 |
| Photo credit: Emily Carlin on Flickr |
You see, you have a good manuscript in your hands; one that you're pretty certain will sell. If you accept the agent's offer of representation, you will enter the ranks with other traditionally published writers. If not, you can take the title of self- published writer.
So let me ask you, my fellow readers: would you publish traditionally if given the chance?
It's a bit of a weird question, I know, and five years ago if you asked any writer, the answer would be a resounding: well, DUH. But nowadays the answer of how to publish isn't so cut and dry. More stories surface every day about writers who, when faced with the decision, choose self- publishing rather than going traditional. There are the Amanda Hockings and J.R. Konraths of the world who have made bundles through independent publishing and more than a handful of writers who have been able to make a living off self- publishing.
And yet, traditional publishing is still a very viable option, because while to some writers the how of getting published doesn't matter, to others it does. Then there's also the matter of all the work that goes into publishing that writers have to tackle largely by themselves when they choose to self- publish, that others would rather let a traditional publishing house take care of.
Some believe that there's more
money to be made through self- publishing and others through traditional
publishing—and still others don't care about the money either way: they want to
see their book on the shelves (or in the case of self- publishing, they just
want to be published one way or another).
When it comes to how to publish, I truthfully don't believe there's a blanket right or wrong answer— it most certainly depends on your goals as a writer (more about that in this post).
So I'm curious. If the aforementioned hypothetical situation happened to you, what would you choose? Would you accept representation or choose to brave the waters of self- publishing?
37 comments:
It would depend on the MS. Seriously. For example, I have a couple MG manuscripts that I would love representation and traditional publication with - and I would take that offer in a heartbeat. Why? Because it is very difficult to reach the MG market with indie publishing.
On the other hand, if someone offered to represent the second book in my Mindjack trilogy (soon to come out), I would say a flat "no". Why? Because my readers are waiting for that book, and I'm not going to put it in a pipeline that would take another year or two for it to come out. If they wanted to rep print rights only and try to get those sold, I might be open to that. But otherwise no.
A more likely scenario is having an agent approach a successful self-publisher, wanting to see their "next" manuscript, to sell traditionally (I've seen this happen). Then I would still have to give it some thought. Releasing titles on a regular basis is an important way to keep building your fanbase, and putting a big delay in there could crimp things up. But if you can toss a MS into the trad-pub lottery, to see what happens, while still proceeding with self-publishing...I think that could be a smart way to diversify your writing portfolio.
Sheesh, this was almost a post-length comment! :)
I believe in diversification for an author. I would definitely consider it, under the following conditions: I thought the agent could get me a better deal, more quickly than I could get myself; the agent was clear on what I wanted and was willing to walk away from a deal that didn't include hardcover, a fair ebook royalty percentage, retention of foreign and movie rights, and a very big advance; if I thought the book was a blockbuster. For smaller, niche audience books, I really think self publishing is better for me -- there's more control, and the author knows her niche better than anyone else (or should learn it if she doesn't).
Of course, I don't know that I'd ever write such a book, so...
I would go for traditional publishing for the reasons outlined on my blog today (lol talk about coincidences). I tend to write the stories that I want teens to be able to read. Right now, self publishing isn't the most effective way for me to get the books into their hands. That will eventually change.
I have to agree with Susan. First, it totally depends on the manuscript and where I think it would do better. And I could never make the decision without knowing who the agent is, how excited they were about my work, if they were okay working with an author who self publishes. etc. so much to consider that can't really be answered until faced with the decision.
Stina makes a great point here (and in her post) about reaching teens. I think serving teens with serious fiction about their lives (as opposed to just entertainment, which also has great value) is important, and for that you have to read the teen readers, not just the adult readers.
Post-length comment or not, that was a very thoughtful answer, so thank you! I think you're right that the option to self-publish or go traditional can very greatly not just on the writer, but on the MS (I've even read posts about agents who represented writers, then told them to self-publish one manuscript while they pursued traditional publishing for another). I've also heard more and more about successful self-publishers being approached by agents, and it's been interesting to see which ones choose to give traditional publishing a try and which choose to continue to solely self-publish. There are certainly many factors to consider!
I think your conditions are fair, although the very big advance (depending on what you consider "very big" to be) seems less and less likely these days, especially with a new author. Out of curiosity, would you still accept an offer that met every one of your conditions except for a very big advance?
Could you by any chance give me the link to that post? I'd certainly be interested in reading it. :)
As Susan said, you made a great point about the audience. Right now self-publishing seems to be a great way to reach an adult audience and from what I've observed, pretty effective for a YA audience too, however I imagine there's some debate as YA seems to sell well in both the self-publishing and traditional marketplaces.
