Preferences in Publication Routes

Discussion in 'Traditional Publishing' started by Wreybies, Sep 25, 2016.

  1. Steerpike

    Steerpike Felis amatus Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Messages:
    13,984
    Likes Received:
    8,557
    Location:
    California, US
    You appear to have misread the thread.
     
  2. Tenderiser

    Tenderiser Not a man or BayView

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2015
    Messages:
    7,471
    Likes Received:
    10,216
    Location:
    London, UK
    ?

    If they're not using the term for legitimacy, why is NOT using the term denying them legitimacy?
     
  3. Steerpike

    Steerpike Felis amatus Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Messages:
    13,984
    Likes Received:
    8,557
    Location:
    California, US
    BayView, I believe, is the one who said they were trying to gain legitimacy. In actuality, the legitimacy stems from what they're doing with respect to writing and publishing. The use of language is an attempt to deny that which they've obtained through their efforts. Surely this distinction isn't hard to follow - the distinction between granting something and denying that something exists.

    To use an example not related to publishing (and no, I'm not equating them so please don't play the inevitable straw man), look at natural rights. Humans have certain rights by virtue of being human, so natural rights theorists would say. At various times, some humans have been denied rights because terminology was used to define them as less than human. It didn't change the fact that they were human and entitled to the same rights as anyone else by virtue of their humanness, terminology was used to define them in a way that sought to pull them outside the scope of "human."

    So, at the very least, I hope you can see that it is a mistake to conflate these two things. The quality of having legitimacy and terminology used to deny that the legitimacy exists are two entirely separate things. You can have legitimacy and have someone use language in an attempt to take it away. Has happened innumerable times in human history.

    One set of people want to use the proper term to indicate the legitimacy that arises as a result of their efforts, another set want to use language to deny that the legitimacy exists. It's simple.
     
    NigeTheHat likes this.
  4. BayView

    BayView Huh. Interesting. Contributor

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2014
    Messages:
    10,462
    Likes Received:
    11,689
    The "bias against self-publishing" thing seems a bit odd... the last three books I've published have been self-published, as have several others. I really don't think I'm biased against self-publishing.

    Not agreeing with you on all aspects of self-publishing doesn't equate to being biased against it.

    And I haven't ignored the link you posted, I just disagree with their decision. I don't accept your belief that their use of the term is "proper" and all other understandings of the term are "biased".

    I'm not an indie publisher. I'm a self-publisher. I think the term "indie" already has a good meaning, and I don't think we should change that meaning just because some publishing organization you've found is hungry for members or because some other self-publishers are trying to make themselves look like something other than what they are. There's nothing wrong with self-publishing, and when I do it, I don't need to hide behind an imprecise term.
     
    Tenderiser likes this.
  5. Steerpike

    Steerpike Felis amatus Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Messages:
    13,984
    Likes Received:
    8,557
    Location:
    California, US
    I believe you said in your own post on how to get published that you were biased against it, at least for new authors. At any rate, as I said above, given the plain meaning of the terms we're discussing, and the fact that historically it is not uncommon for this sort of thing to occur in the face of disruptive technologies, I think it is fair to conclude that there is an underlying bias at work in such situations. Apart from that there's no real reason to object to the idea that some self-publishers are, in fact, independent publishers. It's self-evident based on language alone, and takes a fair amount of contortion to argue that they're not.
     
  6. ChickenFreak

    ChickenFreak Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    15,262
    Likes Received:
    13,084
    You seem to be focusing on "independent" when discussing the objection of referring to self-publishers as independent publishers. I, on the other hand, focus on "publisher".

    To me, a publisher, in the context of the business of books, is an entity independent of the author. A publisher that is not an entity independent of the author needs a modifying word. That modifying word is "self-".

    If you want to also add "indie" as in "indie self-publisher", that's fine. But it's not "indie" that is under debate here for me; it's "publisher".
     
  7. BayView

    BayView Huh. Interesting. Contributor

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2014
    Messages:
    10,462
    Likes Received:
    11,689
    "a bias in favour of new authors trying for trade/traditional publication with the biggest publisher possible" just isn't the same as being biased against self-publishing.

    And if you want the word "bias" to be applied, sure, I'm biased against calling self-publishers "indie publishers" but it's not because I'm biased against an activity I personally take part in. It's because I'm in favour of clarity. Just about all of the arguments I've had on this site about self-publishing have had nothing to do with being against self-publishing and everything to do with being in favour of people going into it with their eyes open.

    I've seen too many people put way too much time into their work and then seen them humiliated and crushed by how few copies they sold via self-publishing. If these people did everything they could to find a different publishing method and couldn't do it and then decided to self-publish, then I guess their disappointment was inevitable. But if they jumped into self-publishing faster than they should have because they believed some of the pro-self-publishing hype that's spiralling around on the internet? Then their disappointment wasn't inevitable, and that makes me angry.

