Writing on the Ether


By

Temple at Sounion / Photo: Porter Anderson

Temple at Sounion / Photo: Porter Anderson

Late addition to the Ether

One short golden age

Careful. We are a destination for detonation this week, my Ethernaut. That plate is hot, these gases are flammable, and those matches are rattling in the box. Don your tinfoil computing suit. I don’t want to have to hose you down.

Here we have mild-mannered author Tobias Buckell:

Imagine my disgust to see the loud-mouthed “if you don’t self publish you’re an idiot” crowd of Michael Stackpole and Barry Eisler and J.A Konrath (remember, Konrath and Eisler work with Amazon, they don’t self publish as such) thumping themselves on the chest and saying ‘if you don’t self publish you’re a house slave.’ … Three white dudes, screaming about how it’s really *them* being oppressed … how tone deaf. How self involved. How dripping full of loud, male privilege.

He titles that one a demure Self publishing doesn’t mean you have to be a raging f–k wad

 

[blackbirdpie id=”134141547443785728″]

 

Speaking of Barry Eisler, he’s as articulate as all get-out in comments on the new Mike Shatzkin post. This is Eisler:

Personally, I don’t think there ever was a time of “pure” indie publishing. After all, Amanda Hocking needed Amazon’s, B&N’s, and Smashwords’ distribution to get her books to readers—she didn’t sell through her own website. And even if she had sold through her own website, she would have been reliant on her website hosting company, on PayPal for billing services, etc.

Then there’s Kristen Lamb, lone star, fleecing the fuzz to warn us Beware the Social Media Snuggie–One Size Does NOT Fit All:  

As awesome as indie presses are, logic dictates that most of them won’t have the manpower to help us in promotion and marketing like Random House or Penguin. We don’t get book placement in major chain bookstores or Wal-mart or Costco. We need a VERY LARGE PLATFORM. Sure, the indie press will help, but the lion’s share of the burden is ours.

Lamb adds, “Pay attention to Chuck Wendig. He makes the second-oldest-profession-in-the-world look good and is not above showing a little leg.”

I can’t look.

 

[blackbirdpie id=”133585028910297089″]

 

The glory that was Greece? Now at fire-sale prices. The grandeur that was Rome? Look out for falling Silvios. Every boy can’t be Tom Clancy, and every girl may not make as mean a cheese sandwich as Margaret Atwood.

Novelist and speechwriter Keith Cronin stokes the blaze:

There are many inexperienced writers who are simply using self-publishing as a way to skip the hassle of trying to gain anybody else’s editorial approval … I’m not opposed to self-publishing. I’m opposed to shortcuts. And I’m starting to see inexperienced writers choose self-publishing as an alternative to learning to write well, fueled by impatience and dreams of becoming the next Amanda Hocking or John Locke.

Cronin’s piece, for Writer Unboxed, is called An Endangered Rite of Passage, and he goes on to write, “So gleeful are they in having eluded the ‘evil gatekeepers’ that they think it’s perfectly fine to self-publish anything they write, brimming with confidence that every word they type is literary gold.”

This is a job for Shatzkin:

Publishers are right when they say there’s a role for them in an ebook world … Although authors will continue to self-publish, the debate that matters in the future is what the basket of services will be that authors require and what will be the right price for them … good covers, changing covers, dynamic pricing, constantly improved metadata, monitoring to catch glitch take-downs, as well as developmental editing, line-editing, copy-editing, and proofreading … The lines are drawn for that discussion and the opinions are really all over the lot.

Mike Shatzkin, in True “do-it-yourself” publishing success stories will probably become rare, is, among other things, effectively endorsing Jane Friedman‘s now-prescient Self-Published Authors Have Great Power, But Are They Taking Responsibility? I quoted it here last week. It’s roughly summarize-able this way: Don’t throw publishing professionalism out with the bubble bath of irrationally exuberant DIY-ism.

