Behind the Scenes
DIY Publishing
In a recent blog post at PANK, a writer shared some very interesting thoughts about his experiences (both good and bad) with self-publishing his first novel. In the comments, another writer remarked that the DIY, self-publishing approach is quite celebrated in the independent music scene while self-publishing is rather maligned in the writing world. That was a really interesting observation and he’s right. Musicians will upload their music to the Internet and sell homemade CDs out of the trunk of their car and they become folk heroes for their efforts. When a writer stands up and says hey, I’ve got this book and I am my own publisher, he might as well run around the room shouting, “I am a leper.” We (generally speaking) judge people who self-publish.
There are many reasons to be wary of self-publishing. Vanity presses are largely corrupt enterprises only interested in parting deluded and/or naive writers from their money. Many self-published writers act like they’re opting out of mainstream publishing. They act like they are making a choice when in fact a choice has been made for them because they cannot sell their work to any publisher because their writing is simply not good by any measure.
Once in a while, a good writer goes the self-publishing route for any number of reasons and they find some level of success–be it personal pride or sales, or in rare instances garnering the attention of a publisher. Those successes are few and far between because paying someone to print your book is one tiny part of what it takes to publish and sell a book. If it were as easy as just paying someone to print a book, it wouldn’t be so challenging for writers to get a book deal.
There’s a lot to be said for working with a publisher, big or small, for several reasons. Writing has an opportunity to be vetted–just because you write, does that mean you should be published? Writers also have the support (to varying degrees) of their publisher in terms of the logistics, ranging from editing to copy editing to marketing to distribution. It is very easy to demonize publishers as exclusive and elitist gatekeepers but I still believe that good writing will always find a home with a publisher, eventually. We won’t all get a deal with Random House or Penguin, but there are a great many other publishers out there who will take on the many kinds of writing currently being produced.
Having said that, if a writer believes in their work enough to put their own money behind their words, why is such a stigma attached to self-publishing? Why does the DIY approach seem to find more success in the music scene? Is self-publishing really that different from publishing with a micropress?
Tags: independent music, self-publishing
I was hoping for you’d attempt to answer the questions you asked in your parting paragraph. Lemme rephrase, you attempted, but that attempt didn’t go the distance, I guess. Everything mentioned could’ve been applied to DIY musically, so I was hoping you’d peel the top off this motherfucker because it doesn’t make any sense, the stigma.
I’ve done both. Bought my own home studio, made my own CDs, did shows, etc. I printed up my own chapbooks, did shows, sold ’em. The people, read THE PEOPLE, your readers, do not care. They just want the goods. They just want to be spoken too and be funned with. This stigma is more of the publishers. Much like how DIY music was more of the labels and their fear of the power paradigm shifting. But it’s also the writers. We’re so attached to the publishing houses, via the publishing houses needs to keep the structure, that tend to accept their ideas of what the publishing industry is and should be. This mindstate is then propagated by writers to other writers, adding fuel to the “eewww, self published??” thinga-ma-jig.
The readers kind of don’t care. If the book is well designed, and the material inside gets them excited, they truly do not care. Just like their music. What’s good is good. These issues are always on the side of the creators and those managing the creative output.
I was hoping for you’d attempt to answer the questions you asked in your parting paragraph. Lemme rephrase, you attempted, but that attempt didn’t go the distance, I guess. Everything mentioned could’ve been applied to DIY musically, so I was hoping you’d peel the top off this motherfucker because it doesn’t make any sense, the stigma.
I’ve done both. Bought my own home studio, made my own CDs, did shows, etc. I printed up my own chapbooks, did shows, sold ’em. The people, read THE PEOPLE, your readers, do not care. They just want the goods. They just want to be spoken too and be funned with. This stigma is more of the publishers. Much like how DIY music was more of the labels and their fear of the power paradigm shifting. But it’s also the writers. We’re so attached to the publishing houses, via the publishing houses needs to keep the structure, that tend to accept their ideas of what the publishing industry is and should be. This mindstate is then propagated by writers to other writers, adding fuel to the “eewww, self published??” thinga-ma-jig.
The readers kind of don’t care. If the book is well designed, and the material inside gets them excited, they truly do not care. Just like their music. What’s good is good. These issues are always on the side of the creators and those managing the creative output.
oh, and money matters! that is the only thing that matters in the world, remember!….
oh, and money matters! that is the only thing that matters in the world, remember!….
does it have something to do with the trunk of the car? seems like the most annoying kind of self-published author expects to self-publish a book then sit at home waiting for the sales to roll in. but with, say, songs, people happen to see you play a song, and then if they like the song, they buy the song.
does it have something to do with the trunk of the car? seems like the most annoying kind of self-published author expects to self-publish a book then sit at home waiting for the sales to roll in. but with, say, songs, people happen to see you play a song, and then if they like the song, they buy the song.
The only decent books I have seen that had been self-published were cases when the author(s) knew that there would be no profitable market: Collections of family correspondence, extremely small-readership technical hobby books, etc. In every other instance, when I have been handed a self-published book by an acquaintance, it was simply objectively bad. I think the above is suggests a perfectly valid test to be applied by the author considering self-publishing. If the work falls within an non-dead genre, and after really truly trying you can’t find a taker, you need to revise, study, start over, learn more, and/or write something else. If your young-adult novel about sexy steam-punk vampires gets rejected everywhere, it may not be a conspiracy.
I don’t think that I would be a better human being if I wasn’t judgmental and suspicious about self-publishing. It might feel warm and fuzzy to be approving, but would require denying reality: most writing submitted unsolicited for publication is really, really bad. Most stories are rejected for a reason.
I do indeed think that there is a smooth continuum between crappy little magazines (ever looked at ‘alien skin’?) that publish basically anything, and vanity publishing. I’d say it depends on how much the publisher takes on the duty (intentionally or not) of gate-keeper. Hence a micropress might or might not be the equivalent of self-published collection by a writer’s group. I’d be generally suspicious of a journal or publisher that *didn’t* have a very high rejection rate. And since a vanity or POD press has a rejection rate of zero, there is reason to be suspicious.
Having said all that, I am not categorically opposed to self-publishing. I merely reserve the right to view it with suspicion, without being accused of being a snob or industry apologist.
The only decent books I have seen that had been self-published were cases when the author(s) knew that there would be no profitable market: Collections of family correspondence, extremely small-readership technical hobby books, etc. In every other instance, when I have been handed a self-published book by an acquaintance, it was simply objectively bad. I think the above is suggests a perfectly valid test to be applied by the author considering self-publishing. If the work falls within an non-dead genre, and after really truly trying you can’t find a taker, you need to revise, study, start over, learn more, and/or write something else. If your young-adult novel about sexy steam-punk vampires gets rejected everywhere, it may not be a conspiracy.
I don’t think that I would be a better human being if I wasn’t judgmental and suspicious about self-publishing. It might feel warm and fuzzy to be approving, but would require denying reality: most writing submitted unsolicited for publication is really, really bad. Most stories are rejected for a reason.
I do indeed think that there is a smooth continuum between crappy little magazines (ever looked at ‘alien skin’?) that publish basically anything, and vanity publishing. I’d say it depends on how much the publisher takes on the duty (intentionally or not) of gate-keeper. Hence a micropress might or might not be the equivalent of self-published collection by a writer’s group. I’d be generally suspicious of a journal or publisher that *didn’t* have a very high rejection rate. And since a vanity or POD press has a rejection rate of zero, there is reason to be suspicious.
Having said all that, I am not categorically opposed to self-publishing. I merely reserve the right to view it with suspicion, without being accused of being a snob or industry apologist.
I read the original PANK post, and when I think more about it, I think it’s a style issue. I expect a self-released EP from a band to be rough in the mix and in sound. So I expect it from something like a hardcore or a punk band or even a rapper. I don’t expect it from a Mariah Carey knock-off; the production values have to be different.
the same w/ writing I guess. Certain subject matter has been more accepted as DIY, hence we expect zines to be advocating straight edge and long, lonely backpacking trips. A DIY chapbook I expect as something kind of edgy, experimental–something that fits the long history & mythic narrative before it.
But a DIY bodice-ripper written by a sixty-year old grandma with the pen name Snora Croberts makes us squirm and elicits the “ewwwww….” comment.
So it is style with substance that may be the difference b/w DIY and vanity press.
I read the original PANK post, and when I think more about it, I think it’s a style issue. I expect a self-released EP from a band to be rough in the mix and in sound. So I expect it from something like a hardcore or a punk band or even a rapper. I don’t expect it from a Mariah Carey knock-off; the production values have to be different.
the same w/ writing I guess. Certain subject matter has been more accepted as DIY, hence we expect zines to be advocating straight edge and long, lonely backpacking trips. A DIY chapbook I expect as something kind of edgy, experimental–something that fits the long history & mythic narrative before it.
But a DIY bodice-ripper written by a sixty-year old grandma with the pen name Snora Croberts makes us squirm and elicits the “ewwwww….” comment.
So it is style with substance that may be the difference b/w DIY and vanity press.
In poetry, I don’t think this is always the case. Chris Tonelli has a hand in Birds LLC, which will publish his book (I’m going off what Justin Marks said on here in an interview). And Reb Livingston’s book will be coming out on her own No Tell Books. And what about HTMLG’s own Justin Taylor’s ties to x-ing books, which published his collection? I don’t think there’s a sense that these authors’ works are in any way diminished by the way they have been/will be published.
