Into the Fire

Passionate thoughts about the world of writing and the Power of God

Just a few things to say. Repetition, I know. But as a self-published author, I really do take offense at some of the statements that roll off the fingers of those who know next to nothing about it.

 

Some of you know The Shack was a self-published phenomenon. The overselling of the little novel forced those involved in writing and producing that book to select a royalty publisher to handle sales which included a fairly lucrative contract for future books if I’m not mistaken under their own imprint. Most writers (including the primary author of that little novel) will agree The Shack was not particularly well written. Needless to say, although the theology in its pages elicited great controversy which furthered sales, the writing itself didn’t seem to bother its readers—except for other writers.

 

Once again I will state self-published books used to look the part and much of the writing was of poor quality. I’m quite sure there are still those kinds of books being produced. In the past self-published books deserved the negative stigma attached to them.

 

However, if you know anything about some of the small custom-publishing presses, you will have learned this: they don’t put forth junk. WinePress Publishing and their derivatives put out a first class quality book from cover design to formatting and template selections. First class that takes a backseat to none. Marcher Lord Press for the speculative fiction writers: same thing. Quality in production from start to finish.

 

The claims of “no editing” for self-published books and the enamored praise for editors making stories better, yada yada yada, simply doesn’t hold true with the two aforementioned publishing entities. Jeff Gerke of Marcher Lord Press is an editor and was previously employed by CBA publishers in that position. WinePress uses specific freelance editors just like the mainstream CBA publishers use and requires editing in certain publishing packages such as the one used for the production of The Famous One.

 

The single thing that makes self-publishing fiction difficult is this: marketing. The two publishers I mentioned take care of listing your novels on Amazon.com, CBD, B&N.com, etcetera. I don’t know the specifics of marketing available through Marcher Lord Press, but WinePress offers several different packages for sale. And, no, they’re not cheap. But the same prospects for marketing your royalty published novel now sit in your lap as an author. The onus of marketing rests primarily with authors nowadays—particularly first time or little known authors.

 

What I’m saying is this: it’s okay to be suspicious of self-published books, but it’s not okay to blanket them with condemnation or to assume they’re all poorly written and unedited because some doofus decided they had to see their story in print. While that might apply to some self-published authors, it’s less and less the case today in the difficult arena of publishing.

 

Lord, help me to follow you. That’s all that really matters. In the Name of Jesus, Amen.

Posted in

4 responses to “Here we go again . . .”

  1. Andi Avatar

    Ok Nicole, I’ll indulge you what don’t those of us who are work within the world of reading and reviewing don’t know about self-publishing . . . other than that most if not all good reputable publishing companies won’t take authors that have self-published because they’ve taken the easy way out. As for the Shack, it was a theological nightmare, no one with sound Christian doctorine would’ve published that farse. As a reader and reviewer I won’t read self-published works because they’re worse than ARC’s. Paper quality is poor, errors are abundant, and the cover art looks like something a 5 yr old has done. Just my personal opinion.

    Like

  2. Nicole Avatar

    I’m fascinated by your blanket condemnation, Andi. You’re probably unaware of the bidding war that took place for The Shack among CBA publishers after it gained notoriety. And if theology was all that mattered in Christian publication, maybe some of the Amish books which are so hot right now wouldn’t be published either.
    I don’t know what self-published novels you’ve viewed or read in recent times, but not many I’m assuming. I’ve given two examples of presses which produce quality books. Marcher Lord Press distributed a couple that I’m aware of for different blog tours and both received rave reviews.
    Your description of self-published books applies to older versions but certainly not to all of the current presses, particularly those I mentioned. It’s your opinion they’re inferior based on your experience, but if you haven’t engaged a certain number of current publications–and, yes, any reader needs to be selective with self-published novels like any other royalty published novels–you’re speaking in past tense about archaic methods.
    Professionals at conferences will tell you now more than ever they’re taking second looks at self-published novels because of the expertise of certain presses and their potential for sales.
    Speaking from experience, it’s not “the easy way out” at all. It takes a lot of work and a lot of money to produce an attractive book–in fact no different than participating in royalty publishing except the author foots the bill. The most difficult facet is selling the book–not unlike royalty publishing either except with a lot less clout.

    Like

  3. Rebecca LuElla Miller Avatar

    Just to clarify, Nicole, Marcher Lord Press is not a self-publishing house. It is strictly royalty paying, which is why CSFF Blog Tour changed our policy to allow their books on the tour. We used to say we didn’t tour print on demand books because that technology was what many self-publishers used.
    While Marcher Lord Press uses the POD technology, it uses the traditional publishing house model for the economics. With this interesting difference: MLP takes their expenses off the top, then whatever else the book makes, the publisher and author split. I think it’s a 50-50 split, but could be wrong on the percentages. I just know it’s a lot more generous than the usual 15 percent. Of course, there’s the matter of clearing costs first.
    But the point for this discussion is that MLP, while it is everything you said as far as quality goes, isn’t an example of a self-pub house.
    Becky

    Like

  4. Nicole Avatar

    Good clarification, Becky. Thank you. I should’ve stipulated that MLP is a small independent press with similarities to custom publishers.
    The point I attempted to make was this: for the better custom publishers and independent presses there are standards. Approval of manuscripts, required editing, quality designers, formatters, typesetters, paper used, etc.–all a necessary part of the books they produce. The level of production is second to none. And, like any novels on the market today, the decision lies with the readers as to whether or not the quality of the story and writing makes for a good book.

    Like

Leave a reply to Andi Cancel reply