Shatzkin, for his part, debriefs traditional- and self-publishing author Bob Mayer. He had Mayer speak at his Publisher’s Launch’s “eBooks for Everyone Else” (#eBEE) in San Francisco. And Mayer now comes to us with a true veteran’s perspective in For authors there are many roads to the Oz of publishing—thoughts from Publishers Launch:

Things have exploded in the argument of traditional publishing versus self-publishing versus agent publishing versus using those little gray guys at Area 51 publish you…The key for a writer is to sort through all the facts, opinions and flat out lies being thrown about, figure out their own situation, decide where they want to be as an author in the future, and then smartly and courageously choose their own path.

What’s more, remember, no path can for-sure save you from the mortification of format-failure. Did you see Kassia Krozser‘s account of what it felt like to read HarperCollins’ initial ebook edition of Neal Stephenson’s Reamde in That Customer Service Thing?

So I started the book. And I noticed. Oh, I noticed. Conversion errors galore! Okay, maybe five conversion errors in my first half-hour of reading. Anything that jerks me out of the flow of a story—and, boy, do conversion errors do that!—is a Bad Thing.

Whether you’re going out as gentle as Lamb’s “hybrid author” or roaring in, beating the papyrus yourself, there’s a chance your tools of change (generic, not our buddies at TOC) aren’t even stabilized yet.

So. As they say in “Camelot,” that was one brief shining moment, huh?

Jump into the Comments below and join the conflagration.

Before the blowback hits, I’m going to have Shatzkin airlift us out of here with a practical point from one of his own answers to a comment on his blog:

I didn’t suggest that one should abandon self- or indie-publishing for traditional. The point I was making … is that people developing the chops to do this will find it sensible to do it for other authors, and that indie authors will find lots of help from places other than the big publishers … A one-to-one relationship between an author and a publishing machine is inherently inefficient. Even in the digital age.

 

[blackbirdpie id=”134413581184802816″]
Late addition to the Ether

New call for an ‘all stakeholders’ organization

We’ve had the organizations in place for decades to make this work, but for whatever reason, they’ve largely looked after their individual interests to the detriment of the industry as a whole. To be blunt, our institutions have failed us…We can’t move quickly enough to compete (or even to collaborate when appropriate) with new entrants to our industry when we’re bogged down fighting the last war or arguing arcane points of future standards that we needed yesterday.

I’ve gone back into the Ether to add what I believe is a critical call from Don Linn for the “streamlined, well-funded, collaborative, empowered team” that Brian O’Leary envisions in his signal Books in Browsers address, which I flagged here last week, The Opportunity in Abundance. (If you’d rather see and hear Brian deliver it, here’s the video.)

With typical precision, Linn identifies both the longstanding and newer trade organizations’ leaders who, while “neither evil nor stupid,” have nevertheless caused publishing to seize up, while “Amazon, Google, Apple and others don’t care and, more importantly, neither do readers.”

I commend to you Linn’s A Tragedy of the Commons for the very reason I’ve made this special late addition to Writing on the Ether. As Linn puts it, “Brian’s call for collaborative action is not just important; it’s urgent.” This is right-headed thinking in a direly muddled context. Please read both O’Leary’s ‘Opportunity” and Linn’s “Tragedy.” Because, as Linn writes, not to take action “in the very near term is to surrender our current and future customers (and borrowers) without even fighting the battle.”

And don’t miss the even newer post O’Leary has written, Not Pretty Enough, responding to Linn’s take on publishing associations (that tragedy of the commons). I’ll leave you  to your weekend homework with a bit of O’Leary’s eloquence:

Not only have most associations fiddled while Rome burned; they have been vocal about it.  Just last week, the AAR blog included a post calling publishers out for allegedly avoiding negotiations about digital royalty rates.  It’s a land grab; why not? “Abundance” explains why not: we are eroding our competitiveness from the inside out.  We need an industry solution, not a cascade of power struggles.

 

[blackbirdpie id=”134682800426205184″]

 

Buckell bucks the trend: a comments-free blog

I turned off the comments to this blog last year, right around this time. I had little energy as I dealt with recovering my health, and I’d come to realize that I was less interested in spending my energy as a moderator and wanted to spend more of it writing and blogging. Some predicted doom. Others knowingly said things like “engagement with readers is critical to growing your brand.” … Despite all that, traffic surged as I both increased my blogging here, and also found my voice.

