Monthly Archives: January 2010

Suggested by The New Podler: A Self-Publishing Symposium

The New Podler is gathering opinions from a variety of authors regarding the current state of self-publishing. My hopelessly optimistic answers follow below. What are your thoughts?

* * *

How does self-publishing differ from traditional publishing?

Self-publishing is either liberation or self-indulgence depending on how you go about it. There’s a dubious association with instant gratification. The core benefits: you retain all control over your material, you keep a bigger chunk of the profits, and, oftentimes, you’re able to forge a more personal relationship with your audience. The drawbacks (which, depending on your motivation, can also be benefits): you must be your own publisher, editing, formatting, creating effective packaging; you must be your own marketing team—you must be willing and able to spend a portion of your time as a door-to-door salesperson of sorts. It’s a lesson in patience and refinement, though not such an added burden considering that many traditional publishers these days require you to have a marketing plan anyway.

Regarding availability, the gap is narrowing between books sold off of a book shelf and those sold via a web site. Chain book stores are steadily closing, and while you still have Barnes & Noble, Borders, and the independents, these stores only have so much physical space. There are legions of capable, entertaining “mid-list” authors whose books are not often included between Dan Brown and Stephenie Meyer. Selling through the Internet is a way to defeat the problem of limited shelf space. It also happens to be the most accessible method available to self-publishers.

Do self-published book review blogs help to raise the reader awareness of self-published books?

Absolutely. Legitimate, critical self-publishing review blogs (like good traditional-publishing review blogs) point out the blemishes as well as the dimples. For serious self-publishers, this is what you want if you have a good, solid book that doesn’t carry the reputation of being self-published because it can’t stand on its own, because it can’t find traditional publication. It should never be assumed that getting reviewed at a self-publishing review blog is easier than getting reviewed elsewhere.

How do you respond to the following statement: “Self-publishing is not a serious way to get one’s work into print now and never will be.”

I daresay a more accurate version of the above statement is: “Self-indulgence is not a serious way to get one’s work into print now and never will be.” If you’re not ready, if you’re rushed, then it will come across to reviewers and readers alike. With self-publishing, there’s no editor or agent acting as a stop-gap. What I’m finding as I go along is that it’s not so much the self-publishing model itself that needs to clean up its image as it is the ability of self-publishing authors to effectively promote their work. It’s all in how you do it.

Has the golden age of self-publishing already passed or is it yet to come?

Bigger and better things are yet to come. I’m convinced the traditional publishing industry had to stumble before a real awareness was raised regarding alternative book markets. The technology had to improve to a point where anyone with a computer and Internet connection could feasibly create and publish. Book stores, whether they’re selling print or digital copies, will continue to be country clubs for the elites, which is perfectly fine. Many authors are bestsellers for a reason: they’re very good at what they do. But they’re not the only kids on the block. Self-published books—good ones—will continue to fill the gaps. Eventually, when (and I do think it’s a matter of when and not if) e-books become the norm, everyone will be selling via digital download. The old notion that you find professional authors’ books on store shelves, and amateurs’ online will hold much less water.

What about the challenges posed to the self-published writer by having to promote and edit his or her own book?

This is something many traditional publishers are requiring of their authors due to tighter budgets. In the past, you could, to some extent, get away with merely sending in your manuscript and letting the publishing team handle the rest. You only needed to be on hand for signings or interviews. Now you need a marketing plan to go along with your synopsis and sample chapters. You need to convince your would-be publisher that you’re a hustler. You need an agent. And even then, a contract with a traditional publisher comes with no guarantees. Yes, depending on your contract, you’ll have access to physical store shelves, but you still have to work your butt off promoting yourself. You’re selling more books, but getting a smaller percentage of each sale. Not a bad thing. On the DIY side, you’re selling fewer books, but keeping more of the profits; you’re having to manage all your book sales yourself, whether through your web site or via consignment agreements with local book shop owners. All stereotypes aside, both traditional and self-publishing endeavors involve a lot of work. The latter is more easily attainable, whether as your sole method of publishing or as a hook to attract a mainstream publisher.