In poetry, I don’t think this is always the case. Chris Tonelli has a hand in Birds LLC, which will publish his book (I’m going off what Justin Marks said on here in an interview). And Reb Livingston’s book will be coming out on her own No Tell Books. And what about HTMLG’s own Justin Taylor’s ties to x-ing books, which published his collection? I don’t think there’s a sense that these authors’ works are in any way diminished by the way they have been/will be published.
I agree with Michael James, few readers know about or care about publishers–the stigma lies with the writers and publishers. Yeah, there’s a lot of crappy self-published books, as there are crappy indie and big-press books. When you go a bar and hear a band, you don’t think “oh, but who’s their record label?” before you make your judgement – you think “this band rocks” or “this band sucks my ass.” It’s the same thing for most readers. If a band sucks, you stop listening or go to another bar just like readers stop reading a sucky book and (hopefully) move on to a better book.
Like record labels, a publisher can do much to help shape, support and promote a book. Or it can restrict, neglect or fuck-up a book. It all depends on the situation and the people involved. Writers have countless publisher horror stories. Publishers don’t = sales.
As an indie publisher, I am regularly approached by poets who want me to publish their poems and books. That’s the case for pretty much everyone with a magazine or press–and pretty much anyone can start one these days. If I’m good enough to publish their poems and books, why aren’t I good enough to publish my own? If I need “feedback” or editing assistance, I know plenty of writers/editors who can give it. I can hire a proofreader. As for “vetting”–what if most of the pieces are already published in magazines? Or better yet, why not let the readers vet the work? They’re doing it already, oblivious and completely disinterested in the publishing biz.
Writers can learn a lot from the music industry. There’s a lot of crap musicians out there, but the good musicians don’t seem to worry about being grouped with them just because they distribute their music in a similar way. Why? Because they know their music stands for itself.
I agree with Michael James, few readers know about or care about publishers–the stigma lies with the writers and publishers. Yeah, there’s a lot of crappy self-published books, as there are crappy indie and big-press books. When you go a bar and hear a band, you don’t think “oh, but who’s their record label?” before you make your judgement – you think “this band rocks” or “this band sucks my ass.” It’s the same thing for most readers. If a band sucks, you stop listening or go to another bar just like readers stop reading a sucky book and (hopefully) move on to a better book.
Like record labels, a publisher can do much to help shape, support and promote a book. Or it can restrict, neglect or fuck-up a book. It all depends on the situation and the people involved. Writers have countless publisher horror stories. Publishers don’t = sales.
As an indie publisher, I am regularly approached by poets who want me to publish their poems and books. That’s the case for pretty much everyone with a magazine or press–and pretty much anyone can start one these days. If I’m good enough to publish their poems and books, why aren’t I good enough to publish my own? If I need “feedback” or editing assistance, I know plenty of writers/editors who can give it. I can hire a proofreader. As for “vetting”–what if most of the pieces are already published in magazines? Or better yet, why not let the readers vet the work? They’re doing it already, oblivious and completely disinterested in the publishing biz.
Writers can learn a lot from the music industry. There’s a lot of crap musicians out there, but the good musicians don’t seem to worry about being grouped with them just because they distribute their music in a similar way. Why? Because they know their music stands for itself.
Yeah, and bands can play shows every night and make t-shirts and free EPs and blaze themselves across Myspace and nobody cringes and says, Oh, overexposure, self promotion, ick! But I like what Michael says–in the end, quality will out.
Yeah, and bands can play shows every night and make t-shirts and free EPs and blaze themselves across Myspace and nobody cringes and says, Oh, overexposure, self promotion, ick! But I like what Michael says–in the end, quality will out.
Heh, I just read this after writing my post below, but yes, there are many examples. There’s still a stigma with lots of poets. I had a number of friends try to convince me not to publish my next book based on “oh what would people say/think” scenarios. Or people assume I couldn’t get it published elsewhere (not true, Coconut Books, who published my first book, offered based on seeing some of the poems, I never submitted the manuscript to any press). I happen to like the books that I publish. I also happen to like my own poems and enjoying working with myself. I think poet-Reb and publisher-Reb are a great fit.
If I spent my time worrying about what everyone else would think, I’d never get anything done. No matter what I do, it annoys or pisses someone off. Writers find no shortage of things to criticize.
Heh, I just read this after writing my post below, but yes, there are many examples. There’s still a stigma with lots of poets. I had a number of friends try to convince me not to publish my next book based on “oh what would people say/think” scenarios. Or people assume I couldn’t get it published elsewhere (not true, Coconut Books, who published my first book, offered based on seeing some of the poems, I never submitted the manuscript to any press). I happen to like the books that I publish. I also happen to like my own poems and enjoying working with myself. I think poet-Reb and publisher-Reb are a great fit.
If I spent my time worrying about what everyone else would think, I’d never get anything done. No matter what I do, it annoys or pisses someone off. Writers find no shortage of things to criticize.
The problem I have is I have met people or read their work, and they never tell me it’s self-published. Like they want me to believe it is not. In the music industry, they clearly say I AM PUTTING OUT THIS MUSIC, ME.
But self pubbed or not, a good work is a good work.
The problem I have is I have met people or read their work, and they never tell me it’s self-published. Like they want me to believe it is not. In the music industry, they clearly say I AM PUTTING OUT THIS MUSIC, ME.
But self pubbed or not, a good work is a good work.
I think the opportunity for live performance tips things in the musicians’s favor. A new band can run through their entire self-released EP during an opening act, and at the end I know if I am excited by them or not.
Text doesn’t “perform” nearly as well. Out of the readings I’ve been to, only a few really excited me, even those by authors whose books I really enjoyed. And only one story from a collection, or worse, an excerpt from a novel can be read in a reasonable amount of time.
So I guess at least with a crappy self-released punk band you can get drunk with friends at their show and have a great time. But that’s much harder to do at a reading.
Or maybe I go to the wrong readings?
I think the opportunity for live performance tips things in the musicians’s favor. A new band can run through their entire self-released EP during an opening act, and at the end I know if I am excited by them or not.
Text doesn’t “perform” nearly as well. Out of the readings I’ve been to, only a few really excited me, even those by authors whose books I really enjoyed. And only one story from a collection, or worse, an excerpt from a novel can be read in a reasonable amount of time.
So I guess at least with a crappy self-released punk band you can get drunk with friends at their show and have a great time. But that’s much harder to do at a reading.
Or maybe I go to the wrong readings?
davy rothbart sold 5,000 copies of his self published collection, the lone surfer of montana, kansas, before it was picked up by simon and schuster.
im not referring to htmlgiant, but for a community of writers as a whole who label themselves as “independent”, i hardly ever see much of that going on.
self publish and sell 5,000 copies out of your trunk…
otherwise what are you independent of?
davy rothbart sold 5,000 copies of his self published collection, the lone surfer of montana, kansas, before it was picked up by simon and schuster.
im not referring to htmlgiant, but for a community of writers as a whole who label themselves as “independent”, i hardly ever see much of that going on.
self publish and sell 5,000 copies out of your trunk…
otherwise what are you independent of?
that’s pretty punk rock yo
that’s pretty punk rock yo
Totally yo! Fuck the big companies (“small indie presses” are cool). Do it however you do it. Just make words and get people to read them
Totally yo! Fuck the big companies (“small indie presses” are cool). Do it however you do it. Just make words and get people to read them
But Davy Rothbart already had an audience independent of his stories. That’s how he was able to sell so many cold. I think it’s a lot harder to find readers if you aren’t a self-help speaker, a preacher, a professional athlete, a movie star, the outgoing governor of Alaska, or the editor of FOUND.
But Davy Rothbart already had an audience independent of his stories. That’s how he was able to sell so many cold. I think it’s a lot harder to find readers if you aren’t a self-help speaker, a preacher, a professional athlete, a movie star, the outgoing governor of Alaska, or the editor of FOUND.
Like, if Sarah Palin or Joel Osteen or T.D. Jakes or Michael Jordan wanted to write their own autobiography, self-publish through their own company, create the publishing company, do the printing and publicity and everything, they could still conceivably get front table placement at every Barnes & Noble in the country and front page treatment at Amazon.com so long as they did a good job and were willing throw some money at it. And though it’d be a gamble and a hassle, they’d stand a chance of making more than the advance someone threw at them because they’d get all the profits instead of some of them. The reason they don’t is that a big huge advance is a sure thing.
Davy Rothbart is a smaller scale version of the same thing, except he’s smart, and he’s willing to sweat, and by God it worked for him, and I’m glad. I wonder, though, if the list of writers who are positioned to do the same thing or are willing to put in the years that helped Davy Rothbart be positioned to do it, is a very long list.
I think that Davy’s model is akin to the indie band model. I think Dave Eggers’s model is akin to the major label band who does well but sees the writing on the wall so goes indie but hedges their bet with a distribution deal with a major label distributor or with Wal Mart or Target or whatever, as McSweeney’s does with paperback and foreign rights sales on their moneymaking titles.
