Besmirchment Of The Free
The agent drummed his fingers on the desk, his smiling teeth clenched down on the pipe. Cherry smoke filled the room.
“Sorry, son!” he chirped. “We love the book. It’s super. Just super! But you went ahead and posted it online! For free!” At these last words, he barely stifled a guffaw. The pipe almost fell out of his mouth. He regained his composure. “Surely you see the problem, my boy.”
“I don’t understand.”
“Look at it this way. Say I’m a man looking for a bride. I don’t want some… dusty, grimy gutter-tramp who’s had sex with one or three other men. I want her unsullied. Pure and sweet, like cane sugar. I don’t want her out there, mauled by greasy hands and besmirched by wandering eyes. Your novel is like that woman. You’ve gone and ruined her.”
“But now it has an audience.”
“Audience! Right, sure. That’s what I want. A woman whose sex organs come with a big audience. Brrr. Shudder. No thank you. That way lies Herpesville.” He kept smiling. Kept smoking. He even winked.
“My novel isn’t a woman.”
“No, but you darn sure want to treat her like one. Keep her in the dark! Hide her under a blanket! That sort of thing. This has been a great chat. You have a nice day, now!”
“But–“
The smile was gone. He took the pipe out of his mouth, and squinted. “I said, you have a nice day, now.” I heard the mechanical slide of a pistol’s action drawn back under the desk. I heard a thumb draw back a hammer.
I thanked the man and left.
…
Did you read my last post? The one where I decide I need an agent? That’s a good place to start. Go on. I’ll wait.
I said there that I might be posting a novel I’d completed online, and some voices rose up from the darkness and warned me against it. The traditional wisdom applies: don’t give your stuff away for free, an agent or a publisher are far less likely to take it if you just throw it out there or go a self-publishing route, free is for jerks, and so on.
It gives me pause. I won’t go releasing the novel for free yet. I’ll hold off. Johnny-Five is alive, and Johnny-Five needs input.
But, it does seem worth it to have this discussion.
The models are changing. The publishing industry is having to navigate new waters. All of entertainment is.
I have a hard time believing that agents or publishers will turn down a quality product because it was posted for free or self-published. (I’m not saying it’s not true, mind you — it may very well be. I’m only saying it surprises me.) Publishers pick up small press iterations of novels with enough frequency that it tells me that they don’t consider previous publication to be competition. (The same is not true for short fiction; generally, journals and zines want first rights or none at all.) If a small press novel — or a free one — gets a readership, that’s what publishers care about. David Wellington, J.C. Hutchins, David Wong, Scott Sigler, these are all guys who built an audience with a free product and ended up with deals because they built audience. They came to the table with thousands, or tens of thousands, of readers (slash listeners).
Now, do I think I’m capable of garnering that kind of audience?
Hey, if I’m anything, it’s delusional! Seriously though, don’t I have to at least think my work is viable? What’s the point? I’m not stepping into this arena with the expectation of failure. I want to succeed, and I think I have the product to do it. If I don’t think I’m capable of being successful, then why not just quit now? (See earlier comment, re: “delusional.”)
Still, the nagging question. Why free? Why give it away?
A couple reasons.
First, the “traditional process” is not a swift one. It’s a slow boat down a lazy river. That’s okay, to a point. I’m patient. … Okay, no, I’m not patient. If the microwave has seven seconds left, those are too many seconds. I have to liberate the food now! I’ll put a brick through the glass just to get the tasty treats into my belly. Sure, I could’ve just opened the door, but eff that ess. Brick! Glass! Liberation! Hot Pocket! Exciting.
Getting your work out there now means that the work is… well, doing more work. It’s generating energy. It’s keeping up momentum instead of letting momentum drag. This might be false logic. In fact, it smells of false logic, and yet I keep saying it anyway. Hurrah!
