There’s a whole lot of chatter out there on the Internet these days about self-publishing. Some people still think self-publishing is a secondary option to traditional publication, some fear a deluge of poorly edited books, some are heralding self-publishing as not only the way of the future, but are fast proclaiming anyone who foresees a future with traditional publishers a hopeless dinosaur.
(Speaking personally, I think there’s room for all models in the new era, we can all get along, and I’m a bit confused about why these debates have taken on such an ideological/religious tenor in some circles. But I suppose that’s not the stuff great blog posts are made of.)
Back to the question at hand: would you consider self-publishing? Under what circumstances?
Poll below! (you’ll need to click through if you’re reading on an RSS reader or via e-mail).
Anonymous says
I'd seriously consider it with a side project that I wouldn't otherwise expect to forward to an agent, or something outside of my typical genre.
I'd still want to try to polish it up, maybe even pseudonym it, and try it as an experiment, but I still plan to seek traditional publishing first and foremost for the majority of my work.
M.A.Leslie says
In a world that is so completely subjective it is almost impossible to not have the thought run through your head. Rejection after rejection makes you start to think of other outlets. Why not? I don't want to though. I still want to go through the agent to publisher process, not that I am old school. I am just under-funded.
janflora says
I agree with you: there's room for all. There is a long history for self-publishing, including some works we now consider classics.
At this point, I am seeking traditional publishing, but I have thought about having a chapbook made through a service.
Richard Gibson says
My non-fiction project fits the concept of self-publishing pretty well, I think – niche interest, and at least somewhat timely so that the 2 years or more to find an agent who finds a publisher who makes a book is an unattractive prospect.
I wanted traditional publishing a year ago, but as things continue to change so quickly (both technological and in terms of attitudes) I really see POD and E-pubbing as a valid approach that can make me acceptable money, and get the thing out there in a way that is also easily revised as the things I report on in the book change.
Daisy Harris says
I know you didn't ask for comments, but I wanted to qualify my vote.
I said self-publishing isn't for me, but the main reason I feel that was is because I'm not a great multi-tasker. I can barely keep track of my contracts, much less organize editors, cover artists, etc.
Authors already had a ton to do with writing, revising, marketing, learning, bookkeeping. I think self-publishing is a great option for entrepreneurial types who want a hand in every step of the process.
jjdebenedictis says
Erm, I already am considering it.
I have a book that is unlike anything else I'm likely to write, and although I've gotten compliments on the writing from agents, they tend to pass because the characters are pretty dark and difficult people.
So this seems like the perfect book to self-publish under a pseudonym. I'll keep trying to get traditionally published with my more-typical fare, but I don't think this book will be to be the one to let me break in.
Jeremy D Brooks says
Absolutely, I already did with my first book Amity. My reasoning: I felt it was a good read (and early reviewers agree, thank zeus), and knew that I could probably make as much on my own as I could via a small press–which was my only other option, since pretty much every agent in Manhattan (and California) had decided that there wasn't a large enough market for it to pay me, an agent, and a staff at a pub house.
The decision came down to: scrap it, self-publish it, or work with a small press and sell 25 copies. I self-pubbed, and am happy that I did.
Anonymous says
I'd consider it for my backlist once rights revert to me on the expiration of the contract.
Having been "traditionally" published and had the help of a good editor and a responsible publisher to promote and distribute my work (along with great cover art) I can't imagine doing anything else.
I respect the time and skills publishing professionals have acquired over the years and don't have the ego to suggest I can do the same with good intentions and a copy of Photoshop.
😉
Josin L. McQuein says
No. There's no safety net.
And while commercial publishing is hardly a sure bet, there's more behind you than your own belief in the book.
Even the books that don't get major marketing get the name brand affiliation with the bigger houses (and the better known small ones). People familiar with those houses know what general level of quality to expect, so your book benefits from that assumption.
Self-pubbed books, on the other hand, have to overcome the preconception that 99% of self-pubbed stuff is garbage. I've never purchased a self-pubbed book, nor do I know anyone who has, and it would take serious word of mouth from someone I knew well to get me to even consider it. If I did consider it, the price would have to be worth the risk, and that doesn't happen often with self-published material.