    It also makes me angry to think that their suffering might be enhanced because they still believe, even after their own experiences, the hype that says it's easy to sell self-published books. Because if they still believe that then they also have to believe that their failure is their fault. They must have written a crappy book or messed up the marketing or something, because everyone says how easy it is to sell self-published books and they still couldn't manage to do it.

    I don't have a bias against people choosing, with their eyes open and with the best information available to them, to self-publish. But getting attention for a self-published book is really, really hard, and the vast majority of self-published books will not sell well, and as a community of writers we owe it to our community members to make that clear. And I think self-publishers calling themselves "independent publishers" is just one more game, one more way to blur the line between self-publishing and having a publisher. And I don't think that line should be blurred, because I think writers need to see the differences as clearly as possible.
     
    Brindy, Tenderiser and ChickenFreak like this.
  8. Steerpike

    Steerpike Felis amatus Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Messages:
    13,984
    Likes Received:
    8,557
    Location:
    California, US
    No, I covered that above in relation to the IBPA. Their definition, which I like, focused on the business approach of the person or entity involved. So, under that analysis, some guy who publishes his memoir through CreateSpace with his hand-drawn cover so he can hand out a few copies to relatives on holidays is not a "publisher," because you're missing the business commitment to the venture. A self-publisher who has the business focus and is producing a product accordingly would be a "publisher." While from a business standpoint it makes sense to use the word "publisher" to describe a person or entity reaching a minimum threshold in the business sense, it doesn't make any sense to me to say that it has to be an independent entity. If you had an entity using exactly the same criteria for quality, professionalism, cover art, editing, and the like publishing their neighbor's book, they're a publisher under your definition, but if they're doing it for their own work they're not. That's arbitrary, whereas the other definition is tied to a level of approaching the enterprise as a business.
     
  9. Steerpike

    Steerpike Felis amatus Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Messages:
    13,984
    Likes Received:
    8,557
    Location:
    California, US
    Getting a publisher for a traditional book is also hard, and the majority of those who attempt that route will never get a publishing contract. I don't think people are uneducated about that, for the most part. I don't know why you're pretending all of what you mention can't be clear to people if we use a word in its most reasonable, plain sense to encompass certain aspects of a technologically new publishing model. And not doing so because there is some speculative group that might lack understanding is a paternalistic approach, and I don't think a good one. As I said, we're going through contortions here to find some excuse not to apply the word in a plain manner. I haven't heard any arguments based on the plain meaning of the phrase "independent publisher," with the exception of Chicken Freak's post about what constitutes as publisher, which I think was already addressed in the IBPA approach that so far seems the best to me. And when the contortions don't prove effective, it's mostly snark and dismissiveness, which while they might make for fun forum discussions don't make particularly compelling arguments.
     
  10. ChickenFreak

    ChickenFreak Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    15,262
    Likes Received:
    13,084
    And my definition is tied in part to a separation between publisher and author. I see no reason why your definition should take priority over mine.
     
  11. ChickenFreak

    ChickenFreak Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    15,262
    Likes Received:
    13,084
    I need to comment, as I had before, that on this topic you seem to be completely incapable of even a minimum level of respect for your opposition. You seem to feel that personal attacks qualify as a debating tactic. I'm seeing most of the snark on your side.
     
  12. Steerpike

    Steerpike Felis amatus Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Messages:
    13,984
    Likes Received:
    8,557
    Location:
    California, US
    You should scroll back through the thread.
     
  13. ChickenFreak

    ChickenFreak Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    15,262
    Likes Received:
    13,084
    There seem to be areas where you are absolutely, utterly unable to consider the possibility that the opposition honestly holds the views that that they speak, without those stated views being some sort of cover for deeper, darker attitudes.

    If you weren't otherwise so thoroughly rational, I wouldn't comment on this--there are plenty of people in the Internet who assume that disagreement means evil intent. But you are otherwise thoroughly rational, on so many other subjects. So it puzzles me.
     
    BayView likes this.
  14. Steerpike

    Steerpike Felis amatus Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Messages:
    13,984
    Likes Received:
    8,557
    Location:
    California, US
    I'll give you a few examples, and you can give your honest input as to whether these are attempts at friendly or respectful discussion or whether they're loaded. I don't mind, either way, but I may engage people on the same level they're engaging me.

    Post 33: Tenderiser says self-publishers have "hijacked" the term, which doesn't strike me as a respectful thing to say.

    Post 58: Tenderiser again refers to hijacking, and also says people who use the term the way I suggest are "disingenuous."

