Would you?

[Foxbat]

Vanity Publishing, Self Publishing...call it what you will.
Personally the answer is no. I believe that one sure fire way of finding out if you have something worthwhile is when the editor decides to publish it. After all, the gamble is financial on their part, be it anthology or first time novel. If a publisher is prepared to go ahead then they must have good reasons. Even if it is s small concern and you are receiving no payment, the risk is all theirs.
Of course there have been exceptions...Poe is one that I know of who started of with vanity publishing (one of my prized books is a copy of Tales of Mystery and Imagination printed by Minerva Press in 1892) but, on the whole, most of us just grind away at what we do and hope for the best.

Will e-publishing kill off the vanity press or is there still that need to hold a book, still that desire to feel the paper between your fingers?
Any thoughts, people?

[dwndrgn]

I can't comment on vanity publishing as I couldn't write an instruction manual for boiling water...

However, I don't think that epublishing will ever take over completely from paper books. It just isn't the same somehow.

[littlemissattitude]

You can't curl up in bed on a rainy day with a computer to read an e-book. Even if you have something handheld, it's just too cold and impersonal. I like books. I like the feel of them, the smell of them when they're new, the way I can underline or highlight things in them and write in the margins when something the author says makes me think of something or makes me want to argue with him or her.

As I guess you can tell, reading is an interactive rather than a passive experience for me.

[Twelve]

Well, I certainly differentiate between E-publishing and Self-publishing.

I'm not sure if E-publishing will ever catch on. The best selling e-books seem to be the ones that come ALONG with the same book that is sold in the "normal" way. Even authors such as Steven King and Tad Williams have tried the internet route and have come up short. Needless to say, I don't think it'll go very far...

As for self-publishing, that's a tough one. I hear good and bad arguments on either side, and people tend to get fired up about it from either side.

I don't see why people have to take sides, choosing either to stand with "mainstream" or "self-publishing". People get into little camps.

I choose to accept both. My plan is to start out with self-publishing, but ONLY with the goal of entering mainstream eventually. Because, I don't care what anyone says, being a mainstream writer is STILL much better than being self-published.

12

[brian]

I'm still aiming for mainstream "traditional" publishing. But if this current work in progress doesn't sell within a year I'll have to go self-published and market it myself. My particular problem is that my writing has a specific meaning - it's a vehicle for some ideas that, so far as I know, are quite original. I feel an overwhelming need to get those ideas out into the public psyche. Most were developed in 1997 and I feel like I'm running out of time. I have to be published. That's why I can't be laissez-faire ni my attitude anymore. I have to have a firm idea of what I am doing, and why it may work. On saying that, I have a powerful sense of destiny. For many years now I have seen 2005 as the year I would be published - I had simply hoped to get something out before then as well. But never time to sit and wait - I must try and make it happen as it happens...if that makes sense.

Ramble aside, I can wholly understand why some people would self-publish. Traditional publishing, in some ways, is a selector of personality types, rather than ability. As far as I'm concerned, that sucks - is wrong.

[Foxbat]

In general, I agree with the comments on e-publishing.
However, I see self(vanity)publishing as something that should be approached if at all, with a great deal of suspicion. It is very easy to become blinkered when writing..to think that you have finally achieved what you set out to do. It is quite disheartening in the short term to have an editor start to point out the faults in what you have written.
Still, I think that is better than the inherent self-interest of the vanity publisher (he doesn't lose, he gets his money no matter what). Whereas, if an editor gets your work published and it's a financial disaster, it does not rest on the shoulders of the author to recoup the loss. This, I believe, is an important distinction to bear in mind.
There. I've had my say. ;D

[Twelve]

Brian,
I just want to say that I've read your feelings about being published before, and you do speak with a sense of destiny. I think this sense is important, because I believe that the only people who do anything great are those who believe they can really do it. Those who doubt and wish and hope and fool around, I believe those folks don't stand a chance. Shakespeare said, "Some men are born great, some men have greatness thrust upon them", because it does SEEM at times, that certain people become great for no apparent reason. But as I've studied the thoughts and writings of great people, it seems that all of these people KNEW that SOMEDAY they would succeed and be great.
Just want to say that I appreciate your attitude and I look forward to seeing you succeed. I'll meet you there.

12

[brian]

I'll be very happy to see you there, too, twelve!

I'm always aware that I could be deluded - but the point is never to sit around and wait for success to happen. It has to be earned - to be worked for.

Darn it, it's a hell of a struggle mentally, sometimes - which is why I really want to help other aspiring writers. We're all in the same boat. This board, which is filled with links to resources I've found incredibly useful and helpful, has been a little quiet of late - but I'll get back to adding material, and make it a proper part of the chronicles-network.

