This month in keeping with our look inside publishing, I’m departing from my usual craft advice to give you my view of the new state of the industry.
I don’t see the new shape of things as many do: the twilight of the dinosaurs, the old-thinking Big Five print publishers staggering, falling to their knees and heading for extinction as they’re overwhelmed by a nimble army of small, warm-blooded mammals whose claws are the sharp, smart, flexible tools of electronic publishing.
It’s true that I’m a gatekeeper, a longtime member (to my surprise) of the industry establishment. But I am no worshiper of the old ways. Traditional publishing always was cost-heavy and inefficient. It’s a wonder that it worked. But the new electronic “paradigm” is not the glorious revolution that true believers would like it to be.
What’s happened instead is an evolution of the publishing world into a new class system, and like any class system it has winners, losers and opportunities. It’s a system that, if not recognized for what it is, will trap frustrated writers in a pit far more hopeless than the one they yearned to escape. Let’s start with a couple of cold-eyed realities.
First, e-books have not hurt the print publishers but rather have helped them. Especially in the recent recession, low-cost/high-margin e-books have been a bright spot. They’ve kept publishers profitable even as brick-and-mortar book retailing has shrunk and consumers have grown cautious. With the mass-market paperback pricing itself nearly out of existence, low-priced e-books have arrived (with help from the Department of Justice) to keep value-conscious readers reading. Of course, the difficult and expensive business of selling print books must still be faced but at least there’s some gravy to make the task tasty.
Second, the self-publishing movement has been a boon to the print industry. Far from being threatened, print publishers instead are now gratefully relieved of the money-losing burden of the mid-list. Like giant banks that have discovered that banking is boring and the real money is in gambling, big publishers are now free to focus on the high-risk/high-reward game of finding the next Twilight, Hunger Games, Game of Thrones or Fifty Shades of Grey.
Better still, because some authors are now—voluntarily!—willing to bear the expense and undertake the effort of building an audience by themselves, print publishers have the luxury of culling the prize cattle from the herd. Even print-only distribution deals with a handful of successful e-published authors are terrific: easy pickings and effortless profit. Most authors are still knocking at the gate, too, since after all seventy percent of trade book sales are of print editions. In many ways these are good times for print publishers.
Third, the self-publishing movement has produced gold-rush hysteria in the writing community. While not exactly a mass delusion, questionable beliefs have been widely accepted. True believers sneer at doubters. So what is the real truth? High success at self-publishing has happened only for a few who have mastered the demanding business of online marketing. A larger, but still small, number of authors have achieved a modest replacement income from self-publishing. Growth from there will be hard for them, however, because wide print distribution still is needed. (Seventy percent of trade book sales are of print books, remember?)
As for the rest…well, the position of the vast majority of self-publishing authors is no better than it ever was, though probably there are fewer cartons of books in their garages. Consultancy to self-publishers is a new job category, however, and that has to be good for the nation’s employment stats.
Fourth, as I said, a new class system has arisen. Here’s how it breaks down:
Freight Class
Self-published authors and electronic micro-presses must haul themselves. While the means of production are easy and low-cost, the methods of marketing are costly either in terms of cash or time. Success is rare. The pleasure of being in control is offset by the frustration of “discoverability”. Online retailers are whimsical and ludicrously over-stocked, both barrier and open door. Lists, blogs, social sites and the like are plentiful but of only spotty help. Trusted filtering of self-published books may arise (watch the recent sale of Bookish to Zola, two recommendation sites started by—gasp!—publishers and agents) but don’t hold your breath. The real problem is that fiction at this level has trouble appealing widely to readers. It can sell when priced at $2.99, sometimes a bit more, often less.
Why? Let’s look at what characterizes Freight Class fiction. While the Kindle bookstore can be an incubator of innovative fiction, for the most part it is an ocean of genre imitations if not amateurish writing. Freight Class novels generally take few risks. Too often they rely on character stereotypes, heavy-handed plots, purple and obvious emotions, and messages and themes that are time-worn. Justice must be done. Love conquers all. Good vs. evil. Freight Class fiction can be easy to skim. Literary flourishes are few, cliffhangers are many. Genre conventions are rigidly honored. Characters are not motivated from within, for the most part, but instead are pushed into action by external plot circumstances.
Coach Class
Here we find decently-written literary fiction and nicely-crafted commercial fiction that achieves print publication but sells best at trade-paperback level ($14.99 or so), or discounted in e-book form. Coach Class novelists support each other yet find it difficult to gain a foothold with the public. So-called “marketing” by their publishers is disappointing and, truthfully, can only do so much. Traditional tours (when they happen) accomplish little, front of store incentives are costly, and online marketing sometimes seems to consist of the hope that Amazon will do a price promotion. Coach Class authors, however, are professionally edited and get goodies like nice covers, ARC’s, and plenty of blurbs. Plus, their books are in bookstores, a big boost in visibility.
What characterizes Coach Class fiction? Readable pages, appealing characters, clever premises, attention-grabbing plot hooks, a display of craft and art, emotional engagement, and themes that “resonate”…which is to say, that stir readers without greatly challenging them. Coach class fiction is less easy to skim. While characters can be motivated from within, their inner journeys can feel somewhat painless. Readers are “engaged” but don’t always feel deeply moved. Coach Class fiction sometimes borrows secondary characters from history or classics, retells other stories, or stretches into series that can become thin. Genre conventions may be borrowed or blended but essentially they are not violated. Coach Class is a moderately comfortable place to be, though one can feel stuck in one’s seat. Economy shocks can hurt.
First Class
The cream class gets a double shot of extended life in bookstores, both in hardcover and later in paper. Their books can sell well at $25 and live long in trade paper. For First Class authors, success looks effortless. Goodies accrue easily. Recognition is instant and wide. Sub-rights sell. Awards happen. Insulated from economy shocks, authors of this class never seem to worry about the industry. In interviews they talk only about their art and process. They mentor. Lines are long at BEA booth signings and readers are fiercely loyal.
Why all that seemingly-effortless success? First Class fiction is characterized by memorable characters, unique premises, story worlds instantly real, plots that grip even when slow, gorgeous writing, and themes that surprise, challenge and change us. Not only do we read every word, First Class writing makes us whistle in admiration. Characters are not only likeable and self-aware, but also follow a singular destiny. First class novels shake our way of thinking, challenging us to see the world in new ways. They confidently break rules, may transport us to unlikely cultures and times, teach us things we knew little about, and always feel utterly unique. Each novel creates its own genre. First Class fiction is imitated but never matched. Its authors are revered and for good reasons.
So, in which class are you? To which class do you aspire? Here’s the thing: In the real world, one’s class can be a prison. Politics plays in. The upper class can use its money to buy itself tax advantages, legal wizardry and gated communities that keep the rest out. Other classes stick together and stick with what they know. Revolution is rare, costs blood and doesn’t happen where minimal comforts are available.
In the world of publishing, though, it’s not like that. Authorship is a true meritocracy. (Sorry, it is.) In publishing there is social mobility. As an author you can change your class, though of course it’s not always easy to do so. It takes education, time and effort. It means seeing yourself differently, having courage and violating the norms and expectations of your community. (One of the most common laments I hear is, “I got published…and lost a lot of my friends.”)
Do things look different inside publishing today? Yes and no. There’s innovation all over the place but also for authors a picture more challenging than ever. The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. Inequality is vast. But change doesn’t require billionaire money buying elections. You don’t need a phony revolution. You can change your class by yourself, right at home, one keystroke at a time.
I’ve exaggerated the above for effect, obviously, but in a lot of ways that’s how the industry looks to me now. How does it look to you?
About Donald Maass
Donald Maass is president of the Donald Maass Literary Agency. He has written several highly acclaimed craft books for novelists including The Breakout Novelist, The Fire in Fiction, Writing the Breakout Novel and The Career Novelist.
Interesting thoughts. I’m grateful that the “class system” is defined by elements within the writer’s control (writing the best book they possibly can, digging deep, pushing further, etc.). I know the books I enjoy reading are in “First Class”, and that’s where I aspire to be. Back to work.
Cristin-
So true, to see what consumers really want from fiction we may not have to look any farther than our own bookshelves.
