently in flux, and things are changing. Like every media, digital technology has changed the way that consumers think. However, it hasn't changed much with regard to producing work.

It is not the "ability" of the common man to produce works that is changing things. It has always been incredibly easy and cheap to print your own books. Desktop publishing has been around for about 30 years, but even before that it wasn't a big deal. The reason that publishers were considered the way forward was because of the niggly bits they took care of, such as storage of books, distribution, getting them to the point of sale and marketing.

With digital media, the storage issue is gone. You don't need the 10,000 odd copies that made self-publishing awkward (and delivered economies of scale). One file can be redistributed over and over again. If someone wants a hard copy, you can print one copy for them! Also, distribution is taken care of.

Getting to the point of sale is still a struggle. Indeed, any old fool can get something on Amazon or Lulu, but if anyone other than family and friends buy it, it'll be a miracle. The POS operators won't care, because it's just not worth their while putting it in the shop window. A publisher, however, will get your work at the front of the display (albeit an on-line display).

Finally, there's marketing. Without good marketing, you might as well give up.

In a nutshell, self-publishing is fine for those seeking little more than the gratification of seeing something they've produced. There will be a few very rare exceptions, but that's all. Publishers will still lead the field: they can get your work (no matter what format) to the front of the queue, and get readers wanting it. 

E-books will be very cheap, but the profit will stay the same because of the overheads being removed. Aside from that, electronic media will change very little.

No, wait. It will change one thing; they'll be more below-par work out there that doesn't get read! If anything, the increase in "noise" will drive discerning readers back to the respected publishers.

Professionally published work will remain as the rule.


----------



## Non Serviam (Oct 21, 2009)

The Backward OX said:


> But readers of fiction want something more. Stories – with the exception of fantasy and science fiction, which could well go online - are souvenirs of the way we felt, and people will go on wanting them in paper book form. They want to be not interrupted by online media distractions such as hyperlinks. They want peaceful reading, in beds and bathtubs and airport lounges and on the beaches, and in the fields, and in the hills, and in the streets....


----------



## Dr. Malone (Oct 21, 2009)

That looks like trying to read on a Gameboy.


----------



## Selorian (Oct 21, 2009)

Amazon and the Kindle may have competition.

Check out Barnes & Noble's new Nook ebook reader.


----------



## Dr. Malone (Oct 21, 2009)

That does look pretty sweet.  I wouldn't want to have to keep using my finger to page down like that, though, if that's what he's doing in the pic.  Also, $259 is ridonkulous.


----------



## Selorian (Oct 21, 2009)

$259-$300 is going price for the Kindle 2, Nook, or Sony ereader.


----------



## Dr. Malone (Oct 21, 2009)

Yeah, those prices just aren't feasible.  Especially considering how generally unpopular reading is to the masses.


----------



## JosephB (Oct 21, 2009)

I've seen a Kindle. It's actually better than it looks. It's been a while, and I can't remember how your turn the page. But it was easy to read -- the contrast seemed just right. I'd buy one -- if they were about half the price.


----------



## StephenP2003 (Oct 21, 2009)

Yep, you can get a device that plays video and has full Internet access for half that.


----------



## JosephB (Oct 21, 2009)

...and can grate cheese and cut thousands of julienne fries in just seconds.


----------



## Selorian (Oct 21, 2009)

...and still have screens hard to read on for extended periods of time, just like all monitors.  I agree, though, the price needs to drop significantly for them to catch on. First generation Kindles can be picked up now for around $150, so there's always that option.


----------



## Dr. Malone (Oct 21, 2009)

For literature people like us it's a definitely an option.  But even for $150, it's still more expensive than a Wii.  I can guess which one most people would pick.


----------



## JosephB (Oct 21, 2009)

Still might have a hard time getting $150 past my CFO.


----------



## Edgewise (Oct 21, 2009)

Reading on a screen like that looks unpleasant.

I agree with Oxen.  There is a sentimental value in a real-world copy. 

Besides, once the nukes start going off and all our fancy fire devices get cooked by the EMP, what good will a block of plastic and copper be?


----------



## SevenWritez (Oct 22, 2009)

If ebooks are the future, it's in a future far from this one. Ox already nailed it on the head. Most readers like the book the way it is. It's funny because the two bookshops I regularly peruse seem to advertise the shit out of the Sony Reader and the (Amazon?) Kindle, but no one even glances at the things. At least no one that I've seen while there. 


As to the question, I'd buy a self published novel just as quickly as I'd buy a house published novel. If it's good, it's good. I don't buy things off the internet, though, so unless I see it on the shelf it's not getting a dime from my wallet.


