Oh, I agree with all of that! But I don't think you're a celebrity in the way that a lot of people are, or in the way I meant - the non-talented, do anything for exposure type of 'celebrity' - the people who are famous just for being famous. I think you have people who appreciate you for your talent and your achievements, which are real and worked for. And I think that's what we all want, whether we have a following of thousands or dozens. And I'm so glad you didn't know who Katy Price is.
I agree. I think we were just thinking (or at least I was) on a different page before. So am I. Maybe she's not as big a celebrity as she thinks.
in number of copies sold, or in total revenue?... i can't believe that ebooks could possibly have brought in more money than 'real' ones...
They said video taping with VCRs would destroy the movie rental business. They said file sharing would destroy the music business. How about we wait and see what will happen in 5-10 years before passing judgement. Besides what else can writers do? Give up? You can't publish if you don't try. What's the worst that can happen?
No one is really passing judgement on the publishing business, and I certainly don't think anyone said that traditional publishing would be destroyed. No one said to forget trying to publish your books traditionally. In fact, what we said was that we would continue to try to publish traditionally. But we're not going to turn our backs on digital text platforms either.
Most of those ebooks were electronic versions of books that are already popular and that have been published via the traditional publishing process. The article isn't evidence that the traditional publishing is dying. It just means that books are appearing both in print and in electronic form, that's all.
Where are you guys getting this idea that we're saying that traditional publishing is dying? Have we said that? It's certainly not dying for bestsellers, or even for the top mid-list writers. But you surely don't see many new authors waltzing out into the lime light. Not like you did 8 or 10 years ago. Traditional publishing will be there for the established writers, but new authors will have a hard time getting in, even harder than before. Only new authors with exceptional work will break through the lines of established writers, and I just haven't seen that happen yet. So what do we do in the meantime? We don't give up, we write and submit to agents and traditional publishers, we self publish, and we publish through DTP.
The gross sales dollars of the e-books might not equal that of hardcopy, but I promise you the profit margins will be several times greater than for 'real' books. No printing presses to run, no paper to buy, no binders to pay . . . nothing to actually make. The cost saving will be enormous. Distribution is a snap, just hit SEND, forget the US Mail, or UPS, or FedEx. I don't think books will die, the buying public likes choices, but e-book will be more profitable for the publishers.
The whole point of this thread is that new writers should not take the traditional publishing route because, according to Edward G, "the traditional route to publishing is basically over." And it really doesn't matter if you're a new writer or an established one. The traditional publishing route is still the way to go. Even if you don't care about writing for money, keep in mind that most people who self-publish end up losing money, so you better be willing to take that risk. On a related topic, I've come across a few posters in various threads saying that because they got rejected by agents X times, they're now turning to self-publishing. I believe that if a writer can't handle rejection, then maybe trying to earn money by writing isn't for him/her. Honestly, five or ten or even twenty rejections is nothing. Then you aren't looking in the right places. There are plenty of new writers out there who have received a positive response from readers and critics alike.
There is a tendency to over-state the negative, and from what I can tell it has been going on for at least a few decades. People have been saying that the traditional publishing is over for quite some time, and it hasn't come to pass yet. I doubt it will any time soon. It pays to be cognizant of changes in the marketplace, but the fact remains that there are quite a few books by first-time authors published every year. Some are quite good, some are very mediocre (in other words, it isn't only the 'exceptional' who are getting publishing deals). If you have a product that you think it worth it, you're still much better off, as a rule, going the traditional route.
The people that lose money self publishing, are those that don't do their homework before choosing their vanity publisher. There are those out there that are only out to take your hard earned cash, but there are legitimate ones too. I self published twice, and I've yet to lose money. Maybe I'm one of the lucky ones. I agree with you here. I'm not talking about positive response from readers and critics. I see new writers getting that every day, as well. I'm talking about positive responses from agents (in representation) and/or publishers (in a book deal).
This does happen as well. It's just that most of these writers have some solid credentials, which makes it easier to get an agent/publisher. It's more advantageous to take this route (publish a few good short stories and then work on a novel). It makes it easier to get an agent, and after the few published stories you'll be better known to readers.
