I once read a piece on advice for writers by an established author. Step one was, if one had not yet done so, to go to college and spend several years pursuing a degree in English. I was blown away. Was this a joke? I read the whole article: No, the writer was dead serious. And this was not an isolated comment. All traditional advice for writers seems to imply that they have an arduous uphill trek before them. It seems that would-be writers are supposed to spend years and years reading hundreds if not thousands of books while honing their craft, rewriting their books over and over, and getting rejected again and again before being published (if ever). It's a long and painful, but necessary, process that will make them better writers, if they survive.
Before I write anything more let me state that I am all in favor of writers improving themselves. I do not favor mediocrity. Each of us should have a willingness to do better. This is not only because we are writers, but because that is what we should do as individuals.
However, when you read some of the notions out there about what a writer should go through, you wonder whether the traditional writing world is controlled by masochists and sadists. There seems to be the idea, perhaps ingrained in our wider culture, that unless we suffer, what we achieve is not worthwhile; and the more suffering the better! It appears that if a writer has not been rejected hundreds of times while eking out a poverty-level living, working by day, and writing by night, then the writer is not "serious", and what he/she writes is probably "not good".
To these notions I only have this to say: thank God for e-books and self-publishing!
In traditional publishing many writers take a long time to get published going from one depressing rejection to the next, and even if their books are accepted the whole publication process moves as slow as an anemic snail. Finally, of course, no matter how perfect the book is, it may not sell, in which case it will be removed from the shelves, and go out of print. However, self-publishing your book electronically can reduce this time (and the pain involved) by orders of magnitude. Most books including e-books do not sell well. But if your e-book does not sell that much, not only can you lower the price to get more sales (or at least more readers), but your e-book will remain on the virtual shelves forever, gathering sales at its own pace and taking its time to find its readers, while you write your next book.
Self-publishing is much faster, easier, cheaper, and anyone can do it. You can take your book directly to the reader without someone vetting you because they think your book is not good enough or will not sell. What is wrong with that? Why is slower, more complicated, and more expensive better? Why suffer more when you can suffer less?
I can already hear the cries, "The quality! The quality! What about the quality?" Yes, I agree, without gatekeepers a lot of people will publish substandard stuff, but that is just the nature of the rough beast that is slouching towards Bethlehem to be born (sorry for that Mr. Yeats). It will be the end-user, the reader, who will decide whether what is published is good enough for them by buying or not buying the books.
Folks, the genie is out of the bottle. Let's not fight among ourselves about what is good or desirable. This will happen so don't oppose it, just find a way to deal with it. According to some polls as many as 80% of Americans feel they have a book in them. That is about 200 million people. Get ready out there because them books are a-comin, and the vast majority won't be paper books!
Before I write anything more let me state that I am all in favor of writers improving themselves. I do not favor mediocrity. Each of us should have a willingness to do better. This is not only because we are writers, but because that is what we should do as individuals.
However, when you read some of the notions out there about what a writer should go through, you wonder whether the traditional writing world is controlled by masochists and sadists. There seems to be the idea, perhaps ingrained in our wider culture, that unless we suffer, what we achieve is not worthwhile; and the more suffering the better! It appears that if a writer has not been rejected hundreds of times while eking out a poverty-level living, working by day, and writing by night, then the writer is not "serious", and what he/she writes is probably "not good".
To these notions I only have this to say: thank God for e-books and self-publishing!
In traditional publishing many writers take a long time to get published going from one depressing rejection to the next, and even if their books are accepted the whole publication process moves as slow as an anemic snail. Finally, of course, no matter how perfect the book is, it may not sell, in which case it will be removed from the shelves, and go out of print. However, self-publishing your book electronically can reduce this time (and the pain involved) by orders of magnitude. Most books including e-books do not sell well. But if your e-book does not sell that much, not only can you lower the price to get more sales (or at least more readers), but your e-book will remain on the virtual shelves forever, gathering sales at its own pace and taking its time to find its readers, while you write your next book.
Self-publishing is much faster, easier, cheaper, and anyone can do it. You can take your book directly to the reader without someone vetting you because they think your book is not good enough or will not sell. What is wrong with that? Why is slower, more complicated, and more expensive better? Why suffer more when you can suffer less?
I can already hear the cries, "The quality! The quality! What about the quality?" Yes, I agree, without gatekeepers a lot of people will publish substandard stuff, but that is just the nature of the rough beast that is slouching towards Bethlehem to be born (sorry for that Mr. Yeats). It will be the end-user, the reader, who will decide whether what is published is good enough for them by buying or not buying the books.
Folks, the genie is out of the bottle. Let's not fight among ourselves about what is good or desirable. This will happen so don't oppose it, just find a way to deal with it. According to some polls as many as 80% of Americans feel they have a book in them. That is about 200 million people. Get ready out there because them books are a-comin, and the vast majority won't be paper books!
RSS Feed