    Post 59: BayView laments the "unfortunate" fact that self-publisher are co-opting this term because they're trying for legitimacy. That's not a respectful characterization, I submit.

    Post 69: Tenderiser paints the side I'm advocating for as "silly" and "clutching at straws."

    Post 79: BayView characterizes an organization (and/or their membership) that is well-known and has been around since 1983 as "hungry for members" and "hiding behind" a term, because she happens to disagree with the way they define a word.

    And so on.

    In addition, if you don't mind taking the time since this is fairly trivial overall, you can look for the first snarky post from me. I'm sure it is in between some of those mentioned above.

    I don't mind the snarky approach if that's how people want to banter on forums, and I may respond in kind. But let us not pretend this is all going in one direction. If you think I'm wrong about that in view of the above, I'm open to listening.
     
  15. Steerpike

    Steerpike Felis amatus Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Messages:
    13,984
    Likes Received:
    8,557
    Location:
    California, US
    On a related but side note, @ChickenFreak, I'm not sure I've ever been snarky with you on the forums (I could be mistaken), but I can't recollect you being snarky either. I do try to confine it to those who indicate their acquiescence, either explicitly or tacitly. And now I have a document to edit, so I'm off again for a bit.
     
  16. ChickenFreak

    ChickenFreak Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    15,262
    Likes Received:
    13,084
    I'm just not seeing what you're seeing--that is, I'm not seeing that the snark is primarily coming from your opposition. To even try to persuade you, I would need to shift my point of view around to try to be in your head for a while, so that I can see what you're seeing. And so far, I'm failing.

    If I cease to fail, I'll come back. I just wanted you to know that I wasn't ignoring your post.
     
  17. Steerpike

    Steerpike Felis amatus Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Messages:
    13,984
    Likes Received:
    8,557
    Location:
    California, US
    I didn't think you were ignoring it. In getting in my car to go to a meeting. On the negative side, late meeting. Positive side, audio book to listen to for the trip. Relevance is I'll be tied up for some time.
     
  18. BayView

    BayView Huh. Interesting. Contributor

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2014
    Messages:
    10,462
    Likes Received:
    11,689
    Okay, to be honest... in my experience, getting a publisher for a book ISN'T hard, not compared to getting sales for a self-published book. But I'm willing to step beyond my experience and agree that based on what I've heard from others, most of the time it's hard to get a publisher. But I think that's a widely known and acknowledged fact. It certainly isn't one that I've ever disagreed with.

    So we're faced with two difficult things. Why is it bad to say that they're both difficult? It's hard to get a publisher. But that doesn't mean people shouldn't try. If it doesn't work out, self-publishing is still there, waiting.

    And if you self-publish, it will be really hard to get readers.

    I think I'm done, after this post. I'm with @ChickenFreak in generally finding you really sensible, and I generally value your contributions. I think you're wrong on this, but... whatever. (I had absolutely no intention of wandering into another pointless and frustrating self-publishing thread on this forum. And I've been reminded of why that was a good intention. So I'm going to wander out...)
     
  19. Steerpike

    Steerpike Felis amatus Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Messages:
    13,984
    Likes Received:
    8,557
    Location:
    California, US
    That is in fact what I've said a number of times. Which is why I support a hybrid approach as making the most sense for new authors, so you're not wasting time while you're trying to land a traditional publishing contract. Given that both approaches are difficult and the odds are stacked against you, it makes sense to maximize your chances by pursuing both.
     
  20. Tenderiser

    Tenderiser Not a man or BayView

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2015
    Messages:
    7,471
    Likes Received:
    10,216
    Location:
    London, UK
    Are you really arguing this? I'm finding it difficult to believe.

    'Independent publisher' has an established meaning that is more than its dictionary definition. I'm 100% sure you know this.

    Self-publishers don't fit that established meaning. I'm also sure you know this.

    You obviously agree with Bay's (and my) belief that self-publishers use the term "indie" to feel more legitimate. You can say you don't agree, but your posts have made it pretty obvious you do.

    You're coming up with arbitrary boundaries of who can and can't call themselves independent publishers according to YOUR definition. I don't see how that's preferable to using the established one.

    So yeah... I think I've said all I have to say. People reading this thread can make their own minds up.
     
  21. BayView

    BayView Huh. Interesting. Contributor

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2014
    Messages:
    10,462
    Likes Received:
    11,689
    But you can't be a hybrid with one book. You can't "pursue both" while you're still a new author.

    Is that seriously all this is going to come down to? (I'm breaking my walk-away resolution on the chance that this can be resolved so easily).

    I'm suggesting that new authors try to place their first book with a publisher. After that? I think it'll depend on each author's path when/whether it makes sense to start self-publishing. I agree that most authors should give a hybrid approach serious consideration at some point in their careers.