I’m a fan of plenty of micropresses, and I buy their books and support them, but I notice that sometimes when they publish their own publisher’s book, there is an attempt by many commentators to marginalize them, reviewers get scared away, and it’s generally harder for their books, which are often good, to find an audience, and that’s in the midst of a situation where the potential audience is already small, since it’s a micropress.
People are skeptical of self-published books for good reason. Most of them are really awful. The few that break through are the few that are some combination of really awesome and/or authored by somebody who has made themselves otherwise significant to an audience, and usually some degree of both.
I think the unknown writer who is also unknown in any other public way would be well-served to attract the attention of a publisher who doesn’t live in the same body as they do.
Like, if Sarah Palin or Joel Osteen or T.D. Jakes or Michael Jordan wanted to write their own autobiography, self-publish through their own company, create the publishing company, do the printing and publicity and everything, they could still conceivably get front table placement at every Barnes & Noble in the country and front page treatment at Amazon.com so long as they did a good job and were willing throw some money at it. And though it’d be a gamble and a hassle, they’d stand a chance of making more than the advance someone threw at them because they’d get all the profits instead of some of them. The reason they don’t is that a big huge advance is a sure thing.
Davy Rothbart is a smaller scale version of the same thing, except he’s smart, and he’s willing to sweat, and by God it worked for him, and I’m glad. I wonder, though, if the list of writers who are positioned to do the same thing or are willing to put in the years that helped Davy Rothbart be positioned to do it, is a very long list.
I think that Davy’s model is akin to the indie band model. I think Dave Eggers’s model is akin to the major label band who does well but sees the writing on the wall so goes indie but hedges their bet with a distribution deal with a major label distributor or with Wal Mart or Target or whatever, as McSweeney’s does with paperback and foreign rights sales on their moneymaking titles.
I’m a fan of plenty of micropresses, and I buy their books and support them, but I notice that sometimes when they publish their own publisher’s book, there is an attempt by many commentators to marginalize them, reviewers get scared away, and it’s generally harder for their books, which are often good, to find an audience, and that’s in the midst of a situation where the potential audience is already small, since it’s a micropress.
People are skeptical of self-published books for good reason. Most of them are really awful. The few that break through are the few that are some combination of really awesome and/or authored by somebody who has made themselves otherwise significant to an audience, and usually some degree of both.
I think the unknown writer who is also unknown in any other public way would be well-served to attract the attention of a publisher who doesn’t live in the same body as they do.
Self-published comics are often much more sought after than those published by big (and small) presses. The constraints of mass printing can really limit the surface aspect of a comic (which is obviously as essential element of its composition) so some of the most amazing books are those created on a small scale in a manner that is unlikely to make great profit. The page and the book itself is almost always a concern from the first moment of creating a comic, and, as such, there is a good chance that you won’t find a publisher who can exactly serve the expectation of the artist – self-publishing is the only way to get it right.
Self-published comics are often much more sought after than those published by big (and small) presses. The constraints of mass printing can really limit the surface aspect of a comic (which is obviously as essential element of its composition) so some of the most amazing books are those created on a small scale in a manner that is unlikely to make great profit. The page and the book itself is almost always a concern from the first moment of creating a comic, and, as such, there is a good chance that you won’t find a publisher who can exactly serve the expectation of the artist – self-publishing is the only way to get it right.
Hey, John. In my limited experience this has also been the huge advantage of working with a small press, being able to work closely with the whole production team–publisher, designer, cover artist, me–to get just what we all want.
Hey, John. In my limited experience this has also been the huge advantage of working with a small press, being able to work closely with the whole production team–publisher, designer, cover artist, me–to get just what we all want.
I’ve been thinking about going this route. I don’t really care about how much something sells or distribution or whatever. I’m not in it to win it. I just want a thing to be what I want a thing to be.
If you’re in it to win it, then you should send your ms to somebody who isn’t you or write something that someone who isn’t you will like.
I’ve been thinking about going this route. I don’t really care about how much something sells or distribution or whatever. I’m not in it to win it. I just want a thing to be what I want a thing to be.
If you’re in it to win it, then you should send your ms to somebody who isn’t you or write something that someone who isn’t you will like.
Do musicians really get lauded for self-releasing? Normally in the DIY scene a small label puts your record out the equivalent of an indie press. Doing a totally self-published release is normally for bands that are just starting out and are trying to get exposure.
I think the process is different though. We like people to be published and edited by others because it is a kind of filter for readers telling them what work from the giant sea of work is worth reading. Music is quicker to listen to and you get that filter by gaining a fan base and playing live shows.
Doing a lot of readings isn’t quite the same.
Do musicians really get lauded for self-releasing? Normally in the DIY scene a small label puts your record out the equivalent of an indie press. Doing a totally self-published release is normally for bands that are just starting out and are trying to get exposure.
I think the process is different though. We like people to be published and edited by others because it is a kind of filter for readers telling them what work from the giant sea of work is worth reading. Music is quicker to listen to and you get that filter by gaining a fan base and playing live shows.
Doing a lot of readings isn’t quite the same.
Or even if you’re not in it to win it, but you wrote the thing and you want as many people as possible to read it. Otherwise, why not just make a pretty diary and typeset it and set it on the shelf above the fireplace, next to the Precious Moments figurines and the Little League trophies and the needlework from Great Aunt Martha?
Or even if you’re not in it to win it, but you wrote the thing and you want as many people as possible to read it. Otherwise, why not just make a pretty diary and typeset it and set it on the shelf above the fireplace, next to the Precious Moments figurines and the Little League trophies and the needlework from Great Aunt Martha?
This is excepting bands who’ve already made it huge and then self-release some stuff.
This is excepting bands who’ve already made it huge and then self-release some stuff.
i was being facetious above. i don’t think it’s any more punk to release shit yourself than it is to work your way into other modes, find doors.
doing whatever makes you happy, that’s the thing.
i was being facetious above. i don’t think it’s any more punk to release shit yourself than it is to work your way into other modes, find doors.
doing whatever makes you happy, that’s the thing.
Actually, many more musicians are self-publishing material. The Cool Kids with Don Cannon, for one. I believe Radiohead did it also. And if I’m not mistaken, the two halves of The Mars Volta have been doing that for years with their solo projects. No labels involved.
‘We like people to be published and edited by others because it is a kind of filter for readers telling them what work from the giant sea of work is worth reading.’
I am highly surprised you typed this, sir. I’d like you to reread this statement and think about that a lil bit…..
The whole self-released albums being for bands starting out has shifted. It used to be that way, with some majors doing it, and the minors consisting of the majority of self-released material. You’d be surprised how much has changed. Most labels are only there for distribution. What is called a DD (distribution deal). Independent artists then decide if they want to take the money (which then must be recouped, but they hope the profits outweight the money lent), or continue on their path. Labels are more and more becoming Loan Banks and not necessarily “finders and star makers”.
Selling chapbooks like selling records out of your trunk is exactly the same. There is literally no difference beyond what the product is. Beyond that, the difference is how the publishing industry has reacted and how the music industry did.
Take Shane Jones. If we treated his ‘Light Boxes’ situation like an album, Penguin would’ve given money to either Shane or his originally publisher to really push the book, allowed them resources to do what they needed to do. Stepping back and just letting the natural steam they already had really build. Rarely do you see a self-released album picked up and then re-released. More so, if anything, the artist goes in the studio to re-record the entire self-released album using these new resources. But that is rare. Most artists would rather just work on a new project. (Always put out new material, the mantra)…
Actually, many more musicians are self-publishing material. The Cool Kids with Don Cannon, for one. I believe Radiohead did it also. And if I’m not mistaken, the two halves of The Mars Volta have been doing that for years with their solo projects. No labels involved.
‘We like people to be published and edited by others because it is a kind of filter for readers telling them what work from the giant sea of work is worth reading.’
I am highly surprised you typed this, sir. I’d like you to reread this statement and think about that a lil bit…..
The whole self-released albums being for bands starting out has shifted. It used to be that way, with some majors doing it, and the minors consisting of the majority of self-released material. You’d be surprised how much has changed. Most labels are only there for distribution. What is called a DD (distribution deal). Independent artists then decide if they want to take the money (which then must be recouped, but they hope the profits outweight the money lent), or continue on their path. Labels are more and more becoming Loan Banks and not necessarily “finders and star makers”.
Selling chapbooks like selling records out of your trunk is exactly the same. There is literally no difference beyond what the product is. Beyond that, the difference is how the publishing industry has reacted and how the music industry did.
Take Shane Jones. If we treated his ‘Light Boxes’ situation like an album, Penguin would’ve given money to either Shane or his originally publisher to really push the book, allowed them resources to do what they needed to do. Stepping back and just letting the natural steam they already had really build. Rarely do you see a self-released album picked up and then re-released. More so, if anything, the artist goes in the studio to re-record the entire self-released album using these new resources. But that is rare. Most artists would rather just work on a new project. (Always put out new material, the mantra)…
wrong readings…. or the people who write ’em just dunno how to perform their shit
wrong readings…. or the people who write ’em just dunno how to perform their shit
wanting as many people as possible to read it is being in it to win it.
wanting as many people as possible to read it is being in it to win it.
I see these as separate. “In it to win it” implies you’re in it to gratify your ego. Just wanting people, as many as possible, to be able to read your stuff isn’t *necessarily* an ego thing. I think any writer who writes something outside of an intentionally private thing–like a diary, as Kyle said–naturally would like for people to read it.
