6 ms·

Most of those eBooks are still being published by the big old publishing houses. Of the authors who are successfully self-publishing, most started out publishi

Most of those eBooks are still being published by the big old publishing houses. Of the authors who are successfully self-publishing, most started out publishing through traditional channels, built up large fanbases that way, and then broke out on their own once they had sufficient popularity to sell books without help from the big publishers. People who jump right into self-publishing and experience dramatic success are way out in the narrow part of the tail. The dime novels you mention were not just an entry-level publishing platform: their more important function was to let the editors and publishers work with new authors, mentoring them and helping them grow. A guy with "one sale and one fan" is still missing the most important part: regular, constructive feedback from successful professionals.

pedrocr 15y ago
>People who jump right into self-publishing and experience dramatic success are way out in the narrow part of the tail. The same is true for traditional publishing. Both mediums are very hard to break into, it's just that in the dead tree version you don't get to see as many of the failures.
- lucasjung 15y ago
  There's another difference: in traditional publishing if you are almost (but not quite) ready for prime time, you have a chance at getting the help you need to get your work into a saleable state before it's published. As long as your potential exceeds the current quality of your work, traditional publishers will work to help you develop that potential. If you are self-publishing, you'll take that same not-quite-ready work and publish it, and it will fail miserably. You'll get plenty of feedback telling your work isn't good enough, but little or none telling you what to do about it. Also, you will have established yourself as a second-rate self-publisher, decreasing the chances that anyone will bother trying any of your subsequent work, so even if you do manage to improve it won't matter because nobody will take the time to read your newer, better work.
  - pedrocr 15y ago
    Self-published authors will get more and more frequent feedback from their actual customers. They can build direct relationships with fans. And it's not only about the support for individual authors it's also that more of them will try and a smaller number of sales will support each of them as their cut is now much bigger. Given the economics and the extra favorable dynamics in connecting with the audience it seems like a tall order to me that a publisher can add enough value to justify itself. For feedback on writing being mentored by other writers sounds much better, and to figure out what sells a direct relationship with your audience sounds like a much better deal. This is especially true as the number of books isn't artificially limited by the logistics of paper and everyone can be shooting for a niche of readers.
    - lucasjung 15y ago
      I completely agree with you about the advantages of connecting directly with fans and making a living by taking a larger cut of smaller sales. As for the value currently provided by publishing companies, everything I've ever read by successful authors about their relationships with their editors when they were starting out indicates that the mentorship provided by the editors at traditional publishers is absolutely critical. I'm not saying that there aren't other ways to get such mentorship, I'm saying that right now traditional publishing companies are the only ones providing it effectively at scale. That's why I said, in my original post, that one of the requirements for disrupting the publishing industry is to come up with a new system for helping new writers grow. Having experienced authors provide mentorship sounds like a great idea--I would love to see someone execute it by building a system that connects aspiring writers with mentors, at scale.
      - pedrocr 15y ago
        I've been following this blog: http://jakonrath.blogspot.com/ http://jakonrath.blogspot.com/ It's by a traditionally published author that used to hold much of the same opinion as you and has now moved to self-publishing and argues that newcomers should do the same. If what publishers provide is good editors it would seem a simple solution would be for good editors to go freelance and take a direct cut of the sales.

pedrocr 15y ago

>People who jump right into self-publishing and experience dramatic success are way out in the narrow part of the tail. The same is true for traditional publishing. Both mediums are very hard to break into, it's just that in the dead tree version you don't get to see as many of the failures.

lucasjung 15y ago
There's another difference: in traditional publishing if you are almost (but not quite) ready for prime time, you have a chance at getting the help you need to get your work into a saleable state before it's published. As long as your potential exceeds the current quality of your work, traditional publishers will work to help you develop that potential. If you are self-publishing, you'll take that same not-quite-ready work and publish it, and it will fail miserably. You'll get plenty of feedback telling your work isn't good enough, but little or none telling you what to do about it. Also, you will have established yourself as a second-rate self-publisher, decreasing the chances that anyone will bother trying any of your subsequent work, so even if you do manage to improve it won't matter because nobody will take the time to read your newer, better work.
- pedrocr 15y ago
  Self-published authors will get more and more frequent feedback from their actual customers. They can build direct relationships with fans. And it's not only about the support for individual authors it's also that more of them will try and a smaller number of sales will support each of them as their cut is now much bigger. Given the economics and the extra favorable dynamics in connecting with the audience it seems like a tall order to me that a publisher can add enough value to justify itself. For feedback on writing being mentored by other writers sounds much better, and to figure out what sells a direct relationship with your audience sounds like a much better deal. This is especially true as the number of books isn't artificially limited by the logistics of paper and everyone can be shooting for a niche of readers.
  - lucasjung 15y ago
    I completely agree with you about the advantages of connecting directly with fans and making a living by taking a larger cut of smaller sales. As for the value currently provided by publishing companies, everything I've ever read by successful authors about their relationships with their editors when they were starting out indicates that the mentorship provided by the editors at traditional publishers is absolutely critical. I'm not saying that there aren't other ways to get such mentorship, I'm saying that right now traditional publishing companies are the only ones providing it effectively at scale. That's why I said, in my original post, that one of the requirements for disrupting the publishing industry is to come up with a new system for helping new writers grow. Having experienced authors provide mentorship sounds like a great idea--I would love to see someone execute it by building a system that connects aspiring writers with mentors, at scale.
    - pedrocr 15y ago
      I've been following this blog: http://jakonrath.blogspot.com/ http://jakonrath.blogspot.com/ It's by a traditionally published author that used to hold much of the same opinion as you and has now moved to self-publishing and argues that newcomers should do the same. If what publishers provide is good editors it would seem a simple solution would be for good editors to go freelance and take a direct cut of the sales.