%%USERNAME%%    %%ACCWORDS%% %%ONOFF%% |
 |  This is a continuation of my blogging here at WdC |
| Self-Publishing INTRODUCTION Okay, I am going to start this by saying that, on the whole, I am not a fan of self-publishing. In my opinion, if my work – if any work – is not good enough for a publisher, then it is not good enough for the public to read. I understand I am trusting their judgment in what works for the public, yes, but that is fine. Now, I know some people just want to put their books out there, want to be in control of everything from advertising to publicity to covers to everything else, and want to get all the money for themselves (after costs). A sense of control in a very tight market. Great; if that is what you want, go for it. My biggest issues with self-publishing come from a vast number of the books I have read that have been self-published: poor editing, and poor stories. Yes, some have been good – in fact, some have been very good – but the majority have been badly written, poorly plotted and nearly all of them badly edited. I am not saying that trad publishers are perfectly presented, because they’re not, nor that their stories are not badly constructed, because some are. But a far higher percentage are better edited and better constructed in a trad sphere than the self sphere. And so the good are tarnished by the greater number of the bad. Then there are the legal repercussions. Publishers have access to legal advice that costs regular people. Not just for portraying someone in a negative light, but also using stuff you do not have the right to use. This can become really messy. ALL OF THIS IS MY OPINION! Self-publishing, however, is far, far better than hybrid/vanity publishing. [Addendum: For my thoughts on vanity/hybrid publishing, please see: "20240530 Traditional v Vanity Publishing"  ]What is self-publishing? I suppose I should start with a definition. Self-publishing is when the author pays for everything involved in the production of a book. Simple. However, for this money, they also have complete control over the process. They pay for an editor, a formatter, a cover artist, the ISBN (and associated), marketing, printing the physical copies, formatting as an e-book for various formats, hiring a narrator for an audiobook, etc. Everything is in the hands of the author. If anything goes wrong, it is all up to them. They have complete control. In this day and age of hyper-businesses taking over everything, I can understand wanting to separate themselves from that. Being in control of your own art is freeing. Self-publishing does mean you need a knowledge of how to market, and that you will be forced to do things that will take time away from writing more and working a real job. A number of writers make a decent income from self-publishing, I know that. A few even make a living. Having said all that, more importantly, sometimes self-publishing becomes vital for a writer to get their work “out there.” When is self-publishing vital? There are several types of works and some types of people for whom self-publishing is the only option. If writers self-publish in these circumstances, good on you! Go for it! I know perfectly well that self-publishing is the only way your work is going to see the light of day (ignoring hybrid/vanity). In these cases, I would self-publish as well. Poetry There are so few poetry journals out there that accept unsolicited poems (let alone full manuscripts) it is depressing. Publishers who accept poetry anthologies or even chapbooks are thin on the ground. Too many really good poets do not get an opportunity to ever see their work in print. A poet who wants to have their work available to the public pretty much needs to go the self-publishing route. Plays, Scripts, Performance Work Everything from poetry can be copy-pasted here. Yes, there are more opportunities through community theatre for especially plays to be performed, and for students to make films, and that will result in publication in a lot of cases, but there are still too few opportunities for playwrights (or writers of screenplays) to get their work out into the public sphere. Experimental Writing Trad publishers tend to be conservative in their choice of works. If you write an experimental piece with lots of emojis, for example, or pictures, or in creative non-fiction mixed with fiction, etc. then you are going to be hard-pressed to find anyone who will even read it. Copy-paste poetry here, but know there are even less markets to even think about submitting to in the first place. This is a shame, by the way, because experimental writing is where a lot of newer ideas can come from. This includes the publication of a lot of online stuff; one book I read recently was a person’s entire Twitter history, including comments in response, showing how the platform became toxic. I do understand Twitter (now X) is trying to have it pulped as they “own” her tweets, and she did not get permission from the others whose tweets she included. Again, I say it is a shame, because it could help so many parents recognise when these things begin. (This does show where the legal issues can also come into play for self-publishing.) Family History This is probably the most important use for self-publishing – collating a family history in order for the members of the family to have a record. No publisher is going to want to publish a book with a market of maybe 25 family members. We cannot afford to lose these oral histories, and so this is a time where self-publishing becomes a public service. Niche Non-Fiction That leads onto the next time when it can be vital – a non-fiction work where there are very few people interested in a topic. Now, nowadays a lot of people say, “Why not make a website?” That is because it is becoming more and more common that online information is stolen (not just by AI) and it is far harder to stand out in a sea of billions of websites than on the “for sale” page of a self-publisher, or to