Yesterday I read this article about an author named Amanda Hocking, who has no publisher but sells 100,000 copies of her book a month on the Kindle for between 99cents and three dollars. What interested me most was the comments, with many people there saying this is the end for publishing and that the future lies squarely in digital.
I spent the evening pondering this. Was it true? What will happen in the long term? Could the industry really just die? And what would it all mean for someone like me, a humble editor?
Despite having self-published in the past, the concept is now somewhat worrying to me. With a reported 98% of submitted manuscripts rejected from publishers, there are many authors out there wanting to get their work known. Whereas previously there was very little or nothing these people could do to get their work released, now they can just sell it as an ebook. This is fine in itself, of course; it means good work can be found and purchased, with the author earning higher percentages from their work and consumers spending less. The problem that i see is, in my experience, a lot of those books get rejected for a good reason; indeed as my position now as a self-employed editor, i see a lot of books that require much work before being in a publishing-ready state. And looking at the comments from the article, there seem to be some people who take rejection far too personally and will now be able to release their book while believing it needs no work - and trust me, every book needs work from a detached party before it should be sold.
Where am i going with this? Simple: the daunting reality is that scores of authors will dump their work into cyberspace to be downloaded immediately and at low cost, while possibly bypassing editors. Not only will countless books be bured in obscurity by sheer weight of volume of titles on the market, but there will be a marked increased in the number of poorly written books now available, thanks to authors being able to sell their work commerically without professional advice, an edit or even a proofread. What happens when everyone is a writer and can sell their book with one click? I predict an increase in volume and a decrease in quality.
Is this how it has to be, though? Frankly, i think no, it doesn't. For a start, in no way do i think the traditional book is going anywhere. Sure, sales may decline but an even plateau will probably be reached at some point, in the same way that people can download music legally but CDs still exist. This works for authors too, because there is a definite sense of pride from seeing your book available in print as well as digitally, and it's an avenue many writers will continue to pursue.
That being said, however, this is a transition period for the publishing companies and they do need to adapt to the modern age. Whether they like it or not they need to update their modus operandi to incorporate the new way of writing, selling, marketing and, ultimately, buying. When all is said and done, the only reason writers will ever self-publish is because they either get nowhere with publishers or they don't think they're getting a good deal.
In my opinion, publishing companies need to embrace the Internet. This does not just mean offer their books on the Kindle or have an email address. If there's one thing that authors really need publisher for it's marketing - with no marketing, no one will be aware of a book's existence, and with no budget it is tough to advertise. So publishers need to utilise viral marketing campaigns, create an author bio page on the publisher's website, perhaps offer reduced-price digital copies, and generally create a new method of working that unites old with new.
Publishing will not die, but it can make an effort now to change ways in order to keep flourishing. Right now the entire book industry is in turmoil, not just the publishers but also the book stores, so now is a time when the entire system can be recreated in a way that will benefit the author more than it does currently while simultaneously securing a strong future for the publishing companies. If things remain unchanged for too long then it may be difficult to regain much mindshare and confidence, but by showing a commitment now to being flexible and adaptable, we could see an end to the war-of-words between ebooks and physical books, instead seeing them coexist without hyperbole about one killing the other.
Grammar tips, literary discussions and freelance writing advice
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHi Richard, I don't see how it will effect the standards at all. Sure, I have a choice of a CD or a download with music, but I never download rubbish music, in the same way as I won't buy a crap CD!
ReplyDeleteI am about to buy a Kindle, and I'm sure that I won't buy any book that isn't up to 'the standard' (besides, who sets the standard? Maybe my standard is to read something less polished?).
Vanity publishing has always been around and that has not effected literature at all.
I am contemplating releasing my first book on Kindle, but I have high standards and I will pay for it to be edited by a professional. There is no reason why it can't be as good as any traditional published material.
I think what eBooks give us is greater freedom to publish, and much greater choice as a reader.
Surely that is not such a bad thing for literature, and it is something that we can all acknowledge and look forward to, can't we?
Hi Diem, thanks for the comment. Let me clarify, ebooks in themselves are not the problem. The potential problem is amateur writers selling their books commercially while bypassing the editing route that every book needs. Now, clearly not everyone will do this and great books will stol hit the market, but with a new avenue for anyone to sell their work we could see an influx in the market that lowers the overall standard (writing, plot, development etc) and makes it harder to find and market good books. Music is different because the industrystill governs almost all of it. The task is for the publishing industry to update and embrace.is that clearer?
