First, go read this:
“The Man Who Thought He Was King.” About a self-published author who gets kind of… well, crazy? Uppity? I don’t know. I’m not even sure what he’s pissed about, honestly.
Read it? Done? Cool.
One of the biggest things holding self-publishing back is the attitude of some — not all, not most and not even many — but some self-published authors. What you will find in the self-publishing (or DIY or “indie pub”) community is a handful of maggot-chewed bad-apples bobbing noisily in the barrel. They’re loud. They’re entitled. They’re oddly defensive (methinks thou doth protest too much). They often have books that look and read like they were written by a fourth grader on a high-test ADHD drug cocktail.
And they’re more than willing to get up in your face about it.
Don’t be that guy. Don’t be a cock-bag. A douche-nozzle. A righteous scum-topped cup of dickhead soup.
My message to the generic That Guy:
First, learn to write. Not just fiction but, say, forum posts. Tweets. Your own name. Whatever. UR JUST MADD COS I SELL TONSZ OF BOOKS AND YOURE SLAVE TO THE GATEKEPERS is not a compelling — or, frankly, cogent — message. Which leads me to:
Second, stop using your sales numbers as a bludgeon. BUT I SELL FOUR BILLION EVERY TEN MINUTES may or may not be true, but what it most certainly is is irrelevant. Is that how Neil Gaiman tries to end an argument? “WELL I’M A BESTSELLING AUTHOR SO EAT MY POOP.” I suspect he does not. (Though now I secretly kinda hope he does? I would give multiple pieces of my anatomy to have him on YouTube yelling that very thing — a boy can dream, can’t he?) Your sales numbers are not interesting. Nor do they represent a useful data point as the lever in whatever argument you happen to be in right now. Sales are not an indicator of quality. And it’s very difficult to establish if your sales numbers are even accurate. Take them off the table. Stop screaming them in people’s faces.
Third, please be advised that the number of books you write is also not an indicator of anything — certainly not quality. I could, if I chose, write a book a week. Each book would be a festering midden-heap, a clumsy orgy of misspelled words feeling up awkward sentences in the dark in order to give birth to a one-legged moaning monstrosity of a story, but I don’t. Yes, I do believe that authors in the 21st century will find increased productivity useful, but what that doesn’t mean is, “Vomit out as much poor-quality content as you can purge into the world.” Yelling, BUT I HAVE 137 BOOKS FOR SALE, leads people to suspect that you’re just another self-published whackaloon with poor impulse control.
Fourth, stop being mad at “gatekeepers.” Blah blah blah agents, publishers, editors. Every time you yell about traditional publishing it just looks like a dumptruck full of sour grapes. Which leads us all to what is likely the correct conclusion: you self-publish because you were rejected and your peen is in a twist about it, not because you have a great story you want people to read, not because you want the control that self-publishing affords you.
To the self-publishing DIY indie community at large:
Call these screeching moonbats what they are: screeching moonbats. I’ve long said that the self-publishing community needs fewer cheerleaders and more police — meaning, more folks willing to say, “That fruity nutball does not represent me, my work, my ethos, my nation, my planet, my species, or my very molecular structure.” Don’t let them be the loudest voices in your community.
Shiloh Walker says:
Good words…very good words.
(Man, you didn’t throw in how many twitter followers you have or how many books you gave away or sold last night. What kind of writer are you?)
May 21, 2012 — 9:34 AM
DL Thurston says:
Wheaton’s Law: Don’t be a dick.
Wendig’s Corollary: Don’t be that guy.
I like it.
May 21, 2012 — 9:37 AM
Kaitlin Branch says:
That… that whole exchange just floored me. Really? Wow. Just wow.
May 21, 2012 — 9:41 AM
Jessa Russo says:
I’m just amazed.
This is why I will NEVER self-publish anything I write. People like this have scared me away from the idea, more than the MANY poorly edited books with blaring typos and terrible looking book covers. Its people like this who have made every single self-pubbed author look bad. The self-pubbed community should be outraged.