Still understated, Tobias Buckell takes a detailed look at The story of a blog, my blog and comes to some interesting conclusions about a field in which “every other new writer is doing the same thing. Everyone’s trying to position themselves as an expert about writing. Or publishing.”

 

[blackbirdpie id=”132215085128093696″]

 

Deepest, darkest Amazonia

The program is great for Amazon and maybe even for consumers, assuming they’re willing to live with the many restrictions, but it’s awful for publishers and authors. Why? As Amazon stated in its press release, “For the vast majority of titles, Amazon has reached agreement with publishers to include titles for a fixed fee.” So no matter how popular (or unpopular) the publisher’s titles are, they get one flat fee for participation in the library. I strongly believe this type of program needs to compensate publishers and authors on a usage level, not a flat fee. The more a title is borrowed, the higher the fee to the publisher and author. Period.

O’Reilly’s expert observer Joe Wikert, while a longtime proponent of Amazon, doesn’t hesitate to wade right into The problem with Amazon’s Kindle Owners’ Lending Library.

The agent and author community have not been consulted about this new sort of use of authors’ copyrighted material, and are unaware of how publishers plan on compensating authors for this sort of use of their books, which is unprecedented … Without a clear contractual understanding with their authors, it is unclear to us how publishers can participate in this program. We take very seriously our role to protect the interests of our clients, and at this stage it is difficult to see how this program is in the best interests of our clients.

That language, with its important, troubling questions about the Kindle lending initiative is the statement of the Association of Authors’ Representatives (AAR, the  professional organization for agents). Agent Rachelle Gardner helpfully includes it in her piece on Amazon Kindle Owners’ Lending LibraryAnd Mathew Ingram voices the parallel exasperation, in Kindle lending: Book publishers still not getting it:

Here’s a hint for publishers: Book prices are going down whether you like it or not, and trying to maintain artificially high prices for electronic books is a losing strategy. In some cases …dropping the price of an e-book can produce sales that are orders of magnitude larger than they otherwise would be. That’s clearly a good thing, just as allowing more authors to reach readers via programs like Amazon’s lending feature is a good thing. But publishers are still not interested.

And meanwhile, down on the Amazon Publishing farm, David Streitfeld at the Times picks up on Laura Hazard Owen‘s revealing The Truth About Amazon Publishing and creates a wish list of concerns, almost fascinating in the proverbial train-wreck way. His post is titled Uncovering Amazon Publishing.

Ms. Owen concludes that “Amazon Publishing hasn’t killed print yet.” But is anyone saying it has? The real question is whether it will reshape publishing by dissolving old rules and creating new expectations, the way it has reconfigured bookselling. Will a physical edition become the reward for a successful electronic publication? Will authors enlarge their share of e-book revenues at the expense of traditional publishers? Will independent bookstores carry Amazon books?

The exquisitely named Alexis Madrigal gets the final (spoken) word in The Atlantic: I See Your Siri and Raise You a Yap: Amazon Quietly Snaps Up Speech-Recognition Startup.

No charge to Prime members for shipping those earplugs.

 

[blackbirdpie id=”134006955437076480″]

 

Still with me? Good. Let’s confer on conferring

Since you can’t swing a dead cat these days without hitting a conference on publishing it felt worthwhile to share what I hope are constructive suggestions … What’s tough in most conferences is pattern-spotting and takeaway extraction. What’s missing are the epiphanies a great teacher gets her students to notice by the end of a class or semester: a sense kids get that they now know more about the topic than when they began.

Having wafted a lot about conferences on last week’s Ether, I’m glad to come across a fine post that almost got away. It’s by Peter Meyers, who spoke, himself, at the fine O’Reilly/Internet Archive Books in Browsers conference. (Here’s the video of Meyers’ presentation on “The Infinite Canvas” of digital production.)

Meyers came away dissatisfied in ways that many of us might grok. No criticism of #BiB11 is intended or material here. What’s at issue is the standard format and effect of so many confabs we’re all trundling through, in which, Meyers writes, we all get “Conference head”—that state you’re in after “speakers #2, #5, #8, and #11 all talk about how ‘social reading’ is gonna change digital books” and everybody staggers out of the Whatever Vista Ballroom finding it “hard to pinpoint what, exactly, they’ve learned.”

