Does self-pub hurt/help publication chances? Think again.

Shelagh wrote:

You have suggested in trhe past that writers should find a subject/genre with less competition than the popular genres. Had you said that, you would have been nearer the mark.

I don't recall ever saying that. I recall saying that you have the best chance of publication if you can 1. actually write and 2. are credentialed to write in the field you're writing in (for non-fiction). I've never addressed popular genres, fiction -YOU did awhile back, though, when you discussed how Harry Potter was your competition.

Quote :

Jeff's novel is urban fiction targeted at a specific group of readers. Most writers don't do that.They write the stories they want to write and then try to get the work published. This is practically impossible, but it's the only kind of writing they are capable of doing.

Well, yeah. That's why the commercial publication rates are so dismal. And self-publishing isn't going to help that.

Quote :

It's the same with telling new authors that they will never find a publisher. They still think it's possible and will tell you that JK Rowling did and John Grisham did and ...

And they should! It IS possible. If you can write, and write about a subject that publishers want to publish.

You said, "I would like to write fiction. I don't think I can do it well enough to sell. I can write non-fiction well enough to sell. So I have resigned myself to that."

You cannot write well enough because the competition is too great. You can write well enough in your chosen field because the competition is not so great. If as many authors wrote your type of textbook as authors of romance novels, you might have found it much more difficult to acquire a publisher.

It's not uncommon, when people feel that they have let themselves down or settled for less to give odd advise to others.

Here we have somebody coming completely unscrewed over my post, telling writers they can be JK Rowling if they want to and not to settle for self-publishing or beleive there's a chance it can lead them to a contract down the road... and yet saying she is resigned to writing textbooks."

It's sad as much as anything else.

If anybody else has been sticking with this trainwreck this far, the answer is basically to do everything. If you're a writer, flow out into whatever seems to work. It's better to take a shot than to resign yourself.
And it's better to aim those shots, and to try shooting in a lot of different places and ways before deciding you're got it all figured out.

It's really dispiriting sometimes when I see these type of discussions all boil down to somebody pounding a pulpit and saying, "This is what I did, so it's what you'd better do, too, if you know what's good for you."

Ok, I can see that interpretation. Well, sure, if the pool of aspiring novelists was something like 100/year I might stand a better chance, lol. But I'm not sure that publishers would choose to publish garbage even if they didn't get lots of submissions. Have they ever, in their history? I think they just wouldn't publish. You can't sell garbage.

And you really understate the difficulty of selling and writing a text to major publishers like Cengage or Prentice Hall. They get lots of proposals they turn down, too.

Lin, you flatter yourself if you think I'm worked up over your posts. I find them more amusing than anything else. You posted the typical self-pub dreck and got your panties in a wad when challenged.

And I didn't say anyone could be J.K. Rowling. Talk about taking classes, you need some for reading comprehension.

Typical self-pub dreck. Hilarious. It's those cartoon glasses.

You've been snagging on everything I posted all afternoon, still have NO clue what I'm talking about, and come off with this "I don't really care" thing.

I have the same problem here at home. These damn flies come in and buzz around, bugging me even though I'm not really something they can eat. So I swat them. Knowing there will be other ones. Just as there will be more of your posts... desparate to stress your own, rather sad, concept of how people should write and defying the possiblity that you might get a grip on what the original post was about if you tried thinking things out instead of going off on your pre-set.

Horticulture argumentum. Chihuahua logic

lin wrote:

I have the same problem here at home. These damn flies come in and buzz around, bugging me even though I'm not really something they can eat. So I swat them.

Well, there's your problem -you should be installing screens instead. You can't see the obvious, though, which explains your thoughts in this thread.

LC wrote:

Ok, I can see that interpretation. Well, sure, if the pool of aspiring novelists was something like 100/year I might stand a better chance, lol. But I'm not sure that publishers would choose to publish garbage even if they didn't get lots of submissions. Have they ever, in their history? I think they just wouldn't publish. You can't sell garbage.

And you really understate the difficulty of selling and writing a text to major publishers like Cengage or Prentice Hall. They get lots of proposals they turn down, too.

I didn't read the book, but the Da Vinci Code film ranked among the worst I've ever watched.

