# Anyone ready to take the pledge with me?



## Jk1 (Sep 4, 2011)

I'm just wondering how people feel about self -publishing in general. How many people out there would consider it? I've actually made a pledge on my site never to self-publish, to give it five years of trying to be published by a publishing house and if that doesn't work to admit that maybe the world doesn't want to read what I'm writing. Anyone feel like taking the pledge with me? (I'm John and i'm a writer! it's been three days since I last thought about self-publishing. One day at a time.)


----------



## patskywriter (Sep 4, 2011)

I want the book that I'm writing now (my first) to be taken on by a big publishing house because the topic, caring for someone with Alzheimer's disease, has a wide appeal. 

However, I'm also planning to put out some hyperlocal books as well. These books will only be marketed to folks in my town, and will be self-published. The benefits would include my being able to update them easily, I'd make more money per book, and the books could be under the same 'umbrella' as my community paper and radio show.

There's definitely a place for both.


----------



## Bilston Blue (Sep 4, 2011)

I understand the sentiments you echo, JK. Sort of, that if you have to resort to self-publishing one might view it as a bit of a failure. But maybe by self-publishing you take your next book to a publisher and say, "Hey, my last one was self-published, it sold XX thousand copies, and I have readers waiting for the sequel." Just a thought, though as an unpublished writer I definitely get where you're coming from.

And you'd need to make that first one good enough.


----------



## patskywriter (Sep 4, 2011)

Darn, I was hoping that the next person to post would be from Durham, Connecticut! We were on a roll, LOL.  

Anyway, several years ago, I typeset a book for a woman who wanted to self-publish a collection of quotations of well-known (and not so well-known) people of African descent. No one had done that before. The woman was great at marketing and the book ("Famous Black Quotations") sold so many copies (including many abroad) that a big publisher noticed and scooped her right up. She was able to put out several books following the same theme but for different markets (teens, women, etc). So, self-publishing can lead directly to "the big time."


----------



## garza (Sep 4, 2011)

To self-publish is no longer a last resort. Self publishing is becoming the first resort for many who are serious about getting their work to market. As illustrated in the post by patskywriter, a good self-published book can be picked up by a major publisher, and that can lead to contracts for more books.


----------



## Brock (Sep 4, 2011)

garza said:


> To self-publish is no longer a last resort. Self publishing is becoming the first resort for many who are serious about getting their work to market. As illustrated in the post by patskywriter, a good self-published book can be picked up by a major publisher, and that can lead to contracts for more books.



I agree with Garza. Think of all the talented writers that have never been published; I'm sure there are many. I recently watched a program about J.K. Rowling. Her book got passed over quite a few times. I think it was one publisher's secretary that convinced her boss to read and consider her book which had been laying in a large pile with other people's works for quite some time. As good as Rowling is, she still needed a bit of luck to get her book published. Harry Potter could have easily fallen through the cracks and remained undiscovered. 

People now have the power to get their work out there without hoping and waiting for someone else to finally give them consideration or decide whether or not they have any talent. Let the readers decide how good you are.


JK1, You could be another J.K. Rowling for all we know, but how will we ever know if your book just lays waiting in a heap of other people's hopes and dreams? I don't think self-publishing means a writer is less talented than one who gets published the traditional way. I just think it means the writer is determined and motivated.


----------



## Sam (Sep 5, 2011)

First, I take umbrage with anyone who says self-publishing means the writer is a failure. I tend to take greater umbrage if that person has never attempted to self-publish.

There is nothing wrong with self-publishing. It is not failure in any sense of the word. Scott Sigler self-published his first novel, _Infected_, and it was soon picked up by a major publishing house and is now a worldwide best-seller. _The Book with No Name _became a self-publishing sensation a few years ago. The author has now secured a five-book deal worth millions. 

I self-published one of my novels, making close to four hundred sales and a profit, before I submitted it to publishing houses and it was picked up for publication this year.