He is truly an arrogant asshat, and I would never purchase book from anyone who thinks so highly of themselves. A little pride is good, but holy cow, humility can go A LONG WAY.
A LONG WAY.
May 21, 2012 — 9:41 AM
John Twitter:awesome_john says:
One of the things that worries me is that after we get done laughing at the crazies, we quiet back down and put noses on grindstones…surfacing again either to jeer at the next Mayor of Wacko City or to emit mewling cries and protestations about how hard it is to be someone who sits and writes. News of “Hey I put two thousand new words on paper today!” or “Got fantastic feedback from my editor!” get washed out because……why exactly?
Because we feel bad saying we’ve accomplished something? Because how dare we be happy because all we did was smash fingers against keys while, in the words of my father, “There are starving kids and wars and fungus on tomatoes”.
The community needs to cheer more than it jeers. That way, the nutbars who think that printing-your-own-books-isn’t-self-publishing won’t be the voice thought of when people discuss self-publishing.
May 21, 2012 — 9:49 AM
terribleminds says:
@John —
Yeah, but I’m not laughing at the crazies. I’m pointing at the crazies because they’re the loudest ones — just as they are in politics or other social discourse. Self-publishing still has that stigma, and this is, in part, why.
This eventually leads into a larger discussion about filter and curation, but that’s a topic for another day, I think.
— c.
May 21, 2012 — 9:53 AM
Mhairi Simpson says:
Unfortunately, the bullhorn still screams louder than your average human being. I wish we could look foward to seeing other self-pubbers get together to pull these guys down, but that probably wouldn’t work in this case. I’ve encountered this particular one before and he caused a stink with exactly the same non-awesome arguments in a group founded and frequented by self-published authors. That argument started because we were suggesting that interacting with one’s followers was a good idea. The complete disregard for others opinions (and the language he used in the process) was breathtaking.
May 21, 2012 — 9:54 AM
Maggie Carroll says:
It’s really a shame. This guy just used up his 15 minutes. He really should have put it towards something more productive, like finding a critiquing group or writing workshop.
May 21, 2012 — 9:54 AM
Fordy says:
Wise words as ever. I’m hoping this whole debacle will serve to prove the adage ‘there’s no such thing as bad publicity’ is a bunch of old arse.
May 21, 2012 — 9:55 AM
John Twitter:awesome_john says:
I know you’re not laughing at the crazies.
It just chews at me that thanks to volume, the crazies become the representative sample for self-publishing — so much so that people are scared away from doing it or that people treat self-publishers as the kids selling lemonade on the corner when the grocery store is ten feet away.
Yes, filter and curation for another day. I’ll go blog my frustrations.
May 21, 2012 — 9:58 AM
terribleminds says:
@John —
I mean, I think you have a point with that original comment and this one — we should be maybe doing more to support good work instead of shouting down bad, but by my mileage, sometimes it just feels right to drop a flag on the field and say, “This? Is not what you should be doing or cheerleading.” So many self-publishers cheerlead ALL of self-publishing, and see an attack on one as an attack on all, which is meaningless tribal trifle.
But you’re right, being a fountain is better than being a drain, and I violate that a little with this post.
— c.
May 21, 2012 — 10:07 AM
Jonathan Dalar says:
Holy crap this is a good post! As someone struggling to publish traditionally, as well as experimenting with the changing paradigm of self-publishing, this kind of guy is hugely offensive and a detriment to the book business in general. Putting crap out there, whether it comes from self- or traditional publishers is detrimental. It undermines buyers’ confidence in books, making them more skeptical of losing hard-earned money, and turning fewer of them into readers.
Huge sales are not an indication of the quality of a book. There are many examples out there to back up a statement like that (without the trouble of offending anyone). People read books for several reasons, including morbid curiosity, peer influence, and cheap thrills.