Taylor Mathews Taylor says
Can we add the option: Yes, but only after I have been traditionally published and have a large and voracious reader base?
Rachel Cotterill says
In other arts, plenty of people pay (modest sums of) good money to see amateur theatre, watch new bands, or acquire the work of a new painter. I see self-publishing as belonging in the proud tradition of amateur arts; if I make a few pennies from my hobby that's all to the good, but I certainly don't have enough spare time to spend time chasing agents & publishers when I could be doing the fun stuff. Plus I get to keep artistic integrity. Win-win.
Chris Phillips says
I would rather have my work selected for traditional publishing. I think it validates it and lets me know it is something worth going forward with.
Creepy Query Girl says
I personally don't think I will head towards self publishment. BUT I think if you believe in your project, have followed the rules, have been told by various professionals that you SHOULD be published but there just isn't a market for your book- I'd go for it. Because, sometimes 'the market' isn't the most important factor in what people read.
hannah says
I have a manuscript I really love that never sold, and at some point I think I'll self-pub it as an ebook and give it away for free on my website. Maybe with a link for an optional donation, or maybe not. It'll help for publicity, maybe, and it'll be nice to get it out there.
But I'd never consider it for something that has a chance in traditional publishing. I like money and audience as much as the next girl.
Nicole Zoltack says
I would never consider self-publishing. I have already sold several short stories for anthologies, some in ebooks, mostly in print. I also sold a fantasy romance series to an epublisher. My first choice is the big publishers, obviously. Then the smaller print publishers, than epublishers. Self-publishing is not an avenue I would ever take.
jjdebenedictis says
Oh, one more point.
People tend to get evangelical when they believe something to be true, but the rest of the world is not so firmly of that opinion.
You see this effect not just in religion, but also in regard to things as diverse as taste in music and choice of computer hardware (Mac users, for example.) When a person feels like no one recognizes that they're right, they often get very fervent about trying to convince others.
The self-publishing evangelists are certain this is the best solution, but the rest of the world doesn't exactly agree. Hence, their fervency.
Dawn Pier says
In a serious bit of synchronicity, I read Alan Rinzler's post of 25 Sept today, wherein you, Sir Nathan, are quoted about this very topic.
Here is the link for those of you who haven't already seen it – https://www.alanrinzler.com/blog/2010/09/25/literary-agents-open-the-door-to-self-published-writers/
Julia King says
I seriously considered self-publishing. I took a community education class about how to publish your novel. The teacher gave multiple ideas for publishing. At that point I was for self-publishing; however, I talked to some people who have publishers and they helped me re-think the decision. It seems more logical and practical to go through a publisher. I do not have money to even think of printing costs. I am completely dedicated to my novel enough to do the marketing but with a publisher's help, the marketing will be easier. Self-publishing may work for some people but it is just not for me.
Andrea says
I wish there was also the option 'maybe'. Because yes, I would consider it. Sure.
Douglas Morrison says
I think the self-publish option needs to find a clearer course than it has now. It is a place where two industries are colliding right now- Paper vs E-Book. One has tons of money and is buying it's way in, the other is holding on to tradition. They will finally meet in the middle somewhere and opinions and lives will change.
Professional expertice from agents who take on in-house publishing of E- Books, (speculating in titles themselves instead of going through traditional publishers) using their market and social experience. Is this a course you see as possible?
All the best to the hardest working agent around,
DougM
Bobbi says
I would rather not be published at all than self publish. I know that for some people it's a great option. But not for me.
Anonymous says
Interesting comments. I personally have self-published. The reason I did so is because the publishing world is so closed door, especially to black writers, frankly. When you know your writing is good, you should publish it and work your marketing plan. Would I like to go mainstream? Sure. More markets open and (a little) less work promoting it myself. Will I ever? Who knows. Right now, I'm not into waiting around for someone else to validate me when I'm getting five-star reviews on Amazon. I think it's a shame that peopl elike Josin would be so haughty as to indicate she would "never" purchase a self-pubbed book unless someone practically twisted her arm. Yes, I understand about quality. This is a sticking point for me too because I think anyone who is serious about the craft of writing would never publish crap and would hire professional editors, layout designers and cover designers. It can be accomplished for less money than one thinks (the biggest spend is marketing and all the free books you'll need to give away for publicity). I do intend to query agents again next year, though, simply because it's the nature of the beast. Right now, however, I love sitting down with my designers and brainstorming my own covers and keeping creative control of everything. My point: self-publishing is *not* simply a venue for poorly written books and for those of us who do self-publish, we really wish writers would respect the craft and stop publishing junk.