I see these as separate. “In it to win it” implies you’re in it to gratify your ego. Just wanting people, as many as possible, to be able to read your stuff isn’t *necessarily* an ego thing. I think any writer who writes something outside of an intentionally private thing–like a diary, as Kyle said–naturally would like for people to read it.
I also have a little experience with the DIY thing, and I think there’s a lot of good stuff being said here; however, one thing that faces a self-publishing writer than normally doesn’t face a musician is the question of academic recognition. A lot of writers are interested in the possibility of teaching gigs or writer-in-residency positions. The self-pubbing is as good as throwing your work out the window in this case. Better to let the manuscript moulder, otherwise you’ll spend your time running away from it once you go “legit.” I’m not saying this is a good thing, but it certainly is real.
I also have a little experience with the DIY thing, and I think there’s a lot of good stuff being said here; however, one thing that faces a self-publishing writer than normally doesn’t face a musician is the question of academic recognition. A lot of writers are interested in the possibility of teaching gigs or writer-in-residency positions. The self-pubbing is as good as throwing your work out the window in this case. Better to let the manuscript moulder, otherwise you’ll spend your time running away from it once you go “legit.” I’m not saying this is a good thing, but it certainly is real.
Well said, Matt
Well said, Matt
my point is getting kind of skewed here. There’s a difference between wanting as many people as possible to read something and wanting as many people as possible to be able to read something. I see the former as having a potential of compromising how an artist wants their work to exist in order to get as many people as possible reading it. The latter is just a matter of availability.
I don’t not want anyone to read something I wrote. I just don’t need everyone, and not at the expense of compromising with editors/publishers/etc. I go to work. I get a paycheck. I come home. In my spare time I print a run of something of 500 by darby press and make it available on the internet. If it sells ten, that’s ten. I give 490 to homeless people outside the library. I feel good about it. I hold on to a copy and put it on my mantle, preferably high enough so no one can piss on it. Then I go back to work. I get a paycheck. I come home.
my point is getting kind of skewed here. There’s a difference between wanting as many people as possible to read something and wanting as many people as possible to be able to read something. I see the former as having a potential of compromising how an artist wants their work to exist in order to get as many people as possible reading it. The latter is just a matter of availability.
I don’t not want anyone to read something I wrote. I just don’t need everyone, and not at the expense of compromising with editors/publishers/etc. I go to work. I get a paycheck. I come home. In my spare time I print a run of something of 500 by darby press and make it available on the internet. If it sells ten, that’s ten. I give 490 to homeless people outside the library. I feel good about it. I hold on to a copy and put it on my mantle, preferably high enough so no one can piss on it. Then I go back to work. I get a paycheck. I come home.
Michael, like I said bands that have already been massive successes, like Radiohead or NIN or whatever, who self-release stuff are kind of a different deal. In publishing terms, I really doubt if Philip Roth would be looked down on for publishing his next novel by himself.
I’m not sure what you are surprised by in that quote.
[i]Selling chapbooks like selling records out of your trunk is exactly the same. There is literally no difference beyond what the product is. [/i]
Of course there is a difference, because music and literature are different worlds and their “products” are consumed differently.
Michael, like I said bands that have already been massive successes, like Radiohead or NIN or whatever, who self-release stuff are kind of a different deal. In publishing terms, I really doubt if Philip Roth would be looked down on for publishing his next novel by himself.
I’m not sure what you are surprised by in that quote.
[i]Selling chapbooks like selling records out of your trunk is exactly the same. There is literally no difference beyond what the product is. [/i]
Of course there is a difference, because music and literature are different worlds and their “products” are consumed differently.
Doesn’t sound so great to me, after all the effort it took to make the thing you wanted to make, and make it as good as it could possibly be.
Doesn’t sound so great to me, after all the effort it took to make the thing you wanted to make, and make it as good as it could possibly be.
This brings up a great, scary, scary point……
i honestly don’t believe you are being honest when you say that you would be happy if you printed 500 books and then only sold ten, so gave the rest to homeless people. that seems very disingenuous.
no, you don’t need everybody in the world, but part of the work is not only creating but then, the other side, the details of which vary from person to person, but i think you’re being a little too ‘i’m an artist, i don’t care’ for what you are saying to be taken seriously.
This brings up a great, scary, scary point……
i honestly don’t believe you are being honest when you say that you would be happy if you printed 500 books and then only sold ten, so gave the rest to homeless people. that seems very disingenuous.
no, you don’t need everybody in the world, but part of the work is not only creating but then, the other side, the details of which vary from person to person, but i think you’re being a little too ‘i’m an artist, i don’t care’ for what you are saying to be taken seriously.
For example, you build an audience in music by playing shows, live in front of people. You build an audience in writing by publishing your pieces in magazines. The filtering system is just different. The time involvement is also different to check out a band versus reading a novel.
For example, you build an audience in music by playing shows, live in front of people. You build an audience in writing by publishing your pieces in magazines. The filtering system is just different. The time involvement is also different to check out a band versus reading a novel.
The selling of the product is not different. No matter their consumption. Ebooks and mp3’s are sold the same way. How they are used is different (depending if we’re talking audio books), but how I go about selling is no different.
If we’re talking about a big company selling stuff, then there is a difference. I’m not going to try to sell a book on VH1. But that line is blurring.
If we’re talking me, the independent artist, selling books — I can go to a concert and sell my chapbooks, same as a cd. Like when I went to a college expo and there were people selling their chapbooks and cds, side by side.
The selling of the product is not different. No matter their consumption. Ebooks and mp3’s are sold the same way. How they are used is different (depending if we’re talking audio books), but how I go about selling is no different.
If we’re talking about a big company selling stuff, then there is a difference. I’m not going to try to sell a book on VH1. But that line is blurring.
If we’re talking me, the independent artist, selling books — I can go to a concert and sell my chapbooks, same as a cd. Like when I went to a college expo and there were people selling their chapbooks and cds, side by side.
what effort? I did it because it was fun. Because its something I enjoy doing in my spare time. It’s my hobby.
what effort? I did it because it was fun. Because its something I enjoy doing in my spare time. It’s my hobby.
I didn’t say the selling was different (though I think there are certainly differences. Publishers don’t sell “singles” from story collections, authors don’t make extra money loaning their text to TV shows or commercials, etc.), I said the consumption was different. For example, a novel takes days to read while an album can be listened to in full in 50 minutes.
Even in your example I think in practice they are different. Yes, you can sell your novel at a reading just like a band can sell their CD at a show. But I imagine bands sell way more CDs from live shows than writers sell from readings.
I didn’t say the selling was different (though I think there are certainly differences. Publishers don’t sell “singles” from story collections, authors don’t make extra money loaning their text to TV shows or commercials, etc.), I said the consumption was different. For example, a novel takes days to read while an album can be listened to in full in 50 minutes.
Even in your example I think in practice they are different. Yes, you can sell your novel at a reading just like a band can sell their CD at a show. But I imagine bands sell way more CDs from live shows than writers sell from readings.
If it didn’t cost you more than the time it took to get it on the page, it probably isn’t worth the reader’s time either. I think you’re right not to seek readers or a publisher, if that’s how serious you are about what you’re “making.”
If it didn’t cost you more than the time it took to get it on the page, it probably isn’t worth the reader’s time either. I think you’re right not to seek readers or a publisher, if that’s how serious you are about what you’re “making.”
And, by the way, you’ll notice I never write mean or sarcastic stuff here. I don’t even like Mean Week. But this attitude that art is so pure it has no communicative function worth integrating into the work, coupled with the sort of disdain these responses drip upon writers who are trying to make the best thing they can — a function of their own moral or aesthetic vision, no less — is really lame when it’s coming from someone who can’t be bothered to undertake the sweat and heavy-lifting that accompanies most anything worthwhile, and who now claims to be a “hobbyist” while continuing to act more artisty-than-thou. I’m sorry, but that’s not really a position worth respecting.
And, by the way, you’ll notice I never write mean or sarcastic stuff here. I don’t even like Mean Week. But this attitude that art is so pure it has no communicative function worth integrating into the work, coupled with the sort of disdain these responses drip upon writers who are trying to make the best thing they can — a function of their own moral or aesthetic vision, no less — is really lame when it’s coming from someone who can’t be bothered to undertake the sweat and heavy-lifting that accompanies most anything worthwhile, and who now claims to be a “hobbyist” while continuing to act more artisty-than-thou. I’m sorry, but that’s not really a position worth respecting.
That is very true. I do find that musicians seem more willing to pound the pavement. They also go out and perform absolutely anywhere. Writers can, of course, participate in readings but I wonder how many self-published writers do that.
That is very true. I do find that musicians seem more willing to pound the pavement. They also go out and perform absolutely anywhere. Writers can, of course, participate in readings but I wonder how many self-published writers do that.
Michael, I didn’t answer my own question because I have not yet arrived at an answer. I’m still very much thinking all of this through. I agree and disagree with your statement that readers don’t care. It depends on the reader and their level of familiarity with the world of publishing. Ultimately though, yes, what’s good is good and one way or another, with the right kind of effort I do think cream will always rise to the top.