I also know that the process can be a hard, long slog — months, years wasted letting the work run the track until it’s out of breath and throwing up on itself, and then it’s still back at the beginning. (Apparently, I’m becoming a big J.C. Hutchins cheerleader. My writing partner, Lance, did a great interview with Hutchins, which you should check out. For the record, I am not stalking Hutchins. I am, however, blogging about this from under his bed. That’s totally normal.)
Second, audience building. Sure, I’ve gotten some audience. Since changing this blog over to WordPress, since getting on the Twitternets, since marketing myself more aggressively, my audience has probably doubled (ahem, of course, if you double a small number, you still get a small number). But I’ve a long way to go. I want to keep momentum, not let it wane. It feels like garnering interest in a new project is a way to seize on that momentum and keep the ball rolling. This also might be right back to the bullshit logic. Never underestimate the power of my brain to make up shit that sounds true but probably isn’t.
Them’s the thoughts at present. I don’t know that they’re useful or revelatory. A “freemium” model continues to have interest, but maybe it’s a dangerous path into a dark forest. That’s the issue with the state of publishing. As I said elsewhere, it’s death by a thousand uncertain options. It’s like a Choose Your Own Failure novel — “Do you want to ruin your chances with an agent? Turn to p. 26!”
Time to stop rambling. I’ve got a query letter to write.
Oh, and also for the record?
I’d never eat a Hot Pocket. I’d rather scald my balls with a curling iron.
October 1, 2009 @ 9:26 AM
That’s actually why I’m doing Whitechapel — to build an audience. While I think “freemium” has a TON of potential, one hidden cost is lots and lots and lots and lots of time doing self-promotion in order to get the audience to Sigler-level density. Whereas Whitechapel wasn’t really a project you can do via the traditional model, so it’s something that helps to build an audience, allows me to get my rocks off on an idea I’ve had for years, and was likely unsalable via traditional models anyway.
One thing Hutchins did say is that giving your novel away online is a great way to build an audience, but it’s also a last-ditch option to promote a book you really believe in. I would try lots of authors first, and continue pushing things like Jet-Pack and Shadowstories to build your audience.
October 1, 2009 @ 9:30 AM
Eddy:
You speak troof, for sure. At present, I am holding off on giving the book away. (This’ll sound weird, but I’m still loading it into WP installation because it lets me look at it in a different way, and I catch more errors and flow-problems that way. But they’re drafted, not published.)
Still, I can’t help but wonder if I’ll eventually have to go last-ditch. The industry right now loves its YA authors, and this book is the furthest thing from YA.
— c.
October 1, 2009 @ 9:30 AM
Disclaimer: I know nothing about writing let alone publishing a book. Nothing. Everything I’m about to tell you should be read with that in mind.
Now … the first potential issue that comes to my mind when I think about giving away your stuff for free is that it might build a certain expectation in your audience, one that will come back and bite you once you’re short on food and Wii games and decide to start charging for your product. Because, hey, the books used to be free before and why the hell would I want to pay for them now? People might have difficulty adjusting to the idea of paying for product that didn’t cost them anything just a month before. Well, it’s how I might feel, if I wasn’t addicted to the crack you cleverly hide in your writing.
But then, what do I know.
October 1, 2009 @ 9:33 AM
Christian! Hey! Haven’t heard from you in a while. You’re always a welcome voice.
The free-then-charge model has that side effect as a potential problem, yeah — though, it also seems that people who really love an author and his work tend to get on board with the idea of, “I want my favorite author to keep doing that thing he does, and so I’m going to help put food in his mouth and games in his console.”
(We got rid of the Wii just a few days ago. The Xbox 360 remains!)
The freemium model, when handled a certain way, shouldn’t engender those feelings — you release a product for free, and it should remain that way. People can always read it online, for free. But, but, but, if they want the print version in-hand, if they want a version that may have revisions and added chapters, if they want something with *value added* then they’re willing to pay for a more “advanced” version of the work.
In theory. 🙂
— c.