Maya says
I think if you want your work to be read by anyone other than your mom and your friends, you have to find a publisher. I think authors need to be backed by publishers to get our names out there. Also, I would like to know that my work has been "pre-approved" by those in the biz. It tells me that my writing has reached a certain level of professionalism. Feedback is essential, and there is just no substitute for professional feedback in the form of "YES, I believe in you enough to back you" or "No, this isn't for me."
Remus Shepherd says
My views on self-publishing are in flux.
I don't consider myself very good at self-promotion. That's why I need an agent and a publisher. I'm not in the craft of writing for money or fame — I want eyeballs, as many as possible. Only a crafty agent and the dedicated publicists that publishers employ can get me the number of eyeballs that I want.
So I don't see the point of self-publishing the majority of what I create.
I am, however, going to self-publish the side projects that I know traditional publishers will never accept. My webcomic will be printed in a bound edition a few years from now. I have at least one novel that appears to be unsellable, and I may self-publish that just to test the waters and get it out there. And if those experiments are successful I might consider self-publishing more of my works.
The longer I go without an ally — agent or publisher — who believes in me, the better self-publishing looks. I want millions of eyeballs, but if they're giving me the choice of tens or none I'll take what I can get.
Richard says
Everyone obviously has their own reasons for the path they choose. I went after both routes for my motivational book. My platform was small, and so I was unsuccesful in finding an agent in a timely manner, so I went the self-publishing route. I have had success based on my measurement and the people who have made purchases, whether via Amazon or at my events are very pleased.
As for the fiction I am working on, I will strive to go traditional. I believe it really just depends on the goals, types of work and countless other factors.
All in all, I will never look down upon someone who goes self-publishing.
KL says
I have published with small houses, and I have self-published. In the latter case, much of my self-pub work was done to return some out of print books to a new audience. During the original run, there were no Smashwords or Kindle publishing options to help increase exposure. In other cases, I have written shorts deemed too short for consideration by larger houses. Yet, as I have a following, I decided to put them out as eBooks.
K.L. Brady says
I self-published my debut novel The Bum Magnet and I would do it again in a NY minute. I did it only with the intent of finding readers for my book. Four months later I had interest from an editor. A couple weeks after that I got a literary agent. Two months after that I got a 2-book deal with a big six publisher. The self publishing stigma is slowly but surely diminishing. I truly believe as the quality of books improve over time, self published books will become the new slush pile for those that want to go the traditional route. And for everyone else, you may eventually be able to supplement (supplant) your income.
To address some of the myths: Yes, I got my self published book in bookstores (B&N and some indies across the country). No, I didn't have at least 5,000 sales (was only asked about my sales AFTER I received the offers). Yes, I did a lot of marketing (pimping books ain't easy). Yes, I got great reviews and decent word of mouth going (which probably attracted the editor). No it didn't cost me a mint (around $1k). No, I didn't query anyone after I published the book.
Why did I go traditional if if self publishing was so great? Distribution – the one major nut left to crack. 🙂
If I had left my manuscript rotting in a drawer when I couldn't get an agent, my manuscript would still be rotting in the drawer because I couldn't find an agent. 🙂 Self publishing is a great option for those willing to put the work in.
Mike says
I think there's room for both, but I would probably go the self-pub route first. When you consider that most authors out there, unless they are household names, are now expected/required to promote and market their own books, are expected to pay for their own signing tours out of pocket, and are getting bare minimum in return, you have to ask yourself what the publisher is really doing for you. Sure, you get the exposure of the bookstores, but with more and more bookstores in trouble, and more people choosing to shop online, is that really a benefit? Most books published today have a shelf-life of two weeks. That's the time frame publishers give authors to decide if they are going to pursue another book with that author.