Hear! Hear! That sentiment is dying. The first time you read a Kindle in bed with one hand, your attitude will change. What I like about print is the asset value of the book, which in turn pays tribute to that book. So, if there's a story I really like, I would have no problem paying $50 or $100 for a leather bound gold leaf version of it to sit on my book shelf for my great grandkids to enjoy in a hundred years. Be that as it may, e-books will take over the fiction market entirely in the next ten years, leather-bound gold-leaf versions notwithstanding. And yet, self-publishing will be the norm--or micropublishing. What's ironic is that this same phenomenon that is laying off thousands in the book publishing industry will in turn provide jobs. An editor laid off today, may become a better paid freelance editor tomorrow. The big publishers are doing that now--just like drowning men grasping at straws, but that way of doing business won't last. E-books cost less and more people are buying them than print. Propping up hardbacks by jacking up the price of e-books is a desperate act of a dying industry. Let me appall you even more: I read in some publishing trade that agents who prefer good literature are at a disadvantage. It's not enough to sell trash to the publishers, you actually have to like the trash, or you won't have the umph to sell it, nor will you recognize the trendy trash that comes along. If you harbor antiquated notions of "good literature" you will end up turning your nose up at the next big thing. It's not enough to represent trash, you actually have to love it, if your an agent who wants to succeed. I say hail to the micro-publisher. Savior of the art! Friend of the intelligent reader! You should. Because I read horror, and I went to see what you had at Lulu, and I was interested in Terror in the South, but frankly the price is too high for a paperback. Even if you were Stephen King, I wouldn't buy it. $3.99 on Kindle however, and I already would have downloaded the sample. Just a word to the wise. Yes. This is the wave of the future for new writers (not that you are one). But I wonder if people here realize this site has over 24,000 members? In another ten years the dedicated paying readers will also be writers--and they'll be in forums just like this. Well said. Do you remember Nicholas Sparks? Publishers created him, essentially, out of thin air. They can do that any time they want, but it's expensive and it's a gamble. They did that with him 20 years ago, they don't have the profit margins to do that again. Yes, celebrity publishing will continue. The six sisters of publishing will probably merge into two or three. And absolutely, a new writer will have to have proven him or herself nontraditionally before they will break in. So what are we waiting for? Yes, that's true, for new authors. The market is broken in that regard, and nothing's going to humpty-dumpty its ass back together again. It's over. Any break a new author has now in the old paradigm (the Stephen King Carrie Dream) is a lottery ticket win--nothing more. And even then, the author contract is probably so bad you'd be better off just sticking the MS in your drawer and forgetting it. Well, there's two possibilities in that scenario: A. the writer sucks and doesn't know it or won't believe it. B. The market is broken so no matter how good the writing, there is no chance and no reason to continue querring agents. With the former, the writer should give up. In the latter, the writer should make sure that MS doesn't stay in a drawer no matter what--even if they have to self-publish or micro-publish.
They've been saying it, about fiction publishing, since November 2006. That's when Kindle came out. Do you own a Kindle? Seriously, do you? And do you realize the implications of some publishers charging $3.99, some $7.99, some $9.99? It means there is no bottom to the deflation in book prices. I paid more for a hardback in the 1980's than I do now. The price of e-books means you can't afford to pay an editor or cover artist, or someone to format it, and you darn sure can't afford to advertise it. And eventually, that's going to affect King and Grisham the same as you and I. Mark my words, they're going to set up their own publishing companies and produce the e-books themselves one day. We're just beating them to the punch.
You still haven't given any evidence that the market is broken. As I mentioned in an earlier post, the example in your original post only mentions two agents. That's only a small fraction of the total number of agents out there. Show me some good evidence to support your claim and maybe then you'll be able to convince me.
It all comes down to what people want to read. Most people I know buy a book because they want a good read. They don't care or don't notice that the writing isn't up to scratch. Publishers are in business to make money and they do that by supplying what readers want, trash or not.
