So you have written a book- why not self publish?

[rdenning]

I can see the potential value in a writing group and of course other authors opinions. I have sought out both and have some good contacts and convesations with a number - more on the hsitorical rather than fantasy side mind you. Someo one commenetd that I was a one man band. That is not actually the case. I have a lot of contacts at new Writers UK and other places - but not yet here of course.

Just to throw a spanner in the works though I have certainly heard it argued by a published author (not self pub or vanity published) of mainstream literature that writers are not always that good at providing editing input. Her argument is editing is actually a different although related skill to writing.

Recently I got approached by a consortium of historical fiction writers who were wanting to collectively edit each others work. I did not want to do this because firstly I dont really have the time to fairly edit another author's book, I did not feel I was qualified to do so either.
BUT I am a novice and noob and of course accept that published long term authors are different.

I did spend quite a bit of time on authonomy about 18 months ago - I am sure you have all heard of it. But I found that all writers wanted was to get their work looked at and would say anything to get you to back their work. My book had hundreds of cool comments added but in the end I became convinced that exercise was futile. The forums there are useful but despite getting quite far up the ranks I pulled the book out. Maybe others have had better experiences.

[SpaceShip]

There are some very good self-published authors on this site who can give you lots of help. I had a good deal of help with regard to getting myself out there from Mark Robson. The thing needed - once you know you have good material, that is - is advertising. You need to do a lot - yep, your book might be good but they ain't gonna come knocking at your door - you have to go knocking on theirs.

[Stephen Palmer]

Self-editing is the skill to acquire, but it is very difficult, and only comes after a lot of experience.

[Anne Lyle]

Originally Posted by rdenning

I did spend quite a bit of time on authonomy about 18 months ago - I am sure you have all heard of it. But I found that all writers wanted was to get their work looked at and would say anything to get you to back their work. My book had hundreds of cool comments added but in the end I became convinced that exercise was futile. The forums there are useful but despite getting quite far up the ranks I pulled the book out. Maybe others have had better experiences.

I thought your book sounded familiar, Richard - you may have come across mine whilst you were there (I listed it under Historical as well as Fantasy, as there isn't a lot of fantasy material in the opening chapters) - the working title was "The Guiser". I agree that most of the comments were more gratifying than useful, but I found it interesting to hear a wider range of reactions than I would get from my usual SF&F crowd! I think I got into the top 150 with very little effort on my part - I refused to join in the whole "you back my book, I'll back yours" black economy

A lot of the people who were on there back in early 2009 seem to have gone on to self-publish or form their own writers' cooperatives - as an experiment, authonomy.com seems to have served only to disillusion writers as to the futility of trying to gain the attention of a big publishing house...

[Jennifer Kirk]

Not all published writers have editors (I certainly don't) and just being a writer doesn't preclude you from being able to edit your own work. Editing is a discipline, just like any other. There are ways of doing it that work, and ways that don't. The best advice a writer who does edit their own work would give would be to leave what you have written to one side for a few weeks or months before you come back to it. Launching straight into editing something you have just that moment finished writing is a big no-no. Also, don't edit as you go along or you will never get anything finished.

My current book (released on the 2nd of October, so it hasn't been out that long) went through seven drafts. Part of that time it was sat on Authonomy (I think draft 2) and I have to agree that Authonomy was of limited value because of the nature of its "like my book and I'll like yours" popularity contest style. John Jarrold read either draft three or draft four, as did several other agents. Unfortunately sci-fi is a tough genre to get an agent and get published in and I believe at the time John told me that he takes on maybe one new client a year. It wasn't my lucky year last year. He did, however make a few comments that I then addressed in subsequent drafts. I then got a publisher interested off the next draft, which resulted in me doing yet another draft to iron out minor wrinkles and a couple of typos that seemed very good at escaping detection in previous edits. At some point I delivered this as an electronic file and crossed my fingers a lot.

One good tip is that whilst Lulu is a lot of a rip-off if you were to try and make a living selling through them, I did get a few copies of my book printed via Lulu and used these hard copies to assist in editing. It's amazing what you notice on the printed page that you don't on the screen. It also meant I could give my test audience (half a dozen SF-loving relatives and friends) the Lulu copies and get feedback from them.

Somewhere on my computer I have previous drafts of all my books. I don't know why I keep them, but I'm not exactly pressed for a few hundred megabytes of drive space so I leave them be.

[Anne Lyle]

Originally Posted by Anne Lyle

A lot of the people who were on there back in early 2009 seem to have gone on to self-publish or form their own writers' cooperatives - as an experiment, authonomy.com seems to have served only to disillusion writers as to the futility of trying to gain the attention of a big publishing house...

Oops - a good example of why self-editing is necessary (and why surreptitious posting whilst at work is a bad idea!). What I should have said is:

"...served only to disillusion writers and convince them of the futility of trying to gain the attention of a big publishing house"

[Ian Whates]

There have been many interesting and valid points made during this thread, and I've hesitated to participate because I hate to gainsay anyone, particularly in areas where opinion counts for a great deal. However, I will say that I don't believe there's a single author out there whose work doesn't benefit from being edited by a fresh, impartial eye.

I've edited many of the biggest names in genre fiction in recent years, including Kelley Armstrong, Tanith Lee, Brian Aldiss, Christopher Priest, Stephen Baxter, Gwyneth Jones, Alastair Reynolds, etc etc, and all have accepted editorial comment.

I'll further add that as far as novels go, any decent publisher will do the job for you prior to publication (certainly both my current publishers do), so employing an editor prior to submission certainly isn't essential in all cases.

