Behold, as I Insult the Written Word

Making the rounds of the indie publishing world lately has been this HuffPo piece from Laurie Gough about the scourge that is self-published books, and how those books are “an insult to the written word.” It’s, shall we say, harsh toward indie authors. It’s also typical HuffPo click bait. But that doesn’t necessarily mean it’s all wrong.

In fact, I wrote a post that was of a similar vein last spring (but that, I suspect, received a slight bit less attention), titled “Are Self-Published Books Any Good?” In it, I wrote this:

When the barriers to publishing are so low — practically non-existent now — buying a self-published novel is going to be a bit of a crapshoot. Literally anybody can upload their work to Amazon; some of those people aren’t very good writers, frankly. Still others are talented writers who just need a tough editor more than they think they do. So, when I start reading a book that has obvious, crucial, elementary flaws, my guess is they were self published, and probably just didn’t get the care they needed before going online. Are self-published books any good? They absolutely can be. But finding the really good ones can be a bit like mining for gold, and nearly as rewarding.

Compare that to what Laurie said:

I have nothing against people who want to self-publish, especially if they’re elderly. Perhaps they want to write their life story and have no time to learn how to write well enough to be published traditionally. It makes a great gift for their grandchildren. But self-publishing needs to be labelled as such. The only similarity between published and self-published books is they each have words on pages inside a cover. The similarities end there. And every single self-published book I’ve tried to read has shown me exactly why the person had to resort to self-publishing. These people haven’t taken the decade, or in many cases even six months, to learn the very basics of writing, such as ‘show, don’t tell,’ or how to create a scene, or that clichés not only kill writing but bludgeon it with a sledgehammer. Sometimes they don’t even know grammar.

Which is to say, I get where Laurie is coming from here. Lots of self-published books really do suck. What was for decades a fortress that stood between individuals and having a published book has been reduced to rubble, and the barbarians are storming the gate. There’s literally nothing stopping anyone from publishing whatever steaming pile of garbage they can lay down on the proverbial paper, and they can do it cheaply or for free, depending on their standards for what gets produced.

Many don’t know how to edit, and aren’t willing or able to lay out the money for a professional to do it for them (which every single one of them should). I feel like, if I can’t afford to pay an editor to do a content edit and proofread of my manuscript, then I can’t afford to publish that manuscript. But there are no such standards in self publishing. There are no standards at all, in fact. Just upload and click the button. Amazon’s happy to add you to the roster of books right alongside best sellers, and you get to jockey for virtual shelf space with hundreds of thousands of others, whether you’ve put it in work to truly “deserve” it or not.

So, yeah, I get it. As a long-time writer (though short-time author), I understand her sentiment. It’s dispiriting to a lot of self-published authors out there (like me! Hi!), but I can see why there’d be frustration. Not only are lots of self-published authors claiming the same title she is without putting in the years of training and hard work, but they’re taking up valuable virtual shelf space on Amazon and elsewhere. Most readers probably can’t tell the difference from looking at the books’ pages/covers, and haven’t made any effort to differentiate them. Maybe that’s part of what drove Laurie, a traditionally published author, to write this: seeing the market flooded with pretenders, and wanting to nudge readers toward being more discerning in their tastes.

What Laurie doesn’t acknowledge is that there are plenty of reasons good, experienced, and fully committed authors choose the indie route. I know, because I’d like to think I’m among them. And I can tell you, I definitely didn’t go the self-publishing route because I was afraid of rejection (I love rejection!). It wasn’t because I thought my book wasn’t good enough to find a publisher, because I believe I could have … eventually. And it wasn’t because I wanted a short cut, because there’s really no rush here. Here are the biggest reasons I chose to self publish:

1. Control
   Going through a publisher, especially as a first-time author with no name to sell with, you have virtually no control over … well, basically anything. The publisher has bought the publishing rights to your book, and they’re not going to put it out there without making it as appealing to readers as possible, which could mean drastic changes to the plot that the author won’t agree with, and prices you have no control over. In some cases, that may be OK. But I believed in the story for “Killing the Immortals” and wanted it to be my artistic vision. Self publishing was the most certain way to accomplish that.
2. They don’t help that much anyway
   This is the dirty little secret in the publishing industry. “Spend years trying to get your book published, and then wait a year or so for it to come out once you do, and your patience will be rewarded when they launch your book to the top of the charts!” But first-time authors still have to handle all their own social media promotion (and you can bet they’re checking out your social profile level before making a decision on your book too). You’ll have to hire your own editor too, because it’s not like they’re going to accept a mere plot summary from a first-time author. They’ll want the entire book written. They’ll price your book too high, take a huge cut from it, and not pay you another dime until they recoup whatever advance you might have gotten. In some cases, that works out. In many others, it doesn’t.
3. I don’t need artificial validation for my work
   I’ve been a published writer for 20+ years. I studied writing and reporting through high school and college, then as a professional. I’m an expert on grammar, punctuation and spelling. If I don’t know, I check. I have very high standards for my own writing, and I also understand the need for a professional to take a hard look at my work to make it better. So much of “You need to traditionally publish” is about having the validation that comes with sending your book through that gauntlet. Laurie and many others may feel more fulfilled in their writing when a publisher certifies they know what they’re doing. I have no such need. I’m not Hemingway, but I can write.
4. Flexibility
   With self publishing, I’m able to publish what I want, when I want. I can publish work in whatever genre I choose, of whatever length I want, and time the release myself. And self publishing one book does nothing to suggest I can’t traditionally publish a later book (which I probably will). Or even (at least in theory, though it’s fairly rare) traditionally publish the same book later. Self publishing allows me to test the waters, and establish myself, on my own timeline, and in my own way. I can package my short stories individually or in a collection, at my own discretion. I can correct any small errors that someone finds in my published works with a few keystrokes. I can adjust the price of my books in the same way, in seconds. In short, I have control over my author career, and it isn’t outsourced to a validation factory.

EDIT: It should be noted that Laurie Gough wrote an apology for the article on her Facebook page on Tuesday evening.