(Which if best sellers lists are to be believed are not that different from our Kindle libraries.)
What a post, Don! I found myself nodding as I read. I must say, however, that I suspect it will tick some people off. Looking in the mirror is a difficult thing and facing truths, even more so. This time you beat Porter Anderson to the punch with Provocation in Publishing. Bravo.
Heather-
Thanks for that. There’s more than one way to look at the digital “revolution”. I framed this post in starkly political terms to get people to do just that.
This is the most realistic overview of the industry I have read in quite some time. Thankyou.
Welcome, Karen.
I loved this post, Don–thank you! I do like what you say about publishing being a meritocracy, since I’m in the freight class (several rows down) but that doesn’t stop me from trying to push my storytelling to its edge. Hopefully at some point the inspector will come by, have a look, and tell me to move up. Meanwhile, I’ll keep writing and saving up for a better ticket. :)
Graeme-
With your dedication you’ll earn that first class ticket easily, no permission necessary. Interesting to think of readers as inspectors, though. Hmm.
Oh, my! I needed to read these realities. I’m in the coach class, a mid-list hack writer, delivering what the market demands (but I do enjoy it and have learned lots as well) and striving to become first class! Thanks for speaking the truth and for encouraging us to excel.
Vijaya-
Some first class authors got their chops in the genre trenches. (Elmore Leonard comes to mind.) Many continue to use genre frameworks for their fiction, it’s just that they later make the genre serve them rather than the other way around.
Love that reminder that genre must serve the story not the other way round.
Don, as one of the admittedly mid-list authors to which you refer, I would add that, although some of the larger publishers probably do heave a sigh of relief as they divest themselves of authors whose books don’t sell hugely, there are smaller presses that are still willing, even happy, to accept us. There will be more shuffling as this takes place and some authors voluntarily enter into self-publication, but reading is here to stay. The trick for authors, obviously, is to realize that each new day can bring changes in the existing establishment. Thanks for sharing a detailed and very interesting view of this new world.
Richard Mabry-
Smaller print publishers are heroes to me (sometimes headaches, but still), and there are some interesting new models in the “e-first” pattern too.
I only wish that physical distribution wasn’t so capital intensive. Smaller publishers are at a disadvantage there yet the good ones even so manage to make it work.
This is a fascinating view of the publishing world, Don, and I quite enjoyed the perspective. Although, as a writer I try not to focus on publishing labels, sales, and status; it can distract and derail creativity and enthusiasm. I am reminded of what author May Sarton said about writing: “We do the best we can and hope for the best, knowing that “the best,” so far as selling goes, is a matter of chance. The only thing that is not chance is what one asks of oneself and how well or how badly one meets one’s own standards.” When we get right down to it, I hear you saying that it’s the standards for that freight class that must rise to higher quality. I’d really like to see that happen because there are some good undiscovered writers there but are buried in the mess of it.
Paula-
I don’t think it’s chance. It’s true that timing, snafus and the public mood can depress sales but when we’re talking about a fiction career we’re not talking about only one book. It’s a cumulative game. A novelist’s lifetime output spans beyond short term conditions.
Put differently, I think that a single good novel can be vulnerable to unfavorable factors but a lifetime of great fiction is not. Write well, write ever better, don’t stop. Nothing chancy in that scenario.
Thanks, my dear Yoda. I’m not so sure your post is as far off your regular ‘craft path’ as you think. I still got it: WRITE A GOOD BOOK.
Cheers,
Denise Willson
Author of A Keeper’s Truth
You begin to sense the truth, grasshopper!
Don, you should have been a lawyer (“Join us….”) You’ve laid out a compelling opening statement. No doubt you’ll hear from the “other side.” As one leaning back in the jury box, observing and listening to evidence, I’d love to get your take on a couple of items.
First, e-books have not hurt the print publishers but rather have helped them.
How do you view the impact of this same digital commerce on brick-and-mortar stores, the vanishing of shelf-space–and, therefore, author discoverability? IOW, the same dynamic that has helped publishers hurts physical outlets, which in turn hurts authors seeking to be found via the traditional route.
The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer.
The “rich” (A list) remain, as always, a small class size. And Jesus said “the poor will always be with you.” But there is in the new economy a growing class of those who were never in the game at all, who tried for years, perhaps, to get into the Forbidden City (or were, after a short citizenship, tossed out again). Now they have new life, new opportunity. So might there not be a third stratum here? The outcasts who have the chance to get strong, get found, and gain a readership (small, perhaps, but larger than the nothing they had before)….Thoughts?
Jim-
“Join us…”? I recently testified as an expert witness and I have to say, getting paid by the hour is attractive.
To your questions…
Do e-books hurt brick-and-mortar outlets? No doubt but also consider this: According to Pew research, of e-reading device users only 4% read e-books only. The rest still buy print editions. Hmm. I wonder where they get them?
The real battle is between bookstores and online sales of physical books. I don’t know about you, but I like bookstores. Heaven must look like Powell’s. I’d like them to stick around and so I patronize them.
Is e-publishing a new chance for the disenfranchised? Sure, but man what kind of opportunity is it? Think about it. E-books sales are 30% of trade book sales. That’s nice, but look at e-book best seller lists: the overwhelming majority of titles are the e-editions of traditional print books.
Thus, what percentage of e-book sales actually are self-published titles? In the context of *all* book sales, print and “e”, what percentage are self-published? Generously, 10%? I’d find that amazing.
Whatever the statistic it’s like saying to the poor…lucky you! You have a way to get around the gates of the Forbidden City! It’s called…audio books! Here, publish your audio edition yourself! You can build an audience that way! Okay, sure, not everyone buys audio books–in fact, ninety percent of book consumers don’t–but, hey, it’s something. You’ll get the hang of marketing yourself in no time!
Yes, it’s something. It’s a legit avenue for those who feel disenfranchised. But there’s another avenue and it’s right beneath your fingertips.
My thoughts.
Alas, I fear that they get their print books from Amazon more often than from a brick-and-mortar bookstore… and still less often from an independent, community-based bookstore.
Also, we Portlanders believe that Powell’s IS Heaven. :)
I love Powell’s. I took a vacation to Portland once just to spend a day in Powell’s. I made sure my hotel was close enough to walk to Powell’s.
Any writing/publishing discussion that includes Donald Maass and James Scott Bell is worth attending. Informative post, Master Don and solid questions, Master James.
A taste of the synergy of your ‘Story Masters’ conference in Minneapolis. I’m still profiting from that event.
“Join us…” Is that line from a Grisham novel?
It’s immensely helpful to see a First Class writer defined so succinctly. And I have copied those words into my Scrivener notes as the hoped-for goal. But, for me, electronic self-publishing has opened up a world I want to be in. I like the grass-roots-ness of it. The everyman, if he is willing to work for it, opportunity to go it on his own. I respect the traditional publishing industry, but I’m glad there’s another choice. I especially respect and appreciate people like you, Don, with your experience and knowledge, who are willing to share with the rest of us, even if we are in different camps.
Carmel-
If it works for you that is wonderful, and there are others for whom it’s working too. When it does work I observe that there’s usually pretty good writing going on…along with tireless, savvy self-marketing.
I’m in no way against self-publishing, but I think folks need to be realistic about it. It’s not for everyone. I’m delighted it’s working for you, though.
So in some ways it hasn’t changed too much for writers. We still need people who are really good at promoting our work, while we focus on improving and developing our craft.
Is it easier or harder for newer authors to become known, assuming they are good. Is it hard to move from the freight class to coach class?
Is it possible to make a decent living in coach class? We all strive for first class, but obviously only a few us will based on talent, effort and luck.
Michael-
Coach class writers can make a living at it, sometimes a decent one. But it’s a status and income that’s not as secure as one would like.
The best plan is to build a body of work and keep it in print and together on one publisher’s list, if you can. As I said above, a fiction career is a cumulative game.
Can you move up? Sure. There’s a leap involved, though. I’ve talked with many highly successful novelists who’ve described it. Boiled down, what they say is that their writing grew when they realized that no one was going to make them successful except themselves.
“The best plan is to build a body of work and keep it in print and together on one publisher’s list, if you can.”
Donald, it’s a good thing you added the “if you can.”