It’s late in the game for folks planning the next Writer’s Digest Conference (#wdc12), Digital Book World (#dbw12), Tools of Change (#toccon), and the Chinese mainland of these things, Association of Writers & Writing Programs (#awp12). But I’ll bet that even at this point, some sessions, some sequences of events, could be thought through in light of what Meyers is so good at articulating in Presentation Overload: Alternatives to Serial Speaker Syndrome. My favorite of his points:

Boy, for an industry built around authors, it’s amazing how little time they get at our events. I’m not just talking about storytellers. I’m also thinking of how-to explainers, idea-weavers, cookbook chefs, photographers. Is there a way to get more of these people up on stage—not just talking about their fears in this new era of publishing—but actually sharing what they create to remind everyone of why consumers buy books in the first place?

 

[blackbirdpie id=”132179433086914561″]


Who are you calling a distraction?

Everything I’ve ever written was composed in notebooks first. I have hundreds of them filled with my scribbles tucked away in boxes … I find that writing longhand I can enter a zone of comfort I find hard to achieve when sitting in front of a screen–I find typing annoying, if I’m honest, not the mechanics of it, but the sound. The constant tap-tap-tap-tap on the keyboard reminds me of all the offices I’ve worked in.

Author and fellow critic Lee Rourke says “there are far too many distractions when writing directly onto the screen,” in   Why creative writing is better with a penWhat on Earth is he talking about?

 

[blackbirdpie id=”132196173271412736″]

 

Big fat books and young wives’ tales?

What this means for long-winded authors is hard to judge—will they benefit (and perhaps write even fatter whoppers) because the disincentive of having to lug heavy novels around and rest them on your tummy disappears? Or suffer because readers become more aware of the eye-fatigue associated with ebooks the longer a book continues?

So not only does John Dugdale at the Guardian declare us to be seized by The craze for long books he tells us is going “on and on,” but he’s announcing an association of eye-fatigue with the reading of long ebooks. No sourcing of that little revelation, you’ll note. He just lays it in there with the Trowel of Truth, there ya go, boom, we’re done. Somebody call Jeff Bezos.

 

 

[blackbirdpie id=”134403182263672833″]

 

Workhouse whistleblower

Night came very suddenly. Dickens’s readers needed to fasten their safety belts: it was going to be a bumpy ride. He was intent on deromanticising the criminal world, of which he had such vivid firsthand experience in his endless nocturnal wanderings through the city.

I’m loving Simon Callow’s essay on Dickens in his time and what Oliver Twist meant, in conjunction with the Guardian’s competition with Vintage Classics to create cover art for An Oliver Twist for Our Times, a forthcoming, new edition for 2012. When Dickens will have been 200 years old.

 

[blackbirdpie id=”131855438340833282″]

 

Comics with a Kick(starter)

Mainstream comics are a buck more expensive and have two pages less content; there are still (riddle me this, Batman!) a majority of female editors but almost no women writers or artists on mainstream books. The writing of female, LGBTQ and minority characters is still kinda cringemaking as they’re still mainly penned by straight white guys … but … but … now there’s Kickstarter. And now there’s digital self-publishing, without having to front up a crapload of money to pay a printer.

Alex de Campi, Comics Innovator and Provocateur, talks with Guy LeCharles Gonzalez  about her  Ashes Kickstarter fundraiser: “I’m a writer, not a coder.”

 

[blackbirdpie id=”134108442129473537″]

 

What’s rational and what’s rationalizing in piracy?

If there were NO way to get these products without paying, and these people weren’t habituated to “free,” wouldn’t we have avoided creating a whole generation of people who feel entitled to intellectual property without paying for it? In any case, plenty of freeloaders can afford to purchase books/movies/songs. They just choose not to.

Agent Rachelle Gardner responds to blog-reader questions on the topic in Authors and Book Piracy

 

[blackbirdpie id=”132959663082835968″]


May all your panics be creative

The amateur (i.e., me blundering around Tel Aviv or getting stuck for twenty minutes in a parking garage) identifies his momentary panic with himself; he internalizes it, blames himself, and loses his composure, making an uncomfortable situation far worse than it needs to be. The professional (i.e., this famous aviator in his Mirage fighter plane with the engine flaming out) does NOT identify with the fear he’s feeling; he focuses instead on the problem—and solves it.

