Six reasons that self-publishing is the scourge of the book world
Filed under: Entrepreneurship, Career
An article by Mokoto Rich in the New York Times recently covered the booming industry of self-publishing books. As traditional publishing houses scramble for an increasingly smaller reading public and suffer from the effects of the re/depression, many writers unable to sell their manuscripts are choosing to foot the bill to publish them themselves. There are six reasons that I see this as the worst trend to hit American writing in a century. These are1. No-one vetts self-published books, allowing even the most puerile piles of crap to adopt the guise of polished, professional prose. While hacks often can't restrain themselves from titles that tip their hand as talentless, readers browsing through the infinity of the Amazon catalog could be fooled into wasting their money. Rich quotes an executive of Lulu, a self-publishing house, as saying "We have easily published the largest collection of bad poetry in the history of mankind." Wow.
2. Self-publishing kills the drive for writers to improve their craft. The artificial, undeserved success they enjoy will trap them in mediocrity.3. Self-published authors are the bane of bookstore managers everywhere. If the number of authors who drop by the stores begging for shelf space were replaced with customers, book stores might start making money again.
4. Self-publishing demeans the accomplishments of successful authors. When everybody has a book out, where will a young writer to find the aspiration to write the next The Sound and the Fury?
5. Self-publishing drives down the value of quality prose by suggesting to the public that making money is of no consequence. And this is an important point - self-published works almost never make more than pocket change, and often end up costing the writer and/or his relatives handsomely. The few that do well are notable exceptions, but are overly publicized by the industry hoping to drive more business.
6. To the degree that self-publishing drives out good writing, the reading experience will be diminished.
If you care about literature and value good writing, don't honor the self-published simply because they have a book. Anyone can buy a bat and a glove, after all, but how many can play center field for the Yankees?
For a hilarious example of bad writing, check out what many think is the worst sci-fi novel ever written, The Eye of Argon, Read it aloud. (thanks, Tobias Buckell)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
1-29-2009 @ 2:21PM
j said...
You sound like a disgruntled writer who's having trouble getting his own work published.
Reply
1-29-2009 @ 4:28PM
Cool Science Chick said...
I whole-heartedly agree with the author here. Not long ago my father bought a children's book for my son that was self-published by a woman he knew. It was no suprise to me why she couldn't get it published professionally! It wasn't horrible, but was very mediocre. I realize that sometimes publishers may deny what could be a very good novel (I'll bet that person who originally turned down Harry Potter is still reeling), but I think more often than not you get people who truly believe they have talent that just doesn't exist. Ever catch an episode of American Idol?
Reply
1-29-2009 @ 11:53PM
Michael Levin said...
Forgive me, but this is about as dumb an article on the subject that I have ever seen. Yes, a lot of garbage gets self-published. But a ton of really excellent self-published books get ideas into the marketplace, appealing to appropriate niche audiences, that the mainstream publishing industry, swinging for the fences with every book (or at least that's what they tell themselves) would never touch.
Self-publishing is the future. Remember going to Tower Records to buy records? Or CDs? All gone. That's what's going to happen to traditional publishing. Wait and see. If you don't believe me, ask yourself one question: can an industry that saw fit to publish George Hamilton's memoirs really expect to survive in the Internet era?
George Hamilton's memoirs were PUBLISHED. Not self-published. So who's offering the steaming piles of kaka to the public?
Michael Levin
www.BusinessGhost.com
Reply
1-30-2009 @ 11:24AM
j said...
Thank you Michael,
I am not an author or writer, but I have seen tons of horrible books written for children (I have 2). Maybe Cool Science Chick should look in her local bookstore at the children section. It might also be the case that children at some ages are not as sophisticated and need simpler stories to learn how to read. (Sally, Dick and Jane were always big page turners) I find myself scratching my head,is this all it is, to the "Magic Tree House" but my youngest can't get enough of them. Publishers republish the same stories with Sponge Bob, Pokemon, Spiderman, and Batman where do they leave room for new voices. Maybe it could help some of these self publishers to find an editor- and maybe the services should offer them. But from Ben Franklin we should learn that self publishing is what help start this country.
Reply
1-31-2009 @ 11:21AM
Chris Lowry said...
Self publishing a bane to the publisihing industry? How doe these bloggers get jobs writing for this place? I'd like one. Apparently, you just have to have an opinion based on nothing- like facts, research, knowledge of industry and more. Maybe instead of crying about losing shelf space to self published authors, the writer here should do some journalistic research. History is packed with self published authors, and yes, the self publishing business promotes the success stories, just like the publishing industry promotes their success stories. You don't hear about the the thousands of books from "new voices" put out by the publishing house that go quietly from the store shelf to the discount bin, and finally to some discount store where anyone can pick them up for $1.
Self publishing is absolutely great for the country and for the industry. Let's quote a cliche here, "Cream rises." Good books with good marketing will be found. Great books with bad marketing will be lost. Bad books with great marketing will sell in the millions. Robert Kyosaki (who self published his RICH DAD, POOR DAD in the beginning) said, "I'm not a best writing author. I am a best sellng author." That's why it's a BUSINESS. In a Free Market society, everyone can put out as much crap as you want (don't believe me? Go watch some garage bands on Youtube.) The books may be drivel, but self publishing is a great way for any author to jump out of the slush pile and to the top of anyone's radar. And if they're good, the publishing industry will come calling. Fast.
In fact, the publishing industry would do better to ONLY look at self published books that are garnering a little attention, instead of the thousands of manuscripts delivered to their doorstep each year.