----------



## Jk1 (Sep 5, 2011)

Interesting responses. Sorry you took umbrage Sam W. I agree that there is a place for both and of course that some books fit into the self-publishing mould more securely than others. Also, yes there are always those exceptions where the writer uses self-publication successfully as a springboard to greatness. What _I_ take umbrage with are writers who spend years building up their 'platform', establishing their little clique of on-line sycophants to buy their print on demand novel that no publishing house would ever touch and wallow in self-congratulation about it. But hey, who am I to cast aspersions? Whatever turns your crank I suppose. But I stick to my pledge. Not because I'm the next JK Rowling, but because just because I know self-publication FOR ME would be a failure.


----------



## Sam (Sep 5, 2011)

Your viewpoint mightn't be the same after you've received 101 rejections and no one, it seems, wants to touch your work. 

For the record, I didn't take umbrage with you. I take umbrage with _anyone _who demeans self-publishing when they haven't done the research to back up what they're saying. A lot of the invective against self-publishing is just the one argument regurgitated over and over by people who like to repeat what they've read. 

I've done extensive research on publishing. I've self-published three novels, selling over six hundred copies as a result. Those sales were not an on-line clique that I'd established. They were members of my local community, this forum, and a couple of people across the pond who I got to know through self-publishing. Six hundred sales doesn't seem much in comparison to the _New York Times' _best-seller list, but it was enough to make a profit and it served as a testing of the waters. I needed to see if my novels had a market and were good enough to be traditionally published. With that answer gained, I went and secured a publishing contract. 

Saying self-publishing makes you a failure is like saying you shouldn't start a small business because your time would be better spent trying to secure a job in a large one. If you have the right market plan, solid business acumen, and knowledge of publishing, there's no reason why you can't make self-publishing a success. The average book sells in its lifetime 5,000 copies. I sold four hundred through word-of-mouth alone. With a marketing plan, a few spots on local radio or television to boost my popularity, there's no reason why I couldn't compete with that.


----------



## garza (Sep 5, 2011)

You make self-publishing a failure for yourself if you perceive it to be a failure. If you truly believe that, then best thing is for you to pursue publication by a traditional publishing house. 

I've just begun writing fiction after a career writing non-fiction. The only place I've 'published' any fiction is here and on my freebie website. But that's not failure. I put enough words together to make a couple of very short stories, and I've got them on display for the world to see, so my fiction writing is, for me, a success.

Success and failure are very much in the eye of the beholder. If you see publication by a traditional house as the only measure for success as a writer, then such publication is what you must pursue.


----------



## sparky (Sep 5, 2011)

i have lots of questions about self pub.  The odds of getting an agent, let alone a publishing deal, seem so far long and impossible it would appear at first glance to be hopeless, and truth is, self pub is no longer a last resort.  My brother SP'd, and sold just less than a thousand copies or so (i think), so not bad odds there, but its still not enough to give up the day job.  SP seems too expensive for what usually happens (and the idea that some publishing house makes its money off the authors and not the people who buy the book troubles me a lot), and trad. publishing seems an impossible goal.  Whenever i read about any SP horror stories i usually become more terrified than of what an agent/publisher might say about me...


----------



## Rob (Sep 5, 2011)

Self-publishing has changed during the last five years, and no doubt we'll see further changes during the next five years. Never say never, John.


----------



## patskywriter (Sep 5, 2011)

Jk1 said:


> … What _I_ take umbrage with are writers who spend years building up their 'platform', establishing their little clique of on-line sycophants to buy their print on demand novel that no publishing house would ever touch and wallow in self-congratulation about it. …



Eeek, that sounds a little bitter. But of course you have every right to feel that way, even if _we_ don't know why. Each of our definitions of success probably has something to do with the reasons we all write. I write because I'm eager to share information. 

… Speaking of which, my lunch break is over and I'm anxious to get back to work (on my book).