Michael, I didn’t answer my own question because I have not yet arrived at an answer. I’m still very much thinking all of this through. I agree and disagree with your statement that readers don’t care. It depends on the reader and their level of familiarity with the world of publishing. Ultimately though, yes, what’s good is good and one way or another, with the right kind of effort I do think cream will always rise to the top.
I definitely agree there’s a lot we can learn from the music industry. I really like what you say with regard to not thinking about the label to which a band is signed when listening to their music in a bar. And I also agree that having a publisher doesn’t equal sales. There are many many factors that go into a book’s success or lack thereof and there are also many different degrees of success.
I definitely agree there’s a lot we can learn from the music industry. I really like what you say with regard to not thinking about the label to which a band is signed when listening to their music in a bar. And I also agree that having a publisher doesn’t equal sales. There are many many factors that go into a book’s success or lack thereof and there are also many different degrees of success.
I wonder why that is. There also seems to be a real stigma against self-promotion but if writers don’t promote themselves, particularly at the indie publishing level, who will? I personally will blog, Twitter and Facebook the shit out of my writing until my fingers grow sore and I don’t really give a shit who thinks what about that. If you don’t want to promote yourself, why bother publishing? Just write and keep your words cozy on your computer.
I wonder why that is. There also seems to be a real stigma against self-promotion but if writers don’t promote themselves, particularly at the indie publishing level, who will? I personally will blog, Twitter and Facebook the shit out of my writing until my fingers grow sore and I don’t really give a shit who thinks what about that. If you don’t want to promote yourself, why bother publishing? Just write and keep your words cozy on your computer.
Kyle, I agree there was disdain in my original comment. I shouldn’t have said it that way. I apologize.
Kyle, I agree there was disdain in my original comment. I shouldn’t have said it that way. I apologize.
I really like what you say with regard to not thinking about the label to which a band is signed when listening to their music in a bar.
While you may or may not think about this in a bar, I totally disagree that music fans ignore labels more than readers. That couldn’t be further from the case. There are tons of fans who are devoted to specific labels, especially when we are talking about various subgenres of things like hip-hop, punk or metal. People will dismiss bands for being on something (“I hate that Relapse poseur metal”) or check it out if based on its label (“I love everything Def Jux does!”)
In literature, OTOH, I really don’t think people think about that much. McSweeney’s books might be an exception.
I really like what you say with regard to not thinking about the label to which a band is signed when listening to their music in a bar.
While you may or may not think about this in a bar, I totally disagree that music fans ignore labels more than readers. That couldn’t be further from the case. There are tons of fans who are devoted to specific labels, especially when we are talking about various subgenres of things like hip-hop, punk or metal. People will dismiss bands for being on something (“I hate that Relapse poseur metal”) or check it out if based on its label (“I love everything Def Jux does!”)
In literature, OTOH, I really don’t think people think about that much. McSweeney’s books might be an exception.
That’s a really important point. Academia will never acknowledge self-published work. They barely blink at journal publications, no matter how “significant”. We can rail all day and all night about how flawed this is but if you are interested in teaching creative writing you have to make peace with the system.
That’s a really important point. Academia will never acknowledge self-published work. They barely blink at journal publications, no matter how “significant”. We can rail all day and all night about how flawed this is but if you are interested in teaching creative writing you have to make peace with the system.
Apology accepted. Next beer’s on me.
Apology accepted. Next beer’s on me.
Roxane,
do you mean they don’t regard journal publications or that they don’t care what the journal is as long as you get published? It never makes sense to me. Sometimes I see writers with nothing but journal publications getting jobs teaching creative writing and other writers I know with books by big houses can’t get a teaching job to save their lives. It’s weird. There’s definitely a “cool” factor that some universities reward, but it’s inconsistent as hell.
Maybe I’m just venting because it’s that time of the semester when I have to run around to all the local colleges to cobble enough classes together for the springtime to make sure I can keep the lights on :( ah, the life of the adjunct.
Roxane,
do you mean they don’t regard journal publications or that they don’t care what the journal is as long as you get published? It never makes sense to me. Sometimes I see writers with nothing but journal publications getting jobs teaching creative writing and other writers I know with books by big houses can’t get a teaching job to save their lives. It’s weird. There’s definitely a “cool” factor that some universities reward, but it’s inconsistent as hell.
Maybe I’m just venting because it’s that time of the semester when I have to run around to all the local colleges to cobble enough classes together for the springtime to make sure I can keep the lights on :( ah, the life of the adjunct.
Speaking for myself, I’ve never once thought about a band’s label. I couldn’t care less because I’m either loving or hating what I’m hearing. There are, as you note, fans who are slavish to specific labels but I would think the majority of people aren’t thinking about it. I don’t devote much time to thinking about publishers either but I do, for better or worse, make some kind of judgment about a book based on the publisher, or lack thereof. I’ll also read a book, regardless of that judgment.
Speaking for myself, I’ve never once thought about a band’s label. I couldn’t care less because I’m either loving or hating what I’m hearing. There are, as you note, fans who are slavish to specific labels but I would think the majority of people aren’t thinking about it. I don’t devote much time to thinking about publishers either but I do, for better or worse, make some kind of judgment about a book based on the publisher, or lack thereof. I’ll also read a book, regardless of that judgment.
To me, there is a big difference between sharing and promoting.
To me, there is a big difference between sharing and promoting.
Self-promotion is also far more annoying for writers.
A musician goes outside Starbucks and plays a few sets, that’s self promotion.
An author gets a twitter feed and a blogspot blog and starts pimping his shit—that’s just transparent.
I think it in part comes down to time investment. I hear a song I like, then I like the artist, might buy the stuff. Took 5 minutes, probably at no cost. Who can tell if a novel is going to be GOOD in 5 minutes. You can tell if it truly sucks, but not if it’s really worth your time.
Self-promotion is also far more annoying for writers.
A musician goes outside Starbucks and plays a few sets, that’s self promotion.
An author gets a twitter feed and a blogspot blog and starts pimping his shit—that’s just transparent.
I think it in part comes down to time investment. I hear a song I like, then I like the artist, might buy the stuff. Took 5 minutes, probably at no cost. Who can tell if a novel is going to be GOOD in 5 minutes. You can tell if it truly sucks, but not if it’s really worth your time.
Charles, the former. This is not to say journal pubs never matter, but increasingly, the threshold for consideration begins at the book. There are a great many inconsistencies. Right now, the market is glutted (it always is, really) so it is very difficult to get the really great creative writing jobs. It depends on the university, the search committee, the writer him or herself, and lots of other random factors. I too have seen folks with only journal publications get positions but I’ve also seen jobs where they state, in the ad, don’t apply unless you have two or more books.
I’m on the job market right now, and I’m really quite grateful I’m not looking for a creative writing position though I am positioning myself to teach creative writing as a secondary specialty.
Charles, the former. This is not to say journal pubs never matter, but increasingly, the threshold for consideration begins at the book. There are a great many inconsistencies. Right now, the market is glutted (it always is, really) so it is very difficult to get the really great creative writing jobs. It depends on the university, the search committee, the writer him or herself, and lots of other random factors. I too have seen folks with only journal publications get positions but I’ve also seen jobs where they state, in the ad, don’t apply unless you have two or more books.
I’m on the job market right now, and I’m really quite grateful I’m not looking for a creative writing position though I am positioning myself to teach creative writing as a secondary specialty.
Hmm. What is that difference, for you?
Hmm. What is that difference, for you?
Well publications aren’t the only criteria, nor should they be. Any good program is also going to interview you and try to see how you are as a teacher
Well publications aren’t the only criteria, nor should they be. Any good program is also going to interview you and try to see how you are as a teacher
Lincoln, they’re not the only criteria but they are what will generally get you to the interview stage.
Lincoln, they’re not the only criteria but they are what will generally get you to the interview stage.
yes
yes
I don’t think about labels either, but I think many if not most rabid music fans types do. You don’t need to think of it as someone being like “These guys must be good even though I dislike them since they are on Matador” but more like a fan may be way more likely to check out the new releases on label X than label Y when they are searching for new things to sample.
I don’t think about labels either, but I think many if not most rabid music fans types do. You don’t need to think of it as someone being like “These guys must be good even though I dislike them since they are on Matador” but more like a fan may be way more likely to check out the new releases on label X than label Y when they are searching for new things to sample.
What? Tons of people complain about how annoying bands are with self-promotion, especially when they are spamming you everyday on facebook or myspace when you only joined as a favor to your friend, blah blah.
What? Tons of people complain about how annoying bands are with self-promotion, especially when they are spamming you everyday on facebook or myspace when you only joined as a favor to your friend, blah blah.
Roxane: Of course. I was replying to Charles talk about how weird it is that some people get jobs with less publications than others though.
Roxane: Of course. I was replying to Charles talk about how weird it is that some people get jobs with less publications than others though.
yeah, I think it’s important to diversify or “generalize” yourself as an English major. And Lincoln, yes they interview, but I’ve been in the academy enough to know that the interview process can be as nonsensical as anything else in the whole job search–and I’ve seen it from both sides of the table.
