Self Published Books

[David Castle]

I feel that one of the most important factors is 'self belief'. Sure, not everyone is going to like what I write about, namely the time of the Monmouth Rebellion. It was an extremely violent part of English history. Plus that dreaded topic of religion rears it's head.
However, the list of characters that survived that period are ideal subjects of research and additions to the storyline. Daniel Defoe was there at Sedgemoor, he had been paid as a 'soldier of fortune' and served under Lord Grey of Wark, who was a total coward. Samuel Pepys, John Churchill, Percy Kirke, Feversham and of course the hanging Judge 'George Jeffreys' all played their parts.
My first publisher has gone bust, owing it's writers thousands of pounds. I for one was never paid, but I hung in there and found a publisher that liked my writing and was prepared to assist.
Never give up trying.

[Celia Hayes]

Oh, yes - the look inside feature is worth it's weight in gold. Seriously, I review books for PODBRAM, which usually are POD books, or from teensy boutique publishers ... and yes, there's no argument from me that a good percentage of them suck with the force to pull in small planets ... but when you can go online, and read a couple of sample chapters of it, or use the "search inside" feature, then there's no excuse for having paid $20 for an awful book. (And this applies to traditionally published books as well, and I speak as a reader who couldn't get past the first chapter of the Da Vinci Code since I kept tripping and falling flat over sentances that read like entries in the Bulwer-Lytton bad writing contest...)

CW Gortner's advice to a writer who wants to self-publish is very much on point. I gave it a year, for each of my books, the last two of which were read by agents who said they loved the story and I could tell it very well ... but they just didn't think they could market it to a publisher. OK, then - I had feedback from a wide circle of readers, and a severe going-over of the Adelsverein Trilogy by three editors - one for historical matters and two for grammar and punctuation. A lot of the other writers I know at the Independent Authors' Guild have done pretty much the same. Some of their books are pretty pedestrian, one or two are awful - but a good portion of them are just amazing. Dianne Salerni has a book about the Fox Sisters, who founded the spiritualist movement, Jack Shakely wrote a Civil War novel about the war among the Cherokee in Indian Territory, and Frances Hunter wrote a terrific account of Lewis and Clark's last journey, and Lloyd Lofthouse wrote about Sir Robert Hart in China ... all of them are terrific reads. And every one was turned down, repeatedly by mainstream publishing.

[andrewoberg]

Wow...this has been a very interesting thread. Thanks to everyone for their thought-provoking posts.

On the whole I'd say it's absolutely best to remain open-minded. Some books published by the big houses may strike me as terrible, but others as great. And of course the same goes for POD/self-published books. So why should stories remain untold just because a publisher deems them less likely to make a profit? Those willing to self-publish (and that includes me--in fact, I didn't, and don't, want to even try and get a mainstream publisher) should be given the same consideration as any other writer. Each book needs to stand on its own, and if a writer isn't willing to let you read a little for free, whether that's via amazon's Look Inside! feature or somewhere else, that should be a red flag. After all, it's hard to judge a book by its cover and you can always browse through a book at a bookstore before you buy it.

[Michy]

I just read through this thread in its entirety, and it is indeed fascinating -- thanks to Andrew for bringing it back up, else I never would have discovered it. This really is a complex issue, and everyone's comments are thought-provoking and enlightening (and so well-stated, also. You all must be writers. )

As to Christina's lament about how the mainstream publishers decide what the reading public wants to read..... I think the same can be said of many areas in our modern society. Take the fashion industry, for instance; they decide what colors and styles they are going to promote each season, and those become what's "in." Fortunately, as I have been sewing since about age 6 I have never been limited to what's available in the stores; if I don't find what I want I make it myself. Obviously, with books I don't have that option; and frankly, it has become harder and harder for me to find reading material to my liking in recent years. I find myself reaching back for older books and older writers, rather than reading current stuff.