Perhaps you can give some instruction on how a writer goes about keeping their work “in print and together on one publisher’s list.” It does not sound like a goal that is within a traditionally published authors control. Am I missing something?
As a thus far classless writer still honing my craft, I’m soaking this up; your post, Don, and the responses as well. We live in such interesting and fast-changing times that sometimes my head spins. But what I hold onto here is what you said about First Class Writing. That’s what I’m aiming for, and yes, its hard. Yes, people get pissed at me for missing weddings and being glad there’s a blizzard so I can hunker down here, undisturbed. But I intend to do what it takes, and I pumped a fist at the word ‘meritocracy’, an endangered species in our ‘anybody-can-be-a-star’ culture. Maybe I’m aging myself here but I’m old-school about earning the gold star. Thanks for your gatekeeping and your post.
Susan-
Blizzards do have an upside. I’m glad you use them the way I do!
Well, first, I aspire to be first class in terms of my writing, it’s quality and characters that make people sad when the adventure is over.
That being said, one thing I’d be really curious for you to address, is something I’m dealing with right now in terms of the new publishing paradigms: Can authors put in the time and money to self-publish while still maintaining careers in other fields? What I see listed above in your blog post assumes that all writers are going to go forward with this full time, but many of us don’t have that luxury, nor do we want to give up the careers that actually inspire our writing. Thoughts?
Heather-
That’s a good question. I don’t know the absolute answer, but I notice that the very most successful self-published authors do work at it full time. It’s labor intensive.
One hugely successful author of speculative fiction says he spends 50% of his time writing and 50% of his time marketing. I’m sure he walks his dog too, but probably he isn’t a full time brain surgeon in addition. Could be wrong about that, but I don’t think so.
This is one of the first completely honest and balanced posts I’ve ever read from someone born and raised on the traditional publishing system. Thank you for this. There’s a few things I’d add:
1)Getting wide distribution isn’t that difficult. Bookstores will order your book POD if there’s a demand and for those prejudice against CreateSpace, Amazon provides a means to list your own publishing company instead for no cost.
2) Why would I want thousands of my books printed and shipped to bookstores when the return rate is so high? Most print books are sold online anyway, which means = Amazon.
3) There are Freight Class authors whose quality products are just as high as those from the Big 5 publishers. Some were first class traditionally published authors that woke up and realized the math didn’t add up and they decided to go their own way. They only hire all the laid off freelance editors that were once working at the Big 5. Cover designers are next to nothing, formatters, etc and if your book does well in ePublishing and justifies a larger print run than POD can provide from CreateSpace, then that’s the time when you have more leverage to broker a deal with a Big 5 publisher.
Kristi-
It’s interesting, isn’t it, that the process of publishing oneself usually circles back to publishing through one of the Big Five. I haven’t met too many self-publishing authors who don’t have that as a goal.
Even the most successful self-publishing authors eventually run up against an inescapable fact: To grow they need print distribution, meaning as provided by the (sadly) return-heavy print industry.
Nobody, far as I know, has become a best seller because of POD. (Am I wrong about that? Would love to know of some examples if I am.)
It’s completely changed now, Donald. Many of the most successful indie published authors didn’t even consider submitting to an agent or editor at a Big 5 publisher because the math doesn’t add up.
As far as successful POD authors, here’s a small selection here: http://www.selfpublishinghalloffame.com/
Throw a rock and you’ll hit one of them amongst that list.
Loathe concepts of ‘class’ nearly as much as ‘submitting’. Still Maass serves the truth–cold.
Janine-
Yeah, pretty cold. I love the image chosen for this post’s header. Pretty chilly but the view is long.
I agree with Denise. I got a lot to think about in terms of craft or at least in terms of seeing where my work sits in your analogy. I also appreciate the class descriptions. It provides a goal to shoot at. Thanks!
Aim high, Cat. Why not?
Thank you for the honest assessment. I, for one, am really tired of hearing about the grandiose self-publishing plans from the “ocean of genre imitations if not amateurish writing.” Mean, I know.
I should have been a bit more explicit about my idea of grandiose plans.
A large number of people I meet who plan to self-publish state they want to do so because”no one appreciates their talent,” which is obviously boundless. Shakespearian, even. They sneer at the idea of basic copy edits, because, well, they don’t need it. Part of my paid job is editing books, and I know I don’t do a great job of copy editing myself.
Then, they immediately go into the all of the money they’re going to make and cite the same two authors who made it rich in self-publishing. (Shouldn’t someone take a hint if there’s only two names you can drum up?)
Then, there’s the whole nitty-gritty of self-publishing. Another part of my paid job is/was creating ebooks and buying print -on-demand books, so I cringe when I hear people who can barely save a file in Word talking about popping out an ebook or buying the print services from a company that I know is a vanity press. They’re probably going to pay a lot of money for those services. . . probably beyond the going market rate.
They have no idea about social media and no PR skills. In fact, many of them diss the whole idea of social media and marketing and nonchalantly say, “I’m a writer, not a marketeer.” I see lots of posts in various forums that say, “My book is on Amazon, and no one is buying it. Why not?” If you ask a couple of questions, you invariably learn they plopped the book on Amazon and sat back waiting for the money to roll in.
This doesn’t apply to everyone, of course, but it applies to a lot of people and a lot of the books I see in the .99 category on Amazon.
Michalea-
Man, I hear you and am so glad you’re there to help folks going the self-publishing route. Keep at it.
Excellent post, Donald. Although I’m grateful for the control e-publishing has given authors, I don’t like the poor quality out there. Even some of it that’s really selling well. I guess more authors should utilize WRITING THE BREAKOUT NOVEL HANDBOOK, shouldn’t they? I know I do b/c I want to be in First Class, baby!
Marcy-
Oh, now you’re talking! Thanks for the plug. And truthfully, that’s why I wrote that book and my others.
Don, my first copy of Writing the Breakout Novel came from a lady in our writers group who had decided to self-publish several years ago through one of the vanity (for lack of better word) publishers. They were giving authors copies of your book at their expense!
“Too often they rely on character stereotypes, heavy-handed plots, purple and obvious emotions, and messages and themes that are time-worn. Justice must be done. Love conquers all. Good vs. evil.”
Are you suggesting that traditional publishing is devoid of such cliches? I would have thought such criticism is more applicable to traditional publishers. After all, they are slaves to their own sales goals and, therefore, are not as free to take risks. Am I wrong?
There’s a lot of outstanding writing put out by traditional publishers. And they take plenty of risks. Do cliches crop up in what they publish? Um, I think so!
Here’s the way I look at it, though: don’t look at the exceptions and stumbles…look at the authors who over time gain that first class aura and success. Bad writers?
Some, yeah. But even some of those are writing better than we may like to think. I’ve done a fair amount of analysis and writing about that. I’ll get back to craft next month on WU, promise.
On the positive side of things, it’s refreshing to see someone so deeply entrenched in the “traditional” corporate way of doing things be so honest about perceptions–usually these are subtle and implied more than outright stated. For a lot of years I never really understood what “privilege” meant because I wasn’t in a position of not having it, but then I became an indie author and I understood. Unfortunately, it means being perceived of as being of lower class than others, regardless of the merit of work or quality of writing.
I think what disconnects me here is the attempted idea of “meritocracy” and the connection of standing in class to things like “gorgeous writing” et al. I don’t think it’s so easy to simply say “Write well and you’ll be first class” (I’m paraphrasing) or “Just self-publish because your work is barely mediocre, at best, and you’re in freight.” In an ideal world, yes, great writing stands out. But we don’t live in an ideal world; we live in one where what drives corporations is less quality of craft and more quantity of sales, and where what’s good is not always popular and what’s popular is not always good.
To quote Jack Sparrow, “Humans aren’t cargo, mate.”
Me, I always thought of class as something that one has, not something that one is, and that the people who have the most class don’t think of other people as being in a class inferior to their own (or, I guess, others’; I’m not sure what you become in your analogy. Maybe a flight attendant?).
Will-
This is America and we all are equal. The class analogy I employed here was chosen to shake up some currently popular ways of thinking, most especially that we’re in the midst of a digital “revolution”.