October 1, 2009 @ 9:30 AM
Somebody said something. At DIY days. I wish I could remember who it was. One of the Blair Witch guys, I think. Or the fella on the far right of that panel. Regardless of the who, the what stuck with me.
“Quit waiting for someone to give you permission.”
I think that about says it.
Some agents may not touch the online novel you gave away. That’s probably true. Those agents will likely be unemployed in a few years.
–M
October 1, 2009 @ 9:41 AM
I haven’t rewatched it yet, but that talk DJ MC Henley is talking about is here for the viewing —
http://diydays.com/2009/08/diy-days-philly-extending-the-experience/
Shout-out to mad genius, David Beard, in that one.
— c.
October 1, 2009 @ 9:32 AM
Oh, and yes, there’s also the (erroneous, yes, but still common) idea that everything that’s free isn’t, well, worth anything.
October 1, 2009 @ 9:43 AM
Christian —
I think the idea of “free = bad” somehow changed with the Internet. People demand free. Websites are generally free. Pirated music and torrents are free. While that stigma still exists to some degree in publishing, I have to imagine it’s falling away. I’ve read enough really good “free stuff” out there to think the perception has to be shifting.
— c.
October 1, 2009 @ 1:26 PM
The reason behind it (as I understand it): Publishers will pay you much less for a “published free on the net” than an “original work.” Because since it was released to the public, the making of it into a book is a “reprinting.” This cuts into the money you & an agent could make.
If you self publish, same thing. But most publishing houses would have little interest in it unless it sold 100,000 copies. And if you sold that many copies on your own, why bother with agents & publishers, right?
Sorry if it is a little disjointed, I’m in need of a nap.
October 1, 2009 @ 1:39 PM
Free good stuff may help you get a book to an agent — but it may not be the book you put up for free. Cory Doctorow gets his cash money before it gets CC’d out, believe you me.
And from what I’ve read many agents are indeed not interested in anything that’s been out there for free. Aside from competition with the publisher there’s liability to consider — the same thing that makes publish authors pretend they never read fiction on the internet, lest they get sued.
But if you’re an excellent fiction writer with big site analytics? Maybe they’ll go for something else you’ve done. Maybe they’ll even take the book you put up — but maybe not.
The medium matters, too. Online, people will pay for content when it comes through a convenient funnel like iTunes or OBS, though pricing takes a hit since consumers want to purchase widely, taking advantage of the funnel (and this can be supported all the way to free if you move to ad support) and because bits are thought of as inherently cheap anyway.
To switch to offline? Blog books based on nonfiction/variety are gaining some traction. The question is whether the trend is sustainable and transferable to the novel. Certainly, if you’re set on free first, seeking out agents who’ve done blog books should be a priority.
Those agents who don’t want your book are probably still going to be employed in 6 years and doing fine in their segment. The question is whether you want to be a part of that segment (and whether from-free needs agents at all). Honestly, I would look for one with your draft and on the strength of your current online work first, and only switch if there are no bites.
October 1, 2009 @ 2:41 PM
The draft I’ve got, I have no interest in self-publishing. Not that I don’t consider that a viable path — it’s just not the path I see. (Of course, in this I personally differentiate “free on web” and “self-published.”)
Far as agents and publishers not being interested in free, is there evidence? I don’t mean to suggest I don’t believe you peeps. I do. I really do. But I’m looking for quotes, links, sites, that say this.
— c.
October 1, 2009 @ 3:16 PM
Your first novel may be a loss leader if released online.
October 1, 2009 @ 3:22 PM
To clarify real quickly — I’m no longer planning on releasing this online, for free. I’m going to let it do the circuit, see what happens.
That being said, I also don’t see evidence yet that any of the doom-and-gloom-free-is-death fear holds water. It may. It probably does. It makes sense that it could be an issue. But I’m hoping to see quotes or commentary rather than pure speculation.
Will: as for a first novel being a loss leader if released online, that’s perhaps true, yeah. But most first novels seem to be loss leaders, these days.