I believe self-publishing will evolve into a state where there is some form of quality control. Many authors already painstakingly ensure their product is edited, proofed, correctly formatted – the best product they can produce – before throwing it out there. Until all do, or at least have some sort of quality control barrier to overcome, we’ll continue to see this kind of crap.
Of course, even then, assholes are assholes. A little bit of quality control perfume ain’t gonna purge the stank underneath.
May 21, 2012 — 10:11 AM
Fantasy-Faction says:
Great post, Chuck. I can’t understand how one man can have such an ego – but there we go. Some people in life are just like that I guess. Best take a moment to point at them and laugh before ignoring them and finding better writers who are nicer people I think 🙂
May 21, 2012 — 10:11 AM
Timothy John Whitcher says:
I just sigh and move on.
What I enjoy the most is when said nutbags respond to negative reviews on Amazon. Makes for great comedy.
“Obviuosly, your unable to cumprehend the grand skeem of my righting!!!! I do’nt want idots like you reeding my books anyways!!!! Hay you ever even ever wrote anything???? Are you an athor???? Lets see you do beter!!!!”
May 21, 2012 — 10:14 AM
John Twitter:awesome_john says:
I’m all for a good flag toss. Hell, I toss flags for a living, but the beauty of the flag-on-the-play is that once it’s addressed, it’s over, and play resumes….because people have assembled to play the game, not track the fouls.
But digitally, oh man, this “tribe” (a concept that has always bugged me, and made me leery of other peoples’ blankets), gets their fouls tacked up and etched into stone in the long run, prompting people who could be really talented, wonderful voices to just be quiet lest they suck at this and end up like this guy.
And it can be tiring to keep saying “You (random person) are not THAT guy. You can’t ever be that guy, just be YOU” because doubt once planted is a weed in the garden of creativity.
I get called naive when I tell people to look at the good and let the bad sit over in the corner, I don’t see it as naivete, but I just believe / want so badly for publishing to be the sum all things good, not bad….and that starts not with the outside consumers but rather the people creating (This is where I’d point, but I’m not pointing at you Chuck).
Side note – It’s kind of weird to me that so many message boards / communities think themselves the brighter star in the publishing night sky, rather than just one star in the constellation of I-make-good-art-and-things-to-enjoy.
May 21, 2012 — 10:16 AM
Damien Kelly says:
Thing is, he doesn’t even see your value system. The author Sarah Pinborough quipped at him—in response to a sales boast—
“imagine how much you could make if you could actually structure a sentence”, to which he replied:
MRM: I dont think i’d make any more. Most readers read on a phone now and dont know how to structure one
[and later]
MRM: sentence structure and books sales are not related. No Country for Old Men has no quotation marks. #Bestseller
That Guy’s argument is that he’s writing for an idiot audience, and finding it. That Guy is writing for That Guy.
May 21, 2012 — 10:23 AM
Tristan says:
The ‘author’ (term used loosely) in question in that flap is pretty much everything that is wrong with self-publishing, and actively making things worse for the rest of us. I followed him on Twitter for a short time – he was obnoxious and did nothing but tweet about his books, so I unfollowed. I looked at a sample of his work – it obviously sucked.
If writers are TV series, he is Jersey Shore. Devoid of substance, attracting suckers and morons. I feel sorry for the people out there who buy without readings samples.
May 21, 2012 — 10:24 AM
Stan R. Mitchell says:
Hmmm…. I’ll probably be in the minority on this, but I say we cut the guy a break. I don’t know him — never even heard of him — but he obviously lost his cool.
Going the self-published route is brutal. There are very few support mechanisms and you get shunned quite a bit by outlets that other authors use for publicity.
And while this guy came off a total jerk here, I’ll give him credit for his perseverance. I’ve been reading all the archive postings of Joe Konrath — I’ve made it a goal of mine to read every single blog posting since he launched his blog in 2005 — and while it’s pretty time consuming, one of the things I’ve finding (besides a ton of great knowledge) is how many have writers have given up on the dream.