If I may restate what you’re saying, it’s that bad fiction can get first class treatment and good fiction can sometimes be handed a ticket to freight. It’s not always a meritocracy, I think you’re saying, nor is what I describe as first class writing always what gets a first class ticket.
Life isn’t fair, natch, who would argue? But do consider a couple of things. Fiction can be good without being popular and also publishers aren’t wrong to put their money behind what sells. Who wouldn’t?
Publishers also put lots of money behind fiction that hasn’t yet proven itself in sales but which they believe in. Are their guesses capricious and grubby? Sure, sometimes, but more often those guesses are based on experience of what sells, particularly at $25. Read that stuff and it often (not always) has many or a lot of the qualities I describe.
Obviously there are a lot of shades of Grey…sorry, I mean gray. But over the long haul I do see that strong writing and great storytelling tend to succeed, whereas passable, imitative and rule-bound fiction tends to struggle.
Finally, I am not as sharply-dressed as most flight attendants. Nor do I hand out little cups of soda. I do try not to read rote announcements, though, but instead to offer some flexible advice to help authors understand what, for the most part, is the basis for success…, which is not agents, publishers, deals, formats, promotion or luck.
It’s great writing.
Thanks for the response. Hope I didn’t come off as confrontational, and further that alluding to a flight attendant hadn’t seemed that way; I hadn’t meant it to. I really did wonder where you, as a self-described “gatekeeper,” fit in your analogy.
I agree that in an ideal world, great writing stands out. Also that it is likely the number one characteristic of work that succeeds–especially in the long term.
I think the problem came when you conflated “self-published authors and electronic micro-presses” with what you’re labeling as “freight-class fiction.” I think if you had stuck solely to books or fiction, rather than attempting to bring authors themselves into it, your analogy would have been far more apt (and palatable). You state “While the Kindle bookstore can be an incubator of innovative fiction, for the most part it is an ocean of genre imitations if not amateurish writing,” but the problem with that statement for your argument is that it’s totally right. Which sounds weird, except that the Kindle bookstore includes all books, whether published by big corporate houses or digital nano-presses. You wrote a book on how to write a breakout novel, and I think that’s because a breakout novel–which let’s call, here, first-class fiction–is the exception to a general rule of otherwise safe, largely mediocre “ocean of genre imitations if not amateurish writing.”
Great writing–whether the author published his or her novel directly to the Kindle platform or managed to attract the attention of Penguin Random House–is great writing. The means of its origination and distribution shouldn’t matter. Just because a title is independent doesn’t make it “freight class,” and just because a book has a little dude with a bat on the spine (or, in today’s world, on its Kindle splash page) doesn’t make it “first class.”
It’s interesting you note how digital has helped corporate publishing, because of “low-cost/high-margin e-books.” You’re right, of course. Advances are down. Digital costs nothing to produce. Royalties are roughly the same as ever (what do they top out at? 25% from someone like HarperCollins)? Publishers don’t have to print books anymore because ebooks are allowing them to basically print money instead.
“Most authors are still knocking at the gate, too, since after all seventy percent of trade book sales are of print editions.” Tellingly, that link you included was to Bowker data. Which I’m sure you realize measures based on ISBNs–which means it’s vastly incomplete as many ebooks are published without them (they’re not required by any of the major digital retailers). It’s more accurate to say that 70% of the trade book sales Bowker can measure are of print editions, and that could leave out a lot of books on Kindle, iBookstore, Kobo, and Nook.
Finally, and not to Mr. Maass, but I’d appreciate if whoever edited my previous comment would mark it as such.
Will-
“Just because a title is independent doesn’t make it “freight class,” and just because a book has a little dude with a bat on the spine… doesn’t make it “first class.”
But what about a penguin, a building block house, a torch, a seed sewer, a rooster, a Viking ship, or (my favorite) a bear carrying a candle? Come on, Will, surely those spine logos guarantee a top quality read every time!
And non-ISBN titles? Oh man, junk every single one of them, right?
Well, of course not. I do notice, though, that when I read a lot of self-published fiction what I see is what I described. When I read a lot of spa-pampered hardcover fiction, what I read tends to exhibit the qualities I highlighted. Not always, but darned often.
If my formulation provoked, it was meant to. It was meant to get people thinking about their fiction. The way its written determines destiny–though of course you don’t have to choose a ride on the Viking ship if you don’t want to.
If I may, Will, one thing you hit originally seems a refrain in comments here, and in my conversations with writers in every setting. It’s, essentially, “How come crappy writing get big money pushes from publishers when my friend, say, wrote a brilliant novel that his publisher ignored? Not fair.”
It’s a valid frustration. Believe me, as an agent with 34 years under my belt I have experienced it probably more than most. Here’s my response.
When what we think is “crappy” writing sells big there’s usually a reason. (See Dave King’s comment today.) Those novels aren’t reaching large numbers of readers because publishers can make consumers buy them. They can’t. They sell because readers are responding to them.
So, for me the better question than how come lousy writers get the goodies, is the question: What are they doing that works and how can I steal their techniques and adapt them to my own ends?
That, to me, is a revolutionary attitude. Or perhaps it’s guerrilla warfare? Or just growing as a writer?
BTW, I thought your flight attendant quip was witty. Loved it.
The question you have to ask yourself, Will, is why should we care what the industry thinks of indie authors? All that matters are the readers, and they don’t give a damn what “class” an author may be in. They buy what they like—end of story.
This obsession with hierarchy is an industry obsession only, and always has been.
Yep. All that matters is getting and keeping readers. Everything else is just a distraction.
It’s interesting to look at the comments on the Writer Unboxed site and then those over at Passive Voice. At WU, it seems to be all writers who aspire to be traditionally published applauding your honesty. At Passive voice, we are mainly self published authors.
As a gatekeeper, you need to classify the inputs to allow you to find what you call first class work. It can be difficult, if not impossible, for you to understand that self published authors are not all putting their work out there hoping a traditional house or an agent will find them and take over – and take the lion’s share of the money.
Perry
Perry
It’s great that some authors are not looking for traditional publishing. I do get that and I like it.
I’ve got a pretty independent streak myself, believe it or not. Wouldn’t be in business for myself if I didn’t.
I also like literary devices that get people thinking and talking. Seems to have stirred a little discussion today, I hope.
“Freight Class novels generally take few risks. Too often they rely on character stereotypes, heavy-handed plots, purple and obvious emotions, and messages and themes that are time-worn. Justice must be done. Love conquers all. Good vs. evil.”
Later, you talk about First Class novels:
“The cream class gets a double shot of extended life in bookstores, both in hardcover and later in paper. Their books can sell well at $25 and live long in trade paper. For First Class authors, success looks effortless. Goodies accrue easily. Recognition is instant and wide. Sub-rights sell. Awards happen.”
Are we classing these types of novel by theme, writing style, or by overall income and performance? Does a book’s sales speak to the “quality” you talk about?
I have read many books you would class as “First Class” that display all the points you outline in “Freight Class”. Vice-versa, too. If sales are the true differentiator, we don’t need people coming up with class systems – we can just look it up.
Nick-
See my reply to Will above and thanks for commenting.
I do think it rather strange that you think the quality of the writing is dependent on the medium used to deliver it. They are two separate variables. Correlation does not equal causation.
Same: see my reply to Will above.
This is still entirely separate from does it tend to be self-published or traditionally published. The truth is, no matter how good the writer is, if they go indie, they go indie. If they decide to go traditional and they’re amazing, maybe they’ll get published and maybe they won’t.
So while I agree with your statement on its face, it still conflates medium and publishing method with craft and success, and the two are not related.
If freight class is indie publishing and first class is traditional, then the whole metaphor in this sentence is irrelevant and false. The delivery method is a separate variable from the content quality.
The most I’ll grant you is that traditional publishing has a higher barrier of entry and that means there is less risk of system failure, but neither method has a cap on success and the strong writing and great storytelling is rising to the top in BOTH methods.
Liana-
“The most I’ll grant you is that traditional publishing has a higher barrier of entry and that means there is less risk of system failure, but neither method has a cap on success and the strong writing and great storytelling is rising to the top in BOTH methods.”
I’ll take it! And there you go. Strong writing is the key whatever your choice. High five.