ReplyDelete"If there's one thing that authors really need publisher for it's marketing"
ReplyDeleteYet who but established authors get the bins, the ad spots, and the full size cutouts at the bookstores. For that matter, fewer people (Borders) even go to a book store? And who goes to a publisher's website to peruse books or to see an author bio? I don't and doubt many other people go to see what S&S is offering today over Knopf.
While most self-published books languish and even well-marketed ones will flare and then die (like so many bad movies), the marketplace will eventually force the cream to the top. On the internet, the buyer can actually judge a book by its cover (and a sample). Agents and publishing houses look at a slush pile of manuscripts and then search for the SASE just to get them off their desk.
Hopefully, a need for editors will remain but editors had better learn to co-exist with the e-published author.
Intersting point Ken, but don't forget marketing extends beyond having cutouts or people perusing in a bookstore. What about newspapers adverts, radio spots, tv adverts, interviews etc? I've workedin a publishing house and seen the huge amount of promotional work that goes into it, like sending out a hundred books to different media outlets for reviews and a hopeful author interview, and that's extremely difficult for self-published authors to do - many places will totally ignore a press release for a book that has the author name and no publisher (i.e. self-published).
ReplyDeleteI don't share your conviction that the market forces the cream to the crop. With Cher Lloyd number one and so many talented musicians struggling to get known and similar patterns being true in the book world, there needs to be marketing to just give a push. If i walk into a bookstore and see a fiction book by an unknown author, i'm much less likely to buy it than i am a new book by an author i know i like because it's a gamble buying something you know nothing about.
A need for an editor will always be there, but i think it's an inevitability that with an open channel for authors to market a great deal less will bother hiring one - it's extra expense and i've seen first-hand from my working experience that too many authors believe the first draft is good enough to be published.
In non-fiction sending books to media, newspaper and TV spots might work because the non-fiction book is written knowing the market it will be sold to.
ReplyDeleteIn fiction, TV, radio and newspaper ads have to be a more shotgun approach. Therefore the marketing budget goes to the best-selling author whose sales are pretty much guaranteed. Nothing from the slush pile, no matter how promising, is going to receive more than a cursory marketing attempt.
Self-published authors must, of necessity, be self-marketers, as well. At that juncture, someone like Amy Hocking is almost on an equal footing with a publishing house in that she can address a specific audience over the internet with almost no budget.
I would also, citing your music example, submit the quality of readers has declined from the lofty peak of literature to the 'graphic novel'. Witness how many movies are based on what used to be known as comic books. When your benchmark is 'Resident Evil', Chaucer doesn't stand a chance.
But surely, if the book is as bad as this then the author will just fade into obscurity as nobody except his dear auntie will buy the thing? Isn't that called evolution? Survival of the fittest?
ReplyDeleteHow many books will a SPer produce if nobody is buying them? Let them gather cyber-dust.
I'm getting a Kindle for my birthday, mostly out of curiosity as well as for research purposes and look forward to being able to download a free sample before buying, and I trust my own judgement as to whether I'll end up buying rubbish or not.
The issue is one of quality. If there's an influx of bad books on the market finding one of quality will be a difficult task, and i think that's the issue more than a bad author finding success. Also, for emerging writers such as yourself, books are far more likely to be lost in obscurity when they're just one product in a sea of poorly crafted books. It isn't about the judgment of the Kindle owner to only choose good books, but the opportunity of new writers to be found and the owner to seek out good books.
ReplyDeleteThe quality of many "published" books is highly overrated. I've read "amateur" submissions to e-zines and free reads on sites like Fiction Press that have better readability and more interesting plots than many of the books I've bought over the years.
ReplyDeleteSure, 98% of books get rejected, but a great many of these aren't rejected on what they contain, but because the publisher cannot possibly sell every manuscript they receive, and do justice to the authors. I don't know the statistics, but I believe a great many of the 98% are capable of selling if put in the readers' hands. These manuscripts are just not the direction the publishers want to go in based on the personal tastes of the editors.
As far as there being an increase in poorly written titles, I think this is misguided thinking, and even if it were true, won't matter. Most writers care enough about their work, and are immersed enough in the "how to write a book" literature, that they'll polish their stories. And even if they didn't, most readers aren't going to randomly purchase books from the back of Amazon's search list, but are going to choose titles they've heard good things about or from authors they've read before.
You need not fear for the reader. They're REALLY smart people.