A self published book shows the author has invested in the success of their work, and also give the publisher an opportunity to view an almost finished product. With the number of POD (print on demand) available now, like BLURB or BOOKSURGE, all publishers could demand that every manuscript be self published and formated like a book. Then editors could cull through the books instead of the reams of 20lb white. Meanwhile, while the book is with the publisher under consideration, the author could do some marketing to promote the book, which could even encourage bookstores to make space for a potential hit.
What this writer forgets, and most jilted typists do, is that the PUBLIC will pick the books it likes. The PUBLIC or at least Oprah will find the books that are good and promote them via word of mouth or radio or television. The rest will end up in the discount bins, where those of us who love to read will hunt for little nuggets of treasure, and donate the crappy ones to the library when they don't pan out.
Reply
2-03-2009 @ 5:44PM
Susan Wenger said...
I work for a self-publishing company, so you can take my comments with as many grains of salt as you like. Here are my thoughts:
1. No-one vetts self-published books, allowing even the most puerile piles of crap to adopt the guise of polished, professional prose.
Some of it is mind-bogglingly awful. Some of it is quite good. You can decide for yourself which is which -- no one is going to make you buy anything you don't want to read.
2. Self-publishing kills the drive for writers to improve their craft. The artificial, undeserved success they enjoy will trap them in mediocrity.
5. Self-publishing drives down the value of quality prose by suggesting to the public that making money is of no consequence. And this is an important point - self-published works almost never make more than pocket change, and often end up costing the writer and/or his relatives handsomely.
Don't #2 and #5 kind of contradict each other?
The reality: authors who put out a book no one wants to read do not enjoy success, artificial/undeserved or otherwise. If they could do that, the traditional publishers would have started printing everything from the slush pile long ago.
4. Self-publishing demeans the accomplishments of successful authors. When everybody has a book out, where will a young writer to find the aspiration to write the next The Sound and the Fury?
Someone else has already said it: the cream rises to the top. Just because everyone has a book out doesn't mean every book gets readers.
Anyway. Yes, some self-published books are pretty bad. Some are good. To avoid the bad ones, read an excerpt before you buy ... same as you'd do with a traditionally published book.
Reply
2-05-2009 @ 9:44AM
Jon Spurr said...
I am an amateur (read unpublished) author. I would tend to agree with Mr. Barlow generally, but I would like to make the following points in favor of self publishing.
A writer can submit a manuscript to a publisher but in general, unless the work is published, there will be no reply if it is rejected. If one is particularly lucky they might get a post card saying that the work is rejected but not explaining why.
A writer really needs and agent to market their work, but agents only want one page "query letters" that describe the author's work. Lots of agents won't even look at work by an unpublished author. Even the ones who will look at a writing sample don't give feedback as to why the work was rejected.
So, I think that for the same reasons that self publishing allows a lot of sub-standard works to be published, it is a by product of a traditional system that often leaves writers in the dark as to what is wrong with their work.
I think that self publishing is a sign of frustration by authors who can't get anyone to actually give them feedback. Perhaps if the traditional system of querying literary agents would produce a comment explaining why a work was rejected, then maybe authors would not be so tempted to self publish.
I've been rejected plenty of times and I am still trying. I don't want to self publish. I want to go the traditional route, but I can see why self publication is tempting.
Reply
2-11-2009 @ 6:45PM
Henry said...
"When everybody has a book out, where will a young writer to find the aspiration to write the next The Sound and the Fury?"
If self-publishing is the thing to keep a writer from writing a masterpiece, the onus is on the writer, not the publishing industry. A greater writer writes, whatever the climate of the moment.
As people have already mentioned, the worst crap doesn't get read or even seen, so they're of limited consequence. But on the mainstream level, it's often mediocre books that are most popular - that seems more damaging to the culture of writing. Self-publishing can actually allow writers to expand and not feel as trapped by the market as they are today. Traditional mainstream publishing is becoming more limiting to writers and small presses don't have the money to put out everything.
Most writing is mediocre, whether it's self-published or not. As is the case for most music and most blogs - that's just the nature of so many more people creating now than ever before. But to not give an outlet to those good writers who haven't made it through the narrow gate of traditional publishing is putting too much faith in publishing as a perfect gatekeeper.
Reply
2-11-2009 @ 6:47PM
Henry said...
By the way, I edit the site, Self-Publishing Review:
http://www.selfpublishingreview.com
Reply
2-13-2009 @ 10:02AM
Patrick is Very Evolved said...
I'm surprised no one has drawn the analogy of the music industry kicking and screaming against the rise of self published music.
Now if we take Tom's arguments 1-6 as true, we must conclude that we have lots more terrible music out there than before, and the drive to create or locate anything good is dead.
And yet somehow I'm still finding and listening to great new music.
Tom your article misses the weight of history - technological change is never "good" or "bad" for society. It's what people do with it that determines that. This change is bad for the big publishing houses in the same way the car was bad for the wagon industry.
Goodbye dying industries, you failed to change your business plan with the times.
Cheers
Patrick @ http://veryevolved.com
Reply
3-08-2009 @ 6:12PM
Seth said...
Dude you make it sound like if anyone, anywhere publishes a book they will get wild undeserved success at the expense of legitimate authors.
Selling a few dozen or hundred copies doesn't make your book a success. Good work gets recognition, bad work only gets flamed and disparaged.
Take a pill, calm down and quit yer whiny antics.
Reply
3-09-2009 @ 2:07AM
Barry said...
Mr.Barlow,not only are you wrong,you are terribly,drastically,STUPENDOUSLY wrong.Ever hear of a little ditty called 'Leaves Of Grass' by Walt Whitman?Self Published.
The future is here and we dont need another shrill for the bloated,corrupt 'Main Stream' Publishing Industry looking down their noses while they churn out the latest on Paris Hilton's bellybutton and Donald Trump's pompous hot air -
No Thanks.
Reply