Emma, the WW promotion overload danger I was referring to was not from all books published, merely from pushing the ones WW members have published too obtrusively.

As far as other comments are concerned my personal opinion is that market forces will always prevail, and if that feels morally wrong, well, writers need to be courageous, seize the initiative and do whatever it takes to get their work out there, even if that means starting in a small way and building up a readership gradually. As someone said, publishing seems to be the only business in which this is seen as unprofessional.

The self-publishing writer is simply setting up a business with a staff of one or more, just as any other self-employed person might. They succeed or fail by their own skills/efforts - it's as straightforward as that.

Nell.

starting in a small way and building up a readership gradually. As someone said, publishing seems to be the only business in which this is seen as unprofessional.

I think that's so true. When a self-publisher can earn a living solely from their work, still more when he/she starts publishing someone else's work, then hey, they're a publisher. And people do start publishing companies small - Tindall St is a glorious example, Canongate even better, and my friends at Leaf Books are doing something new and different that looks pretty promising too; Persephone's another lot with a delightfully different take on the whole thing. There is a cycle, of course; arguably, the bigger a small player becomes, the harder it is to buck the market forces. Remember Fourth Estate, whose fortune was made by a weird book about measuring time in the 18th Century Navy that ought to have been a disaster? Now part of a conglomerate - HarperCollins, I think.

I do agree that market forces will always win, which is why I don't think moral arguments about what big publishers 'ought' to do get anywhere - however much we feel like screaming it at them sometimes. As you have, a much better way of making the case for another way is to get out there and do it.

Emma

<Added>

Though it has to be said that a lot of small publishers rely wholly or partly on local or national Arts Council (or equivalent) funding or sponsorship. That's another way of bucking market forces, or course.

With distribution being less of an issue for the self-publisher as more poeple buy books online, the real difficulty maybe is getting the book reviewed -this being one of the key publicity/marketing events for a new author especially. It's here that the big or established publishing operators presumably hold an advantage through long-standing relationships in the reviewing/journalism process. Any thoughts/experiences on how a self-publisher might have a chance/get a\leg up in that arena?

Pete

<Added>

usual typo apologies

Going back a few posts, I do like the idea of an outlet for supporting writers' publications across the country, perhaps harnessed by/based on some kind of Writewords co-operative? I think we somehow need to have a bigger voice, or another string to our site bow - like the Writewords School.

Just an idea!

)

A
xxx

I would like to echo a largely overlooked comment a few posts back here. In truth there is no difference, and should be no difference between between Publishers and Self-Publishers. A self-publisher is just a very small publisher. And from small publishers, bigger publishers grow.

I would like to publish my own book under my own imprint, in part because it is increasingly difficult to get read, let alone taken on by both existing publishers and agents. Admitedly it's a while since I last tried to get an agent, but even in the finding out who to address it to stage, I came up with 'list full' notices, and when you peruse the handbooks at the publisher's details, more often than not you see the words 'do not accept unsolicited mss'.

It would nice to make a little money from writing but this is not my driving force, which is good because unless you happen to be a JK Rowling, a Dan Brown, or god forbid a Jeffrey Archer (I know I'm being prejudicial with my views of that last one as lots of people seem to like him??) the chances are that you are going be earning not more than that that 70p royalty on a each book. Publishing the book myself is to me, not because it will automatically mean I can give up work and write full time, but because, I get to keep control of my work, publish it the way I want, and earn enough of a return that it will cover costs and allow me to publish the next book and maybe a few others by writers in a similar position to me. I guess I want to be a writer/publisher just like those singer/songwriter/producers that have been mentioned earlier.

Where my plan falls down, and I have followed the various excellent links given in this post, is that whilst POD printing seems like the obvious choice on the one hand, I do not see how you can even cover costs unless you sell all your copies direct from your own website. I could sell through Amazon (and if I was able to get some reviews out there amazon is probably where people would turn to find it) but they charge 60% discount. That, added to the £5 or £6 production cost means that I would be making a loss on every copy sold.

Gardners, it seems are being very generous are being very generous in agreeing to list your POD book, but this is still affected by the POD pricing. If I was to fork out the cash and print conventionally, could I realistically get Gardners to stock it so that bookshops can order it, and I can get some return on the books. The first one, might involve 'start up costs' in the printing that I never recover, but if the sales of it could fund the next one that would be a start.