Why is it that a self-published author has yet to emerge into national recognition as a self-published author? (As opposed to being given a mainstream publishing contract after a self-published book attracts attention.)

I think a lot of it is the social stigma of someone coming up to you and saying, “My latest novel is great! You should read it!” People don’t like it when other people toot their own horn—but they don’t mind as much when you toot someone else’s horn. With self-publishing, this is something of a challenge. You have to promote yourself without sounding like a greasy car salesman, you have to get other people to blurb you and promote you. It can be exceedingly difficult, because you’re not working with a paid staff, you’re working with friends, other self-published authors, family members. They all have their own lives to worry about.

Also, at this point in time, traditional publishers still carry a lot of clout. A contract with Random House can do wonders for your literary presence. I’ve seen numerous instances where an author will start a series of books with a mainstream publisher, and then finish the series at a smaller press, or under his / her own imprint. Whatever politics are going on behind the scenes, an audience has gathered, and they’ll follow if the books are good. Bands do it all the time.

Has the experience of self-publishing changed the way you write? (If you have self-published.)

I started self-publishing because the small presses I’d been with closed up shop, and I felt my work up until that point was still relevant enough to warrant some kind of distribution. With new material I’ve found that I’ve become more daring. After all, I’m no longer having to adhere to a publisher’s tastes or guidelines. I’ve been able to stretch out a little, blending genres and styles. I’ve already had to go it alone, and so I’m not worried about falling from grace, so to speak. At the same time, though, I’ve had to make sure I don’t get too lax. Proofreaders are still important (before the publishing process!), honest opinions still matter, and it’s still my main goal each time around to write the best book I can.

* * *

There you go. As I mentioned at the start, I’m optimistic when it comes to the DIY movement. What’s happening now in the publishing world is sort of like what was happening fifteen years ago during the rise of the commercial Internet. And MP3s a short while after. I mean, who texted back then? Who ditched their CD collection in favor of MP3s? Nowadays, everyone texts (and sexts), everyone listens to MP3s—and, I wager, in a few more years, (nearly) everyone will be reading e-books instead of paperbacks. We just need that iTunes-like revolution. Maybe it’s the Kindle or the nook or some other fancied contraption that makes it as easy to squeeze 10,000 books onto a hand-held reader as it is to fit your entire music collection onto a handy portable player. Maybe it’s the mass production of such devices that lowers prices and suddenly makes not having one a social embarrassment (like with the iPod). Maybe it’s the passing of new environmental laws that restrict paper production. Whatever. The day will come. Are you looking forward to it, or do you already have your “Physical, not digital!” protest sign ready?

TV Won’t Steal Your Vision After All

A recent Scientific American article offers up some insight regarding that modern-day question of the ages: Does TV ruin your eyesight? I know until I hit my mid-teens, my mother was always yelling at me and my brother to “sit back from the TV!” while we played the shit out of Metroid. No doubt her logic was motivated to some degree by the likes of this:

…back in the 1960s General Electric sold some new-fangled color TV sets that emitted excessive amounts of radiation—as much as 100,000 times more than federal health officials considered safe. GE quickly recalled and repaired the faulty TVs, but the stigma lingers to this day.

Nice to know, even though those old-school CRT televisions and computer monitors used to drive me nuts with their refresh rate / flicker. I had to limit my exposure to a few hours a day or else I got headaches. LCDs have removed this problem, but have, of course, opened the door to another: extended comfort while remaining completely sedentary during tantric coding sessions. Before LCDs I had to get up and walk around, do other things out of necessity; now it’s just a prudent suggestion if I want to keep the ol’ muscles from atrophying.

I do agree with the part of the article that mentions TV as not causing nearsightedness, but rather drawing attention to a person’s pre-existing vision problems. That’s how it worked for me. I started losing my 20/20 at an early age, but it wasn’t until I started playing video games habitually that I realized I couldn’t see Mario or Simon Belmont on the TV screen unless I was pressing my nose against the glass.

That’s still no excuse for inactivity. The basic theme here is moderation. It’s been said that the longest-lived residents of the world (the healthy ones, that is) practice lifestyles that involve frequent, low-impact activities distributed throughout each day—as opposed to the typical Western norm of lengthy office chair vigils broken only by occasional trips to the gym. As annoyingly cliche as the saying is, “use it or lose it” just about sums it up. But, then, our parents already knew that long ago, back when they used to tell us to put down our effing gamepads and play outside for a while.