— c.
October 1, 2009 @ 3:38 PM
Oh, and there are several posts on Free and Freemium publishing worth reading over at Guy LeCharles Gonzalez’s blog, Loud Poet. Lots of good reads over there.
October 1, 2009 @ 3:39 PM
From the way I see it, a lot of agents will be spooked by the idea of an author who has released material online. A lot of agents and publishers have a very old-school mentality, because for them, a conservative viewpoint is business fact.
That having been said, I doubt those are the agents for you.
October 1, 2009 @ 6:01 PM
Here’s a question to consider: Would you rather make, I dunno, $12,000 off of 24,000 readers who bought a book through mainstream publication and brick and mortar stores? Or would you rather make that same $12,000 off a thousand readers who paid you directly through some internet setup? It’s the same money. It’s less fame. But it’s more hoops.
I really hope that an agent could come along and take away all the yucky shucking and jiving and “no-date-on-Saturday-night” desperation that comes with trying to sell fiction for money. I really hope that getting an agent in the current publishing climate would NOT AT ALL be like hiring an interior decorator when your house is on fire.
Hope dies last.
-G.
October 2, 2009 @ 1:14 AM
I feel for you 100%. The irritation with 3-6 month response times, the submissions that disappear into the ether, the seemingly interested agents who suddenly stop responding to your emails, and did I mention the irritation of waiting 3-6 months for a reply? And once you get past queries and send a manuscript, you’re expected to be 100% faithful to whomever is reading it – even if they take 3, 6, or 9 months to reply.
Intellectually, I know why it’s almost impossible to communicate with an editor by any method that doesn’t require a stamp. I know they’re busy and that they have to sift through thousands and thousands of submissions every year, so I can completely understand why they might be difficult to impress.
But I can’t express how much I wish getting acceptance/rejection for a book were more like, well, applying for a loan online. Type in your information, and BAM – approval in 60 seconds! Yes, even if I submit the application at 3 in the morning.
Unfortunately, that’s not the way it works. I’ve been really bad about marketing my writing because by the time I get the rejection letters I’ve already waded deep into another project and don’t feel like doing boring research again. Writing is fun. Selling it, less so.
TERRIBLEMINDS: Chuck Wendig, Freelance Penmonkey » Blog Archive » Painting With Shotguns V
October 2, 2009 @ 8:08 AM
[…] noted, I’m looking for an agent, Also as noted, I was looking to maybe release my recent novel for free and build audience. The first is true, the […]
October 4, 2009 @ 5:09 PM
I will age to agree with Christian that the “free = worthless” view is still around. I am cynically looking at my own habits; I have collected a dozen free RPG’s in PDF and haven’t gotten myself to even really open the files. For me they are something I collected rather then something of value which I purchased. At the same time, I might not have put down my money for those systems. By contrast, I have read almost all of the bundled pdf’s from the Wicked Dead Brewing company which I bought on sale for $5 for the collection I think.
Ideal distribution of a product depends on two different elements in my mind.
1) Acquiring: Use marketing, free products or your reputation to convince customers to acquire the product.
2) Encouraging: Getting the customer to read and use the product. A price paid for the product, demos or reviews can do this.
Step 1 is easy, anyone can make things free. Problem is that free products that don’t have support in step 2 wind up simply satisfying magpie urges. A freemium model seems to allow for satisfying both options. Another idea that someone might try (possibly myself) is to have a instant pdf that costs money (5$ perhaps) with an option to get it for free but you need to wait for it (perhaps a month.) That might satisfy without having the price as a barrier.
October 4, 2009 @ 5:48 PM
I like the use of the term, “satisfying magpie urges.”
Good stuff.
And welcome, Jagash! Thanks for commenting. Certainly more to think about. I’d add more of my own thoughts, but right now the brain is mush, the throat is sore, the Sunday energies are sapping my will to do much at all.
— c.