show their friends and family and others interested through personalised media and emails. Sometimes the book of the work is a better, more permanent record of the work gone into the research. For example, website hosting companies can go bust, can be hacked, all sorts of things. And after the author dies, websites can fade if money is no longer paid. Mixed language Works with a mixture of languages, especially from authors from south-east Asia, are becoming more common, but trad publishers do not want to deal with different language type-faces and trying to market such pieces. They do not seem to understand how many people are bilingual, or even multilingual, in that region and that books like this reflect the way people speak. These are not language education books, but books written in the patois of a region. They make these peoples feel more included in the world at large. Translations This leads onto translations of works. This is both translating a work from a language into English or vice versa. Lack of publication is especially the case if the non-English language is not a widely used one. I am looking here at Indigenous Australian languages; books written in those have to be self-published because no trad publisher will touch a work with only 100 people who speak it. Anthologies This final one is one that is odd to me, but it is what it is. Unless you already have a name as a short story writer, or have a heap of novels behind you, getting a collection of short stories published is next to impossible. Some mid-sized trad publishers have started doing open calls for short story anthologies; however, if they accept 2 such collections a year, and there’s maybe 20 publishers world-wide doing it, that is only 40 a year. That is hardly going to scratch the surface. In my case, I have had almost 100 short stories published traditionally, of which I have the rights currently to more than 60, and I am struggling to get an anthology accepted. There is also the simple fact that some people are better writers of short works than longer, and so this excludes them from traditional publishing. For whom is self-publishing preferred? Again, in my opinion, there are three types of people who self-publishing would be the best option for. The Sick Or Elderly This is rather morbid, but if someone really wants to see a piece of written work in print, and they may not have a lot of time left, then self-publishing is perfect. They can not only see their work as a real book, but also gift it to people while they are still able, and see the looks on their faces. This has really hit home for me lately, as one of my best friends has cancer with only a 5% chance of survival, and she has been struggling to get one of her books accepted. I am thinking of paying for her to have my favourite of hers (I’ve read and edited them all) self-published, just so she can see it in print before she goes. Her one life goal she has not met is to be a published author; it would be nice for me to do that for her. Marginalised People It is a rather unfortunate effect of the current intolerant society in which we increasingly found ourselves that some members of our society are not afforded the same opportunities as many others. While I understand these sorts of things are not made public for fear of backlash, the following are some of the people I have heard on the publishing grapevine some select traditional publishers will not publish, as it would be seen as supporting them: LGBT+ people; transgender people specifically; Muslims; ex-prisoners/ ex-felons; Australians (seriously); any non-Christian; atheists. How do they know? Because they ask for social media. A lot of publishers will do this in order, as they say, “to see how much you can help with the marketing of your book.” This is a legitimate concern for smaller publishers, and it does make sense; if you have no online presence, how can you help sell your own book in this day and age? However, some publishers do use it for this more insidious reason, and that is something they will not publicise. All they have to say is you’ve been rejected, and that is that. So, for people who fall into marginalised categories, self-publishing could well be their only way into the writing market. No Social Media And this leads on to the last group – people who eschew social media. That is their right, but as mentioned above, many publishers do not like it because they say you cannot help market. The crazy thing is, statistics from the past five years, since COVID, show that the only two social media platforms that seem to affect sales are Instagram and TikTok. Facebook results in selling pretty much only to friends, X is so toxic that people avoid books advertised on the platform, Discord is selling just to members of a server, and the others have very little market influence. But people should not be forced onto what is a nasty, toxic and generally hostile environment just to be published, so with those whose books would only appeal to small to mid-sized publishers, having no social media becomes a valid reason to self-publish. Conclusion To finish, when it comes to general, run-of-the-mill books, fiction and non-fiction, I do not see the reason for self-publishing. I reiterate my statement: in my opinion, if it’s not good enough for a publisher, it’s not good enough for the public. However, as can be seen, there are a lot of occasions when I feel self-publishing is not only the way to go, but possibly the only option available to a writer. And, no matter what: SELF-PUBLISHING IS FAR, FAR PREFERRABLE TO HYBRID OR VANITY PUBLISHING! |
View Portfolio
Visit Notebook
Send Gift Points
Awards
Badges
Send Email
Community Newsfeed
General Discussion
Sponsored Items
Book of Trinkets
Static Items
Books
Groups
Interactive Stories
Audio
Campfire Creatives
Community Notes
Crossword Puzzles
Documents
Folders
Images
In & Outs
Madlibs
Photo Albums
Polls
Product Reviews
Quizzes
Survey Forms
Web Pages
Word Searches
