Deborah's Journal

Nathan Bransford, who worked as a literary agent and then turned author, hosts Nathalie Whipple on the subject of the difference between "legacy" (traditional) and indie (self) publishers. The article explains the basics without going into too deep a discussion of why an author would choose one form of publishing over another.

The bottom line is that we are in the midst (or perhaps the end) of a period of time when most authors who went indie didn't have a choice. They were dropped by their traditional publishers or their advances went down past the point of sustainability or some other reason that caused them to look elsewhere. If they were going indie, they had to figure out how to get the same professional level of editing and book production that we take for granted with traditional publishers. Now that's happened -- which is not to say that there are no sloppily produced, unedited self-published books, but that there is an emerging understanding of how to do it right. This includes more readily available resources. Promoting self-published books takes an enormous amount of time and energy, that many authors feel could be better spent writing the next book. But it may not be necessary to perform every function of a legacy publisher by yourself.

When Book View Cafe (the online writer's cooperative) was founded over 5 years ago, we concentrated on epublishing our out of print backlist books. These had already gone through the editorial process and while they needed proofreading, they were essentially ready to go. Gradually we created internal procedures (a consensus understanding leading to a publication checklist) that enables us to not only put out quality original ebooks, but printed editions as well. (This latter is still in process, but I'm confident that there will soon be a BVC POD imprint.) We have contracts with audiobook producers and library distributors. We did this collectively, pooling our skills, but many of these opportunities are available to single self-published authors as well.

It will be fascinating to see what the next 5 years brings.

Self-publishing vs. Traditional: Some Straight Talk | Nathan Bransford, Author

As much as we love to complain about how hard it is to get an agent to read your material or, worse yet, an editor to consider it, the alternative may be worse for our long-term writing growth.

There is a joke that frustrated writers tell about publishers and agents. They say editors separate the wheat from the chaff and publish the chaff. They can be a frustrating barrier to entry, and they are not always right. More often than not, I am afraid to say, they are.

Getting a novel right is a long term proposition. It is a marathon, not a sprint. Someone once wrote (I say it this way not because it was someone eminent, but because I can’t remember who it was) that runners do not have Boston Marathons in them waiting to get out. A novel, like the marathon, is a peak experience that comes as the result of lots of tedious work. In the case of the novel, that means lots of tedious rethinking and revision when you thought it was all done.

To jump to yet another metaphor (really where are those editors when you need them?): As stones are polished by the friction of ocean waves, novels are polished through resistance.

Read the rest -- and it's well worth reading -- here:

Resistance is Vital or When is it Time to Self-Publish? | Author Laura Lee

Special thanks to Patricia Burrroughs for pointing to this post.