4 ms·

I've read his blog posts on the subject. I've also read plenty of other posts that explain why his advice is terrible: self-publishing works for him because he

I've read his blog posts on the subject. I've also read plenty of other posts that explain why his advice is terrible: self-publishing works for him because he already has a huge fan base, which he established while working through the traditional publishers. The following post, written by an outspoken proponent of e-books, deconstructs Konrath pretty thoroughly: http://mikecanex.wordpress.com/2010/12/29/joe-konrath-needs-to-shut-the-fuck-up/ http://mikecanex.wordpress.com/2010/12/29/joe-konrath-needs-... Key passage (original emphasis): 1) He has had books in print 2) He was not a total unknown 3) He busted his ass on the Net for years to get better known But many, many people are out there doing number 3 and getting nowhere. So for him to tout his New Religion while ignoring 1 and 2 is like those experiments Cory Doctorow periodically engages in, where he wants people to forget who he is, as if he’s starting from scratch, but while still using his well-known Cory Doctorow name. And that’s why I will always say Konrath’s name with an emphasis on con. Because unless you out there have numbers 1 and 2 and also 3 going for you, there is no damn way in hell you are going to even come close to the alleged number of sales Konrath brags about (over and over and over again…).

pedrocr 15y ago
That didn't seem like a thorough deconstruction at all, just a bunch of mostly incoherent rambling that manages to confront Konrath's previous position with his new one and saying "look it has changed". And when part of the argument involves insulting the person... As for the only meat in the argument - that "many, many people are out there doing number 3 and getting nowhere"- it suffers from the bias I mentioned in my original reply. This is also true for print, you just don't see it because they don't get published at all. And even if the percentage of unsuccessful authors is higher for ebooks (for which no evidence is presented) that's ok since higher margins for authors and more direct access to their readers should be able to support more niche authors. The argument that Konrath does better than most because he has a backlog and name recognition is just comparing apples to oranges. Of course established authors will make more than newcomers. The real question is will an established ebook author earn more than an established print author. And the math I do there is that for the margin the publishers take they provide very little that can't be provided more efficiently, so they will die when they cease to be gatekeepers to distribution (very soon).
- lucasjung 15y ago
  His point is that success as an author is not a state function: what works for Joe Konrath (or any other established author) will not necessarily work for a new author. If we want new authors to succeed at self-publishing, we need to give them good advice, and Joe Konrath's advice is like an experienced cliff-diver telling a bunch of strangers with no experience: Come on! I just jumped off this cliff and it was awesome! You should do the same!" There is far, far more to becoming a successful author than building up a critical mass of fans. I completely agree that, with middle-men eliminated, the number of readers required to support any given author is much lower, but even to get to that lower number you have to achieve a certain level of proficiency as a writer, and right now there are no mechanisms in place to safely build up to that point outside of the traditional publishing industry. This is a quote attributed to Jim Baen by Eric Flint, editor of Jim Baen's Universe (original emphasis): "Eric, almost no first novel is worth a thin dime, in cold-blooded money terms. Most first novels lose money for the publisher. But publishers--smart ones, anyway--aren't really buying 'first novels.' What they're really doing, when they pay an advance for a first novel, is taking a gamble that the author will someday be writing books that will bring in a lot of money. It's an investment in an author's future earning prospects, not the purchase of a book..." Along with the payment for that first book (to help put food on the table), freshman authors also get a lot of mentorship to help them grow. More importantly, they get good editing so that their first novel won't be so disastrous that it destroys their reputations as authors and handicaps all of their future work. An incredibly talented first-time author will probably succeed no matter what. Likewise, a bad author will never succeed, no matter how much he tries or how much help he gets. I'm concerned about the authors with potential--the ones who aren't great yet but have the potential to be great. If they start out in traditional publishing, they will get the help and support they need to realize their potential. If they start out self-publishing, they will encounter economic failure and, more importantly, will establish reputations as mediocre authors, reputations which will be incredibly hard to overcome. I'm sure it's possible to separate the "grow new authors" aspect of the publishing industry from the "gatekeeper" aspect, and I'd love to see it happen. Unfortunately, right now there is nothing out there to serve that purpose.
  - pedrocr 15y ago

pedrocr 15y ago

That didn't seem like a thorough deconstruction at all, just a bunch of mostly incoherent rambling that manages to confront Konrath's previous position with his new one and saying "look it has changed". And when part of the argument involves insulting the person... As for the only meat in the argument - that "many, many people are out there doing number 3 and getting nowhere"- it suffers from the bias I mentioned in my original reply. This is also true for print, you just don't see it because they don't get published at all. And even if the percentage of unsuccessful authors is higher for ebooks (for which no evidence is presented) that's ok since higher margins for authors and more direct access to their readers should be able to support more niche authors. The argument that Konrath does better than most because he has a backlog and name recognition is just comparing apples to oranges. Of course established authors will make more than newcomers. The real question is will an established ebook author earn more than an established print author. And the math I do there is that for the margin the publishers take they provide very little that can't be provided more efficiently, so they will die when they cease to be gatekeepers to distribution (very soon).

lucasjung 15y ago
His point is that success as an author is not a state function: what works for Joe Konrath (or any other established author) will not necessarily work for a new author. If we want new authors to succeed at self-publishing, we need to give them good advice, and Joe Konrath's advice is like an experienced cliff-diver telling a bunch of strangers with no experience: Come on! I just jumped off this cliff and it was awesome! You should do the same!" There is far, far more to becoming a successful author than building up a critical mass of fans. I completely agree that, with middle-men eliminated, the number of readers required to support any given author is much lower, but even to get to that lower number you have to achieve a certain level of proficiency as a writer, and right now there are no mechanisms in place to safely build up to that point outside of the traditional publishing industry. This is a quote attributed to Jim Baen by Eric Flint, editor of Jim Baen's Universe (original emphasis): "Eric, almost no first novel is worth a thin dime, in cold-blooded money terms. Most first novels lose money for the publisher. But publishers--smart ones, anyway--aren't really buying 'first novels.' What they're really doing, when they pay an advance for a first novel, is taking a gamble that the author will someday be writing books that will bring in a lot of money. It's an investment in an author's future earning prospects, not the purchase of a book..." Along with the payment for that first book (to help put food on the table), freshman authors also get a lot of mentorship to help them grow. More importantly, they get good editing so that their first novel won't be so disastrous that it destroys their reputations as authors and handicaps all of their future work. An incredibly talented first-time author will probably succeed no matter what. Likewise, a bad author will never succeed, no matter how much he tries or how much help he gets. I'm concerned about the authors with potential--the ones who aren't great yet but have the potential to be great. If they start out in traditional publishing, they will get the help and support they need to realize their potential. If they start out self-publishing, they will encounter economic failure and, more importantly, will establish reputations as mediocre authors, reputations which will be incredibly hard to overcome. I'm sure it's possible to separate the "grow new authors" aspect of the publishing industry from the "gatekeeper" aspect, and I'd love to see it happen. Unfortunately, right now there is nothing out there to serve that purpose.
- pedrocr 15y ago