Granted, seven years is a long time, but as I go through the comments, it’s amazing how many have given up on the dream; at least from what I can tell. No blog. No website. Or abandoned blogs and websites.
I say we give this guy a break — unless he acts like this all the time — and further redouble our efforts to support self-published authors. He’s probably been writing and working hard for years and he had a meltdown. It’s not fair we remember him for this one episode.
May 21, 2012 — 10:26 AM
sqt says:
This is precisely why I won’t review self-published books. I have seen too many online meltdowns over negative reviews to even bother. And, truth be told, most of the submissions aren’t that good– they’re usually in serious need of editing. I’m sure there are many good self-published books out there, but I don’t have time to weed through the slush pile to find them.
May 21, 2012 — 10:28 AM
Kaye Draper says:
Oh man. I know it’s counter productive, and feeds into his attention seeking behavior…. but I hate That Guy! Not only in writing, but in every aspect of life. It’s times like this you just wish society wouldn’t frown on you if you slapped the asshat senseless. Someone give that man a crowbar so he can free his head from his anal sphincter. Well… here I go, off to try to work on my QUALITY, off in my QUIET little corner of the world…
May 21, 2012 — 10:29 AM
Stan R. Mitchell says:
Well, crap. Lots of people were posting while I was composing my comment. I didn’t realize he said sentence structure doesn’t matter. Maybe he should be judged for that post…
May 21, 2012 — 10:30 AM
Anthony Elmore says:
I self-pubed one book and my first lesson was: Outside of your friends and family, no one gives a shit because, well, just who are you? Just face it, you’re self publishing because no one will buy your work or you’re not willing to suffer slush pile obscurity until your work earns notice.
Remember the podiobooking craze a few years back? Remember when everyone thought they could be a Sigler or a Hutchins? Now everyone wants to be a Amanda Hocking, but very few will be.
May 21, 2012 — 10:31 AM
Dan says:
Yeah, no one wants to be That Guy. Then again, it’s hard to be Not That Guy. What does Not That Guy do? What does Not That Guy say? And just how am I supposed to recognize Not That Guy?
What I’m getting at is that while it’s easy for us to point to bad behavior and say, “Don’t do that!” it’s a lot harder to point to good successful behavior and say “That’s the way… uh-huh-uh-huh… I like it… uh-huh-uh-huh!” (That last line needs some good 70’s grind music.)
I’ve gone the self-pub route, and while I’m determined to not be That Particular Guy, I’m also trying not to be That Spambot Guy, That Never-shuts-up Guy, and a few other variations. I did a modest launch, sent a few copies to friends, and got back to work on writing the next book.
I think that was the right decision for me, and I feel good about the direction I’m taking.
But I really don’t think anyone is going to point to me and say, “Yeah, be This Guy.”
May 21, 2012 — 10:38 AM
Josin says:
The numbers game is a favorite of vanity publishers. I don’t mean the authors who use vanity presses; I mean the presses themselves. “We have 3million happy authors and publish more books / year than all of the big houses combined!” So shouting about how many books you’ve written means zip. (Unless I’m wrong, in which case, I used to have 89.2 things posted on fanfiction . net. 😛 )
And while a 4 star average over 90 reviews is good, best selling titles – even self-published best-selling titles – have WAY more reviews than numbers in the double digits.
Arguably the biggest name in self-publishing at the moment is Hocking, and one of the things most striking about the posts / comments she makes is the level of professionalism and polite courtesy involved in them. This guy should take lessons.
May 21, 2012 — 10:50 AM
Guilie says:
Excellent analysis, Chuck. Indeed–indie authors need to speak up and make sure that these “screeching moonbats” don’t get the limelight and become standard-bearers for the rest. It’s scary to think that these misguided souls with egos the size of a smallish planet can ruin the entire self-pub revolution for everyone, and rob truly worthy people of an excellent opportunity.