Sharing is an act with a much smaller amount of ego-driven motivation than promoting. Promoting, to me, is a habitual and repetitive motion made with thoughts of path, goals. Promotion is advertising and sharing is handing someone a book. Not saying either one is bad, or should be strived for. I find though that promotion, esp. like a lot of stuff found on Facebook, Twitter, is more often grating than it should be. No need to make something known twenty times… words will be read or they won’t and you’re never going to ‘reach’ everybody.
yeah, I think it’s important to diversify or “generalize” yourself as an English major. And Lincoln, yes they interview, but I’ve been in the academy enough to know that the interview process can be as nonsensical as anything else in the whole job search–and I’ve seen it from both sides of the table.
Sharing is an act with a much smaller amount of ego-driven motivation than promoting. Promoting, to me, is a habitual and repetitive motion made with thoughts of path, goals. Promotion is advertising and sharing is handing someone a book. Not saying either one is bad, or should be strived for. I find though that promotion, esp. like a lot of stuff found on Facebook, Twitter, is more often grating than it should be. No need to make something known twenty times… words will be read or they won’t and you’re never going to ‘reach’ everybody.
I think the difference is that the music world moves faster, has always moved faster and, in recent years, has had to move faster (because of the development of the internet) than the literary world. Arguably, the music world has been moving that speedily and exploring the DIY ethic since the days of punk (“here’s three chords, now go form a band”). I view it as a great shame that the literary world hasn’t caught up (“here’s three words, now go self-publish a book”, maybe? okay, maybe not). But as crusading, alternative and different as the literary world often likes to portray itself, it hasn’t had its punk moment that has shaken the industry up in the same way as punk did to music; it hasn’t even, in my opinion, quite seized on the opportunities provided by the internet in the same way that music has. Why not? Is it too set in its ways? Too conservative? Still too in thrall to the establishment?
I actually admire the increasing distrust of the established routes of getting music out there – namely, the record company and the agents, which swallow at least half your profits (or more, if you’re unlucky). Bands and artists think “fuck it, I don’t need you when there’s Myspace or Muxtape or countless other ways of distributing my stuff”. Writers don’t seem to think like that so much. They might lip service to the DIY ethic, but deep down you always tend to get the feeling that they’d run into the open arms of a publisher if they came knocking.
I think the difference is that the music world moves faster, has always moved faster and, in recent years, has had to move faster (because of the development of the internet) than the literary world. Arguably, the music world has been moving that speedily and exploring the DIY ethic since the days of punk (“here’s three chords, now go form a band”). I view it as a great shame that the literary world hasn’t caught up (“here’s three words, now go self-publish a book”, maybe? okay, maybe not). But as crusading, alternative and different as the literary world often likes to portray itself, it hasn’t had its punk moment that has shaken the industry up in the same way as punk did to music; it hasn’t even, in my opinion, quite seized on the opportunities provided by the internet in the same way that music has. Why not? Is it too set in its ways? Too conservative? Still too in thrall to the establishment?
I actually admire the increasing distrust of the established routes of getting music out there – namely, the record company and the agents, which swallow at least half your profits (or more, if you’re unlucky). Bands and artists think “fuck it, I don’t need you when there’s Myspace or Muxtape or countless other ways of distributing my stuff”. Writers don’t seem to think like that so much. They might lip service to the DIY ethic, but deep down you always tend to get the feeling that they’d run into the open arms of a publisher if they came knocking.
which is to say, it’s fun & useful to do a little bit of both for folks with lots of ambition/ego (me included)
which is to say, it’s fun & useful to do a little bit of both for folks with lots of ambition/ego (me included)
The literary world has long had indie magazines, house readings and indie presses… those seem to me to be more the equivalent of a DIY sensibility than publishing your novel on a vanity press.
Bands and artists think “fuck it, I don’t need you when there’s Myspace or Muxtape or countless other ways of distributing my stuff”. Writers don’t seem to think like that so much.
I think the part of the equation your are missing is that bands are really saying “Fuck it, I never made any money from CD sales by the labels anyway, I made all my money from merch and shows. With the internet, I can just release the music myself and still make my merch and concert money.”
Until lit fans are doling out money for the latest Jonathan Franzen t-shirt or paying 10 bucks to see some indie lit star read, the only source of money for writers is article and book publications.
The literary world has long had indie magazines, house readings and indie presses… those seem to me to be more the equivalent of a DIY sensibility than publishing your novel on a vanity press.
Bands and artists think “fuck it, I don’t need you when there’s Myspace or Muxtape or countless other ways of distributing my stuff”. Writers don’t seem to think like that so much.
I think the part of the equation your are missing is that bands are really saying “Fuck it, I never made any money from CD sales by the labels anyway, I made all my money from merch and shows. With the internet, I can just release the music myself and still make my merch and concert money.”
Until lit fans are doling out money for the latest Jonathan Franzen t-shirt or paying 10 bucks to see some indie lit star read, the only source of money for writers is article and book publications.
yes;
publishers can remove the often boring shit (promotion, product production & distro, sales/marketing) from the artist’s responsibility… as more and more writers/musicians/artists become business people, the comfort of having people to do things for you will ebb a bit, as it has in music.
yes;
publishers can remove the often boring shit (promotion, product production & distro, sales/marketing) from the artist’s responsibility… as more and more writers/musicians/artists become business people, the comfort of having people to do things for you will ebb a bit, as it has in music.
Lincoln, agreed. good call on the corollary with indie presses. that culture seems most similar to the music scene. vanity press is something distinctly different.
Lincoln, agreed. good call on the corollary with indie presses. that culture seems most similar to the music scene. vanity press is something distinctly different.
i think people forget that there’s a long history of self-publishing amongst writers whose work did not fit the tastes of the time or the molds into which some publishers would like their books to fit or because they were criticizing the establishment: for instance, william blake, anais nin, and thomas paine.
just because there’s a conspiracy involved in someone agreeing to publish someone else’s work doesn’t mean its any better. that being said, it does mean something, just not everything.
but really, most of the reason for my decision to self-publish my recent chapbook was just that i didn’t want to wait. by the time my chapbook would have been published by someone else we might be out of the damn economic situation i was attempting to portray and i’ve already printed zines before so it’s not like i didn’t know how to do it. honestly, i barely gave the idea of legitimacy a moment’s thought.
i think people forget that there’s a long history of self-publishing amongst writers whose work did not fit the tastes of the time or the molds into which some publishers would like their books to fit or because they were criticizing the establishment: for instance, william blake, anais nin, and thomas paine.
just because there’s a conspiracy involved in someone agreeing to publish someone else’s work doesn’t mean its any better. that being said, it does mean something, just not everything.
but really, most of the reason for my decision to self-publish my recent chapbook was just that i didn’t want to wait. by the time my chapbook would have been published by someone else we might be out of the damn economic situation i was attempting to portray and i’ve already printed zines before so it’s not like i didn’t know how to do it. honestly, i barely gave the idea of legitimacy a moment’s thought.
True, true.
True, true.
Yes, the Facebook/Twitter/Etc stuff can get grating when it’s extremely repetitive. There is such a thing as over promotion and oversharing.
Yes, the Facebook/Twitter/Etc stuff can get grating when it’s extremely repetitive. There is such a thing as over promotion and oversharing.
I know someone is gonna jump on me and say all self-publishing isn’t vanity presses.
I guess what I meant though is that when I think of the DIY hardcore/punk scene, it seems fairly similar to the indie scene that many people here are involved with. Band didn’t just release their own stuff, they built labels that had lots of bands. Greg Ginn made SST and put out tons of great bands. Ian and a few others did DIschord and did the same. etc. etc.
This seems similar to Adam Robinson making Publishing Genius or Eggers doing McSweeney’s or whoever you want to talk about.
The only difference I see is that it seems less kosher to publish your own work in your indie press than it does in music to publish your band on your label. Although even that might be somewhat overstated. Does anyone look down on Eggers for doing his books through McSweeneys?
I know someone is gonna jump on me and say all self-publishing isn’t vanity presses.
I guess what I meant though is that when I think of the DIY hardcore/punk scene, it seems fairly similar to the indie scene that many people here are involved with. Band didn’t just release their own stuff, they built labels that had lots of bands. Greg Ginn made SST and put out tons of great bands. Ian and a few others did DIschord and did the same. etc. etc.
This seems similar to Adam Robinson making Publishing Genius or Eggers doing McSweeney’s or whoever you want to talk about.
The only difference I see is that it seems less kosher to publish your own work in your indie press than it does in music to publish your band on your label. Although even that might be somewhat overstated. Does anyone look down on Eggers for doing his books through McSweeneys?
And when you have many, many friends in bands, in shows, etc…this constitutes many favors to friends and much annoyingness.
On the other hand, I never feel bad about letting my friends know I have a new story coming out, since that only happens once in a while as opposed to a gig every weekend.
And when you have many, many friends in bands, in shows, etc…this constitutes many favors to friends and much annoyingness.