I like how people refer to 'traditional' publishing as some immovable force that has always been the same and never adapts, when in reality it's ever changing. People say traditional publishing is dead, but what happens when traditional publishing just moves to using more e-publishing. Oh no, you'll still be published, maybe just not exclusively in print as if it were the 90s (1890's). But that aside, it's hard to keep up with what the latest 'death of' is hysterically circulating through literary communities (if we can even call them communities anymore). In part I blame the internet, where everyone is allowed their opinion and faulty, pessimistic or hysterical opinions are bound to find a sympathetic ear (err eye). And of course the internet is a breeding ground for things to go viral (I know, I know, breeding ground sounds like a bacteria pun. I'm not perfect!). The internet is a worse hype machine for irrationality than the old-school black and white government propaganda videos with children dancing in clouds of DDT. I also blame writers. Why? There are more would-be writers now than ever before. The industry is overflowing with the hopes and dreams of aspiring writers. Sure, this is good, everyone thinks they get their fair shot at it. This is also bad, though, because a lot of people start thinking the shot they get should be fair. This is also a problem with the internet, where any would-be writer can find validation to fuel their dreams. I'd almost argue that part of the problem with publishing these days is the system is bogged down by people that should know better than to keep trying. Agents are getting buried in queries and left to hope someone else will discover the talent they'll get to represent, because it's getting too expensive to try to discover new talent (and unpaid slush pile readers do get expensive!). Publications across the board are having the same issues, with a deluge of submissions which raise costs and push the market toward a trend to not bother even reading the unsolicited submissions; if they don't already know you, it's not worth reading the other 99% of drivel hoping to get to know the new writer. Basically, anything that takes submissions of any kind are being buried in a sea of manuscripts, and most of them have no business being submitted. It's great that the dream is more accessible than ever, but it's also killing the industry in many ways. One of the interesting ways the industry suffers is there are now far more wanna-be writers than ever before, but reading far less. It used to be there was a healthy exchange with smaller journals where writers read and supported journals and worked toward getting published in the journals they read and supported. Instead, these days, a successful literary journal will have submissions outnumber subscribers by magnitudes that are embarrassing (embarrassing for all the writers who are clearly not actually reading). Too many would-be writers have a few favorite, big-name authors, then think they'd like to write a novel too, they'd like to go from writing ideas on cocktail napkins to overnight success like JK Rowling (I don't know how many young writers I've had to explain how hard she actually worked--WORKED--at getting published). So, they crap out a novel, can often find a ton of validation online by people that say 'this was really great' when what they mean is 'I skimmed it, but please read MY work and tell me it's great' and end up sinking the industry because there isn't enough discouragement these days. That's a killer, but true. Writing of any kind is very tough to make it, yet there seems to currently be a lack of obstacles for new writers. I know, I'm boggling even saying it, but I think it's true. I've lost count of the amount of would-be writers I know who are paying for an English degree (with writing emphasis, woohoo) and think it means anything at all and will lead to publication or success. I've lost count of the number of writers online who are clearly not cut out for being a professional writer, yet keep on keepin' on because you just don't understand their genius. I can't even keep up with the amount of people I know who are pretty good, competent writers who have little chance of ever making it because they think being pretty good and competent is anywhere close to what they need to be to make it in the industry. And all the people who have 'real' jobs and write a few hours a week and are indignant that they haven't yet caught a break and been given a shot... don't get me started. The problem is the industry has been blown wide open. It's not just e-publishing, or easier access to self-publishing, or the availability of writing instruction. It's that, and a million other small pieces that have led to the situation we're in. It reminds me of a story a Russian from the Soviet era once told me about how when you saw a line, you got into it. Who knows what they were giving out, but if so many people were in a line it must be worth it, and chances were it was something you didn't have already anyhow. Never mind the fact that half the time the line literally was just a line people were getting in because they thought it was a line for something, and it actually went nowhere. Occasionally there would be something amazing, though, like being in your 30s and tasting a banana for the first time in your life. That's kind of how I see the climate of writing right now. So many people see other writers getting in a line and then get into it themselves. Like how fads become