When I hear about how a friend's novel was praised by agents and publishers, but rejected because it wouldn't sell, and how he self-published and the book became a number one seller online, it makes you wonder. I know that won't happen with everybody, but you still…
I also look at some of the publishers like Dorchester, who made the move to digital publishing first, with authors getting 10%. Why settle for 10% when you can self-publish yourself through Amazon for 70%? I'm thinking self-publishing is looking more and more appealing.
Project Savior says
I remember the direct to video trend that swept up movies. People said the same thing about the low budget films being a scourge to Hollywood. It turned out some B Movie directors became legends, some lost everything but for the most part the major studios grabbed the best talent for the high end products.
Today a new director is asked for their youtube page before they can make it through the door. I feel publishing will go the same way.
Maya says
@Anon at 11:46am-
If you're writing something that is not "hot" or not selling at the moment, then yes e-publishing is a way to reach some readers. You have to have the strong ability to promote yourself, and you'll still have a an uphill battle getting the distribution that a traditional publisher can offer.
But how do you know that your novel is not selling because it's not a hot topic or because the writing just plain isn't there yet? If your dream is to make a living off your work, to see it in a bookstore, and really create a career then IMO it is better to hone your craft and wait for the yes.
Carolyn says
There should have been another option: Print published and have or will self-publish backlist titles…
Which is what I will probably do as I get back the rights to my backlist. There are a lot of reasons now for print published authors to get that reversion letter in hand . . .
Kaitlyne says
I wouldn't, for two main reasons. One is that I'd never get the kind of readership to make it worthwhile. If I had a big following and fan base already who would buy my book no matter what, then sure, I'd be more willing to consider it, but I'm just another nobody. My books wouldn't be on the shelves, no one would no about it, and likely the only people who would ever buy it and read it would be friends or family–and I can just print off a copy for them.
The second is that there's no validation. Yes, I'd love to see my books in print, but if I did it myself, I'd know that it didn't really mean anything. I would like to know that other people found my work well written and entertaining enough to think it would sell.
And the truth of the matter is, I figure if I can't get an agent, it's probably because my work just isn't up to par yet. I don't mean to downplay the opinions of my beta-readers, and I am pleased to hear that they think it's great, but I'd like to have an expert tell me the same thing.
Anonymous says
Nathan,
I have this fantasy of publishing the first volume of a series. It doesn't sell very well and though I am contracted to continue writing, I am summarily dropped, told by my fantastic publisher that my numbers are too low to warrant them pubbing the second volume.
Now I don't even know that that's how it would work, if they would be able to drop me and so forth if there was a contract for three books or however many so I suppose I'm asking if that is possible. And yes I know it's probably not a great idea to write a series before one knows that the first volume will do well etc but in this fantasy, after things go south, I self-pub the second volume and am able to continue the series that-a-way.
So, my question is, is that legally possible in reality? If one's publisher doesn't want Book Two, whether or not they even know of its existence, is it possible for a writer to self-publish a 2nd volume which contains a story and characters that originally appear in a first work pubbed by a specific company?
Sommer says
This is probably more about my own mind set than the actual self-publishing industry, but I believe that if I put everything into a book, I follow all the rules, I seek lots of advice when I query, I query many, many agents and I work hard at improving my book when I get no bites, and if I still have no luck, then the problem is with me, not with the industry. Either I'm not ready or the market isn't ready for me, but I wouldn't try to go it alone.
I'd keep working on my craft and keep trying. I don't want to publish no matter what. I want to publish when my writing is ready and the market is ready because I want to be successful. I know self-published authors can do well, I just don't think of myself as going down that road. I respect that the publishing professionals have a lot more knowledge and experience that I don't and probably never will.
Anonymous says
I suppose my question also goes for a writer who publishes a couple of books of a series and then continues that series through self-publishing or for a writer who writes a sequel or prequel to a novel which may have done well but is either not wanted by the publisher or is simply self-pubbed by the writer because they decided that's what they wanted to do.
Again, this is all predicated on the existence of contracts etc and whether there is a signed one out there but I'm wondering if it's frowned upon or actionable in some way if, say, JK Rowling decides she wants to continue Harry Potter or if a much less well-known story such as Desperate Characters by Paula Fox, which is still being published, got the prequel/sequel treatment.