Re: textbooks. You cannot compare that with romance novelists.

I'm comparing the difficulty of writing and selling books to publishers, period. I'm assuming it's as difficult to write a good novel as a good textbook.

The fact that less people write textbooks only means that less are published. Pubs aren't going to put out garbage -no one will buy it.

1/1/2010

I would never, ever pay to be published..I know
someone who paid thousands of dollars, I told her
she was an idiot for doing it....Never , ever pay a
publisher or an agent...


Cheers..Joe

The BBC did a series last year about Mills & Boon. One of the hour-long programmes was titled, "How to become a Mills & Boon Author". A thriller author wanted a crack at becoming a romance writer. She found out that there are definite rules that have to be adhered to. If authors bend the rules, they are automatically rejected. The novels don't have to be well-written (that isn't one of the rules) but the pace of the novel is very important (the lovers have to meet by the end of the first chapter). Dialogue is as important as pace ... and so on and so on ...

Many romance writers write and submit to Mills & Boon without a clue about how they should write their novels. A well-written story that breaks all the rules is not the way to influence a Mills & Boon editor.

Btw, assuming things is not a good thing to do.

The list of authors that self published their way to traditional deals is long and I don't feel like finding one right now. I self published and secured a traditional deal. Entire genres like urban fiction would not exist except for self publishing as the industry said there was not a market for that type of fiction. One advantage of self publishing is that some growth can occur by writting multiple books. My logic is how do you know if that one manuscript that you continue to submit and polish is the right fit regardless of how long, how much and how often you resubmit. Now when I read my first book it is hard for me to believe that I wrote it. I have also written fiction and nonfiction and both have been reviewed well. There are certain triggers that can place an author on the radar screen of traditional publishers such as making certain bestseller lists, awards etc.

I think learning about the business is greatly enhanced by self publishing and allows an author to deal with agent and publishers better if the opportunity arises.

Authors who are able to get that traditional contract up front are to be commended, but that is not the only way to get there. I think publishers are simply searching for porjects that will sell and make money regardless of how it comes their way. Traditional publishers actually getting into the self publishing business says it all.

Is self publishing the ideal state, well no, but I heard that the train that comes through town with publishers searching for writers such as when Margaret Mitchell was discovered, has been mothballed.

I bet Margaret Mitchell doesn't give a damn.

LC wrote:

Ok, I can see that interpretation. Well, sure, if the pool of aspiring novelists was something like 100/year I might stand a better chance, lol. But I'm not sure that publishers would choose to publish garbage even if they didn't get lots of submissions. Have they ever, in their history? I think they just wouldn't publish. You can't sell garbage.

And you really understate the difficulty of selling and writing a text to major publishers like Cengage or Prentice Hall. They get lots of proposals they turn down, too.

Publishers sell what readers will buy. If a celebrity is compelling and has a large following they will pursue that person for a book to be written by someone else because it will sell a certain number of units.

1/1/2010

I really don't care what LC says, My next murder
mystery based on my Clara Layten character I'm
publishing myself ( Note not paying a publisher) I have
plans to do a series of books based on my character who
I believe in. If I didn't have the dream and the brains to think
up stories and yes from my own little brain. I'm proud to say
in five years I have had four books published, no I'm not
going to get rich but , I did it my way. I have my 2nd murder
mystery will be published this year and I'm very proud...

Cheers...Joe

dtpollard wrote:

Publishers sell what readers will buy. If a celebrity is compelling and has a large following they will pursue that person for a book to be written by someone else because it will sell a certain number of units.

Then their book is not garbage. By definition, garbage is something nobody wants.

1/1/2010

I guess LC still doesn't get it ?

Cheers..Joe

Shelagh wrote:

Many romance writers write and submit to Mills & Boon without a clue about how they should write their novels. A well-written story that breaks all the rules is not the way to influence a Mills & Boon editor

Well, that kind of makes my point that you have to give a publisher what it wants, right? A large number of manuscripts are rejected because a large number don't give the pub what it wants! So bringing in self-publishing as an end-run around this just muddies the water with irrelevancies.

I would also take all TV reality shows with a grain of salt.