I’ll say here what I told you when I saw this earlier:
This post made me itch to get back to my Morris chair to work on my edits. In other words, I see it as both a healthy dose of reality and an inspiration to further up my game.
Thanks, Kim.
Great snapshot of the situation but like everything in this crazy, digitized and constantly changing world, stay tuned because instability is the constant and what now seem like established strengths and assets today can become vestigial relics almost overnight. For instance, I can imagine the large publishers, increasingly dependent on cheap and quick digital, losing their traditional advantages and appeal to authors. As they crank out the ebooks, they are doing less editorial, less crafting of the physical book and less broad marketing, so over time, there’s the possibility they could lose their appeal to even bestselling authors. And while printed books rule now, who’s to say they couldn’t go the way of the CD–or of the USPS? Like I said, stay tuned.
Tony-
The CD and the USPS are means of delivery, not the content. It feels like things are in a whirl, but really they’re not. Fiction writers tell stories to readers. Whatever the delivery scheme, that basic transaction hasn’t changed.
What you forecast about editing is interesting. I do believe that if the Big Five publishers are to maintain their relevance they must not only distribute print editions but grow the art of editing. All the editors I know are highly dedicated and add greatly (listen to their authors) and yet I also read novels that I feel could have been better, haven’t you?
I bang the drum of quality quite a bit. For a reason.
Tony Vanderwarker, I use USPS every day (except Sunday) and I still listen to my CDs.
Don, I know you’re painting in broad strokes, and you’ve admitted to some exaggeration, but I have a hard time swallowing your description of “first class.” The implication seems to be that any fiction printed in hardcover meets those lofty conditions of “memorable characters, unique premises, story worlds instantly real, plots that grip even when slow, gorgeous writing, and themes that surprise, challenge and change us.”
I agree, those elements often characterize the truly great books. But really, do you think all – or even most – hardcover releases can lay claim to such accomplishments? If so, you must have a way better bookstore in your neighborhood than I do.
Believe me, I get your desire for all of us to aim high – and it’s an aspiration I share. But I can’t quite accept that a hardcover release is synonymous with the best writing. I’d argue that it’s more an indication of that particular book being perceived as the most marketable writing, regardless of its literary quality.
Thoughts?
Keith-
“But I can’t quite accept that a hardcover release is synonymous with the best writing.”
Ha! Well, obviously not. Not always. But do see my reply to Will above.
Keith Cronin, for instance, there are tons of “literary” books that contain excellent writing, but they are not marketable. The authors receive awards instead of money. Joyce Carol Oates said that calling a novel ‘literary’ is like giving it the kiss of death as far a sales and marketing and publication options go.
My first and main comment is still stuck in moderation, so I’m resubmitting it:
Well, yes. They get to keep the costs down and MORE of the profits from the author who actually deserves it because they pay skimpy royalties. I don’t really think it’s a plus that traditional publishers rip off their authors badly on ebooks.
False comparison. Indie publishers ARE printing books and doing a good job of it too. And selling those books in independent online bookstores all over the place because Createspace’s extended distribution is now free. Some authors are just now catching up to the fact that if they price their books high enough to give the bookstores a cut, they often don’t even have to make an effort to get listed right next to all sorts of traditional publishers’ books.
Note: Traditional publisher does not equal print publisher. Self- or indie publisher does not equal digital publisher. There are some of both on both sides of that equation.
Most writers are still knocking at that gate because they actually buy the myths you’re spouting here.
HIGH success at traditional publishing has happened only for a few have mastered the demanding business of book marketing. The numbers are fairly comparable between trad elite and indie elite and are unlikely for any other to reach on either side.
You know the first thing they taught me as an aspiring writer when traditional publishing was the ONLY game in town? Don’t quit your dayjob.
Sure, replace your income success is perfectly doable in either paradigm only if you work very, very hard and produce many GOOD books, and bestseller success is unlikely in either paradigm, but I find it telling there are more stories of indies being able to quit their day jobs than traditionally published, non-hybrid authors.
Wide print distribution is available to anyone now. Smart marketing to get a bookstore to put physical copies in a physical store is lacking, but due to shrinking shelf space, it’s unlikely a traditional publisher will get you in for very long either. Online independent bookstores carry many, many indie print books and are carrying more and more as indies are made aware of the requirements to get listed.
It used to be self-publishers spent a lot of money to have a lot of books that never sold more than 13 copies. Now, they can spend only as much money as they desire or none at all and sell on average no more than 1000 copies. The numbers are looking pretty good in terms of improvement.
Liana-
I’m interested in something you say here, about wide print distribution being available to anyone. Indie bookstores are a godsend, man I love them, but as an indie author have you figured out an inroad to the chains? Serious question, would love to have your take.
Let’s start with Lightning Source. That’s an option everyone knows about. The only issue if you use them is that you’re on your own developing the publishers catalog and sending it but here’s a book that includes how to do that: http://www.amazon.com/Think-Like-Publisher-Wesley-Smith-ebook/dp/B005GDF7MM
The updated 2014 post hasn’t gone up yet, but he’ll get around to it and his company is doing it. This was written by a former trad publisher/author and current indie/hybrid author.
Then there’s the current passive approach to distribution for indies: http://kriswrites.com/2014/01/15/the-business-rusch-pricing-discoverability-part-7/
And at last the post outlining the big shift in the first place: http://kriswrites.com/2013/05/15/the-business-rusch-shifting-sands/
Liana-
Dean and Kris are buds, so if I get the chance I’ll ask them about this topic. Thanks for the links and for getting back on this.
Don, I heartily recommend you do talk to Dean and Kris about the changes in publishing. One thing I love about them is how often they reasses their own thoughts on where the industry is going based on new data, and they are always trying to keep on top of things.
If you do have a chat with them, be sure to report your findings. I think we’d all love to hear what you take away from it.
Yes!
This post captures a lot of what I’ve seen with my clients’ publishing struggles and does it succinctly and elegantly.
What resonated most was the comment that writing is a meritocracy. In the end, good stuff sells and poor stuff doesn’t. True, there are a lot of flawed writers on the bestseller lists, but they almost always have strengths that outweigh the flaws. (I’d love to get my editorial hands on a couple of them.)
This is why I encourage clients working on a query letter to present their stories as simply as possible, without rhetorical flourishes. In the end, it’s the quality of the story that will get the book read.
The only place where I’d respectfully disagree is on the leap between the classes. I suspect all first class writers started out in freight. When you’re just beginning, you’re an amateur by definition, so your writing is going to be amateurish. As you add to your skills and confidence, you’re better able to create believable characters and an original voice. In the end, you move up through the classes, and at some point in the process, break into print.
Thanks for another good one.
Thanks so much, Dave. A comment from you means a lot to me.
“I suspect all first class writers started out in freight.”
Huh. You know probably more than a few, now that I think about it. That’s interesting. And encouraging. Appreciate it.
Donald,
Thank you for the words. The post managed to be stark and vibrant at the same time. I found myself nodding or commenting aloud, in the middle of an otherwise empty room. That’s healthy.
I am curious, though. “[P]rint publishers have the luxury of culling the prize cattle from the herd.” How often does that happen? If an author gets published by a small publisher who is NOT a vanity publisher, as I am about to be, would you recommend that they start submitting/resubmitting to agents and the Big Five? Does already having an ISBN help your chances of finding an agent?
I appreciate your time.
Katie-
“How often does that happen?”
Not often, though I do know that print publishers are watching for breakouts in the indie ranks. They’re not crazy.
The path you choose is up to you, but my advice is whatever you do write like you’re aiming for the top…by which I mean not the top of publishers’ lists or best seller lists but the top, maximum effect you can have on readers.
This is a great post, Donald. As someone who has seen both sides of publishing, I think there is much to be said for what the big five can provide. Large scale visibility and marketing budgets are the things that come to mind if we’re lucky enough to get them. While I sometimes object to the lack of control in the planning process, marketing is such a huge part of things, that, even with their help, it takes at least 50% of my time, which I often fail to provide. But it required even more when I self published. Distinguishing a book of fiction is difficult. My background was marketing, so I’ve been thinking a lot about branding lately. Do you think fiction writers can (or should) attempt to create a brand?