It's a conundrum certainly, and one that my brain at this hour, is now too tired to think about...

~Thomas

I think reviews are one big problem. On the other hand it's very debateable whether reviews (as opposed to other kinds of press coverage) actually sell books (as opposed to providing juicy quotes for the first few pages of the paperback in due course), except possibly for the kind you see in the glossies - good reads for the beach, etc.

Again, local is no doubt easier, and easier still if you have some kind of peg for the journalists to hang their interest on (no difference there from the big publishers, you could say!). But arguably, someone publishing their own novel is a peg in itself, though it helps if there's something else interesting/surprising about you. And if you can write a really snappy press release (makes synopses seem easy, I suspect.)

But it ought to be possible to tap into the huge growth in reading and writing groups, into library-sponsored events, and into the live poetry circuit. I've been to readings where the poets dished out very snappy postcards with a choice single poem on the back - why not a couple of paragraphs of your latest novel? Or even a chapter or short story, bound into a little A6 vol, sold for a couple of pounds, or given away as a taster?

Emma

Hi Emma,

Some interesting thoughts there - yes.

And something else that I've just thought of. Yes, one might loose money on the POD printed copies of a book but you would lose the same or more money on printing a 1000 or more copies 'conventionally' if they don't sell. Better I guess to print some, to send out for review hand out, make it available via ISBN and Gardners or some such distributor and of course Amazon, and then concentrate on getting word of mouth out there to get it talked about.

I can do my own website, so I can use that to make it available as tasters online, and tasters maybe as eBooks, but yes, a free first chapter that you can hand out via book groups, or if your local independent book shop will let you on their counter, might get it talked about. And if it gets talked about, then one can do that big run printing...

Even if you 'self-publish' that doesn't mean you can circumvent what the 'big' publisher's do. The small publishers of today, become the big publishers of tomorrow, or get subsumed by them, and thus the cycle goes on ... and on... I wonder if it's possible to become a publisher which continues to look at each and every unsolicited mss on their own merit...???

~Thomas

I wonder if it's possible to become a publisher which continues to look at each and every unsolicited mss on their own merit...???

Well, my editor maintains that she does this, and so does my agent; they may be busy, but they really don't want to miss the next Sarah Waters. And everyone I know who's been an assistant in publishing (and it's quite a few), has been given the slush pile, and set out reading the every submission carefully. But within a week they realised that a) if the beginning's bad, the whole thing will be, and that you really can tell very quickly if it's any good and b) the next sackful's arriving tomorrow, so they'd better get on with it.

I think the trouble is that every publisher sets out to do this, and is swamped in pretty short order. A small poetry press actually put a phrase not unlike yours in their PR stuff and website. Within months, according to the TLS, they had 'no unsolicited submissions' everywhere, from the impossibility of coping. Curtis Brown have to cope with 400-odd MS a week.

Emma

[quote]On the other hand it's very debateable whether reviews (as opposed to other kinds of press coverage) actually sell books (as opposed to providing juicy quotes for the first few pages of the paperback in due course), except possibly for the kind you see in the glossies - good reads for the beach, etc.[/quote

Huh? Can this be true? Pretty much the only way I find out about new books is through reviews -broadsheet, tabloid, tv, radio, magazines. But you're saying reviewing is debateably inconsequential for a book's sales? I don't think I've ever bought a book because I've seen an ad for it, if that's what you mean by 'other press coverage'.

I'd like to know more about this.

Pete

This thread is an interesting one because it gets to the nub of several problems with publishing in its current state.

It's obvious the publishing system is flawed and I agree that often writers tend to be passive in the face of that - partly through an assumption that it is the only way, but also because it gives them something to blame other than themselves when they fail - 'I got beaten by the system'. I also think it's something to do with the fact that many writers don't have much self-confidence in themselves as writers, therefore need the validation of a publishing deal no matter how poor that deal is.

As for reviews, I'm of the opinion that they really count. Most people buy paperbacks and if they are looking for something to read that's not an author they already know, then it's straight to the reviews. In the past I have made choices based on the fact that the reviews on one book were from websites and local papers, whereas the reviews on the others were from national papers. Maybe that's wrong, but I doubt I'm the only one who's done it.