fads at some point not because they're worth following, but because the following is what's worth it (to the people, not in reality, usually, imo). Hey, your neighbor is a writer and coffee shops are filled with writers and your friend is a writer and you're in a class where everyone is a writer, why shouldn't you also be a writer, right? Everyone is doing it, so surely there must be opportunities down the road (something tasty being given out that started the line) otherwise why would so many people be doing it? This isn't healthy, though. This doesn't create writers, it creates people who want to be writers (and if you want to be something, you aren't). This causes a lot of the problems I mention, where there are far more people trying to be writers and using resources and submitting and running up costs. And honestly, writing has always been the kind of thing where only the select few are cut out for it, but more than ever it's bloated with people who have no business even trying. Tough to say, especially as someone who wants to teach creative writing, but it's simply true. Meanwhile, there are strong new voices in fiction and plenty of opportunity for those that aren't on the bandwagon or chasing a dream, but creating a reality. There are plenty of people who don't have dreams of someday being a big-time writer and think that means they just keep pitching their novel year after year, but instead are working in the industry and becoming educated and becoming educators and editors and basically finding any and every way possible to be IN the industry in more ways than simply pimping their novel or worse, constantly talking about the novel they're working on that never seems to get done. The opportunities and expectations of the industry haven't changed, it's the number and naivete of the writers that has. I don't like blaming the victim, but I think we're all just victims of ourselves at this point, feeding into our own hysteria, feeding other people's un-earned dreams, feeding marketing blitzes, feeding empty writing fads that are more about celebrity than quality fiction. Feeding, feeding, feeding until the entire industry is bloated and the 'death of' prognostications become easy to make. But meanwhile there are a ton of writers who work hard, put in their time, diversify their efforts (realizing being a writer is about a whole lot more than ****ting out a novel), make connections, amass accolades, and eventually find success. Granted, it may not be the kind of success so many dream of where they type up their dream and create the next Twilight phenomenon, but it's success. The old fashioned kind of success where dreams become reality by being earned through hard work, not through the notion that simply having a dream entitles one to any amount of validation.
I used to agree. A few years ago, even, I still would have leaned towards agreeing. But these days I truly believe publishers don't just do this anymore. A good publisher doesn't just provide supply for what is under demand, but create demand. It's weird, but almost all industries anymore have a heavy emphasis on marketing and advertising. It's insane, really, but to compete at just about anything these days, whether it's a burger join, publisher or non-profit group, it requires heavy marketing, advertising and creating the desire to desire what you're offering, not just what you're offering. You know, it wasn't enough to create foundations and non-profit groups that supported cancer research, instead we need everything to be pink (not saying it's a bad thing, it's not, just it is what it is: marketing). The revelation for me was when I realized Burger King's ad campaigns had nothing to do with selling burgers, but instead selling control. Have it your way, come to Burger King and for a few minutes you get to be in control of your life (as long as it's offered on the menu). Our entire world is pretty much ruled by marketing and advertisements and a product's 'image' and just about everything BUT the actual service or product being offered. Publishing included, sadly. I mean, you could read a good, moving novel... oooorrrr you could read the LATEST VAMPIRE NOVEL GETTING THE BIG PRINT AND GLOSSY DISPLAYS AT THE END OF BOOK SHELVES AND OMG THERE'S A LINE TO GET THE BOOK AND A MIDNIGHT RELEASE AND ALL YOUR FRIENDS THINK IT'S GREAT AND YOU DON'T WANT TO BE LEFT BEHIND AND IT'S BETTER TO BE PART OF THE PERCEIVED IMAGE OF THE FAD EVEN IF YOU DON'T ACTUALLY EVER READ THE BOOK!!!!! I won't digress much further, but Harry Potter and Twilight, for instance, weren't about reading at all. Just like the Dr. Phil show isn't about helping people with their problems and Burger King is no longer about getting a burger. If those things happen to occur, then great, the marketing machine isn't all bad, I suppose, as sometimes people end up reading, getting help, or finding something to eat when they're hungry. But also, the best burgers in any given town are usually from some hole in the wall that doesn't have flashy ads (if any at all) and don't hire marketing gurus and instead stay in business because they offer a good hamburger. And they aren't going out of business just because the McDonald's down the street has had over 1 billion served. It's an analogy. I don't think small presses, traditional publishing or anything related to the industry is going under anytime soon... as long as there are at least some people who want a good burger, not a good advertising campaign... hrmmm, okay, maybe we are doomed.