However, it's far easier to spot the minor glitches in someone else's work than your own, so a fresh perspective is always a boon.

Right, that's it... I'll get me coat.

[Anne Lyle]

Originally Posted by Ian Whates

However, it's far easier to spot the minor glitches in someone else's work than your own, so a fresh perspective is always a boon.

Very true - one thing I learnt as a production editor is that you never try to proofread your own work. Your brain knows what you meant to write, so it just skips over the errors.

Of course we still do it anyway - but a fresh pair of eyes is invaluable. One thing we did on Holly Lisle's novel revision course was to work on a printed copy of the manuscript, because you see errors differently in print than on screen. Your eyes are less likely to slide and skim, perhaps because they are not being bombarded by so many photons!

Also there's the issue that you know the story intimately, but you can never be 100% sure that you've put just enough on paper for the reader to share your vision. That's where beta-readers come in, because they will soon let you know where your story is unclear!

[SJAB]

Originally Posted by Anne Lyle

. That's where beta-readers come in, because they will soon let you know where your story is unclear!

And when you waffle, go round in circles, change the main character's hair colour, have eyes, hands and feet roaming around of their own free will, have a table move across a room and back again, glasses become empty of their own accord... I think I should stop now, but... oh yes, beasts turn into breasts and bowls into bowels

[rdenning]

Originally Posted by Ian Whates

However, it's far easier to spot the minor glitches in someone else's work than your own, so a fresh perspective is always a boon.

Right, that's it... I'll get me coat.

I think that is what I was meaning in my first no doubt blundering way.
I went back and had quite a natter with my friend (the author Helen Hollick). She sent me a lot of good points back that I may post sometime (maybe on my blog if not here as I don't want to dominate this forum. But in brief She wrote that discovering the diamond thing and is basically an evangelist for the need for all authors to take editorial input in some form. She drew a distinction between a proof read and a full edit.

The editor who is looking at my stuff is actually her editor and is also a published author so YES authors can edit (of course they can) but I think the point she would make is that we cant ALL do it and that many people don't have that skill.

I totally agree that you need someone else to go over your book. That then could be a good writers group if they possess the skill, a professional editor or maybe even another author if they are able and willing.

Anyway I guess we have done this point to death.

[Boneman]

Originally Posted by Jennifer Kirk

Somewhere on my computer I have previous drafts of all my books. I don't know why I keep them, but I'm not exactly pressed for a few hundred megabytes of drive space so I leave them be.

I know! I know! One day soon, when you're a well-respected author, who has sold loads, you'll offer a first draft of your best book as prize to raise money for charity, and all aspiring writers will gain tremendous heart from it... I'm positively embarrassed by my own first draft, but enormously encouraged by how far I've come.

[Anne Lyle]

Good gravy! No-one's seeing my early drafts if I can help it. Deleted scenes, maybe...

[Virtuous]

I think there are a couple of strong reasons to get a professional editor to give the MS a thorough going-over before you send it out.

First, ideally this person doesn't know you personally, and because there's money involved the relationship will be strictly professional and you can be reasonably assured that you will get a very honest assessment. This is essential.

Second, if you do your research you can be pretty confident that the editor is an accomplished pro and that you can trust his or her judgement. Giving your work to a writing group is great to help you through the early challenges, or to give you direction for the second draft. But there comes a time, especially as an unpublished author in a group of unpublished authors, when you have to realize that feedback from your social network can only take you so far. To really be comfortable with the MS, a professional opinion is never a bad thing.

For my first published novel, I used a group of six "beta-testers" (friends and family) who gave valuable feedback that greatly improved the story. But since I wasn't yet published I didn't want to take any chances, so I did a lot of research and eventually hired an editor to assess the book. She provided about 20 pages of feedback, most of it positive. I suppose that might prove that I didn't need an editor, as I'd clearly brought the MS to the appropriate level with my own craft and skill, but as a unpublished author, I really benefitted confidence-wise from that professional stamp of approval: I felt it validated the MS.

Since this thread is all about self-publishing, I think it's really important to address the issue of validation. There's no doubt that tons of self-published stuff out there is garbage, and the most common reason is that the MS never went through the proper editorial process. If you want to seriously make a go of it in self-publishing, you owe it to yourself to get an objective, professional opinion before you go to press. Sure, it'll cost a few hundred, but when compared to the thousands it's going to cost you to print the book, create and optimize an awesome website with e-commerce capability, create marketing material for appearances, promotions, and all the other things rdenning clearly laid out, the cost is minimal.

And if you're really going to make a go of it, and fight all the prejudice and challenge facing a self-published author, you want to be absolutely sure that your MS is perfect, lest you give the anti-self-publishers even more ammunition. Good luck to you, rdenning!

[Virtuous]

Oh curses! Somehow I missed the last few posts. Here I was, all ready to roll up my sleeves and delve into the editor debate, and then I see that you've all finished talking about it. Oh well; I'm still new. Sorry. Enjoy my (sincere) manifesto above, but please don't write me off as a long-winded dolt.

[Teresa Edgerton]

Originally Posted by Virtuous

Oh curses! Somehow I missed the last few posts. Here I was, all ready to roll up my sleeves and delve into the editor debate, and then I see that you've all finished talking about it.

Not really. There hasn't been a consensus that the debate is closed, so there is no reason why you and anyone else who comes in now and feels they have something to add -- especially if your remarks are directly related to self-publishing -- shouldn't have your say.