You also bring up a fantastic point--the agent. I think the decision could very greatly depending on who the agent is and the amount of confidence you have that the agent is a good fit for your manuscript (or not).
I've always had a dream of being published by one of the big houses. I think that I would try to get an agent, but keep the self-publishing idea close at heart in case no one bites. There are a lot of good stories out there that just don't get picked up for one reason or another.
From what I've seen online, that seems to be a popular strategy, especially for writers who are still open to traditional publishing, but don't mind the idea of self-publishing, either.
I worry constantly, about everything. I'm happy to pay a legion of someones little percentages of each book so I don't have to worry. This will give me more time to write.
"More time to write" is reason one of my two-item list entitled "Why I Want to Make a Career of Writing". The second item is "External, reliable validation".
The only way I'd try to publish something myself is if either self-publishing completely eclipses the traditional model in terms of sales and quality or my agent doesn't sell a work we both agree has potential.
Definitely not. I wouldn't even consider it. I love self-publishing. I love having full creative control over my ideas, my titles, my covers. I don't believe that traditional publishing has anything to offer that would trump that.
I don't want to accept traditional really, because I like the freedom but I'm awful at marketing so a traditional publisher might actually make me a success. I just can't compete with other people, for various reasons, on my own.
I think that's an entirely reasonable way of looking at it. Self-publishing involves a lot of non-writerly work (if you want to be successful, anyway) and although I suppose you could still get external validation from it (in the form of sales), I imagine it wouldn't be quite the same as joining the ranks of the traditionally published.
Then there's the matter of the agent, which, from what I understand, is a huge source of support, advice and publishing smarts with a dose of encouragement when needed along the way.
Sounds like self-publishing has been a great experience for you! :)
Marketing isn't an easy thing--it's an entirely new skill you have to learn that's mostly unrelated to writing, but is essential for success to self-published writers. That's not to say you won't have to do any marketing if you publish traditionally, but at least the brunt of the marketing legwork doesn't fall on you.
I would chose traditional publishing. Lately, I've been thinking more and more about self-publishing, but if I had the opportunity, I would still run for traditional.
Some day, I really want to be able to hold a paperback copy of my book while standing in a bookstore. I know, that's so 20th Century, but that's been a dream for years, and I don't think I would be able to get that if I went self-pub.
I had a great bookstore experience this week visiting Parnassus Books in Nashville. Great book discussion. Browsing shelves and finding people I didn't know I wanted to read. I grew up living among the library stacks as a kid and even had a short run working in a library while in college. My house is overflowing with bookshelves. So, yes, I like the idea of one day seeing and holding my book in my hand and having it on the shelves rubbing shoulders with other writers. Also, I don't know if I want to devote so much time to the publishing aspect. I can barely keep up wiht the modern requirements of doing my own writing while trying to keep up with social media.
It's so hard to say! I've toyed with this thought before and I just don't know. The eager little writer in me says "I want to hold a paper version of my book some day and see it on a shelf at Barnes & Noble." The practical side of me thinks self publishing can be great and sometimes better if you do it right.
I'm afraid in the end I couldn't resist a traditional publishing deal.
I think a lot of writers share that dream--I know it's one that I still think about from time to time. Although it could be hypothetically possible through self-publishing (indirectly, anyway, i.e.: Amanda Hocking), it's a much more likely scenario through traditional publishing.
You bring up a great point that writers really have to consider before deciding whether or not they'd like to go indie--namely, that self-published writers need to spend a considerable amount of time with the publishing/marketing aspect. Although it's still something you need to consider if you get published traditionally, it's a much larger factor for independent authors. Some can handle it without a problem, but for others it can be a lot to juggle.
A lot of writers seem to have that dream of seeing their book on the shelf. The question nowadays becomes would you rather wait and possibly put more of your manuscripts in the drawer before finally reaching that dream or go ahead and self-publish, accepting that you may not (I say may not, because it's still a possibility) see your book on the shelf?
I definitely see myself self-publishing at some point. Sometimes that can be the in for a traditional publishing deal. However, I don't think I could turn down the deal if it came my way.
One trend I've noticed is that writers who are already traditionally published will still use self-publishing to promote other genres of writing, short fiction and memoirs. I think a blend of the two worlds would be the best case scenario.
Thanks for the post Ava!
I've heard a lot about that too, and it certainly sounds like those authors have hit the hybrid sweet spot. Certainly something to consider!