All I can do is sincerely hope that anything here is of use to others. It's all I can do to help - for the moment.

[An8el]

I mainly have used writing in the past to teach, rather than to entertain or make it my medium of art. So I love the idea of self-publishing, because it's a wonderful way to make what I can offer available to a larger number of people - who may eventually get curious about what else I might have to offer them personally. I'm just working on my own first website, and it's very exciting. I've already written a handbook that I've made available to my own students. So it's great to take parts of it and use it for content on my site I'm learning to do right now.

I have noticed that self-publishing also is a way to get a more traditional publisher interested in your book. All the authors I know personally self-published first, then by doing their own distribution, eventually got someone else interested enough in their book to promote it properly on an international scale.

So I'd regard the self-publishing thing, whether e-book or paying for a short run of "vanity press" yourself - to be a stepping stone to being offered much more opportunity from a "real" publisher.

[brian]

Originally Posted by An8el

I have noticed that self-publishing also is a way to get a more traditional publisher interested in your book. All the authors I know personally self-published first, then by doing their own distribution, eventually got someone else interested enough in their book to promote it properly on an international scale.

On that point I've just been reading something somewhere about a couple of different agents, who won't look at self-published work unless it's sold between 5,000-20,000 books.

Frankly, though, if I could sell 20,000 copies of any book of my own writing, why would I be looking for an agent?

I do hear that self-published works of non-fiction tend to sell much better than self-published novels, with diet books toppng the self-published charts.

Don't ask for cites at the moment, though! I'm forwarding this as rumour unless I can justify it elsewhere.

[Twelve]

Originally Posted by An8el

So I'd regard the self-publishing thing, whether e-book or paying for a short run of "vanity press" yourself - to be a stepping stone to being offered much more opportunity from a "real" publisher.

That's my logic, and that's my strategy. It's going to take time, time, time...and a bunch of hard work. But I'm willing.

12

[Michael]

Originally Posted by Foxbat

Vanity Publishing, Self Publishing...call it what you will.
Personally the answer is no. I believe that one sure fire way of finding out if you have something worthwhile is when the editor decides to publish it. After all, the gamble is financial on their part, be it anthology or first time novel. If a publisher is prepared to go ahead then they must have good reasons. Even if it is s small concern and you are receiving no payment, the risk is all theirs.
Of course there have been exceptions...Poe is one that I know of who started of with vanity publishing (one of my prized books is a copy of Tales of Mystery and Imagination printed by Minerva Press in 1892) but, on the whole, most of us just grind away at what we do and hope for the best.

Will e-publishing kill off the vanity press or is there still that need to hold a book, still that desire to feel the paper between your fingers?
Any thoughts, people?

I'm publishing my first book through Authorhouse--a print-on-demand company. don't see anything wrong with it. In fact, if it sells well enough, it may help me find a commercial publisher interested in my work.

As far as a work in print--my personal preference. In the future people might feel differently (still think at least 2 trees should be planted for every 1 cut down, though).

[I, Brian]

Originally Posted by Michael

In fact, if it sells well enough, it may help me find a commercial publisher interested in my work.

Argh!! I see so many self-published writers use this - yet I have to say such people seem to myself to have a very naive approach to publishing. The number of self-published fiction writers this side of the 21st century you could probably count on one hand. Apparently, non-fiction - such as cookery books - can and does make it to tradtional print publishing - but we're talking about works selling in the region of 20,000 copies.

In my opinion, if someone can put the incredible amount of time and effort required to sell that number of books, then they were capable of getting an agent in the first place - else they are doing so well that they don't need an agent or traditional publisher, anyway! Certainly in terms of fiction. So why not go for gold first?

No offence intended to anyone - as twelve rightly pointed out, having a sense of destiny may be skewing my perception of the issue somewhat. However, in my opinion, people self-publish to pass on their work to friends and family, and maybe a few strangers, too - but to self-publish with the aim of getting a traditional print contract out of it is no better than buying lottery tickets.

Just my opinion, mind you. I just have strong feelings on the subject - especially after I spent time in another forum, where aspiring writers are encouraged to print via a board admin's Print On Demand company.

[polymorphikos]

One could of course just self-publish, sell a few copies and give them away, and try to get a deal whilst doing so. Best of both worlds, unless I've chronicly misunderstood a key aspect of how this all works.

[I, Brian]

You could - but I strongly suspect that someone who spends their money on self-publishing has not spent their money on third party editing - which in my opinion is much much much more important.

If your book is going to traditionally print published then there is absolutely no need to spend time and money in having it self-published anyway. I think I mentioned before that my impression is that agents don't look at creativity first, but at professionalism. Self-publishing work and then submitting to traditional publishing I do not believe would be normally considered as "professional".