Where's the downside?

The talk of self-publishing has been rampant.  JA Konrath posts near daily of his success and the success of others.  He has no problem telling you how much money he makes and really, it's a lot for an author.  Many mid-list authors published traditionally still have day jobs, so you can see how appealing his numbers look to an aspiring author.

There's a lot of talk about what you gain in self-publishing:  money, creative control, and quicker release.  A lot less heartache from rejections, editors that like your work and then disappear when it's time to turn it in, imprints closing, etc.  Books don't stop getting published because the house decided they didn't want to print it anymore.   The list is dauntingly large and certainly makes one think twice before they decide to go the traditional route or not.

But what do you lose by self-publishing?  There are the known things:  time to write because you have to spend so much time marketing your book and making your presence known, in store placement, traditional review methods, etc.  Don't forget the mighty TV commercials that a very limited number of authors get.  But what about the things people  don't want to talk about?

How many self-pubbed books have been optioned by film studios?  Eragon doesn't count because he got the agent and publishing deal before the option (I'm guessing the option came because of the agency).  Authors like to say they don't care (it's all about the book), but really, they do.  They dream big just like anyone else.  They hope for a blockbuster movie so they can become the next Stephanie Meyer, Stephen King, or JK Rowling, rolling in the dough of licensing merch and such.  Even if they don't get the blockbuster they hoped for, they at least get a two hour commercial for their book on someone else's dime.  Karen McQuestion's A Scattered Life has been optioned, but anyone else that was a complete unknown?  Konrath seems to believe this too, shall come.

How many have gotten a jacket blurb by an established traditional author?  These actually sell a lot of books.  Lot's of people read something based on another author's recommendation.  Which also leads to the question of other self-published author blurbs, do they have a network where you can approach other successful self-published authors in your genre to ask for a read and a possible blurb? I'm sure they do.  I don't know anything about it but it seems like the top selling self-publishers are supporting each other.

One reason many authors choose not to self-pub is legitimacy.  Some authors just can't stand the thought of not being viewed as legitimate.  Vain, but true.  We are human, after all.

But.

There's now a rather large but.  In November, the NYT revealed that they will now have an ebook bestseller list.  The details are sparse but it's supposed to start rolling out early this year.  The odds of legitimacy just went up a great deal.  Before, a self-pubber had no chance of ever saying they were a NYT bestseller.  It's no longer out of reach.  I think that if anything is going to turn the agency-model on its head, this is it.

Another interesting thing that I dont' see talked about:  the self-publishers that have agents.  These agents generally do things like film rights, foreign rights, audiobooks, etc. for the self-publisher.  Clearly, there are agents paying attention to these sales records.  But now with Podiobooks, you can do your own audiobook and keep 75% of the profits, so is their role shrinking?  Are they snagging these self-pubbers to gain a much-needed foothold in a market they've shunned?  Will the nature of queries change from MS representation to representation of works in other markets like film?  I would have thought that impossible just a year ago.  It doesn't seem so impossible now.

The publishing world is changing, no doubt.  It's going to be interesting to see where it all lands. I can't deny that with the NYT bestseller list coming, it's looking mighty attractive.  The idea that I might actually be able to make a living at writing?  Whodathunkit?  Very few traditionally pubbed authors accomplish this feat.  There are bestselling authors that can't even accomplish this without a movie deal.

I've always planned to try the traditional publishing route but the whole climate might be much different by the time I'm ready to publish. And seeing some of those sales numbers of unknown authors is like bait on a hook.

Thoughts? Comments?

Amazon and the erotica debacle

I'm coming in late on this topic, I know.  But bear with me.  If you don't know what I'm talking about, here's a personal account from an author that had her books pulled.  Although I'm a bit late to the game, Amazon has stood their ground as evidenced by the fact that her books still aren't back up.

I don't want to get into the arbitrary decision process they have adopted as to why certain erotica books are removed and others aren't or why they accepted them in the first place.  The mechanics of this particular business choice is, fortunately for them, theirs to make.  Not so fortunate for authors, since now they really have no idea what they can publish with them or distribute through them.  Even traditionally published books are being sent to the trash bin.  Customers are again complaining about their books being pulled from their archives without any notice or refund.  But there's plenty being said on this already.

The one thing I've found interesting in reading all the uproar about this is that no one has mentioned that this practice of removing purchased items from archives isn't just ebooks and it isn't something they've only done once or twice before.  Amazon has been doing this regularly since it started selling digital content.