Steve Pressfield, my favorite Warrior of Art, would think he looked pretty professional trying to get his Hertz out of a garage overseas if he’d seen me trying to get one into the Dusseldorf airport after buzzing over from Maastricht at the crack of dawn. And as our good friend Todd Henry comments when Steve announces he’s Out of My Comfort Zone, “I love the observation that creative panic rarely means smoke in the cockpit.”

Since it seems we’re all driving through one creative panic or another this week, I’m handing the wheel back to the maestro here:

Comfort zones do widen. What scared us on Tuesday becomes old hat by Friday. Composure can be learned. I’ll remind myself of that, tomorrow at Minute Nineteen, when I’m still trying to find my way out of the parking garage.

 

Porter Anderson

Porter Anderson is a Fellow with the National Critics Institute, and a producer and consultant formerly with the United Nations World Food Programme in Rome and INDEX: Design to Improve Life in Copenhagen. As a journalist, he has worked with media including CNN, the Village Voice, and the Dallas Times Herald. He reviews literary fiction at Reader Unboxed, and is based in Tampa.

  • http://twitter.com/jenniecoughlin jenniecoughlin

    Great roundup, as usual, Porter. I’ve been arguing for a while that if indie publishing is going to become a viable route for more than the odd success story, something will have to arise that does the gatekeeping role publishers used to play — likely book bloggers in some manner or other. Until then, the sheer volume of books out there will make it even more difficult for those of us who are trying to publish quality work to break out of the pile. 

  • http://twitter.com/KristenLambTX Kristen Lamb

    Thanks for the shout-out and I ALWAYS love this list because I can count on you to find all the good stuff I miss. THANK YOU!

  • http://twitter.com/ByRozMorris Roz Morris fiction

    Agreed, Jennie – we absolutely need gatekeepers, but in a world where we are selling ourselves by gathering social media ‘friends’, many people are wary of imposing some form of quality control.

  • http://twitter.com/ByRozMorris Roz Morris fiction

    And thank you, Porter, for the thorough round-up and the surprise mention!

  • http://twitter.com/TonyNoland Tony Noland

    Love this summation – great post!

  • Pingback: Writing on the Ether | Jane Friedman | Author Blogs Worth Reading | Scoop.it()

  • http://stacygreenauthor.com/ Stacy Green

    This just showcases more and more what a hot mess the industry could be in. So many people out there claiming to be experts on everything and pushing their advice. I do think that if an author uses patience and research, they have more options than ever before.

    I’m unpublished. I’ve written my second book, and I know it’s got potential. I’m just starting the query process, and I’ll be honest, there’s a part of me that boils every time I do it. Query writing is different than writing a book, and to be passed on without my book even getting a chance to be read is frustrating.

    That said, I have A LOT to learn. I want to go through the query process, no matter how much I stomp and whine. I want to find out what works and what doesn’t. I want to have a shot at an agent or editor reading my work and giving me some advice, even if they ultimately turn me down. After spending a year writing the book, I’m willing to throw myself into the traditional process for the learning experience if nothing else.

    That’s not to say every self-published author is jumping hurdles out of fear or impatience. There are some quality ones out there, but there are still far too many who need help in one area or the other. And it’s those books that mar self-publishing for the ones putting out quality work. I do think, as Jenni said, there needs to be some sort of gatekeeping system if indie is ever going to be as respected AS A WHOLE, by authors and readers alike. 

    Wonderful post. Sorry for my longwinded ramble!

  • http://twitter.com/EditorJamieC Jamie Clarke Chavez

    What Kristen said. :) I’ve blogged a lot about this and felt for awhile I was shouting in the wilderness. Glad to have someone with a following saying it right out loud. 

  • http://twitter.com/Porter_Anderson Porter Anderson

    Exactly, Jennie — and your view is being ratified by @StacyGreen:disqus  a few comments down, too. It does seem that SOME sort of standard-setting is needed, whether we call it gatekeeping, credentialing, or whatever. And, of course, as @ByRozMorris:twitter  rightly notes below (and she, like you, is a very serious self-publishing author), a huge problem is that the very idea of any sort of standard-setting has become anathema to so many in the self-pub camp. Rightly or wrongly, it’s just a big, big issue with so many.