May 21, 2012 — 11:01 AM
Charlene says:
Wow. Wonder what J.A. Konrath would say.
This actually reminded me of a question I’ve had on and off since my first experiment in self-publishing years back:
How can anyone be sure all those reviews and rankings are legitimate? How does anyone know those aren’t all from friends doing the writer a favor? What reason would anyone have to believe they can trust my book’s reviews and rankings are accurate? I was also concerned people who had a grudge against the author would get friends to post horrible reviews.
Anyway, I enjoy your blog, and this post was an interesting read.
May 21, 2012 — 11:14 AM
Rick Bylina says:
Yep, what everyone else says. The literary police are coming. You can bet on it. Amazon will have an army of screeners with automated tools to ensure a base level of quality in the novels before someone finds a way to sue them, instead of the author, for pushing, through their information mining techniques, a crappy novel to many unsuspecting readers.
Oh yeah, everyone, buy my book. 🙂
May 21, 2012 — 11:35 AM
Dahnya Och says:
I’m still so amused at how I completely missed all this drama over the weekend. I’m almost glad I wasted four days playing D3. *cough*
At any rate, thank you, Chuck. I’ve been playing self-pity bullshit all morning, wondering if I were so horrible person for wanting to self-publish after seeing this smeared all over TwitterTown this morning. You make me feel a lot better about it… like it’s just him, not everyone. And maybe that’s enough.
May 21, 2012 — 12:02 PM
terribleminds says:
“At any rate, thank you, Chuck. I’ve been playing self-pity bullshit all morning, wondering if I were so horrible person for wanting to self-publish after seeing this smeared all over TwitterTown this morning. You make me feel a lot better about it… like it’s just him, not everyone. And maybe that’s enough.”
See, this is kinda the point of why I post this — to remind the world that the crazies are just the crazies. They are not the front-line self-publishing troops any more than the Tea Party is representative of all American politics, any more than a rabid squirrel is emblematic of the entire woodland population.
— c.
May 21, 2012 — 12:15 PM
Lor says:
I love that this is all over the internet, I feel a little more justified having to put up with his abusive tweets at 2am, if for no other reason than posts like this reach people, and they know not to judge all self-pub authors by this guy’s example.
Thanks Chuck, appreciate it dude.
May 21, 2012 — 1:01 PM
Shauna Granger says:
Well said, Chuck! People are right, to a point, though; these jackwads get so much attention they just reinforce people’s ideas that we’re all crazypants too. But thanks to posts like these, from well established authors, you help change that concept.
Also, I totally want to see Neil Gaiman lose it too, that would be amazing.
May 21, 2012 — 1:09 PM
Martin Greening says:
Wow! Sadly this guy is going to get some publicity off his little tirade, but hopefully those extra sales he may acquire will result in honest reviews of his work.
I’ve been considering self-publishing some work of my own, but guys like this make it really difficult to consider that a viable avenue until an author is well established in the mainstream.
May 21, 2012 — 1:26 PM
Gregory Lynn says:
I’m generally of the opinion that if you have to be told not to be a throbbing douchenozzle that you aren’t likely to recognize throbbing douchenozzlery in anything you do.
May 21, 2012 — 1:30 PM
Kim May says:
I want to give you a standing ovation. I hate that it’s so easy to self-publish that any talentless, uneducated boob can consider themselves a writer. Just thinking about it is enough to make my eye twitch. I agree that there needs to be some way to police this. Heck, I’d settle for a dunce cap stamp to warn the public of sub-standard work.
May 21, 2012 — 1:54 PM
James says:
I’ve self-published. What Chuck says is true, and what’s stunned me about the self-publishing “community” is how often it acts as an all-inclusive club–where there’s no such thing as bad writing, just bad marketing. I’ve already grown weary of the ALL YOU SALES ARE BELONG TO US–crap about how publishers (and most agents, and the Establishment man, the Establishment) is just out to Control Everything.
