4 ms·

I've been reading a lot about publishing and self-publishing, and the core themes around going the traditional route keep repeating themselves. The negatives o

I've been reading a lot about publishing and self-publishing, and the core themes around going the traditional route keep repeating themselves. The negatives of traditional publishing: 1) Unless you're a known commodity/celebrity, you're basically writing for your advance, and that it. 2) There's not going to be a lot of marketing support for your book from anyone other than you. 3) You don't have as much control over the product as you think you do. There are a lot of positives, too -- there's the ego aspect, as you have to get past a gatekeeper; if you're a writer, you don't have to worry about all the stuff that happens to go from manuscript to book; they handle distribution; etc. But this guy didn't really gain or care about those factors. And some factors which would be a positive for many writers (i.e. the design of the book itself) are a HUGE negative for him. I'm really not surprised that his experience was negative.

ecspike 14y ago
I wrote my first book for a traditional publisher and unlike the norm, my book earned out its advance and gave me several royalty checks. If you take into account the confs I traveled to giving talks, it's probably a wash. I think the problem with his case is that he did it somewhat backwards. He already had the brand identity and market to not necessitate needing O'Reilly. My publisher didn't do anything other than sending out some promo copies I asked for and sponsoring a giveaway or two. Going through a traditional publisher is a good way to learn the rules. I tried to soak up as much as I could from my editors so when I tried to do it on my own (as I'm doing now with an experimental project), I wasn't so lost. Too many people look at O'Reilly as the brass ring that will suddenly make them tech-famous. The hustle is the same whether you are self-pub or trad-pub. The only difference is your royalty and control.
hvs 14y ago
Actually, his chief complaint is that they willfully disregarded their contract with him. That has less to do with "traditional publishing wasn't right for him" than "O'Reilly didn't honor a contract."

ecspike 14y ago

I wrote my first book for a traditional publisher and unlike the norm, my book earned out its advance and gave me several royalty checks. If you take into account the confs I traveled to giving talks, it's probably a wash. I think the problem with his case is that he did it somewhat backwards. He already had the brand identity and market to not necessitate needing O'Reilly. My publisher didn't do anything other than sending out some promo copies I asked for and sponsoring a giveaway or two. Going through a traditional publisher is a good way to learn the rules. I tried to soak up as much as I could from my editors so when I tried to do it on my own (as I'm doing now with an experimental project), I wasn't so lost. Too many people look at O'Reilly as the brass ring that will suddenly make them tech-famous. The hustle is the same whether you are self-pub or trad-pub. The only difference is your royalty and control.

hvs 14y ago

Actually, his chief complaint is that they willfully disregarded their contract with him. That has less to do with "traditional publishing wasn't right for him" than "O'Reilly didn't honor a contract."