    Honestly, I don’t see how the readership at large can be asked to engage avidly without offering some sort of standards. If we’re in a post-traditional era, then the proverbial “seal of approval” needs to come from somewhere else. Publishing shouldn’t be criticized for this, either, almost every industry has available criteria for the estimation of quality. And some of those gatekeepers — say a @ConsumerReports:twitter just as an example, which has a great reputation in the US, for the most part — have a real track record. Others don’t.

    I wonder if an answer for self-publishers doesn’t lie in what @MikeShatzkin:twitter is telling us: That self-publishing authors might need to band together — perhaps in the way that @Bob_Mayer:twitter is doing — for the practical needs of professional-grade publishing services (which, as Mike says, make NO sense for each author to pull together all by herself).  What if the kind of community of authors that Bob or someone else pulls together then became its own pedestal of quality? Is it possible that being a member of something akin to the old Magnum photographers would confer that element of verified quality that’s missing in the current Wild West of self-publishing?

  • http://twitter.com/Porter_Anderson Porter Anderson

    Yep and yep, see my note to Jennie above.

  • http://twitter.com/Porter_Anderson Porter Anderson

    Most welcome. Very glad you’re doing this series on writing and music, I’ll keep an ear out whenever I duck away for a minute from my beloved @Q2Music:twitter  :)
    **This comment written while listening to Bart Visman’s “New Heaven!” on @Q2Music:disqus http://ow.ly/7peai

  • http://twitter.com/Porter_Anderson Porter Anderson

    Many thanks, Tony, tell your friends, and thanks for reading. :)

  • http://twitter.com/Porter_Anderson Porter Anderson

    Right, @EditorJamieC:twitter, I hear that “high time” comment from lots of folks, you’re not alone in feeling this way. The discussion might be a bit heated, but it’s time we had it. Thanks for reading and commenting!

  • http://twitter.com/Porter_Anderson Porter Anderson

    Thanks, @KristinLambTX:twitter, always glad to find such germane issues under debate on your blog, keeps the rest of us on our toes. :)

  • Bob Mayer

    I’m putting the finishing touches on my reaction to the f%ck wad post.  I think we all need to tone the rhetoric down and understand there is no one path to Oz, and even Oz means different things to many writers (which is my current blog post).  I agree that way too many industry conferences focus on speakers who are “experts” on publishing but when I check their bio, I’m not sure what they really do, or, more importantly, what they’ve accomplished.  I call it street cred.  The bottom line in publishing is selling books.  That’s what I do.  I think we need to hear more from authors who are trying new and innovative things that actually work, not theories from someone trying to peddle their expertise on something they actually don’t do.

  • http://twitter.com/Porter_Anderson Porter Anderson

    I hear you, @@stacygreen26:twitter and I think you’re taking the right — laborious, but right — approach in testing your material fully. We just aren’t far enough along yet to know what the best course is in any given case. That’s one reason I always appreciate how @Bob_Mayer:twitter reminds people that his own success in self-publishing just wouldn’t be possible if he hadn’t moved to that mode with a 40-book backlist. Unless you have the heft of that sort of content library on hand, the kind of self-publishing engine he’s developed is too much to mount and maintain. (This is @MikeShatzkin:twitter’s point.) And so now we see Bob trying to expand his own self-publishing operation to “take in” other writers who could be serviced by it as self-publishers who need the professional gears and levers of quality publishing. (In fact, you may want to be in touch with Bob, at least to see what it is he’s doing — BobMayer.org — by way of covering the waterfront in terms of your options.) Good luck with it, it’s no walk through the park for anybody, a very difficult transition period. Thanks for reading and commenting!

  • http://stacygreenauthor.com/ Stacy Green

    Thank you. It’s encouraging to hear you say that. I second guess myself often, but I know if I don’t at least try this route, I’ll have regrets. Yes, Bob Mayer’s success came from his own long writing experience. He had the quality on hand, and that’s a huge different. I think expanding his approach is a great thing and the kind of help newbies will need. I do wish he and his partner considered my genre, but those are the breaks:)

    Thank you very much, and you’re welcome!

