SP is a different form of publishing entirely.

Actually, it isn't any more. There is plenty of overlap between the mainstream and self-publishing. As you say, some traditional publishers now do very little editing (which is what they're supposed to be good for) - e.g. two of my books I edited myself because the publisher's editing service was minimal and poor. However, some POD publishers that are close to the self-publishing side, do intensive editing (BeWrite Books for example).

I don't know if you read my previous posts here, but the authors I mentioned before, like Scott Sigler, started out as self-publishers but are anything but 'niche non-fiction specialists' and would strongly challenge your assertion that they're not 'serious authors'.

one should invest in a damn good editor to convert one's novel into a mainstream commercial proposition.

Well, I'm a damn good editor (references available on demand!) but I'm not sure I'd take on an author who wanted me to 'convert [his] novel into a mainstream commercial proposition'. If that's what he's aiming for, that's mainly his responsibility. A good freelance author certainly help a writer along the path he's already definitely decided to go up. But ethically speaking, an editor's most practical help is on the technical side (obviously allowing for what market the author is aiming at).

Going the slush-pile route ends in success for the writer far more times than going the self-publising route.

I'm not at all sure about this. The slush pile odds are heavily stacked against the author. Take short fiction: looking at Duotrope's stats, Glimmer Train (highly respected literary fiction magazine) for example, accepts only one in 300 submitted stories. And that's not taking into account that many of their slots will be given to writers with a track record, leaving new writers with an even bigger mountain to climb. For novels, the odds are possibly even worse. Orion Books for example receives over 3,000 ms a year, and take on - what? - a couple of new writers a year at most.

Going the slush pile route means you could have a perfectly good story/novel on your hands yet can do nothing but wait for maybe years until someone notices it and/or the timing is right. At least with self-publishing, you can invest all that time directly into promoting your book.

Self-publishes often have enthusiasm, commitment and optimism in abundance. I guess the trick as such, therefore, is to find ways to transfer the same qualities into approaching traditional publishers.

Terry



<Added>

Should of course have said, 'a good freelance editor can . . . '

Aw, Terry, and there was me throwing you a bone with that 'editor' stuff.

What is one's criteria for success if one goes the SP route? If it's being picked up by a traditional publishing house, then don't waste time and money on SPing it, but invest them in getting the mss up to scratch and submit via the slush piles.
Once your mss is SPed it's dead in the water as far as the traditional publisher and Agents are concerned, unless it achieves excellent sales figures - and if you've POD published then you've shot yourself in the foot twice over. GP Taylor went for a couple of limited print runs, and if you're a serious self publisher then go that route. Authonomy and YouWriteOn are touting the POD route, which will be the death knell of many viable (with a bit of work) manuscripts.



- NaomiM

Well, if 'it's being picked up by a traditional publishing house' then of course you wouldn't go the self-publishing route (although there is the Sigler/Doctorow model of even then still giving the book/podcast away for free first, but that's possibly another subject).

However, perhaps to save this discussion from getting too polarised - of course it's true to say that the vast majority of self-published books are not going to sell more than a few dozen copies mostly to people with the same surname as the author. Similarly, it's also more or less true to say that a traditional publisher is a better route for establishing oneself as a 'proper' author, e.g. you'll get reviewed, distributed and maybe even promoted with someone else paying for it.

But the reason I think some of us are resisting your somewhat prescriptive view of self-publishing is because it excludes two possibilities (that need to be joined up for the author to stand any chance of success): quality and enthusiasm/hard work. A self-published book could be a very good book, and if the author has drive, commitment and passion, I don't see any reason why it couldn't get picked up by a traditional publisher.

What is one's criteria for success if one goes the SP route?

Well, again, obviously this will vary. But as I keep saying there are several modern authors who aimed for commercial success and got it via the self-publishing/self-podcasting route. Check them out. Or, if anyone's afraid of hard work, don't!

Terry

"Enthusiasm and hard work" - but to what end? My point is that the majority of SPed writers go that route because they see it as a backdoor into a traditional publishing house; or it's simply to have their mss in book format. I would argue that the former is the wrong attitude to take, since all one really achieves with SPing is the latter. As you say, Terry, if one wants to be taken seriously as a career author one must go the traditional publishing route. There are no short cuts, and with time and dedication it is prefectly possible to succeed via the slush pile.


- NaomiM

"Enthusiasm and hard work" - but to what end?

Well, again, if you can go the route of Scott Sigler or J C Hutchins, the end is commercial success through fiction writing.

But yes, I agree that the majority of self-publishers are not going to be that successful. Not sure, however, that the majority see it as a backdoor into traditional publishing. I really don't know what most of them think, but would imagine there are plenty who are content to produce their book for more modest and specific aims. And I didn't say that if you want to be taken seriously as a career author you 'must' go the traditional publishing route. Yes, mostly this is true. But times are changing. Podcasting has blurred the lines and so has electronic publishing. If anyone's interested in hearing strong, positive views in support of e-publishing, check out the Dragon Page podcast.