And MLE's comments about the current shake-up of the publishing industry are spot-on. The publishing industry is definitely undergoing a sea change right now, as are other industries (music and newspapers, for example). It will be interesting to see how it all shakes down, and what business model the publishers will emerge with that will allow them to survive and become viable in the future.

And you all have give me interesting food for thought regarding self-published books. I have always avoided them like the plague, assuming they were sub-standard. But you've given me reason to think that may not always be the case -- especially if self-publishing becomes more of a trend in the future; or at least, the new way for writers to get themselves noticed so they will be picked up by a major publishing house.

Most of all, this thread has reinforced just how difficult it is for a writer to get noticed and published. So to those of you who have succeeded at doing that -- congratulations!

[andrewoberg]

[quote=""Michy""]And you all have give me interesting food for thought regarding self-published books. I have always avoided them like the plague, assuming they were sub-standard. But you've given me reason to think that may not always be the case -- especially if self-publishing becomes more of a trend in the future; or at least, the new way for writers to get themselves noticed so they will be picked up by a major publishing house.[/quote]

It will be very interesting to see how publishers change themselves, or rather, how those that can/do decide to change themselves. The industry seems to be reacting very, very slowly (even more so than newspapers) to emerging technologies, and the base strategy seems to be to focus solely on potential best-sellers by already established commercial writers. All of which can make for some pretty boring reading!

But the main point I wanted to make, is that for a growing number of self-published writers, being picked up by a major publishing house is something they never want to happen. For many indie writers, being published by a major house means killing your art by allowing far too many middle-men into the mix; people who are businesspeople first and readers second. Many also disagree with the whole commercial side to publishing and how it is handled. For these people, speaking broadly, I would say that their goal is to produce a work of commercial quality without being one produced for commercial interests. I of course can't speak for everyone, though.

[LoveHistory]

Creative control is indeed a good reason to self-pub.

I think many writers try to balance between the art and the business. When survival depends on income from one's writing, compromises will be made. A heart-breaking work of staggering genius is wonderful, but few would recommend eating a book (at least not without a very tasty sauce).

[Misfit]

I think the biggest handicap for me as a reader is that libraries will not buy self-published books (at least mine won't) unless there are *professional reviews* or industry buzz to justify it. I had put in a purchase request for Carla's book (which is a small publisher, not self-published) and that was the reason they gave me for not picking up copies of her book.

I hate to say it, but I've been burned enough for dropping $18 on a self-pub that was beyond dire and finances the way they are I am hesistant to buy a book by a new to me author (and trust me, that is not just limited to self-published authors). If I love them, I can always purchase later.

[Divia]

My library won't buy them either. but then again my library has some issues, as you all know, when it comes to historical fiction.

That being said I believe the biggest pitfall for self published authors is the lack of editing. It seems to me that many of these authors write one draft, have a beta reader do it and call it a day. They rush it out and then we get 18 dollars of crap.

I know not all are like that, but it sure feels that way to me.

Are there any self publishers that can separate themselves from the crowd? Are there any who actually make their authors go through countless edits?

[Misfit]

Typos and lack of editing are a big issue with me as well.

The other problem is how to promote yourself without overkill (which has become so bad at the Ammy HF boards I rarely go there anymore). I think HFO's own boswellbaxter did an excellent job of this with the first edition of The Traitor's Wife. Perhaps we can get her over here and let the rest of you know how she did it?

[Sonia]

I side with MIsfit on this.. I have wasted tons of dollars on very expensive self published books and one time, I had one so bad, I literally cried over the loss of my money. There are some good ones out there but I have personally made a rule.. If the book is self published and A. Has 5 or 6 GLOWING 5 star reviews on Amazon (all one hit wonder reviewers) and B. Has NO reviews on goodreads, I won't buy it.

My advice to self published authors: Get your book in the library system. Even if you have to donate a few copies. Get it in the library system so avid but cheap readers can read it and then you just may get a few postitive reviews out there and thus, starts some sales.. If your book is 18 bloody dollars and nobody has touched it, you are doomed.