  • BrielleZbub

    I don’t know if Mcluhan made ref. to this, but eventually the ‘media war’ includes art and artists. The digital mob evolves to the point where individuals are only shouting to be louder and garner attention for individual agendas. We it they I become students of ‘How to Woo’ But who is hearing? Then there is the end of time where novelty meets the transcendental object. (T. McKenna) Can’t wait actually… maybe it’s tomorrow. :)

  • http://twitter.com/Porter_Anderson Porter Anderson

    Thanks for the comment, @Bob_Mayer:twitter, will look forward to your coming post. Yeah, if we can just dial back the volume on some of these (perfectly worthy) disagreements in the industry, we’ll do ourselves a favor. Probably the near-screaming-match is healthy in the long run for making everybody realize it’s getting a little shrill. Appreciate your input and viewpoints. 

  • http://twitter.com/VictoriaMixon Victoria Mixon

    Thank you for the Cameo Tweet, Porter! I did mightily enjoy that book cover, but it can sometimes be easy to lose the message in the, ahem, medium.

    When I first started blogging and indie editing almost three years ago, the sense of entitlement I saw in the newly-overblown online amateur writing community drove me insane. Where did the belief come from that anything–either self-publishing or just lucking out with agents and traditional publishers–could serve as a substitute for apprenticeship to the craft, learning our trade the way all skilled professionals learn their trades, the long, hard way? Why are there so many thousands of eager first-timers out there innocently following the illusionary trail of Fame and Fortune on the assumption that our work (work upon which so many of us have spent professional decades) can become a lucrative income stream for those who’ve only stumbled onto it in the past year or two, even while it leaves long-term professionals in its dust?

    I have answers to those questions, but I don’t think you, Porter, need them.

    And I have learned, truly, not to let those answers bother me. I’m over here in my little corner doing what I can to maintain high quality in the books that pass through my hands, to educate the writers who come to me on what this craft is, why we do it, why readers love it, and how to hone their skills so the work they produce makes them proud, whether they choose to self-publish or follow the traditional route. It’s my job to fan the flames of their passion while instilling in them a powerful sense of self-discipline, because this craft is not for the fainthearted.

    Those are the writers whom readers will remember.

  • http://twitter.com/Porter_Anderson Porter Anderson

    Big McLuhan fan, myself, Brielle, thanks for reading and commenting!

  • http://twitter.com/Porter_Anderson Porter Anderson

    Yeah, @VictoriaMixon:twitter, I think what you’re saying is familiar to many of us who have waded through the swamps of professional experience for decades, only to find newcomers apparently expecting to have and do what we have and do. It’s of little comfort, but publishing is hardly the only industry experiencing this. In major news media, for example, folks in entry-level positions somehow expect to be given on-air spots as live correspondents and anchors.

    Somehow the rise of the Internet looks like The Great Shortcut to so many. The fabled Northwest Passage to instant career glory.

    You hate to even mention such ideas as “paying one’s dues” in a given role or profession, for fear of being boo-ed off the stage. Earning your credentials as a journeyman, aligning your talents and skills and lifestyle with the kind of long-term self-grooming and development that used to be common in most of society’s main disciplines is not a ready concept right now, which I think will hurt us everywhere, from medicine to law to science and in the arts.

    No worries, the passé shall rise again as soon as we’ve all walked into enough walls. :)

  • http://twitter.com/VictoriaMixon Victoria Mixon

    You know, I mentioned the link between blogging and self-publishing over on Writer Unboxed when I followed your link to Cronin’s great post.

    I do think the sense of entitlement about self-publishing has grown out of a sense of entitlement about blogging. We see a whole generation of young adults raised in a world in which they simply don’t question their unassailable right to enormously complex and expensive technological devices like computers, much less the loyal readership of the millions online.

    I have to remind myself of the brouhaha that blew up in the 1930s when Penguin invented the dimestore paperback. Yes, a lot of really terrible crap was published in the ensuing decades, escalating the rise of genre as king of modern publishing. And a number of writers who had not necessarily paid their dues made a living in an industry that left such exquisite craftspeople as Jean Rhys in poverty.