Terry

Hmmm...not sure that I agree with the alleged reasoning behind going SP. Obviously, some people will go that route becuase they see it as an easy way in, but not all.

I put two of my books out as SP for a number of reasons, the time involved being the prime consideration. Getting an agent, getting a publisher, then, once accepted, waiting up to another year to see your book in print is far too slow a process for me - and one that provides few of the expected benefits. Getting picked up by a proper publisher doesn't mean that you're work is going to be promoted at all by them, or that you'll even reach the shelves. From what I've experienced of mainstream publishers, unless you're in the upper echelon of writers, mainstream means very average PR through the same old tired channels and a quick entry into Smith's bargain bin.

It's an old saw, but most books released don't sell more than 500 copies - SP meant that we moved 300 copies in our first month. So, for the average writer who won't be getting a 100K advertising budget, what are the actual advantages of going traditional? The only thing I can see is that it provides the author with some kind of perception of validation, making them believe they're a 'real' writer, even though their sales and exposure may be far, far less than they would have got if they'd gone SP.

I think what it boils down to is being very objective about the supposed benefits that mainstream might bring, and comparing them to SP.

ST

what are the actual advantages of going traditional?

It's a very valid question. I agree that traditional publishing may simply confirm an author's perception of validation as a 'real' writer, when actual sales don't necessarily say the same thing. Unfortunately, that perception doesn't just belong to authors. For example, you could be a brilliant writer and a qualified trainer/facilitator but if your book was self-published (even with respectable sales) you'll find it extremely difficult to get work teaching creative writing. On the other hand, you might have had only one book published that sold zilch but as long as it was with a 'proper' publisher you'll get the teaching work, even if your presentation skills are crap.

Similarly, one 'proper' publication will get you into the Society of Authors and other professionals' groups, which adds validation to your career. To a degree, this is right and proper, in that it reflects the fact you wrote something that someone else was prepared to invest money in. However, that line of logic breaks down when you see that teaching posts (in the UK at least) tend to be top-heavy with low-selling literary writers at the expense of more commercial writers who oddly enough, like the self-published, are also not seen to be 'real' writers.

Terry

>> For example, you could be a brilliant writer and a qualified trainer/facilitator but if your book was self-published (even with respectable sales) you'll find it extremely difficult to get work teaching creative writing. On the other hand, you might have had only one book published that sold zilch but as long as it was with a 'proper' >>

Yes, I do agree with that 100%. Being published gets more kudos in the outside world in terms of career value. Published seems to be almost synonymous with expert nowadays. For those who aren't looking for a knock-on career out of it though, mainstream is not quite as attractive. There are benefits, but they're not really apparent until you become a top writer.

It does depend on what you want out of it though, money or a career. I may well be shooting myself in the foot by not wanting a career out of it. I don't make any attempts to promote myself as a writer, or have aims to be thought of as one, I suppose because I'm writing non-fiction it's a different mind-set. I see writing as a pleasure and a business, not as a way of furthering my personal profile - and that could be entirely the wrong way to go.

But yes, I agree to the indirect benefits, but direct ones?

ST

<Added>

And more fool me for not clicking on your profile sooner I've just been to the Writer's Ark site your profile links too - that looks very interesting. Are you allowed to say here what your charges are for looking at someone's work?

ST, I've sent you a WWmail about editing.

Terry

To be fair, I don't think anyone is giving the impression that self-publishing is a back door to getting an agent at all. In fact, most of the points made here are contrary to that. I know there are some self published writers out there that do think like that and I agree, that is the wrong reason to self publish--but I don't think it's fair to say just because a writer publishes his own work that he won't get any success. Really, with self-publishing, you get out of it what you put into it. So if you sit on your backside and do nothing, then of course you won't sell.

My theory is, so long as you know your book has a market, why not try to self-publish it? So long as you put the time and effort into it then by all means go for it--just don't expect it to be a best seller. But at the same time, if you do get signed to a publisher (and I take my hat off to anyone who can do it) that's still no guarantee your book will be a best seller. Sure, you'll have the backing of the publishers to help you, but even then it's no guarantee you'll sell well. I actually know a guy at my work who was a published writer. He had his book picked up by a publisher--but he barely sold a hundred copies, even though it was promoted. So since then, he has gone into self-publishing and has more success with his books that way than he has through the publishing route. So it's swings and roundabouts I guess.

Really, I don't think there is anything wrong with telling writers to self-publish--so long as you make them aware of the dangers and struggles. So long as you explain it to them that way, they can make their own mind up whether they want to go ahead with it or not.