Oh, gosh, I don't think I have a short answer for that one! I like being self-published. I don't think that I could have gotten my series out there via traditional publishing. If I was offered enough money, though? I have an ego. I would love to see my book on a shelf, especially if by some miracle I could keep my e-rights. However, I don't think that would be able to maintain the kind of creative control I enjoy right now via a traditional publishing contract (or avoid some of the frightening non-compete clauses that are becoming more and more commonplace), so...it would have to be a lot of money.
WHAT??? Of course I want my books to find a home in a corportate publishing house! The hours I invest daily selling myself on social media is to create my brand. Being a signed author to a large house gives me, as an author...some klout. I am proud of my colleagues who publish independently... but it has never been an option for me. I WANT THE BOOK DEAL. And it has nothing to do with holding the book in my hands at a B&N or an advance. I want the opportunity to compete with bestsellers, I want my book placed next to an author who is on the NY Times Bestseller List, I want the the book signings (even if there are only a few bookstores left) I like ebooks, trust me...but I LOVE old school publishing. Douglas Wickard A PERFECT HUSBAND.
I would prefer to be published traditionally and to be paid an advance on royalties. There is still a belief that self-published books are poorer quality than traditionally-published, although with the proliferation of very small housed with poor editing facilities, this is certainly not true.
All my books so far have been published traditionally and I have two more contracted, but if I can get a good agent, I intend to go that way with future books. If not, I shall seriously consider self-publication.
We all stand on the shoulders of others to arrive where we want to go. Like Douglas I want that book signing the recognition and klout not offered through some of the other ways. I like that there is that option as we all like other choices even if we don't choose some of those choices. I love my kindle but love my book collection. While self publishing is wonderful there is nothing like arriving. I want to arrive on GMA, Jay Leno, Ellen and any place that promotes the works of authors they like. LIKE ME CORPORATE OR SELF PUBLISHED BUT LIKE ME.
Someone else mentioned the money thing, and I think that's interesting especially since nowadays, publishers don't often offer a particularly large advance unless they're very confident it's going to sell really well...but as advances go down, the potential for the author to earn out their advance goes up, so there's that trade-off...
Sounds like it's not a particularly difficult decision for you. :D
You actually bring up a pretty interesting point about competition--while indie authors can certainly compete with traditionally published authors via the e-book market, it's not quite the same as the NYT Bestseller List (to my knowledge, anyway) and any book signings you want as an indie author will have to be arranged by you. It's comparable to the traditional publishing experience, but not the same by any means (which, for some, is a good thing and for others, not so much).
Just out of curiosity, were you published through a small publishing house?
You make a good point about the agent--having a good literary agent can completely change one's publishing experience.
Oh, I missed this discussion. Anyway, I don't think I would ever consider self-publication. With me, it's traditional or it's nothing. Maybe I'm rather conservative for that matter, but I don't think I deserve to get my book published if it isn't approved by an editor. Is that weird?
And also: if you take the traditional way, there's a lot of help. An editor reviews your novel to make it even better. Yes, for me, it's an easy choice. Although I get the idea that self-publishing is more used in the US (and the UK) than in my little country ^^
There's definitely something to be said for the klout that traditionally published authors receive that is much more difficult to come by for indie publishers (not impossible, granted, but more difficult). Something about passing through the gatekeepers and coming out the other side gives traditionally published authors a little extra edge from the start when it comes to reputation.
No worries! The discussion can continue at any time. :)
I actually don't think what you feel about not deserving to get published if it isn't approved isn't weird at all. For years the publishing gatekeepers (agents, editors, etc.) have acted as a sort of right of passage for writers--only with their nod of approval were you deemed skilled enough to join the ranks of the traditionally published, so it makes sense that many writers still want that extra external validation before continuing.
And you're right about the help you receive if you traditionally publish--that in my mind is a huge perk of going traditional. Through traditional publishing, you as the author have to worry about two things: writing and (some) marketing, which a much larger emphasis on writing. Along the way you have an agent and editors and marketing specialists (as well as many others) to help you. There are a lot of people behind getting a book published.
When you publish independently, you have to take on the roles of all of those people (or else hire someone to do it). For some it's a manageable reality, for others it's much more difficult.
I'm suprised you didn't say anything in defence of independent publishing :-) I thought you liked that. So what would you choose? Traditional? And if that doesn't work out, will you give the self-publishing a chance?
I stand in the funny position of supporting both sides--I can see the pros and cons of either decision and think the "right" decision depends solely on the writer.
As for myself...I think I'll leave that announcement for another day. :)
Post a Comment