----------



## JosephB (Oct 23, 2009)

Yes, most people, including me, would prefer the tactile experience of reading a book. But kids raised using laptops and iPods and reading text messages won’t be as resistant.

But even when prices come down and the technology gets better, I don’t see the readers replacing books for a long time -- just co-existing with them. Some people might prefer them, some might use both. I see myself doing the later.

  Like I said, I had a chance to read one, and that influenced my opinion. Maybe folks won’t be so quick to dismiss the readers once they’ve given one a try.


----------



## Baron (Oct 23, 2009)

Anyone interested in a good promotional tool should check this out:

Myebook - get it out there!


----------



## Dr. Malone (Oct 23, 2009)

That looks like it could be cool, Baron.  Bookmarked.


----------



## Baron (Oct 23, 2009)

Dr. Malone said:


> That looks like it could be cool, Baron. Bookmarked.


I made this one up quickly to give it a test run:

Myebook - Baronstaniford's profile


----------



## SevenWritez (Oct 23, 2009)

JosephB said:


> Like I said, I had a chance to read one, and that influenced my opinion. Maybe folks won’t be so quick to dismiss the readers once they’ve given one a try.


 
The two bookstores I mentioned allow you to try them. Their lackluster performance in the mainstream and the fact that you don't see many (if any) people carrying one around should say something about people's desire to read from a screen rather than the page. The iPod generation won't be as resistant, sure, but I still think the vast majority prefer a book to a slim piece of hardware. 

Digital distribution works for music and videogames because it makes sense. Rather than flipping through CDs you can select from a vast selection of tracks you've put onto an Mp3. I recently purchased the PSP Go, a download only device, and when I'm away from home I can pick from one of three fully fledged games rather than pull a disc out of my pocket.

I don't see many people going through five or six books in one sitting, and this paired with the eReader's stupidly high price makes it a joke (IMO).

And because books are just better (again, my two pennies).


----------



## JosephB (Oct 23, 2009)

I think it has as much or more to do with price than the reluctance to read from a screen. 

But so far – it’s a growing market. And people a lot more knowledgeable than I am think there is a future for them. 

Will electronic readers replace books any time soon -- even in the next generation or two?  Likely not. Probably, both will be used. The price will come down, and no doubt the technology will allow for a better reading experience. 

And people will have less of a sentimental attachment to books. I think a lot of the resistance to electronic readers is based on that.


----------



## Ilasir Maroa (Oct 23, 2009)

I despise e-readers. I don't really like electronic formats in general. I've read one book on a cd, and one from the baen free library (both on a monitor, I'll admit), and while I liked the books, I would much have preferred a hard-copy.

All of the e-readers out there are deficient in one or more areas, as far as e-reader features go, and I find them all deficient when compared to a book. Even _thinking_ about regularly reading an 120,000 word novel on one of those is enough to make my eyes bleed.

And I'm part of the younger generation. Not the tweens and their crazt texting obsessed generation, no, but still.


And to answer the OPs question, I might start a self-published book if it was free.  And if it was good, I would finish it.  But as most sp work in my experience is horrible turgid crap, I would not spend money on one, unless I was very familiar with the author.  Not even on a friends advice.


----------



## JosephB (Oct 23, 2009)

Well, barring some cataclysmic event that sets us back technologically, some form of electronic reading will largely replace books. How soon is anybody's guess. 

Maybe sooner than you think, based on how quickly technology is developed and adopted. This current technology probably won't result in the generation of products that will allow it to happen. But it will happen.


----------



## Ilasir Maroa (Oct 23, 2009)

JosephB said:


> Well, barring some cataclysmic event that sets us back technologically, some form of electronic reading will largely replace books. How soon is anybody's guess.
> 
> Maybe sooner than you think, based on how quickly technology is developed and adopted. This current technology probably won't result in the generation of products that will allow it to happen. But it will happen.


 

Never!   I'll burn down the factories and purge the world of this ungodly technology.  E-reader companies, beware. :spidey::lone:


----------



## Dr. Malone (Oct 24, 2009)

I have a 37" 1080p LCD monitor set at full 1920x1080 resolution, and I get a migraine behind and above my eyes when trying to read books on it.  The screen starts to do like light blooming after a while.  I'm hoping to find some kind of program that sets an acceptable background color and text color to ease the eye strain.  I also recently found an ereader that automatically scrolled through the text and your eye followed, which they claimed eased the stress, by it wouldn't work on Windows 7 so I never got to try it.


----------



## BitofanInkling (Apr 3, 2010)

I have bought one, Dan Marvin's Dan Marvin’s Blog Briefs for the Reading Room. It's a bunch of flash fiction.


----------