WWers Doing It For Themselves? I'm not quite sure how a co-operative would work in reality. But I think a showcase website of work by members of the site would work. It could be part of an enhanced fee that if you get published while a member of the site you can put some biog and an extract from the book on the showcase website regardless of whether it was self-published or otherwise.

The difficulty then is getting a buzz going so that people actually visit the website. As ever, marketing and press coverage would be the most difficult and time-consuming part of the process.

That's a good idea, Sibelius. Makes sense to me.

And I too also read reviews to see what stuff I might like next.

)

A
xxx

Interesting thread. Self-publishing is something I have considered over the years, but I just don't think I would have the energy or front to do it.

Sorry to bang on my old drum again, but Macmillan New Writing may be worth considering as an alternative route for some. After all, MNW was set up solely to publish books by first time authors. All the manuscripts they receive are unsolicited and are judged on merit. Of course, the imprint was criticised because it doesn't pay advances, but Macmillan are taking on all the financial risk of production, and are distributing and promoting the books. At the same time, everything that an individual author can do to help promote his or her title will help. But like Emma, I am finding myself strangely reticent about going into bookshops and introducing myself.

When a self-publisher can earn a living solely from their work, still more when he/she starts publishing someone else's work, then hey, they're a publisher.

Emma, if you publish a book, your own or anyone else's, then you're a publisher. Are you going to postphone calling yourself a writer until it's your sole income?

<Added> Though it has to be said that a lot of small publishers rely wholly or partly on local or national Arts Council (or equivalent) funding or sponsorship. That's another way of bucking market forces, or course.

I'm beginning to think that Pete (Cholero) was right when he said:

I hear in your arguments the passionate believer in the status quo, the a,b,and c responses of a conservative mind intent on defending a system which has many, many wonderful aspects to it but which is nonetheless faulted at certain key points.

There's a tone of placation in each of your posts which always seems to be followed by a 'but...'

But... far better things to do than deflect arrows, off to get some work done.

Nell.

Big publishers don't take an economic risk with books. On the contrary they have strategies and formulae which cut that risk to a negligible factor. The risk is always the writers': it is they that face losing a year or two years earnings every time they write a book.

Of course it's a publisher's job to stay in business. But it is most certainly not a publisher's job to get seriously rich.


Pete

For the moment, I have not considered self-publishing, not because of the distribution or promotion difficulties (I would have even greater problems in that area as I don't live in an English-speaking country) but because I am afraid that I would be deluding myself that anyone would be remotely interested in reading my work, never mind pay for it. So the main thing I would get from the traditional publishing route is a objective, external validation of my work. Supposing I got that validation through good sales of a previously published book or in some other way such as competition wins then I would certainly consider self-publication as a viable, alternative way to build a writing career.

As for the current system the problem is that it is impossible to know if one is not making the break because the work is not up to scratch or through bad luck.
Emma, from these quotes you seem to dismiss that huge element of luck involved in getting published and that seems unrealistic to me.

I'd rather take the cash/energy/time and use it to write a novel that is good enough to get a publisher.

I was a humble supplicant for so long because my writing wasn't good enough. When it was, I got a deal.

It's just not as simple as that. Anyone who has studied statistics and probablility theory will know that when the sample size is so tiny relative to the population from which it is drawn then luck has a huge part to play. You refer to Curtis Brown receiving between 300 to 500 submissions a week. This means they get on average 20,000 submissions per year. How many new writers do they take on from the slush pile (as opposed to personal recommendations, competitions etc) 10? Probably on the high side but this means that there is a 0.05% chance of being taken on. That means 99.95% of people get rejected! When the percentage chance of success is so small then luck inevitably has a lot to do with it. I am not implying that it's a pure lottery-type situation. If your work is not good enough then for sure you won't make it but in the vast majority who get rejected there is a lot of people whose work is good enough but they have been unlucky.

Implying that, if you are rejected, it's simply because your work isn't good enough is not very helpful and I do think that lots of good publishable writers get discouraged and give up because they believe that very notion, instead of understanding that the odds are heavily stacked against them and it takes superhuman levels of perseverance and self-belief (contacts and networking would probably be quite useful too) to keep putting yourself out there so that one day your number may come up.

If someone has the confidence in their own work and chooses to self-publish rather than put themselves through that soul-crushing system then I can understand and respect that.

Ashlinn