Anon @ 1201
John Sankovich says
I think it is more of a last effort if my book doesn't get picked up, and that's after exhausting all the other avenues that are available.
Mark Terry says
Your poll didn't quite have the response that I fit into, but let me expand a bit.
I am traditionally published–4 novels, a 5th coming out in a year (The Valley of Shadows, June 2011). I have also published a collection of novellas via iUniverse years back through a free program briefly affiliated with Mystery Writers of America. I wrote 3 children's novels that didn't fly after fairly extensive marketing, and I liked 2 of them enough–and my kids did as well–that I self-published them via Kindle (The Battle for Atlantis and Monster Seeker). Mostly I wanted those 2 to see the light of day because of my kids.
I had a thriller, formerly called Dancing In The Dark, now titled Edge, that we couldn't place. It was my first experiment with the Kindle DTP.
Just this weekend, after about 18 months of marketing and not finding it a home (including a Kensington editor wanting it but the marketing department shooting it down and a film producer trying to hunt up financing for it), I decided to self-publish Hot Money for Kindle. I expect to write more novels featuring the main character, Austin Davis, because I think he's fun.
But I'm also traditionally publishing my other Derek Stillwater novels, and I'm currently looking for a new agent, so I've got a proposal for an espionage novel, and I very much want to go the traditional route with that.
I think–and hope–that there will be room for both.
Mira says
This is an excellent question. I'm very interested to see the results of the poll, and I applaud you, Nathan, for taking this on!
I want to point out, though, that there is a very big difference between self-publishing (expensive and you have to find an audience from scratch) versus e-publishing, (more reasonable costs, and you have instant access to those that use e-devices).
For me, I'm very torn. I really, really want to work with some particular people in traditional publishing. And having your book in a bookstore is great distribution. It reaches folks that don't have e-readers.
That may change though. I mentioned this in the forums the other day. With POD, bookstores and e-published authors and agents may eventually decide to negotiate without the publisher.
And traditional publishing drives me crazy sometimes. It seems to hold disdain for the author as a culture. I'm sorry, and I'm not saying that is anyone's fault, but that's my perception. Some days that really makes me mad. Other days, it hurts me and pushes me away.
I also don't like that the industry takes (what I feel) is an unfair share of the profit. I'm not in it for the money, actually, but some people are. And it just feels part and parcel of not truly valuing the author. If the author were more valued, I think they would make sure the author could make a living in the industry just like everyone else. Especially given how important the author's contribution is.
If I e-publish, I lock in a very high royalty rate – up to 70% for the life of the book. I also have creative control. I pick my cover and title. And I'm going to have to market myself anyway, so why not get the profits that come from that?
On the other hand, I do want other eyes on my work, that's for sure. And I think traditional publishing has some absolutely terrific people working within it. There is something wonderful about having a team to support you. But I'm not sure it's worth the trade-off – I can gather my own team, as well.
This is all hypothetical, of course, since I haven't written anything, but I'm trying to answer the question honestly.
When I write something, and I'm ready to publish, I know I'll query you, Nathan. Obviously. If you decide the projects not right for you, I may approach a few others. After that, I just don't know.
Jesse says
ABSOLUTELY!! Do I prefer it over traditionally published–oh yeah. As someone pointed out, there's a lot of your own leg work involved. Problem is, being traditionally published these days, you're STILL doing that legwork. Especially with the indie and smaller presses. You're expected to sell your own books, set up your own book signings, send your own review copies. Hell, if I'm gonna do that, I'm gonna self/subsidy-pub and get a better royalty rate.
And yes, I'm a control freak. I want more control over my story, my cover. I edited the hell out of that. I had good friends who are also professional editors read and edit story and copy edit. Now, I want to control how it's viewed, how it's marketed. Like I said, if I'm gonna do it anyway, I might as well do it right.
So, I'd prefer a trad contract. But I would self/subsidy-pub in a heart beat. And probably will here very soon.
Phoenix says
I'm soliciting short stories for an anthology that I'll e-publish as a way for those involved to test the waters. I have a pro artist experienced with cover design attached and some fair editing skill so I expect a quality product.
Depending on how that goes, then sure, I'm on board with e-publishing projects where agents and editors have praised the writing and the storylines — taken them to editorial board meetings, even — only to turn them down in the end. As long as the work is not an embarrassment, why not?