    But some authors don't write a second book. Some have spent the last twenty years working on their magnum opus. And I absolutely believe that those authors will have a better chance of getting a sizeable audience for their books if they work with a publisher. So new authors, with only one book to publish... I think they should give their book the best chance at finding a readership.

    I guess you're more concerned with time than I am, maybe? You think of looking for a publishing deal as "wasting time"? But how long did the person spend writing the book? I'm more concerned that the writing time not be wasted, rather than the "looking for a publisher" time.
     
  22. Steerpike

    Steerpike Felis amatus Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Messages:
    13,984
    Likes Received:
    8,557
    Location:
    California, US
    Sure you can. How long does it take the average writer to see their first book on the shelf, from the time they type the last word until they get a publisher (and agent first if they go that route) and the book goes into print? Are they not writing during that time? I would hope so. I suspect many could have something ready to go the other route well before the novel they are shopping traditionally sees the light of day.
     
  23. psychotick

    psychotick Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2011
    Messages:
    1,526
    Likes Received:
    477
    Location:
    Rotorua, New Zealand
    Hi,

    To jump in a little here. Yes I call myself an indie, and I do like the term better than self publisher. But that's for two reasons. The first is of course that the term self published has been absolutely trashed for the last ten years or so to mean - "inferior crap". Lets not beat about the bush here. And I'm not saying that a lot of self published stuff isn't crap. I'm simply saying that I don't want to be associated with it. So why should I be? But there's another reason I like the term indie - because it references the independant aspect of my work. I don't write shall we say - formulaic fiction (not wanting to cause offence here since I've already been slammed for using another equivalent term). Or at least I don't write that sort of work completely. I like to throw things in that I don't see elsewhere in my reading lists. I like to be a little more original. And not to be constrained by the dictates of various publishing concerns.

    There is pride in the music industry in being an indie musician, for exactly this reason.

    So if I am a publisher - and I do by definition publish books, and I'm independant of the trade publishing concerns, why shouldn't I use the term indie?

    But lets broaden this out a bit here. The term legitimacy was used here - which carries with it the underlying assumption that self publishing isn't legitimate. But legitimacy and attempts at claiming it, subtly or not, trade or not, are rife throughout the entire industry.

    When a trade published work seeks an endorsement from an established author, that's an attempt at claiming legitimacy. When a cover contains lines like "if you liked ... etc" that's an attempt at claiming legitimacy. When a publishing company or an indie places a big publisher's mark on their book, that's an attempt at claiming legitimacy.

    When I've read through the last couple of pages about indies claiming legitimacy through the terms, in some of the posts I get the feeling that writers are trying desperately to keep self publishers out because of the perception that it "lowers the side". And this underlying thought that it's somehow wrong for self publishers to do this. But why is it wrong? Especially when trade publishers have been doing the same thing for decades.

    That's I think the question that people need to answer, at least for themselves. Are they opposed to the concept of self publishers using the term indie because it genuinely confuses them and people won't understand? Or because they feel it demeans their bastion of quality and value of trade publishing?

    Cheers, Greg.
     
  24. BayView

    BayView Huh. Interesting. Contributor

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2014
    Messages:
    10,462
    Likes Received:
    11,689
    But all the people self-publishing crap are ALSO calling themselves indie publishers... which means that any stigma you perceive attached to "self-publisher" will be transferred over to "indie publisher" - and under that term it will smear not only other self-publishers but also the poor independent publishing companies.

    So - the term "indie publisher" when applied to self-publishers doesn't really confuse me, it just means I have to ask another question - are you a real indie publisher or a self-publisher calling yourself an indie publisher? And it's not about some sort of snobbish ranking, it's just about trying to figure out what the person/company does. Like, should I be considering submitting a manuscript to you? Obviously not, if you're a self-publisher, but possibly if you're an indie publisher. etc.

    ETA: I think the lack of clarity also makes data collection more complicated, and if there's one thing that would be really, really valuable to people trying to decide how to publish their work, it's reliable data. If I read a report that says that the average book sold via independent publishing sells 2 000 copies, I really need to know what "independent publishing" means in order for that number to be useful. It's lower than I'd hope for what I think of as independent publishing, but higher than I'd expect for self-publishing... it's close to useless, really, if the terms aren't clearly defined.
     
    Last edited: Sep 30, 2016
    jannert and ChickenFreak like this.
  25. ChickenFreak

    ChickenFreak Contributor Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    15,262
    Likes Received:
    13,084
    If "indie publisher" is taken by self publishers, we're probably going to need a new phrase. "Indie traditional publisher" might do the job?
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice