Nah, no one's saying anything like that. At least not here they're not. Don't put words in my mouth. I'm saying the picture's a lot more complicated. Sometimes you have to look at your options, and sometimes self-publishing makes sense.
I think that's what it sounds like you're saying. It's essentially what I've said in my earlier posts, including the last one. Perhaps you're not saying what you mean? Just like in fiction, it's your job to make your story clear, to make sure we know what you're saying. If I think that's what you are saying, and he thinks that's what you are saying, there's a good chance you're saying it. Even if you don't mean to.
It is dangerous to be so adamant about something you don't fully understand. I'm no expert, but neither are you. You sound like a car salesman that's never driven a car.
I don't believe I called you anything of the sort, don't put words in my mouth please. Perhaps you should read what I said again. I never said you weren't being respectful, I said I believed you were using the definition "modest" and that it doesn't fit. I stand by that. It doesn't. Expecting it to sell modestly, have modest success, and/or get modest reviews is NOT the same as the authors being modest by self-publishing; The author showing humility. I stand by what I said. As far as the thread about the book that sounds fine, I misunderstood, and though I apologized beforehand if I had mistaken your intent, I'll apologize again. I'm sorry I assumed you would be advertising.
Well, I know what I said and it certainly wasn't "I'm a genius! Nobody understands my genius!" Not trying to sell you on anything here, guys. Just defending my point of view. it's amazing to me the extent to which writers get turned off by self-publishing. Personally, I've seen some empowering stories about it. And I've put a lot of thought into this sort of thing. It's like this buddy of mine who opened a theatre in his basement. Laugh at it if you want, but everyone loves that theatre. And it's not because he thinks other people don't get his genius. It's because he wants to take the bull by the horns and do something. A lot of the time, that's what self-publishing amounts to. I know the circular argument that comes after this. So you don't like self-publishing. Cool. I get it. That's just like, your opinion, man.
A little red flag should go up in your head when people say things like, "Many people are doing ________, and many people are being successful with ________. But then, they have nothing to back it up with. It's all just talk.
There's plenty to back it up. I posted a few links earlier in this thread. I've seen a lot more, too.
He said that was the equivalent of what you're saying in his opinion. He didn't say that's what you said. You CHOSE to be offended by it. Good for him. Nobody said YOU shouldn't do it. We just wouldn't, and these are our reasons why. It's a simple thing. No need to get hot under the collar. They are exceptions...there are always exceptions. Been there, said this.
Haha -- hot under the collar. OOOh I'm so fuming!! It's not that. It's just that what he said I said simply isn't what I said. No "offense" taken. Just correcting him.
I'm not putting any words in your mouth. While I'm sure the use of ironic quotation marks confused you, they are meant to represent a faceless number of people who go through that route. I thought that was pretty clear that I wasn't quoting you but showing you what I thought of the subject using a made up sentence. I never attributed it to you. The picture is pretty complicated, yes. But I stand by my statement that implying that self publishing is an example of showing humility is simply wrong.
Two, actually. I have about 30 I could post, but something tells me it's not going to make a difference. 30 people could win the lottery, right?
Think about that, please. 30 brilliant successes in the self-publishing industry. Well bowl me over with a feather, I must have been wrong all this time. Seriously? 30? I hope you're joking if that's all you've got, but I suspect you're not. Definitely traditional publishing for me.
Self Publishing promotes laziness. It is human nature. Are all self published novels bad? Of course not. What percentage of self published novels though were published too early in the writing process? I don't have the numbers, but I feel it is safe to say that the percentage of poorly edited self published novels is much higher than the traditional novel. It only makes sense. To encourage new novelists so strongly that self publishing is the way to go is misleading, in my opinion. Instead, they should be focusing on their writing skills, and how to improve their craft. There's no such thing as an easy road to success. 99.9% of the time, a new writer has NOT been shafted by the system. They just aren't writing good enough.
Very well said Forgive my sarcasm in my previous post, but the circles are endless. I think we already said all this stuff, guam.