Except for Amazon. Apparently, Amazon–that bastion of Freedom and Democracy (and easy distrubution of e-book genre fiction) is all about apple pie and Chevrolet.
May 21, 2012 — 2:34 PM
Rachael Sarah Williams says:
You nailed it! Very well said.
With all this talk about social media marketing for promoting anything and everything, people seem to forget that it’s incredibly easy to sabotage one’s own efforts. Perhaps the “bright side” of all this is that at least we know who the a–holes are. Their obnoxious tweets told us so, saving us time and money in the process.
May 21, 2012 — 2:58 PM
LJ Cohen says:
Sometimes I feel like a lone voice in the wilderness, and then I read something like this and at least I know I’m not alone. As a writer pursuing both paths–indie and traditional–I cringe when I hear indie authors going off the rails like this guy.
And don’t even get me started on the tit-for-tat circles of mutual amazon tagging/reviewing/promoting.
I’ve gotten into heated exchanges on writing sites with indie authors who have a hissy fit over what they perceive as less than perfect reviews. As if they should get a pass b/c they have such a harder job getting their work out there.
Here’s what I believe: No matter how good your book is, no matterr who publishes it, there are no guarantees that it will find readers. BUT if your book isn’t as good as you can possibly make it and you are not willing to invest time/energy/money in making it better, then don’t publish. Just don’t.
Yeah–and don’t be *that* guy.
May 21, 2012 — 4:25 PM
Diana says:
Sigh. I’ve dealt with people like this in my personal life, I’ve rarely been successful.
What everyone needs to understand about That Guy is that they can not and do not recognize themselves in this post. That Guy has the emotionally maturity level of a child. They may have enough birthdays to qualify them as an adult, but they really are just children. Any attempt to get them to see reason only exacerbates the problem. They just become more angry, more shrill, more aggressive, more abusive. That Guy doesn’t get it and will never get it, no matter what you say. The best course of action when That Guy starts his or her meltdown is to ignore them. However much you would dearly love to reach through the internet and beat some sense into the guy, it won’t work because there is no opening through which sense can enter.
In this case, the only thing that could be done was to correct his misunderstanding of Self-published and Small Press. It’s clear from his original post that he is under the impression that forming a company and publishing his books through that company removes the label self-published from his books. It doesn’t. It also clear that he thinks that books published by a small press are small books. Which makes sense in a strange sort of way. Never the less, you could point out to him that small in Small Press refers to the press not the books that are published.
Some people did try to point this out to him, but again it is a bit tricky because you have to ignore all the reasons he states for why his books aren’t self-published or small and just point out that error in his understanding. It has to be clear and concise with no wiggle room for misunderstanding.
Even so, that might not work. He or she still might not get it.
Somebody wondered how to be Not That Guy. If you’re sitting here wondering if you are That Guy, then you’re probably Not That Guy.
On the one hand, Chuck, paying more attention in a post such as this does just feed the crazy machine. On the other hand, people need to see that not all self-published authors are bat shit crazy like That Guy. I think you write very insightful and meaningful posts. I share them with my writerly friends. And so every now and then it is good to write a post like this which reminds everyone that not all self-published authors are That Guy.
May 21, 2012 — 4:53 PM
Shane Dodd says:
“Wheaton’s Law: Don’t be a dick.
Wendig’s Corollary: Don’t be that guy.”
I need that on a shirt!
May 21, 2012 — 6:08 PM
Nicki Syler says:
Well said Chuck. Great writing doesn’t depend on a forum thread. If it’s good, people will find it.
May 21, 2012 — 8:29 PM
oldestgenxer says:
My GF just finished reading the whole “50 Shades of Gray” or whatever it is. Truthfully, I don’t care enough about it to verify anything. She said, however, that it started as a self-published deal that was then picked up by a publishing house.