Brunonia-
Yes, but that brand is between the covers of the author’s books. It’s hardly anywhere else.
If your question, though, is about whether one should choose to write one type of book and select not to write others, well, that’s a complex question without one correct answer. Honestly, I think the issue really is one of reaching out to and connecting with fans of whatever you do.
The hardest pattern to make work is making every book highly different. That’s not wrong it’s just a challenge to sustain a constant readership. Not everyone will like everything you do.
(But, heck, that’s a bit true of series writers too. Never have I seen books in a series sell the same number of copies each time!)
Your question really requires some time, face to face and coffee or alcohol.
Great insight. I think face to face time with coffee or alcohol sounds like a fine plan.
Interesting breakdown. I’ve often wondered if it’s just other writers who experiment with the self-pubbed writers and their offerings of free or dirt-cheap entertainment. The 70% number still amazes me. I just assume that I’m the last to pick up on the latest technology, so if I’m reading by Kindle-light, everyone else must be as well. I have to look to my non-writing friends for a better market gauge. Sure enough, they like paper, and they like to stick with one or two of their favorite authors. Reading is time consuming, so they don’t like to waste time with an unknown. Sure, it’s not fair. But what is? Even if we never make it out of Freight, we continue to do this because we have to. If and when I do make it to First Class, it won’t be because of my political prowess, it will be because I busted my ass and continued to learn and practice my craft. Thanks for the post, Don.
Ron-
Yeah, that’s what I think too. Thanks.
Mr. Maass, It’s interesting that you’ve compared writers/ published authors to the passengers on a cruise ship. While it might be a fair comparison, it evokes the feeling that you’re stuck on the deck you’ve been given for that trip, and can only aspire to first class for the next time around. I like to think of my own writing journey as being proactive; I’m not stuck in steerage, I’m growing in other ways, all the time.
I guess it depends on how you look at things. I see writing as another art form. I don’t write to make money; I write to get better. (I think I’ve improved.) Sure, I query in the “traditional” way, and maybe one of these days my very own ship will come in, but I’m not counting on it. It’s not point of writing (for me) anyway. My point is to create art, then share it with others.
It’s just my opinion, and I know of other writers who feel violently opposed to self-publishing, but many authors self-publish for reasons other than vanity.
Anyway, it makes for interesting discussions. :-) Thanks for bringing it up.
You bet, Joanne, thanks for joining in.
Dang, what a post. (As evidenced by the vibrant discussions here in the comments, which I also love.)
Whether or not I agree with every single one of your statements is kind of besides the point, isn’t it? You’re trying to make me think, question, reevaluate. Mission accomplished. Thank you.
Hard to argue with me, I have to agree. LOL. Seriously, great discussion today. Thanks to you and everyone.
Pretty accurate and it’s good to get people to focus on craft. In the bad old days very few authors got an agent and got published on their first or even second manuscript. But now many people are slapping those up on digital expecting results.
I do disagree that print is necessary. I disagreed with Mike Shatzkin when he said the same thing and he wouldn’t budge. I simply know that I, and several of our authors here at Cool Gus, do quite well with over 95% of our sales being digital. As a small publisher, print brings in costs we don’t want in our overhead. We use Createspace, but it’s a pull rather than push system. However, I suspect we are going to see some drastic changes in Amazon’s print distribution. We’ve seen hints of that with kiosks being set up in various places– if the POD machine can get to a size and efficiency to be in kiosks, that would be a big game changer.
I have picked up a sense of having weathered the storm among those in traditional publishing. I look forward to checking in on those people in a year or so.
Bob! Thanks for chiming in. Nice to see you, we’re due for a beer, no?
“I look forward to checking in on those people in a year or so.”
Likewise. Interesting what you say. I know one other e-first publisher who’s doing well in “e”, but it’s with specific types of fiction. His top seller in units is doing well and would be considered so at the Big Five, too. But it’s only one. I continue to feel that print (costly and inefficient as it may be) is needed to grow big, though if you’re happy without it more power. Bottle that magic, baby!
Did I just agree with Mike Shatzkin on something? Strange day.
I don’t have anything to add or argue here, just wanted to stop by to say how nice it is to see a controversial topic being candidly and maturely discussed. I’m impressed with the post and by the fact that the comments have remained civil and thoughtful. This is why Writer Unboxed is one of the top sites for writers! Thanks Don!
Well thanks, Annie. Nice crowd here. Smart, supportive and respectful. I love WU.
I love your analogy of the independent publishing “revolution” to a gold rush. I like to think that in a few years time, most of those who expected to get rich quick will drop out when they realize it’s not easy money. Whether or not they get picked up by traditional publishing houses, those who keep working to improve their skills and provide quality reading entertainment will gradually build a big enough fan base to make it work. Just like the gold rush, the ones really profiting now are the new service providers.
Cruise ship? I thought it was a train.
BTW, Don, replying to everyone in the discussion must have eaten up most of your day. Thanks!
Ruth Donald: I, too, thought we were on a train. And the idea of the “gold rush” is perfect.
Don, this is a very smart post, and spot-on in its analysis / analogies. And just like in real-life travel, I get the sense that literary “coach class” is becoming more and more like what my family affectionately refers to as “cattle class” when we travel: the seat size is shrinking, a growing number of passengers is packed into each square foot, comfort has taken a nose dive, amenities are paltry and you usually have to pay for any extra services, including food. Yet we pack our bags and climb aboard, focusing on getting to our destination!
Sharon-
All of us who fly nowadays can relate, I’m sure. Moo.
This is technically true, but misleading in the extreme. There is no typical book title. The print/ebook mix varies from 100% print to 99+% ebook, depending on the particular title. The fact that 70% of trade book sales are print may be important to a big trade publisher, but it is worse than useless for a writer.
When you look closely at more genre-specific statistics, you see that erotica and many subgenres of romance are heavily weighted to ebooks and online print sales (70-90%). But even genre specific statistics don’t tell the whole story. There are many types of books that will never get bookstore distribution that can find a huge audience without it.
The most important thing to remember about the sales of a particular title is that book sales in general are governed by two competing power laws, sales per title and purchases per buyer. The best sellers have orders of magnitude greater sales than the “average” book. Likewise, avid readers buy orders of magnitude more books than the “average” consumer. To have a bestseller, you have to appeal to buyers who buy a handful of books per year. For that, it helps to have bookstore distribution. But writers can have a successful career by supplying stories for people who read several novels a month. There’s no benefit to bookstore distribution to reach power readers (although library distribution would be beneficial).
William-
No question, certain categories work better in “e” than others.
You don’t mention pricing but that certainly plays in too. (The biggest complaint I get from authors about their e-editions from print publishers is that they’re priced too high.)
Big, blunt statistics do miss a lot of the nuances, as you say. And for sure it’s possible to find much of one’s audience in “e”. Erotica authors know that. So for such authors, why not? Self-publish, love the high royalties and have a blast.
Most authors I meet in most categories are looking for print publication, though. One doesn’t need it, perhaps, but it’s striking to me how many want it, including some of the most successful “e” authors.
I’ve been in the industry for 30 years. I was a solid mid-list writer. No more. I’m fortunate that a small press, Torrey House picked up my new novel, 29, and is bringing it out in August. I was fortunate that I had a presence on NPR to help my books.
Your analysis is clever. However, I teach writing, hang out with other good mid-list writers and have watched and been affected by the corporate congealing – as it were – of what used to be hundreds of good presses. I’ve also watched as the people making decisions about what gets published tend to be in the marketing departments.
So, as I woman who once believed she would earn her living as a writer (seven nationally published books), I don’t like the breezy tone of your piece. I find it condescending. And, I’d suggest you interview a few of us who are teaching, clerking, doing anything to support our craft.
One last question: Can you name a dozen of these writers who are selling well; and out of that number, those who are older than 40? : “First Class fiction is characterized by memorable characters, unique premises, story worlds instantly real, plots that grip even when slow, gorgeous writing, and themes that surprise, challenge and change us. Not only do we read every word, First Class writing makes us whistle in admiration.”