Regarding Awkward Poses Performed in Skin-Tight Pants…

This gem is from page 3 (towards the bottom) of a thread over at the TrekBBS forum:

Remember the episode where the ship fell off a cliff before each commercial break?

Remember the episode where the ship fell off a cliff before each commercial break?

I swear I only found this by happenstance, and not because I routinely hang out on Star Trek boards where the members post cheesy photo manips of Kirk and Spock as pimps. I’m tempted to start, though. Some of those user avatars are absolute winners.

Regarding the “awkward poses performed in skin-tight pants” thing: Shatner’s pose is actually somewhat close to how I imagined Theo in “Carjam.” You know, when he downloaded into the backseat of Mrs. Flammer’s car and unwittingly enacted the flexibility of an aerobics instructor without having stretched first? Yeah, it was like that, without the tight pants or go-go boots, yes—but I bet Theo’s expression was the same.

Steve Ballmer Signs MacBook

Autograph or graffiti?

Autograph or graffiti?

The above is what happened to one student’s MacBook during Steve Ballmer’s recent Trevacca Nazarene University visit. It should be noted that the MacBook wasn’t entirely Apple:

…the machine was running Windows—we’ve yet to find out what would happen if Ballmer was asked to sign a MacBook running OS X.

Maybe it would be something like what happened to the second, less-fortunate student who asked for a MacBook signature:

Accident or foul play?

Accident or foul play?

Personally, I would’ve had Ballmer autograph my retail copy of Windows ME—or does the statute of limitations apply?

The Topless Bikini

Don’t get me wrong, I’m a staunch supporter of the “-less” suffix when added to either the top or the bottom of a woman’s bikini. But can a topless bathing suit really be called a “suit” at this point? Isn’t it just…briefs?

According to the film short, the topless suit is advertised as “Half the Bikini, Twice as Sexy.”

As this is being touted by Victoria’s Secret, I’d say the slogan should be more like, “Half the Bikini, Twice the Price.” I can imagine the department store conversation between a guy and his girl:

“What do you think?” asks the girl, holding up the topless against herself.

“It looks nice,” says the guy, “but where’s the top?”

“There is no top. It’s a topless bathing suit.”

“Hm.” The guy glances at the price tag. “It’s kind of pricey for what it is.”

“What do you mean?”

“Well, it’s only half a bathing suit, now isn’t it?”

“No it isn’t,” says the girl.

The guy frowns, takes a two-piece bikini off a nearby rack, holds it up. “See this?” He removes the top from the hanger, tosses it away. “Half the price and just as stylish.”

“That’s not stylish,” the girl says, scowling. “That’s being cheap and buying only half a bikini.”

That’s half a bikini!” the guy insists, jabbing his finger at her.

“No, it’s a complete suit. It’s just topless.”


The girl shakes her head. “‘Half’ is taking a complete suit and throwing away the top to give it the appearance of a topless.”

“Ugh,” sighs the guy. “You’re ridiculous, you know that?”

“And you’re no fun,” sighs the girl. She sets the topless back on the rack and leaves the aisle.

The guy watches her go, and it dawns on him that she’d been about to buy a topless bathing suit.

Shit, he thinks to himself. Should’ve just kept my mouth shut.

On a semi-related note, I wonder, considering the apparent bikini fabric shortage plaguing the women’s fashion industry, if this means Calvin Klein will be putting out a bottomless swim suit for men?

100 Games Cupcake Game

This is sweet—literally:

Pacman eat pellets? I eat Pacman!

Pacman eat pellets? I eat Pacman!

That’s 100 cupcakes for 100 classic games in celebration of 100 years. Hover over the question mark beside each cupcake for the answers. Deliciousness.

Also delicious: the annual Preditors & Editors Readers’ Poll, over at the site. I don’t have any eligible works this year because I’ve been doing screenplays about oatmeal. But there are a lot of people I know on the list, and they’re pretty darned good at spinning yarns. Show some love.