DG says
Did I want to land an agent and then sell to a traditional publisher? Of course I did, it would be a dream come true.
After an exhaustive attempt at even finding an agent however, I began to investigate self publishing, although it still seemed like forbidden fruit.
Then my health worsened again, and I realized I didn't want to die with my manuscript left as merely a file on my computer. I wanted my kids to have a finished product.
Now I'm just weeks away from publishing through Createspace, and I couldn't be happier.
Anonymous says
Nathan — I know you said the topic is almost like religion for some people. And you're not wrong because what I'm about to say may be a little controversial.
But, really, isn't it a little disingenuous when agents don't offer much of an opinion on self-publishing? "It's a good option for some people, blah, blah." Yes, there are cases where it can help authors (if they already have a name for themselves, or are writing for niche market, or don't care about having a real distribution).
But REALLY, in the spirit of what most of us are trying to accomplish — to become a mainstream author in a mainstream genre — isn't self-publishing a sort of cop-out, and giving up on your dream?
Douglas Dorow says
I plan to self publish my Thriller ebook on kindle, smashwords, pubit, etc. The financial incentives are there with the percentages an independent author gets, plus with the direction publishing is going and the momentum ebooks are gathering makes it a good time for a new author.
Traditional publishing would maybe be an alternative later to widen distribution beyond the eworld.
To be a successful independent ebook author I need to focus on the same things I would going the traditional route:
Write a great story
Have it reviewed and edited
Have a great cover
The writing is up to me, I'm part of a critique group and have beta readers, I've hired an editor and a cover designer.
I hope readers will like my story.
ThrillersRus.blogspot.com
swampfox says
It's a brutal world out there. If you have no name you might be stuck in writer's limbo forever. But if you have a name, like Snookie, you get published with little effort.
Extremely talented people with no name who put in a lot of hard work (yesterday's topic) will have a chance, but with bad timing and/or bad luck success still might elude them.
So, yes, there is room for both. You prefer one, but might have to settle for the other to get launched, and then…well…what happens then might still depend on timing and luck.
Giles Hash says
Personally, I don't plan on self-publishing simply because the "traditional" machine is much better at distributing a book to the widest markets. Of course I'll put in a ton of effort to sell my book once it's published, but when I want to go into a store, the last thing I need is a fight between a bookstore and an indie-press/distributor.
I've seen it happen so many times. An author comes into a store for a signing and someone (either the store of the distributor) dropped the ball and didn't get any copies for the author to sign. As someone with a day-job and family, I just don't have time to fix those problems on a weekly basis…and I've seen it happen several weeks in a row at the store I worked at.
Les Edgerton says
No. And, why do they call it "self-publishing?" What happened to the original, correct term–"vanity publishing?"
You can call it anything you want to, but it's still just vanity publishing. Just cheaper. And, I guess, using a more politically-correct term…
There's a somewhat well-known writer who is all over the place self-promoting is success in self-publishing and making money at $2.99, but if anyone ever read his books, there's a reason he never sold that much in print. They're only worth about $2.99 and that's being extremely generous. Mostly… drek…
Nathan Bransford says
anon re: series-
It depends on the contract you sign with the publisher, but usually you'd be free to self-publish sequels if they weren't interested.
anon@12:36-
I do have an opinion on self-publishing – that every author should decide what is best for themselves. Some projects are best pursued via self-publishing, some are best via traditional publishing. That's not lip service. Every situation is different. Self-publishing is not a route to mainstream success for most authors, but it has been for some.
I'm not going to demonize it or oversell it because it really all depends on the project and on the author. I would still suggest overall, when in doubt give the traditional publishing process a try first, but if that doesn't work or if the author doesn't want to go that route it's not my place to decide what's best for their book.
Lindsay says
Self-publishing via the Internet *is* probably the wave of the future, but I'm not interested in being self-published. I might consider experimenting once I'm published by a traditonal print publisher, if they wouldn't mind.
abc says
No b/c I'm too lazy.
Khanada says
I voted that self-publishing is not for me cos I'm a beginner. My goal is to write well enough to be published, so self-publishing just doesn't tell me whether I've done that.