Isn’t Stephen King over 40? I’m pretty sure he’s riding first class. So is Patterson, George R.R. Martin, Joyce Carol Oates, lots more…
Mary-
Only 30 years in the industry? Welcome, newcomer. (Kidding. This is my 37th year, so we’re kind of the same generation. I love how you call industry consolidation a “congealing”. That made me laugh.)
Sorry, I’ll try not to be breezy.
“First class” authors over 40? (Meaning who write according to the criteria I mentioned?) I’ve never seen that measured scientifically, but I would put down pretty big money that there are far more of them over 40 than under.
Mary, I think the changes in publishing have raised the bar for all but, when you think about it, what’s changed the most is consumers. For $25 readers expect one hell of a reading experience. They want a lot for $15 too.
Stuff I used to be able to sell as an agent ten or fifteen years ago and call mid-list, I can’t sell anymore. That’s not because publishers don’t want to publish it. It’s because consumers won’t buy it, not in sufficient numbers.
Offer it for $2.99 as an e-book and that picture changes. That’s partly what I’m saying in my post.
I teach writing too, and what I teach are the techniques I have observed in fiction that gets over the bar, that we experience as “great” fiction, and that create the melding (not, I hope, congealing) of literary and commercial intents in the 21st Century.
Would love to talk craft with you sometime. (You post prompts? Will check those out.)
Thanks for this post. A good reminder…
I’m not in any class at the moment because I’m not published (yet?), but I’m aiming for first. Anything else doesn’t really matter to me, because if I’m talking (writing) and nobody listens (reads), then I might as well be quiet. What’s the point? And I have been quiet for many years because I thought I didn’t really have anything to say.
Aiming for “first class” motivates me to keep reading, improving, implementing critique, writing a better novel every time, etc. Being published is not my goal. It’s the means to being read. I hope that doesn’t sound arrogant, because I’m not at all sure that I’ll succeed. Some days I think I can, other days I’m glad I have a “real job” as well. :-)
Couple comments from the back of the train.
I’m a trad pub romance author who has hit the lists and nailed some Best Books. SEVENTY percent of my readership is reading on devices, which is not unusual for my genre. FAR more than 70 percent of my revenue comes from this sector of my readership. To continue writing for the other 30 percent of my audience as a trad pub author, I must surrender a ton of control over the product to others who are less invested in the book’s success than I am. (That there is your basic healthy bush of literary fig leaves.) I endure a development schedule long enough to gestate a baby plough horse, and I wait sometimes years for my compensation.
I give up control over titling, pricing, meta data, schedule, and choice of editors. I give up flexibility and I give up cost of money, so my books have trad pub access to stores. (PR is a whole ‘nother rant, but show me a trad pub author, and I’ll show you somebody floggin’ the goods.)
Nobody else in the trad publishing pipeline expects to work for free 30 percent of the time (well, maybe an agent expects to). That arrangement doesn’t leave an author feeling respected or inspired… or very smart.
Patricia-
I meet a lot of romance authors and what you express are feelings shared by many of them. Romance sells especially well in “e”. Considering that, the royalty share for authors feels unfair.
Every agent I know (and that’s a lot) agree. What would happen if print publishers doubled their e-royalty rates? Interesting to think about, isn’t it?
Well, I’ll console myself over the fact that some consider me “freight class” by FLYING first-class, I guess.
(By the way: Your agency was one of the ones that turned down my first book. I’m SO HAPPY that you–and everyone else–did! I made more my first month self-publishing than I had at the day job [which I’ve long since quit]; and my fifth month, I made 7.5 times more. So, thanks.)
Rosalind-
Congrats, I’ll check out your book. (Title?)
Thanks for your courteous response. I apologize for being curt; confess to being put off by your tone.
I have eight books out now since I queried you two years ago. The “Escape to New Zealand” series contains five books; “The Kincaids” series has three. My latest is “Asking for Trouble.” Amazon just paid to have an audio version produced of the book that everyone turned down, ‘Just This Once” (due out in late February), requested the German rights to the same book, and have asked me (via Montlake) to submit a new series to them (haven’t decided about that one yet).
So, yes, it all worked out great!
A lot of people here seem to be reacting to the idea that “the best writing” gets traditionally published, in print, while most self-published stuff is poorer-quality writing. One aspect of writing quality that is harder to point out, because it requires such a macro view, is story quality. I believe that story quality – that is, the overall structure, the story’s meaning, and the logic of the plot – figure VERY heavily in marketability and the ultimate sales figures, even if readers don’t fully understand why they are buying.
In general, what I’ve found among the self-pubbed novels I’ve read that were ostensibly well-written – interesting style, good grammar, clever dialogue, etc. – was often a story that was flawed in some important way. The plot points didn’t occur in the right places, or one of them was skipped entirely, rendering the story strangely imbalanced. Or the main character’s motives seemed off somehow. Or the plot just didn’t make much sense or was contrived. Now, yes, you do find these flaws in some traditionally printed novels, but generally you’ll only find one, and it will be much less overt (and crippling) than the ones I’ve seen in self-published novels.
Thank you, Leanne. We do hear a lot of justification for self-publishing (which for some makes sense) and a lot of slamming of “traditional” publishing (which is not always great).
Yes, we hear a lot about self-publishing, the process. We hear less about self-published novels, the product.
BTW, I am amused by the current phrase “traditional publishing”. There is publishing, period. Formats and the internet don’t change that. A novel is written. It’s put in a form readers can buy. It’s marketed. Readers buy and read it–or not. Same as it ever was.
Some good stuff here… And some serious flaws of reasoning.
First, yes, ebooks have largely been a boon to publishers. Publishers earn a MUCH higher percentage of the cover price on ebooks than they do on print – they are significantly more profitable, as Penguin (for example) pointed out in their stockholder report about a year ago. Largely, this is on the back of paying writers a lower percentage of profits, and keeping a larger percentage of those profits for the publisher (thus, the push for a greater royalty share on ebooks, which I think will eventually happen…).
Second… Yes, it is certainly true that publishers have been dumping the midlist for the high stakes gambles games. However, this shows a poor sense of the history of the industry – because just a few decades ago, the majority of both profits and stability came from the midlist, not the breakout hits. Because breakouts could not be manufactured – because they were/are so risky – the “throw spaghetti at the wall to see what sticks” model of publishing is high stakes gambling at its worst. If anything does put one or more of the big publishers out of business, it will likely be this decision.
Third, the gold rush hysteria is pretty much over. Yes, there was one – especially when the Kindle Select program made self published ebooks dominate over 75% of the top-hundred bestseller lists by genre, for a few months! Of course, then Select was pared down, and things returned to a more baseline level. At present, about half the top hundred list for ebooks in each genre of fiction are self published. It’s held there for around a year now, with mild fluctuations (the overall bestselling ebook list on Amazon averages 35% self pub, because the top ten titles in each genre tend to be more trad than self).
Yes, there are classes.
We have first class – writers making a six or seven figure amount per book, either from a major publisher or self publishing. Interesting tidbit – almost as many SP writers make this amount as trad pub writers. These folks represent significantly less than 0.01% of the writing population.
Right behind them, we have the working class – people making a good living wage from their work. Median US income is $32,000, so I’m talking about writers making something in that ballpark or better. The majority of these are indie writers – thousands of indie writers making that sort of income from their work. Some trad pub writers do, too, but nowhere near as many. With midlist advances plummeting, trad pub novelists need to sell several novels per year to make that, these days.
Then we have the aspiring pro, or the semi-pro. The writer who doesn’t make enough to make a living. Some want to (aspiring pro). Others are content to work the day job and produce a novel a year to help with the bills some (semi-pro). This is where almost all traditionally published writers fall. It’s also where a huge chunk of indie writers fall.
Then there’s the amateur writer. We used to call this writer “unpublished” – their skill wasn’t up to snuff yet, and so they had not yet been selected to be published. Today, many of these writers publishes themselves. But the effect is the same – because readers don’t buy bad books. So most novices find themselves selling perhaps a handful of copies, and then watch their work plummet to the depths of the Amazon ranks, never to be seen by potential readers again. Some amateurs take this as a sign they need to improve – much like the rejection slips of old. Others don’t (again, an awful lot like the rejection slips of old). This determines which of these writers will progress and which will not – the same way reaction to rejection slips does.