    But it didn’t destroy publishing. It didn’t even destroy literary fiction. (Leave it to modern times to do that.)

    And it did help foster a huge common expectation of a literate lifestyle in a sector of society that might otherwise never have leaned heavily in the direction of literacy.

    I take what comfort from that knowledge as I can.

  • http://profiles.google.com/kpooler63 kathleen pooler

    Porter, Thanks for another thoroughly enjoyable and informative whirlwind tour of the publishing world at every angle. Lots to chew on here. My  favorite line “is self-publishing just an excuse for not learning to write well?” Gatekeepers do serve a purpose. Quality and standards do count. You have lots of fodder for many more weekly posts. Keep it coming!  :-) 

  • http://twitter.com/Porter_Anderson Porter Anderson

    Thanks, Kathy, and do catch @DonLinn:twitter’s new piece, too, in which he starts with @brianoleary:twitter’s work and makes a call for cooperation among our publishing trade organizations, great reading: http://ow.ly/7pSlp  — thanks so much for reading and commenting, Kathy, totally appreciate your constant support.

  • http://twitter.com/Porter_Anderson Porter Anderson

    These are good thoughts, @VictoriaMixon:twitter– I wonder what role the blogosphere’s mentality may play in that sense of self-publishing entitlement that some seem to feel. The connection you’re positing makes good sense. What worries me (minister’s son that I am) is the missionary zeal you find in SOME, not all, self-publishing folks. I think it’s that “one way” character that’s the most off-putting and divisive element of this. As @google-09a2be7b6f84fae4eec329151af4fc09:disqus is writing this evening, every writer’s situation is different, and a snarling put-down by one camp of the other side is counter-productive. In fact, the “my way or the highway” concept of almost anything is normally an amateur’s hard line. A professional understanding normally comes with the gray-area complexities that make people look a bit old before their time. :)

  • http://twitter.com/VictoriaMixon Victoria Mixon

    I absolutely agree about “the amateur’s hard line,” Porter. And I’d track that back to the blogosphere as well, when it’s become so easy to lose our manners out here where no one can see our faces or show the shock of being spoken to rudely. I’ve gotten comments on my blog saying, “It’s fun to be a troll!” Which begs the obvious question, “What’s fun about it?”

    When we’re talking with another human face-to-face, it’s much harder to keep ranting hysterically that our point of view is the only point of view. Their humanity is a factor in how we treat them–as it should be.

    And understanding that is very much about maturity.

  • http://twitter.com/jenniecoughlin jenniecoughlin

    I was actually thinking Good Housekeeping, but @consumerreports:twitter  is another good example. :) There are some groups out there, like @indiebookibc:twitter  but right now there still is a stigma among some readers against indies (check Amazon’s Kindle forums for examples), which is why I think book bloggers have better credibility at this point in time. But you’re right: whether it’s @mikeshatzkin:twitter ‘s idea about banding together like @bob_mayer:twitter  or my idea about a go-to book blogger review site, something has to bubble up. That’s going to be the key to self-publishing really becoming a credible part of publishing. 

  • Pingback: Indies: We need to call for standards « Welcome to Exeter…()

  • Pingback: Industry News 13 November 2011 » RWA-WF()

  • Florence Fois

    Porter, I missed this because of a techno-blah on my email. I love the entire post, all quotes before, during and after the fact. I would only like to comment on one aspect.  Does anyone remember JA Konrath’s original rant until two years ago? He said anyone who self pub’d was a lazy-sell out, a bad writer and cast a negative light on all “serious” writers. Do we remember the chant of the sheep on the farm?  “Four legs good, two legs better.”  Poor Joe finally figured out how to make money, but he still hasn’t learned any humility? A month after he made the amazing discovery of amazon kindle, I wrote to him … since he had set himself up there as the champion of the newbie … I asked what he thought if an unknown with no back list went directly to kindle? Bless  his arrogant A%% … he told me not to spin my wheels and without a solid   platform, backlist and readership I would never make it. Gosh isn’t he such a nice guy?

  • Pingback: Why Writers Need a Platform « Kristen Lamb's Blog()

  • Pingback: Writing on the Ether | Jane Friedman()