----------



## garza (Sep 7, 2011)

JK1 - I'm curious about why you appear to feel so bitter about people who succeed at self-publishing? If they can build up a market for their books, more power to them. Why would you call the people who buy their books 'sycophants'?


----------



## Sam (Sep 8, 2011)

I think it's because he believes that every self-published author hasn't the talent/skill to make it traditionally, which is a crock. 

I can tell you for a fact that the book recognised by practically every academic circle as the greatest novel of our time, James Joyce's _Ulysses_, was self-published. I can tell you that _A Time to Kill_, the novel which launched John Grisham's phenomenal career, was self-published. To rub more salt in the wound, the book that is a must for every writer, _The Elements of Style _by Strunk and White, was also self-published.  

Some of the greatest writers throughout history have self-published: Edgar Allen Poe, Mark Twain, Bernard Shaw, Thomas Paine, Virginia Wolff, e.e. Cummings, Ezra Pound; the list is long and rife with talented/skilled authors.


----------



## Brock (Sep 9, 2011)

If a person is able to make money and entertain others by doing something that he or she loves, isn't that success?  Who on earth would take a pledge against that?  I'll write until the day I die, regardless if I'm approved by a publisher or not.


----------



## Baron (Sep 9, 2011)

Many writers have taken advantage of the internet in the same way that musicians did.  It has enabled them to get their work seen without the need of an institution to promote it.  There are many I know who, like myself, have tired of the controls of mainstream publishing houses and of seeing the profits made while the writer received only pennies in royalties.  There are few successful writers, who make an income high enough to maintain themselves solely from writing fiction.  The opportunities offered by Createspace, Lulu and similar give the writer a bigger bite of the apple.

Regardless of how much is spent on promotion, which is where the publishing houses do have an advantage, more sales of books result from word of mouth recommendation than any other means.  This is where social networking sites and similar have given the writer a great advantage, which no previous generation ever had.  People don't recommend rubbish and those self published works which achieve a lot of sales do so because they're good.  Even friends won't endorse trash.


----------



## Jk1 (Sep 11, 2011)

Ok. First off, I don't believe that all self-published authors are talentless or sub-standard in some way. Of course, things aren't that black and white. And I wasn't basing my opinion on 'something I'd read somewhere'. I was thinking of a few self-published authors I've met and one particular author I've come across on-line, who galls me not because she's such a good self-publicist, but because I truly believe her writing is poor. 

It's as if the lure of self-publishing, IN THOSE CASES, completely abjured the self-awareness necessary to admit that having an idea for a story wasn't enough, that at least as much time should be spent on rewriting as on writing, before getting it out there. I think the whole platform-building thing, in some cases, can take over to an extent where the hard work of polishing and editing until your fingers and brain turn blue becomes secondary, or even completely overlooked. Aside from that, I'm a little sick of all the promotion of self-publishing all over the net and I thought it might be interesting to throw something contentious into the mix and see what reactions were. 

Sam, you make some excellent points very eloquently and if Self-publishing has worked for youthen I can only say fair play to you, and to anyone else who manages to use it as part of their overall strategy in such a way. I think it may be worth mentioning though, that the list of heavy-hitters you mention have something else in common - many of them were literary giants living in completelydifferent contexts and climates whose writing was initially seen as so revolutionary or challenging that the establishment took time to catch up. I'm not in that league and I Know it. Maybe you are. I think I have some good stories to tell and believe with hard work, tenacity and a lot of luck I can get published. Maybe!

Beyond all that, I think it’s fair to say that yes, my tone was didactic and not a little bitter – something I need to look at. Thanks for all your comments and for pointing out some flaws in my thinking.

PS. And Brock, I'll write until the day I die too. I meant, that if I can't eventually get it to a wide audience then i don't see the point in broadcasting it to a smaller one.


----------



## garza (Sep 12, 2011)

So for you it's all or nothing. Odd, that. 

The possibility exists that you need to learn a bit more about the way the world works.


----------

