Comments on: Don’t Be Too Eager to Publish

By: Stephen Thorn

Stephen Thorn — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 16:49:51 +0000

A friend of mine has self-pub’d a book of poetry and is preparing his second, and in both cases he asked me for assistance in proofreading, commenting on the poems themselves, and getting the manuscripts print-ready. I think he is following a good formula for that genre — write most of the work, then give it to a critiquer (is that a real word?) for vetting while you finish more poems — but not necessarily for other genres.

When I’ve written a story or poem I read it several times to myself before letting anyone else see it. This is my polishing phase, where I’m trying to get the work as finished and complete as I can; after I’m satisfied with it I’ll present it to others and ask for their input.

On the subject of self-publishing (SPing), I guess it all depends on what you’re trying to get out of the experience. SPing is a good way to see your work on paper and maybe get other people to look at it too, but that can turn into a narcissistic masturbatory exercise if you’re not careful. I don’t think anyone really makes a profit at SPing — certainly not like they would at some job like schlepping trash cans or digging ditches — but money isn’t the only motivator around, after all. Traditional publishing (wherein a publisher pays YOU for your work instead of you paying for it) validates your work in ways that SPing cannot, plus it has the aura of respectability to which SPing aspires but doesn’t quite achieve.

Just my two cents.

By: zack kushner

zack kushner — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 21:59:24 +0000

Thanks Jessica,

As someone who normally writes non-fiction, I will admit that I find novel writing intimidating. I think waiting until I’m happy with it is a good benchmark; my concerns about reader comprehension can be addressed then.

I may try to find one reader before then to help me course-correct on any missed major issues, but we’ll see how it goes.

Cheers,
z

By: Brad K.

Brad K. — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 21:33:24 +0000

I didn’t see anything about all self-publishing. This article seem clearly targeted to those that skip the quality control, especially those authors that are over-eager to publish.

By: Maeve

Maeve — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 20:47:06 +0000

Vic,
I didn’t mean to imply that all self-published works are terrible–although that is what I did in this post.

Please see today’s post in which I try to clarify my position: http://www.dailywritingtips.co.....-revision/

I’ve read many excellent and well-written books that were self-published.

By: Vic

Vic — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 17:33:47 +0000

I have to disagree with your premise that a self-published work is somehow inferior. I have self published several books and have just signed a publishing contract with a major publisher for my latest work. I was graduated with a degree in Journalism 30 years ago. My writing skills have nothing to do with who my publisher is. You make an illogical conclusion. I do agree that many self-published books are terrible and riddled with all kinds of problems and mistakes. But this is a reflection on the writer and not the method of publishing. I have also read several books that are terrible and have been published through a “real” publisher. Read some of Dickens’ works. He was paid by the word, so he tended to be verbose. He’s widely published by respectable publishers. Anyway, I don’t want to belabor the point. I appreciate your newsletters, but just had to comment on this one.