And she says it is awful. Poorly constructed, unbelievable premise, bewildering character development. Maybe it’s not bad for BDSM porn, but it’s being passed off as something more than that. She saw it–and I take her on her word–as evidence that writers need editors. So if you’re going to self-publish, you still need to get your shit edited. And take the criticism like a man.
May 21, 2012 — 9:27 PM
Karin Cox says:
I couldn’t agree more, but unfortunately the moonbats shout the loudest. My approach is to leave them to their doom because I am sure that rational readers will come to their senses and avoid such unprofessional authors eventually.
May 22, 2012 — 3:18 AM
Paul Tarranto says:
I don’t understand that need that some people have to have praise heaped upon them whether it’s deserved or not. I let my work speak for itself, reap what benefits I get from it and then go home to a nice meal. I have no desire to knock on my neighbors door to tell him what I’ve done and ask, “Aren’t I the best?” The people you mention in your article are in desperate need of therapy to moderate their feelings of self-esteem and worth.
May 22, 2012 — 5:44 AM
Tom says:
Wow… on the one hand, it’s nice to know that even an absolute nutbar can potentially make a living through self-publishing. Imagine the possibilities for people that can form sentences!
On the other hand, it seems that being an aggressively promoted self-published author kinda equates to “can be relied upon to crap his pants in public.” It seems that well-guarded pen names might well make a comeback. At least authors can maintain a certain anonymity and even use stock photos for jacket covers if necessary. I’ll never be able to wear a mustache again for fear somebody might recognize me from a little film work I did in college.
May 22, 2012 — 6:31 AM
Armand Rosamilia says:
Chuck,
I wish for once you’d just stop beating around the bush and tell us what you REALLY think… great post as usual!
Armand Rosamilia
May 22, 2012 — 9:27 AM
Stuck in the Stone Age says:
No, sales are not an indicator of quality, but they’re an indicator of what the market is reading. And if people are reading it, who is anyone else to complain about the quality? If you don’t like it, don’t read it.
May 22, 2012 — 9:59 AM
Athena McCormick says:
I find this distressing – and by ‘this’, I mean all of it, from the weird, entitled douche who restarted the conversation right down to the people who say that they won’t read/review self-published works* because of people like him. It’s unfortunate that decent, hard-working writers are losing out on potential readers because of a few people who aren’t really thick-skinned enough to be in the business.
There is definitely a stigma to being self-published, which is taking a while to lift – and everytime something like this happens, it sets all (or at least most) self-published authors back a step.
I’ve self published one book, I’m looking to go the traditional route for the next and will self-publish the one after that – because as much as there is a stigma, I like the control self-publishing offers and because I know that, at best, some of my work will find a tiny niche market, and I think self-publishing is suited to that.
I think there needs to be an even balance – of cheering on the good writers, self- and traditionally published and I think there needs to be at least a little backlash from the writing community against those that make fools of themselves, because, rightly or wrongly, others are being judged for their lunacy.
*The saddest thing is, even as a self-published author, I can kind of see where they’re coming from.
May 22, 2012 — 11:07 AM
Allison M. Dickson says:
You are my hero. My foul-mouthed, articulate, wordtacular God of Fuckawesome. I bow down to you.
May 22, 2012 — 11:16 AM
Steve says:
@Stan: “I say we give this guy a break — unless he acts like this all the time ”
He does. I had a run-in with him in a closed writing group about 7-8 months ago. It was a question posed about the effectiveness of hashtags; he jumped in and said all of his 17k followers loved his tweets (which use hashtags liberally, like “#check #out #my #bestselling #fantasy”). I asked, quite innocently, something along the lines of “how can you be sure they all do, or are they just ignoring the message and not bothering to unfollow?” not really knowing who the guy was. I thought it was a valid question (because honestly I have no idea if all – or any – of my followers love my tweets or just ignore them…does anyone?)