On the other hand, I never feel bad about letting my friends know I have a new story coming out, since that only happens once in a while as opposed to a gig every weekend.
ummmm… yeah… which he built…
ummmm… yeah… which he built…
which he built by doing stuff other than writing short fiction, I think was the point.
which he built by doing stuff other than writing short fiction, I think was the point.
i agree with everything everyone is saying. and most of it points to my original question. if the purpose is to gain exposure, teach creative writing, get a book deal, get accepted by this institution or that institution, then what is INDEPENDENT about it?
i think people hide under the name independent and for some of them it just means, i havent yet got the book deal or the recognition from academia im really after.
i admire people who just say fuck it. im gonna create and keep creating and get it into people’s hands by any means necessary and whoever aint down with it, fuck em… thats independent.
so if you have a collection and you believe in the motherfucker. than prove it, invest your money, print some shit, and make things happen, make moves. too short sold albums cd’s for 10 years out of his fucking trunk in oakland befiore he signed with jive and became a legend. thats independent.
one thing kyle didnt mention in his davy rothbart info is the fact that, yeah, he had found magazine to hustle through, but where did found come from. he built a fucking empire because he believes in what he does and he made others believe in it too, thats INDEPENDENT. fuck what ya heard.
i agree with everything everyone is saying. and most of it points to my original question. if the purpose is to gain exposure, teach creative writing, get a book deal, get accepted by this institution or that institution, then what is INDEPENDENT about it?
i think people hide under the name independent and for some of them it just means, i havent yet got the book deal or the recognition from academia im really after.
i admire people who just say fuck it. im gonna create and keep creating and get it into people’s hands by any means necessary and whoever aint down with it, fuck em… thats independent.
so if you have a collection and you believe in the motherfucker. than prove it, invest your money, print some shit, and make things happen, make moves. too short sold albums cd’s for 10 years out of his fucking trunk in oakland befiore he signed with jive and became a legend. thats independent.
one thing kyle didnt mention in his davy rothbart info is the fact that, yeah, he had found magazine to hustle through, but where did found come from. he built a fucking empire because he believes in what he does and he made others believe in it too, thats INDEPENDENT. fuck what ya heard.
barry, I think the disconnect is that you’ve got a romantic association with this idea of “independence.” I don’t think everyone shares that, and there’s nothing wrong with that. The word itself is freighted and fairly meaningless. For fiction at least (and I’ll grant this is less true for poetry chapbooks) the idea of “independence” can be subjective. To suggest that we write in a vacuum where these concerns of future aesthetic viability don’t exist is a little too wishful, I think.
barry, I think the disconnect is that you’ve got a romantic association with this idea of “independence.” I don’t think everyone shares that, and there’s nothing wrong with that. The word itself is freighted and fairly meaningless. For fiction at least (and I’ll grant this is less true for poetry chapbooks) the idea of “independence” can be subjective. To suggest that we write in a vacuum where these concerns of future aesthetic viability don’t exist is a little too wishful, I think.
I must admit I don’t see why publishing a book on McSweeney’s (for example) would make you way more “independent” than publishing one on FSG (for example.)
I must admit I don’t see why publishing a book on McSweeney’s (for example) would make you way more “independent” than publishing one on FSG (for example.)
the thing that seems burping in your logic to me is that the quality of the creation has some pending on the state of the independence. or that someone’s belief in their work is more verifiable by being ‘independent’. there are just as many shitty creation getting pimped by dudes ‘out of their trunk’ (as so many people seem hell bent on romanticizing) as there are things published by any level of organization.
believing in what you do is not an inherent trait of the supposed ‘independent’. neither is ‘making others believe’.
this might be the most off-based formed discussion i’ve ever seen on this site, which is saying a lot. it seems to me like nobody, not even the people in the big houses, or on the street, wherever, really ‘know what that they are doing’. you throw shit up and see what sticks. hopefully you get some kind of satisfaction out of process. but the real work is at the desk. and all of it is short lived in relation, like everything else you could ever do.
the thing that seems burping in your logic to me is that the quality of the creation has some pending on the state of the independence. or that someone’s belief in their work is more verifiable by being ‘independent’. there are just as many shitty creation getting pimped by dudes ‘out of their trunk’ (as so many people seem hell bent on romanticizing) as there are things published by any level of organization.
believing in what you do is not an inherent trait of the supposed ‘independent’. neither is ‘making others believe’.
this might be the most off-based formed discussion i’ve ever seen on this site, which is saying a lot. it seems to me like nobody, not even the people in the big houses, or on the street, wherever, really ‘know what that they are doing’. you throw shit up and see what sticks. hopefully you get some kind of satisfaction out of process. but the real work is at the desk. and all of it is short lived in relation, like everything else you could ever do.
I think the main difference is that bands want people to come to their live shows, and albums, to some extent, are just a way to get people interested enough to come out. Writers want people to read their books. That’s the end of the line.
People would think it odd to go to a show at a night club that a band built for themselves to play in.
I think the main difference is that bands want people to come to their live shows, and albums, to some extent, are just a way to get people interested enough to come out. Writers want people to read their books. That’s the end of the line.
People would think it odd to go to a show at a night club that a band built for themselves to play in.
what does off-based mean?
what does off-based mean?
Not all true. Let’s use Write Bloody as an example. They are truly about the performance aspect. This I understand. Us writers who normally, routinely, perform our work want our shows packed. The difference between music and literature in this regard is that we want the performance shows and the books to have equal importance, not just using the book as a tool to get people to come to the show.
Write Bloody tells their authors they MUST tour. They must book their own shows. No ifs or ands man, just fucking do it. (fucking emphasis mine)
This is why Write Bloody has more ties to musicians.
This is also why my poetry group had connections to comedians and musicians. We weren’t following the same literature scale. We were using the successful and powerful music paradigm to change how people viewed what *watching* literature can be.
These changes must start with us (writers) first. Change the way we engage our own work. Because I’ve read fiction, too, live. Yes, it is a little different, but it is definitely how you engage and perform the work which can bring people to you.
And have some wine or beer or perform at a night club or a bar.
That helps, too.
Not all true. Let’s use Write Bloody as an example. They are truly about the performance aspect. This I understand. Us writers who normally, routinely, perform our work want our shows packed. The difference between music and literature in this regard is that we want the performance shows and the books to have equal importance, not just using the book as a tool to get people to come to the show.
Write Bloody tells their authors they MUST tour. They must book their own shows. No ifs or ands man, just fucking do it. (fucking emphasis mine)
This is why Write Bloody has more ties to musicians.
This is also why my poetry group had connections to comedians and musicians. We weren’t following the same literature scale. We were using the successful and powerful music paradigm to change how people viewed what *watching* literature can be.
These changes must start with us (writers) first. Change the way we engage our own work. Because I’ve read fiction, too, live. Yes, it is a little different, but it is definitely how you engage and perform the work which can bring people to you.
And have some wine or beer or perform at a night club or a bar.
That helps, too.
everyone likes music, but only writers like books.
you listen to a song once and decide to listen to it again and again. you don’t read a book once in order to decide to read it again and again. therefore, books need a more reliable editorial process, and self-publishing disregards that. In a sense, self-distributing music is its editorial process. Music is too easy to listen to and make quick quality determinations.
the base is off
everyone likes music, but only writers like books.
you listen to a song once and decide to listen to it again and again. you don’t read a book once in order to decide to read it again and again. therefore, books need a more reliable editorial process, and self-publishing disregards that. In a sense, self-distributing music is its editorial process. Music is too easy to listen to and make quick quality determinations.
the base is off
I don’t dislike anything you said, I think all that stuff is great and I think all readers should be making readings more performance oriented.
That said, giving readings is not the essence of writing. The vast majority of book readers don’t go to readings, while I’d imagine most fans of music see live music on a somewhat regular basis.
For some writers, giving rad readings will be a part of their career, but we can hardly expect or even want all authors to be focusing on that.
I don’t dislike anything you said, I think all that stuff is great and I think all readers should be making readings more performance oriented.
That said, giving readings is not the essence of writing. The vast majority of book readers don’t go to readings, while I’d imagine most fans of music see live music on a somewhat regular basis.
For some writers, giving rad readings will be a part of their career, but we can hardly expect or even want all authors to be focusing on that.
I mean, you can bring up outliers all your want, but I think you’d probably agree it is still true that the vast majority of writers are not very interesting in live performances and probably 100% of writers are not making their income from live peformances.
Musicians, otoh, are almost all involved in live performances (there are a few exceptions) and almost all of them are making their income through live shows or merch sold at live shows.
I mean, you can bring up outliers all your want, but I think you’d probably agree it is still true that the vast majority of writers are not very interesting in live performances and probably 100% of writers are not making their income from live peformances.
Musicians, otoh, are almost all involved in live performances (there are a few exceptions) and almost all of them are making their income through live shows or merch sold at live shows.
are belong to us
are belong to us
win
win
You’re right man, and that’s the problem, right?
Aren’t companies already selling clothing marketed as “cool writer clothes”.
Isn’t American Apparel cashing in as a type of writerly/artistic fashion or something? More writers need to start making merch. Seriously. I am in the process of designing a series of clothes that my homeboys would wear in the streets. And the artsy crowd, and my mom who is neither. Because 1) They’ll be comfortable, 2) it’ll have a graph on it that looks neat 3) it’ll make them feel smart (some of them) — among other factors.
Just like all musicians aren’t only their cds, or only their shows, the new generation of writers shouldn’t be only their books, or only their shows. Should be kinda balanced.
‘I think you’d probably agree it is still true that the vast majority of writers are not very interesting in live performances and probably 100% of writers are not making their income from live peformances’
Hell yeah I’d agree. Hell fucking yes. This is because of the past/current climate. If you notice, more and more writers on going on tour. How many readings are conducted by the very writers of this website, and through the many tendrils and sixth degrees of that make up the literature industry.