I ordered the movie "Coraline" (because who doesn't love Neil Gaiman?) when it first became available for purchase - tells you how long ago this happened.  I purchased it, not rented it.  When I went back several months later to watch it again, it was removed.  I have no idea when they removed it and I had to call and ask for a refund.  I was told it was removed because they lost the license.  Well, great.  Why didn't you offer me a refund when you took it back?  I don't recall any vocal outcry like there was for 1984.

Which leaves me to believe books are pulled from Kindles all the time.  Movies are pulled all the time.  Music probably isn't affected nearly as much because the music is usually transferred to iTunes or something similar so they have no direct access.  I'm praying they don't come out with some crazy MP3 player that will only play music from them because you know it will lead to some new proprietary format that won't let you play it anywhere else.  And if that wouldn't be crazy enough, people will buy it.

All their digital content is open to removal from your archives at any time.  Last time I checked, even the periodical subscriptions that you may have purchased are going to be tied to the serial number of your Kindle, not you - so hope you never have to get your Kindle fixed if you have periodicals because you won't get yours back.  I don't know if the periodical thing is still the case but at the time I was finally jumping on the ereader bandwagon, it was.

And there have been complaints to Amazon about this very practice forever and yet it hasn't changed. People still shop there and people will still continue to shop there.  It's unfortunate but true.  They will continue to take back what they bought and hope you never notice so they can keep their money.

I would like to see an accounting of how much money they've chosen not to return to people who have no clue they are missing purchased items.  I bet it's fairly substantial.

I no longer purchase anything digital from them.  If I ever purchase an ebook from them again, I will download it to my hard drive.  I can't do that with movies (because you're forced to watch online through any player that will connect to Amazon) unless I get software that allows me to record my computer screen, so I won't be buying movies at all.

The moral of this blog is that when dealing with Amazon and any digital content, buyer beware.  This isn't an anomoly.  It didn't only happen with 1984 or erotica.  Amazon does this all the time with everything digital.  They simply have a very poor business model when it comes to digital content and it's not stopping anyone from shopping there.

I tend to think that the backlash just isn't going to mean much to them or their bottom line.  It hasn't before and it probably won't ever.

And that's why I went with a Nook.

The query and why I suck at it.

My wip is far from being ready to query.  But in my blog-catching-up-time, I read a lot of query related posts (see this amazing rule-breaking query here).  Part of my procrastination regime is to do things that are associated with my wip without actually writing it so I've written several queries over the months.  None of them were any good and I can see why so many writers talk about how they hate writing query letters.  It has that reputation for a reason.

They are hard.  You have to condense your voice, your plot, your MC, why it's different and why anyone should care into 250 lonely words or less.  Who wants to do that to their baby?

Needless to say, mine suck.  I do like to think they are progressively getting better, though.  Maybe by the next fifty or so I'll have a winner.  I sent the latest version that I thought might be, at least, okay into a crit group.  I've only gotten one crit so far and it confirmed that I still suck at it.  I only sent it a couple hours ago so there is still plenty of time for the other critters in the group to tell me how much it sucks.  The best part about being told you suck (no, the words are not actually said, no one is ever mean-spirited) is that you learn from it which is far more valuable than being told something crappy is good.

Most will tell you there is an art to query letters that is far different from novel writing and I would venture to say they are right.  Before sending out those queries, I would highly recommend you get feedback.  Lots and lots of feedback and don't send out that query until everyone loves it.  You only get one shot per agent and you don't want to send that query to your dream agent before it's right.

Anyway, the reason why I think I suck at it is that I don't think I have the confidence to "sell" my book.  I was asked what was unique abou it.  The honest answer is, I don't know.  I've never sat down and thought about what makes it unique, I just write the story that's in my head and hope it's good enough.  I wonder if it's something I just don't want to look at for fear it's not unique enough.  I never set out to write thinking in those terms.  I never set out to turn the literary world on its head. I simply set out to write.

I'm told it's unique but it's not like anyone ever explains to me what's unique about it (and I never ask).  I can't put its uniqueness into words unless I examine it, though.  That's the catch twenty-two because if I set to examine it that closely, I'm terrified I'll discover it's not that great of a story.  I already had to rewrite what I had because the voice was all wrong.  What if there's more to it that's wrong?

All I can say is that I'm very glad I'm not even at the query stage yet.

I'm my own worst enemy in this matter.  I'm aware.  Feel free to send your condolences.  Flowers and chocolate are also accepted.

New look!

What do you think?  Should I keep looking for new clothes to dress this baby?

Are you good enough to even self-publish?