His response started with “Listen ass hole” and went downhill from there. (His space between the words, not mine.) And he viciously went back and forth with others who chimed in, constantly throwing out how many books he sold, bestseller lists, etc.
No, this most certainly wasn’t an isolated incident, but this was certainly his most public.
-S
May 22, 2012 — 11:34 AM
Sam X says:
Absolutely right that the self-publishing scene needs more police. I figure enough people can guy this guy a screeching moonbat because it’s obvious and easy; but good policing also requires relevant and articulated opinions–aka criticism. So far the criticism in my magazine has been of small press stories rather than self published stories, but I intend to branch out to them this summer. I believe with intelligent criticism will come additional respect for medium. In time….
May 22, 2012 — 11:46 AM
lars T says:
I am in an odd situation.
On one hand I agree with every word that you just wrote, but on the other I find myself having to say that you are a cretinous / privileged moron who has absolutely no idea what he is talking about.
The agreement part first: Yes, most self published work is inept, poorly written and badly plotted. For the most part it is incompetent to the n-th degree.
But the disagreement:
I spent a lot of time in the visual arts world where they have a similar problem. A book I read estimated that during the 1980’s New York there were 60,000 professional artists (professional begin defined by portfolio, slides, decent work, etc…) trying to get in to around 300 gallery spaces. This problem has only gotten worse.
The result, was that artists began to create new means to display their work. Alternative spaces, happenings, performance art, street art, graffiti art etc… So much so that contemporary curatorial practice has pretty much turned away from the gallery situation because it is stale, genre bound and formulaic. Real art happens outside the gallery situation.
The same thing is pretty much happening right now in the publishing industry. Previously self-publishing had been both cost prohibitive and the distribution was just limited to friends and family. eBooks and the internet changed this. it is now possible to read the self published novel of someone living in England, Portland or Japan. I can go online and read reviews and find lists about what is good and what is bad. Co-op systems between self published authors are growing to share design, editing and marketing skills.
At the same time the model of writer > agent > publisher continues to put out books like “Vampirates” and “The Submission” that are well-executed but were most likely written by a P&L spreadsheet.
So consider this. J.K. Rowlings was barely published and were it not for luck wouldn’t have been. Same goes for John Kennedy Toole. Stephen King almost gave up writing except for his wife. Proust had to self-publish. The Diary of Anne Frank was rejected god knows how many times.
What I am saying here is not that an author has to keep trying and trying. That is pretty much obvious regardless of publishing medium. Nor am I saying that every self published novelist is a hidden genius. I’ve read hundreds of self published novels and i can guarantee that they aren’t. What I am saying here is how many good, no great authors got missed, simply because the publishing world focuses mostly on easy mediocrity.
I’m also say that the publishing world is undergoing a revolution as sweeping and dynamic as any any other artistic movement in the history of the world. People like you who look at what is happening right now and say writing the kind of garbage in this post are a lot like the french academy looking at impressionism and saying “bah.”
So on a last note. I’ve actually read Blackbirds. It is good, and the idea of having the girl able to touch someone and see their death is clever. It is well written and smart. But it is neither brilliant nor for that matter all that deep. Maybe you will improve as you find the voice of your character… if so more power too you, a lot of authors started off slowly and grew.
But accept this. Your publishing success grew out of nothing but the luck of fortunate circumstances. There are a ton of better writers than you out there, and a million billion worse ones. The way I see it, as long as we are building a situation where talented writers can rises then who cares where they began.
May 22, 2012 — 12:05 PM
terribleminds says:
@Lars:
You’re responding to a post I didn’t write. Which is to say, you’re taking issue with an attack on self-publishing, which this is most certainly not. It’s a reference to one specific type of attitude and one specific type of troll within that self-published community.
As for my work, Blackbirds, luck was most certainly a factor. But the book not sucking was, hopefully, an even better one.
— c.
May 22, 2012 — 1:46 PM