3 ms·

What angers me most is not the high prices, but that so little goes to the author. It's not only greedy bankers who are ruining the world for the rest of us.

by Mordor 15y ago

nicwest 15y ago
Authors always have the option to self publish, and this is becoming increasingly easy to do with ebooks/pod.
Tyrannosaurs 15y ago
I agree that more should go to the author but following an author friend on Twitter going through the editing of his third novel, I've been amazed by how much editing and fact checking is done by the publisher (or rather the editor on behalf of the publisher). They've pulled him up on everything from one character removing the wrong persons trousers (seriously), to commentary about when things were overwrought to picking him up on mentioning a TV show that hadn't screened at the time. And that's just a selection of the bits he mentioned, I'm fairly certain there's a shed load more that were less remarkable and amusing. Writing may be a solo pursuit but getting a book in a finished form and getting it to market takes more effort from more people than is apparent to most of us I think and that's all got to be paid for by someone. Obviously an author could contract directly with a copy editor but there are issues with that, from having to provide the money up front to the fact that once you the author are paying them they're less likely to give you honest feedback for fear they won't get work in the future. The current publishing model is, like most businesses, flabby, but we need to be careful not to assume that there's no value there.
- Mordor 15y ago
  Great point and I would expect copy editors to be the real losers if things were to change, since people assume anyone could be an editor, even their 10 year old daughter.
wccrawford 15y ago
If the middlemen weren't providing a service, authors wouldn't use them. At least, if they had any sense. I agree that it seems like they get a pittance, but that is their choice. You can chain yourself to the monster and get a lot of money, but only a small % of the total money made... Or you could go it alone and get a huge % of the total money, but only a small amount of money total. Unless you're really awesome, and then this way would seem to be better in every regard. From what I can tell, Stephen King played with self-publishing for a bit, but didn't follow through with it. Why? I couldn't find a reason, but it was over 10 years ago that he first tried it, and he's still using established publishers. I suspect it's because they take care of SO much stuff that it's cheaper and easier for him to let them handle that, and he can do what he does best: Write books. Of course, he probably also gets better deals than Joe Average, but most of the major writers will.
- kijin 15y ago
  If Stephen King were still self-publishing, Under the Dome would have been 500 pages longer than it already is. Thank God there's an editor to tell him to keep it "short". Also, there were speculations a few months ago that J.K. Rowling was planning to do something interesting with electronic versions of her books. [1] I can't find any follow-up on this, but this could be worth watching out for. Perhaps nobody cared when King played with self-publishing many years ago, but these days people might pay attention to a well-known author doing self- something. [1] http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2693384 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2693384
- Tyrannosaurs 15y ago
  My guess is that if Stephen King couldn't make it work with a massive installed fan base and a global reputation then it's a non-starter (or at least a very tall order) for an author who has neither of those.

What angers me most is not the high prices, but that so little goes to the author. It's not only greedy bankers who are ruining the world for the rest of us.

by Mordor 15y ago

What angers me most is not the high prices, but that so little goes to the author. It's not only greedy bankers who are ruining the world for the rest of us.

nicwest 15y ago

Authors always have the option to self publish, and this is becoming increasingly easy to do with ebooks/pod.

Tyrannosaurs 15y ago

I agree that more should go to the author but following an author friend on Twitter going through the editing of his third novel, I've been amazed by how much editing and fact checking is done by the publisher (or rather the editor on behalf of the publisher). They've pulled him up on everything from one character removing the wrong persons trousers (seriously), to commentary about when things were overwrought to picking him up on mentioning a TV show that hadn't screened at the time. And that's just a selection of the bits he mentioned, I'm fairly certain there's a shed load more that were less remarkable and amusing. Writing may be a solo pursuit but getting a book in a finished form and getting it to market takes more effort from more people than is apparent to most of us I think and that's all got to be paid for by someone. Obviously an author could contract directly with a copy editor but there are issues with that, from having to provide the money up front to the fact that once you the author are paying them they're less likely to give you honest feedback for fear they won't get work in the future. The current publishing model is, like most businesses, flabby, but we need to be careful not to assume that there's no value there.

Mordor 15y ago
Great point and I would expect copy editors to be the real losers if things were to change, since people assume anyone could be an editor, even their 10 year old daughter.

wccrawford 15y ago

If the middlemen weren't providing a service, authors wouldn't use them. At least, if they had any sense. I agree that it seems like they get a pittance, but that is their choice. You can chain yourself to the monster and get a lot of money, but only a small % of the total money made... Or you could go it alone and get a huge % of the total money, but only a small amount of money total. Unless you're really awesome, and then this way would seem to be better in every regard. From what I can tell, Stephen King played with self-publishing for a bit, but didn't follow through with it. Why? I couldn't find a reason, but it was over 10 years ago that he first tried it, and he's still using established publishers. I suspect it's because they take care of SO much stuff that it's cheaper and easier for him to let them handle that, and he can do what he does best: Write books. Of course, he probably also gets better deals than Joe Average, but most of the major writers will.

kijin 15y ago
If Stephen King were still self-publishing, Under the Dome would have been 500 pages longer than it already is. Thank God there's an editor to tell him to keep it "short". Also, there were speculations a few months ago that J.K. Rowling was planning to do something interesting with electronic versions of her books. [1] I can't find any follow-up on this, but this could be worth watching out for. Perhaps nobody cared when King played with self-publishing many years ago, but these days people might pay attention to a well-known author doing self- something. [1] http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2693384 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2693384
Tyrannosaurs 15y ago
My guess is that if Stephen King couldn't make it work with a massive installed fan base and a global reputation then it's a non-starter (or at least a very tall order) for an author who has neither of those.