I know some very happily self-published authors. No agent, editor or publisher telling them what they can or can't do, what needs to be cut, what needs to be changed or how many pages they can or can't have for acknowledgments. All the money from sales is theirs to have and the success or failure of a book rests squarely upon their shoulders (and, more importantly, defining what they would call a success or failure).

With the rise in self-pubbed works, the future of publishing is changing and where it will land is anyone's guess.

But what I really want to know is:  what possesses an author to self-publish?

Oh, I know there are plenty of valid reasons to do so. There are those that have queried and queried with nary a bite and there those that never got past partials and fulls and I know of some that were published, dropped and decided to self-publish said dropped book. There are those that are just happy to write and hope others might enjoy reading unknown authors enough to buy it and like it, too.  But what about the (I hate to say it because we all start somewhere) bad writer? I suppose if you knew you were a bad writer you wouldn't self-publish but it's amazing how many still manage to do it, presumably because they simply don't know they are bad.

And please don't confuse the issue, I'm not saying that all self-pubbed books are badly written. Not by a long shot. I'm only saying that with the rise in self-publishing, anyone is able to do it. Like the guy/gal who decided that their New Year's resolution should be to start, finish and publish a book in one year.  Sure, some succeed beautifully, but the majority don't. That same guy/gal poured lots of love, time and energy into getting it done. Love, time and energy, I might add, that may have been better served learning how to write. Yanno, like basic grammar and punctuation, never mind the craft as an art form. 

I've perused the self-published titles and while some of them look like they are well written, a large portion could have used the benefit of research on how to write, a critique or two or twenty, and an editor. Do they simply not know? How can they not know?  

There are many fine authors that go undiscovered and rejected yearly. I suppose knowing if you are one of those fine authors isn't easy, what with all the rejections. But wouldn't you know if you weren't at least passable if you were going to self-publish?

I certainly don't think that anyone should be denied the right to self-publish, but I definitely reserve the right to not read it and I can't help feeling bad for the author every time I see one of these books floating around.  Readers are just as harsh critics as agents and editors. If they think ridicule in an agency is bad, ridicule from the entire known web-verse isn't likely to be any better.  Is it bravery to put yourself out there like that or is it just (as Miss Snark used to say) nitwittery?

I'm real, I'm real!

But I'm not a boy.  Just making sure everyone knew I wasn't a figment of their imagination with people thinking to themselves, "Remember that one blog on writing?  You know, the one that only had two or three posts ever.  Ink-something-or-other."

I don't have anything I'm going to claim as a resolution, I'm just not that crazy anymore.  I have lots of things I could easily put out there into the ether as a resolution but I steadfastly refuse.

I do, on the other hand, have a few things I would like to say I will try to do better.  Like blogging, for ince.

Sure, blogging could be considered a fairly self-important endeavor and it could be said that you'd have to have some amount of narcissism to partake but I would disagree. Who cares what I have to say, after all?  Well, let's not go from self-important to self-deprecating.  I don't particularly want to blog because I think someone wants to hear what I have to say but because I simply like it.  It's kind of a like a diary I get to look back over and see how utterly ridiculous I was back when.  Or those moments when I was brilliant.  But mostly just seeing the moments in time and what I was doing or thinking.  So it's really more for me.  Maybe that does fall into the "self-important" category, after all.

So I'm choosing to do try to do better.  Did you like how non-committal that was?

On another note, I've been catching up on all the blogs I've lost track of over the last few months.  That was a lot of reading and a lot of time that should have been put to my MS.  I wouldn't call it totally wasted, though because I learned more useful things to put toward my writing.

Happy New Year, everyone.  I hope it brings lots of motivation to write, write, write for all of us.

More procrastination?

I decided today I was going to write, write, write.  I have some time and I can try to catch my word count up for NaNoWriMo.

It's 9:48 AM and I've been reading blogs and now writing my own. Figures.

Amazingly, it's a good day. I'm in a fantastic mood. The coffee is running through my veins and honestly, it's prolly too much and that's why I'm blogging instead of writing. But I woke up happy this morning. Not that I'm depressed or unhappy with my life, I'm just a mom, a wife and many other things that make me too tired/busy to think about my mood or to indulge in it. And let's face it, my word count deficit is enough to rain on anyone's parade. Thank goodness it's not doing so today. Today I indulge. I'm happy. Cheerful, even.  And if I can whip up some focus and attention, I might even be able to write some.

Maybe it all has to do with my boys.  My boys started music lessons in school and last night we picked up a digital piano for my youngest and a violin for my oldest.  It excited me to know they are excited about music and learning how to play these instruments.  And getting a $1500 digital piano for $250 is definitely not a mood killer, it's a mood enhancer, by golly.