It is becoming more common for publishing houses to publish writers who *are* interesting to see live. This is more important than I think writers realize. It isn’t about making income from these performances, and while this may be true for musicians, making money off their performances, the currency I see from performing comes in the form of *a good show*. Fun. Sure, buy my book, but I’d rather you have fun and enjoy the fucking night than anything, no? This means I will stay on your mind longer with more of a chance that you’ll buy my book in the future, or buy my book after the show and instead of forgetting a few hours later you’ll tell a friend.
You’re right man, and that’s the problem, right?
Aren’t companies already selling clothing marketed as “cool writer clothes”.
Isn’t American Apparel cashing in as a type of writerly/artistic fashion or something? More writers need to start making merch. Seriously. I am in the process of designing a series of clothes that my homeboys would wear in the streets. And the artsy crowd, and my mom who is neither. Because 1) They’ll be comfortable, 2) it’ll have a graph on it that looks neat 3) it’ll make them feel smart (some of them) — among other factors.
Just like all musicians aren’t only their cds, or only their shows, the new generation of writers shouldn’t be only their books, or only their shows. Should be kinda balanced.
‘I think you’d probably agree it is still true that the vast majority of writers are not very interesting in live performances and probably 100% of writers are not making their income from live peformances’
Hell yeah I’d agree. Hell fucking yes. This is because of the past/current climate. If you notice, more and more writers on going on tour. How many readings are conducted by the very writers of this website, and through the many tendrils and sixth degrees of that make up the literature industry.
It is becoming more common for publishing houses to publish writers who *are* interesting to see live. This is more important than I think writers realize. It isn’t about making income from these performances, and while this may be true for musicians, making money off their performances, the currency I see from performing comes in the form of *a good show*. Fun. Sure, buy my book, but I’d rather you have fun and enjoy the fucking night than anything, no? This means I will stay on your mind longer with more of a chance that you’ll buy my book in the future, or buy my book after the show and instead of forgetting a few hours later you’ll tell a friend.
oh. i think i get it.
its true. the real work is at the desk.
but i still want people to enjoy it on more levels than alone while reading.
much like how you sometimes enjoy talking about books with other people, and not just looking in the mirror watching your lips move as if phrasing “Ulysses”
oh. i think i get it.
its true. the real work is at the desk.
but i still want people to enjoy it on more levels than alone while reading.
much like how you sometimes enjoy talking about books with other people, and not just looking in the mirror watching your lips move as if phrasing “Ulysses”
Don’t get me wrong Michael,
I love fun readings and am actually working on a series now. And actually I do kinda think authors should make merch.
still though, at the end of the day music is made to be listened to and writing is made to be read. There is some work that transitions to live readings, to be performed and heard. But not all work. And the work novels and verses that don’t work well in audio form are no less worthy.
Don’t get me wrong Michael,
I love fun readings and am actually working on a series now. And actually I do kinda think authors should make merch.
still though, at the end of the day music is made to be listened to and writing is made to be read. There is some work that transitions to live readings, to be performed and heard. But not all work. And the work novels and verses that don’t work well in audio form are no less worthy.
do you really think only writers like books? that is a deranged idea, darby.
do you really think only writers like books? that is a deranged idea, darby.
Because McSweeney’s is an independent publisher (non-conglomerate, non publicly-traded) and FSG isn’t? Definitions go a long way with me. Unless this is just another one of those “whose more punk rock” things, in which case fuck the whole conversation.
Whether or not a company has investors to please makes a huge difference in the products they’re willing to invest in.
Because McSweeney’s is an independent publisher (non-conglomerate, non publicly-traded) and FSG isn’t? Definitions go a long way with me. Unless this is just another one of those “whose more punk rock” things, in which case fuck the whole conversation.
Whether or not a company has investors to please makes a huge difference in the products they’re willing to invest in.
I was really referring to barry’s post where he seems to imply that being on an independent house or publishing yourself correlates with some kind of punk rock free thinking inspiring independent mind.
I realize what makes the companies McS and FSG different, but if you write a book and it is accepted without any changes to both places, choosing one over the other isn’t going to make the work more “independent” in any meaningful sense or you as a person more “independent”
I was really referring to barry’s post where he seems to imply that being on an independent house or publishing yourself correlates with some kind of punk rock free thinking inspiring independent mind.
I realize what makes the companies McS and FSG different, but if you write a book and it is accepted without any changes to both places, choosing one over the other isn’t going to make the work more “independent” in any meaningful sense or you as a person more “independent”
im not saying that this romanticized, print shit up and sell it out the trunk is the only definition of independence or that it is even a good definition. i am simply saying that it is one version of it. and all these responses are still responding to one aspect, which i sort of agree with everyone, but avoiding the first and primary point:
“if the purpose is to gain exposure, teach creative writing, get a book deal, get accepted by this institution or that institution, then what is INDEPENDENT about it?”
someone define “independent”
im not saying that this romanticized, print shit up and sell it out the trunk is the only definition of independence or that it is even a good definition. i am simply saying that it is one version of it. and all these responses are still responding to one aspect, which i sort of agree with everyone, but avoiding the first and primary point:
“if the purpose is to gain exposure, teach creative writing, get a book deal, get accepted by this institution or that institution, then what is INDEPENDENT about it?”
someone define “independent”
True
True
an entrepreneur can be independent and ambitious at the same time. people can want whatever they want, the difference is whether or not they’re using someone else’s money/time/love to get there.
an entrepreneur can be independent and ambitious at the same time. people can want whatever they want, the difference is whether or not they’re using someone else’s money/time/love to get there.
Sadly, it may be almost true.
Sadly, it may be almost true.
I think the real line in the sand is when you have a writer who writes the next vampire novel in a formulaic fashion and makes a billion dollars and then you have the writer who writes the novel nobody believes in and maybe wins but probably doesn’t. And I think it’s this virtue of usually not winning that makes us feel that we are independent–independent of the trends of consumer society, independent of the economics that might stop our novel from ever seeing the shelves of Borders, independent of anything that might compromise our selfish vision for our own work.
It seems there has arisen this well-trodden path to success in the indie world, sort of using it as a stepping stone. I’m not saying I condemn or condone this path but I do feel like you compromise a lot more when you’re a jerk later on than if you were a jerk from the beginning. Here you’ve got a huge community of very vocal people ready to point it out in you. And your day is coming.
I think the real line in the sand is when you have a writer who writes the next vampire novel in a formulaic fashion and makes a billion dollars and then you have the writer who writes the novel nobody believes in and maybe wins but probably doesn’t. And I think it’s this virtue of usually not winning that makes us feel that we are independent–independent of the trends of consumer society, independent of the economics that might stop our novel from ever seeing the shelves of Borders, independent of anything that might compromise our selfish vision for our own work.
It seems there has arisen this well-trodden path to success in the indie world, sort of using it as a stepping stone. I’m not saying I condemn or condone this path but I do feel like you compromise a lot more when you’re a jerk later on than if you were a jerk from the beginning. Here you’ve got a huge community of very vocal people ready to point it out in you. And your day is coming.
no, it isn’t
no, it isn’t
Yes.
Merge and Epitaph have never steered one wrong, while bigger labels put out at least one shitty artist per year.
Yes.
Merge and Epitaph have never steered one wrong, while bigger labels put out at least one shitty artist per year.
Of course you’d fucking think that. Jesus. It’s YOUR VIEW and therefore YOU FEEL it’s completely normal.
Meanwhile, even a casual reader of Rolling Stone can tell you at least one or two labels which has put out some crap and one or two that has put out some gems. And two people could tell you the exact inverse of each others’ opinions.
My favorite thing in music is when I dig a new band and then discover it’s on a label I already trust. Just confirms my good taste for my subjective self.
Of course you’d fucking think that. Jesus. It’s YOUR VIEW and therefore YOU FEEL it’s completely normal.
Meanwhile, even a casual reader of Rolling Stone can tell you at least one or two labels which has put out some crap and one or two that has put out some gems. And two people could tell you the exact inverse of each others’ opinions.
My favorite thing in music is when I dig a new band and then discover it’s on a label I already trust. Just confirms my good taste for my subjective self.
November 13th, 2009 / 4:51 pm
barry—
im not saying that this romanticized, print shit up and give it away
*fixed
November 13th, 2009 / 4:51 pm
barry—
im not saying that this romanticized, print shit up and give it away
*fixed
@ Lincoln – “Does anyone look down on Eggers for doing his books through McSweeneys?”
that’s a very interesting thought, and i’d say NO, but primarily because he’s done so well at McS and has published, edited, and written so much (short and long) and has gotten a really positive response from so many – i’d be willing to be that many of his novels COULD have been published by other presses – small, medium and large
i have a ton of respect for Eggers
@ Lincoln – “Does anyone look down on Eggers for doing his books through McSweeneys?”
that’s a very interesting thought, and i’d say NO, but primarily because he’s done so well at McS and has published, edited, and written so much (short and long) and has gotten a really positive response from so many – i’d be willing to be that many of his novels COULD have been published by other presses – small, medium and large
i have a ton of respect for Eggers