Some good points made in this thread, although I still disagree with a lot about the way self-publishing is being characterized as lazy. While I'm sure that's the case sometimes, it isn't always. @Trish -- 30 is just a number I pulled out to represent roughly the number of successful cases I've read about. It's not exact, and it's certainly not all of them. Anyway, not much point in getting into a debate here based on statistics if you ask me. @Vance -- It really did look like you were trying to lump me in with a bunch of no-goods who are whining about not having their self-proclaimed genius understood. Not only do I object to being characterized that way -- I object to that characterization of other authors who decide to self-publish, even if they aren't successful. I'm not personally offended, but it shouln't be surprising that I object to the implications of that tone. I do appreciate some of this perspective, and it's encouraged me to think about some ways to ensure that this project is successful, even though that's not really my job. I'd like to suggest that we move the productive aspects of this conversation over to another thread I'm going to start about my book once I get all my thoughts together on it. It's only one dimension of a larger conversation, but I'd certainly appreciate any honest criticism of this aspect of the project in a conversation with more context. The aspect of the conversation that doesn't seem productive is the question of whether the system is broken or not. I think that seems to be a sensitive issue to approach, and we'll just have to agree to disagree on it.
I think I disagree on more than just the state of the "system", but I'll let that lie for the moment. First you were offended by Vance (I state that by the tone of your response), then you insisted you weren't, now you say you "object" to it, but you're "not personally offended". Again, your overall tone seems to contradict your words, but hey, you say tomato..... I don't honestly see how your future thread will turn out differently, but we'll see I guess. You're probably right about there not being much point in having a debate about statistics. At this point the sky is green, the grass is pink, and dirt is purple. What I mean is, you're gonna believe what you want and stick to your guns even if the facts don't back you up. So you're right, not much point.
Honestly this thread has been a whole lot of opinion and not a lot of fact from anyone, myself included. If this is a discussion worth having then that's a frame I'd like to avoid. I tried to provide a couple of inspiring examples but it soon became clear there wasn't much point to that. Ultimately I'm framed in the negative in this argument (self-publishing is not necessarily lazy or bad) and you can't call on someone to prove a negative. I apologize if my tone has come across as defensive or irrational at all. Looking back over it, that doesn't seem to be the case to me, but I guess sometimes tone doesn't transfer well on internet forums. I've somehow come 'under attack' here, so if we're going to continue this discussion, I need to provide a better context for what I'm talking about and make it clear that I am not necessarily interested in your opinions in a vacuum, just as you surely feel about mine. I am interested, however, if you have any actual insight that may be useful to my situation. I'll deal with all of this when I put my book thread up.
Inspiring stories don't change the fact that they are not the norm. They are the exception to the rule. I'm not attacking you, I'm trying to understand how, when the man you work for was given helpful, honest, clear information along with his rejection the next "logical" step was to sidestep all the "garbage" in a "broken system" and go the self-publishing route instead of following the suggestions given by traditional publishing to go that route. By your own story the system did not seem to have failed, or be broken in any way. The "system" tried to help, with an honest critique, suggestions on fixing the broken parts of his own proposal, and he decided that the system was broken. Then you come on and encourage first time authors in different genres that this is the way to go because of the garbage filled system. Self-publishing will soon be king. I find that irresponsible. It seems not much different than touting the benefits of olden day elixirs that will fix everything you're ailing from. If it sounds to good to be true, it probaby is.
You keep saying they're the exception to the rule but you haven't said what this rule is or given me any evidence of its existence. None of that is what I was saying at all. I'm not encouraging writers to do anything of the sort. I might be saying don't be so scared of self publishing or going against the grain. Still none of that has very much relevance to the contract I'm working on. The whole 'system is broken' thing is rather philosophical, but I'd still hold my ground on that one. It's pretty clear that's a separate conversation, though. If we're going to talk about my book I have to provide more context. You're making a whole bunch of wild assumptions.
I don't think I'm making wild assumptions. I'm stating your own words back to you. Do you really want me to try to make a list of all the people who self-published and have gone nowhere? I'd like to continue writing my own book, not spend the next decade getting all the names for you.