I find myself agreeing with just about everything you said, Popsicledeath. But I tend to blame the publishing industry itself. The decline of literary standards has lead all us wannabes to believe we can be a writer, too.
I'm just not sure when this great decline is supposed to have taken place ? Since the introduction of mass literacy and mass publishing there has always been the popular penny fiction and trashy novels. Before that there was the localised storytellers and the oral traditions that most folk experienced. Sure we have more books on the shelves now but I am willing to bet the proportion of good and bad fiction isn't that much different now to in the 1800s. We have more books because we have more leisure time and money to indulge and more people can read. I do not think any of them have seriously hurt the sales of literary fiction - certainly has not hurt the classics - some of the biggest TV events in the UK are costume drama. Fact is whatever you may think of King, Rowlling, Brown, Pratchett, Meyer, Reichs, Cornwell etc they have managed to write in such a way that they enthrall a reader and tell an engaging story - they have communicated their story competantly enough that thousands feel what they have written. In my book that makes them great storytellers. Not every good writer can achieve a story that can enthrall and transport, that has a magic about it.
I don't think they're that related. Sure, some people read something they perceive as not being written well and think 'I could do that' and start writing, but overall I think it's simply accessibility. Then again I don't actually believe literary standards have declined. In fact, I believe more high-quality writing is being produced now than ever, and across all genres, whether poetry, fiction, scholarly papers, etc. The difference to me isn't the writing being produced, but the writing that's being marketed. But award committees and journals looking to produce high quality fiction and readers who want to read the 'best' fiction have more options than ever. In fact, as well as being buried in submissions by people who have no business submitting, most submission-accepting entities are getting more high-quality submissions than ever. The trickiest thing is the in betweeners, the 'highly competent' submissions. More people than ever are educated--whether formally or informally--on how to write 'properly' and end up writing competently. This creates a false-positive of sorts, a near-example in that a submission seems 'good' but is instead simply well-written or nicely-packaged junk that doesn't resonate, or doesn't move the reader, or isn't entertaining or interesting... but all done at a high technical level. This of course has led to people proclaiming the death of writing education, and a backlash against education that is ridiculous, but that's another digression. The point is, the standards haven't lessened necessary, as there is more competition and higher work being produced (all arguably) than ever before. The main issue is that there are WAY more manuscripts for those in the industry to sift through to find the gems, and way more books on the shelves. To cover the boom in submissions and writers pulling resources from the industry, I think it was naturally to turn to trying to market and create huge sellers (something that has always been done, but now is more than ever and is arguably more vital than ever to the financial health of a publisher). But I don't think overall it's that literary standards have declined, it's just easier to find the examples that would lead to that sort of conclusion, because the industry is swimming with also-ran's, so it's harder to find the winners among the bunch.
I don't even think it is that - it is the same thing that makes classical literature and costume dramas popular the misty eyed view of the past, when all was rosy and genteel. When actually it smelt bad, was pretty darn illiterate, people were treated horrendously and they got terrible diseases that killed that these days we get to go to the Dr and be over in a few days. It is the same with the literary standard brigade - just because the penny fiction books perished (probably because they were more well read copies lol) doesn't mean they didn't exist and they weren't extensively well read. Victor Hugo includes an interesting discourse or two on them that pretty much echoes Edward's posts and that was in mid 1800s
"And all the people who have 'real' jobs and write a few hours a week and are indignant that they haven't yet caught a break and been given a shot... don't get me started." I think you'll find that most published authors had that real job before they managed their first sale, and were forced to squeeze writing time into their scheduals. Having a 'day job' doesn't preclude someone from putting in the work needed to be published. I also wonder what qualifications you have that let you judge which writers have the talent to "cut it". No disrespect intended, but I find this sort of pseudo-cynicism elitist, and tiresome