Someone should take note of the ebook sales surge during the holidays this year. Ebooks may challenge traditional books (fiction, non-fiction and text) in the future. These challenges may have little to do with the publisher and more to do with the quality of the content and the public demand.

Teachers who use smartboards well can really create their own living texts and ignore those that are published and using up valuable space in a classroom. Forget the smartboards and bring on the smart phones......it's a whole new world out there.

Quibbling about self-pubished or mainline published seems to me a wasted argument. How a writer gets to their audience has multiple influences. Their ability to exploit them is as much the answer for the future as who has their imprint on the copy scanned into the electronic Library of Congress or Google.......

joefrank wrote:

1/1/2010

I guess LC still doesn't get it ?

Cheers..Joe

Doesn't get what? No one is discussing your Clara Layton books except you.

1/1/2010

LC..

Don't be so SMUG ! Nobody including other
authors likes anyone who thinks their better than
anyone and that's the impression your giving on
this board. Your type of writing is completely
different than mine, Shelagh's, or anyone elses
here, we do fiction and non fiction, it doesn't compare
to what you do, you can't do what we do and we can't
do what you do...I think that should settle it ..


Cheers...Joe

dkchristi wrote:

Someone should take note of the ebook sales surge during the holidays this year. Ebooks may challenge traditional books (fiction, non-fiction and text) in the future. These challenges may have little to do with the publisher and more to do with the quality of the content and the public demand.

They have everything to do with the publisher. Commercially published paper books turned into ebooks are selling well. What's your data for sales from "indie" sites?

Quote :

Teachers who use smartboards well can really create their own living texts and ignore those that are published and using up valuable space in a classroom.

LOL, they could but they won't. Most teachers rely very heavily on someone else's textbook to teach their class, and that's a fact, Jack. You can't even get them to look at a textbook if you don't ADDITIONALLY spoon-feed them tests, powerpoints, syllabi, suggested uses, and assignments.

Edgar A. Poe self published. Ben Franklin self published.
Times have changed. The only thing that has not changed is that people who write want someone to read their writing.
Writing is the closest thing to telepathy the mind can come up.


Love,
Betty

LC wrote:

Shelagh wrote:

Many romance writers write and submit to Mills & Boon without a clue about how they should write their novels. A well-written story that breaks all the rules is not the way to influence a Mills & Boon editor

Well, that kind of makes my point that you have to give a publisher what it wants, right? A large number of manuscripts are rejected because a large number don't give the pub what it wants! So bringing in self-publishing as an end-run around this just muddies the water with irrelevancies.

The majority of first-time writers who self-publish do not check to see what a publisher wants. If they did, they would stand a better chance of finding an agent/publisher. To reduce the odds even further, they should attend workshops, join writing groups, and attend conferences.

You earn a reasonable amount of money by staying at home to write. You could probably double your income by working the same number of hours working outside of the home. You said it's a matter of choice; you prefer to stay at home.

Why can you not allow people to write the stories they want to write, to not attend conferences or join writers' groups? Instead, their rejected manuscripts can be self-published by choice. Even if they could make far more money by stacking shelves in a supermarket.

Quote :

Doesn't get what? No one is discussing your Clara Layton books except you.

The nerve of dragging one's own books into this. It's much more tasteful to show pictures of alleged paychecks.

And there's nothing smug about her. "I resigned myself to writing textbooks and rod&gun books because I didn't dare find out if I was good enough to write what I wanted to"? That's no smug, it's sad. And the more belligerant she gets about it, the sadder it is.

The "doesn't get what" thing is just about too big to discuss. What you don't get here is a long, long list.

To start with, if you weren't wearing your cartoon goggles, you'd have picked up on the fact that nothing I said was advising self-publishing, just pointing out (to people gifted with a normal sense of logic) that one argument against it is fallacious.

But that's beside the point, isn't it? You're not here to discuss, you're here to fight. You picked a scrap over NOTHING and keep pushing it.

And what it comes down to, you're saying everybody should do what you did: pass up on the risk of finding your potential. And have somehow talked yourself into the concept that NOBODY reading your fiction is better than somebody who's crappy novel gets read by 100 or 20 or 5 readers. And just can't stand that people are "cutting the line" instead of resigning themselves to artistic bankruptcy like you have.