The “classes” are not so divided as Maass would have us think. There are large differences; but on the whole, the digital publishing changes have been very good for writers – although they’ve been very bad for midlist writers who’ve stuck to traditional-publishing-only. For indie writers and hybrids, the changes have been superb. For top sellers, the changes have largely been neutral, no significant gain or loss.
Excellent comments, Kevin, thanks for joining in.
Wait, are you saying that highly successful authors are a small minority in both in print and “e”? Well, that’s talking in my terms, that’s highly interesting to me. What I want to know is, WHY? What are those authors doing–in their writing–that others are not?
I’ve written several books fired by just that curiosity. All the statistics you offer are worth investigating but more relevant to me is what makes successful fiction successful.
It’s an excellent question. Really, it’s the “right” question, if there is one – or at least a better question than some of the ones I hear asked. ;)
I’m much less worried about how a particular writer chooses to get work in front of readers, and more interested in how to tell stories readers love. So we’re in agreement there!
Just a note: median income is more like $52,000
(http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/22/us/politics/us-median-income-rises-but-is-still-6-below-its-2007-peak.html?_r=0).
I don’t know if $32,000 really qualifies as “a good, living
wage.”
$51k is median household income. Median per capita income was about $27.5k last year, according to the US Social Security Administration.
Just the other day Connecticut made national headlines by voting to raise their minimum wage to $10.10/hr, which gives a full time worker $21,000 a year in pre-tax income, in one of the most expensive states in the country.
No, $32k a year is not a COSY income. But it’s more than the mean US worker makes each year. And it’s livable, in most areas of the country.
Shoot. Thanks for setting me straight. So “working class” seems like a good description. I wonder how many writers out there (I’m think fiction writers, especially) would fall into the working class and how many into the middle class. Right now, a lot of us are still in the is-it-actually-possible-to-make-money-writing? class. It’s interesting to note that even many writers who are household names have other jobs (teaching is probably the most common), or they monetize their fame in ways other than writing.
Well, the GOOD news is, I am very confident there are more writers today making “working class” incomes than ever before. Most of them are indie writers. The self publishing boom has shifted a lot of people from barely making anything to making a small but viable living.
Right now, about one in two ebooks sold in the US were self published. About one in four fiction titles sold in the US (print and ebook) were self published. Over a billion dollars of self published ebooks were sold in the USA alone in 2013.
There are a LOT of books in that pool, soaking up that billion dollars, so the average isn’t that hot. But thousands of writers are doing pretty well, now that they’ve cut most of the middlemen out of the money.
Also, I think the reason so many “name” writers used to have other jobs is because when you’re stuck writing only one or two books per year, you sort of need to do something with all the rest of your time!
A slow, SLOW writer produces 500 words per hour. A 100k word (longish) novel is therefore 200 or so hours of work. Add in fifty more hours of brainstorming, outlining, and research, and another two hundred hours of revision, and you’re looking at 450 hours as the very most being spent on a single book (most books go to the publisher with maybe half that).
That’s what, 11 weeks of work in the real world? So if you do two of those per year, what are you doing with the rest of your time?
That’s why we’re seeing so many writers producing 3, 4, 6, even 8 or 10 excellent books a year now. Because productivity is simply about spending more time in the chair writing. And now that writers CAN do that full time, many of them ARE.
In defense of those of us indie writers who only publish one book a year (sometimes just barely within the calendar year as with my last one which was released Dec. 22–15 months after the one before that), if you write compelling characters in a series of books readers want to know more about, you can do more than make working-class income. My gross last year (without a single month of royalties for a new book) was $401,000. And that was pretty much for two $4.99 books and one that was $3.99 only half the year and free over the summer, then 99 cents the last few months.
True, that’s not a median or average–just me. And I have many indie author friends making more than that (albeit with a lot more books out than I have). But I still have to consider this my full-time work. Between researching, traveling to conventions to meet readers, marketing efforts, and writing/revising, I work 15-hours days (unless I’m on deadline and then I barely stop).
Kally
This was very informative. I especially liked the different classes mentioned. Freight, coach, and first…made me self reflect there based on the attributes you attached to each class. Thanks for posting this. I will share with my writing group when I see them.
So, you are the author of The Breakout Novelist. I’ve been meaning to read that one. In regards to what you said, I think you said it well and said it all. As a self-published author, I agree with those comments as well and emphasize that in that role there are many hats to wear; some are worn well and while some get very ragged from the efforts; and, with a few, there turns out to be little time left or none at all. It’s tough, but oh so rewarding.
As far as the industry goes, and again being self-published, it’s finger-top accessible. Whether or not that is good depends on the author, the product, and the goals.
Thanks for writing on this. I may finally get that book!
I would say that I am a First-Class writer, according to the descriptions of the types of books I write that span multiple categories and defy labeling because of their originality, but I charge my hard-working readers freight class prices. I’ve grossed half a million dollars in my first two full years self-publishing (2012 and 2013 income). I have my loss leaders (a free intro and 99-cent combo of the first two e-books), and then make a living off the three subsequent titles priced $4.99 each for epic-length titles from 140,000 to 185,000 words in my ongoing Rescue Me saga. And I am nowhere near the most successful writer in my indie writers’ group, but I’m not mid-list author there either.
I don’t spend a lot on paid advertising, but I do engage daily with my readers on Facebook and elsewhere.
I think the flaw in the description of first-class is saying they must have a tie-in to bricks-and-mortar stores with paperback or hardback books. With Print on Demand, my books are available around the world via Amazon and CreateSpace.com for $15-18 and via my own web site for slightly less–and personally signed. Would I love to be the next talked-about series on the Today Show–hell, yeah, because I write a damn sight better than some of the ones they have featured, like Fifty Shades of Grey. But I continue to grow as a writer so I have every expectation to turn this series into a cable TV series some day and am sure the media will pay attention then.
I also treat this as a business and hire the professionals who make me look good–a 5-person editorial team, a cover artist, a formatter (who could help a lot of NY publishers look a lot better in e-books, too, if he wanted to mess with them). I see all this talk about ALL the money we put out to get our books on the market, but honestly, I’ve always been able to make back my total expenses on a book’s production costs within days of uploading to Amazon and Barnes & Noble. (With my first book, it took a few weeks, but was only about $200. With my last, my production costs were about $8,000, but I believe in paying my top-notch staff more than they charge other authors because they’re worth it–and I made that back within a few days of sales.)
On the other hand, traditionally published authors give and give and give a percentage of their royalties (income already much lower than what I’m making) month in and month out. They are the unfortunate ones paying through the nose for the professional services at the publishing house, not the self-published author who contracts out her own production team.
I know sales probably aren’t going to continue forever at the rate they have the last two years (although last year, my gross royalties paid doubled from the previous year’s six figures without me even putting out a single new book. (I went 15 months between releases–I take my time to put out a book when it’s ready and don’t flood the market with a lot of quickly written books just to make a quick buck off my readers. I write for the working-class reader and they don’t have money to waste.)
Then again, the year is off to a good start. I already have grossed an estimated $107,000 for my January to March first quarter this year (thanks mostly for two of the three months including sales of a new release).
Having been around traditionally published authors for decades (mostly through Romance Writers of America), I don’t know of any who were able to say that from a contract from Harlequin, Kensington, or any of the other NY publishers.
So, I’ll gladly continue to write first-class books at freight-class prices and give readers something they won’t find anywhere else to read and re-read to their heart’s content.
Kally
http://kallypsomasters.com
Kally-
Wow, thanks for joining in! Huge congrats. Those are first class sums you’re talking about, good for you. You are completely on top of your marketing and strategy, too. I’m impressed, especially with your investment in editing. You are both author and publisher, a true publisher, which seems to me how self-pub works when it works.
Now I can’t wait to read your fiction. First class? Great. Looking forward to it.
When I was writing my first novel, I read every craft book I could find, including two of yours. Given the industry’s recent changes, I’d braced myself for the worst, but then my debut novel sold for much more than I ever imagined. I was going for coach and now with foreign rights selling as well, I dare to hope for first class. The novel has a 2015 pub date and as I start book 2, I want to know what can I do to make sure my writing is first class? Other than read award winning literary fiction, how can a published author improve her writing?
Aline-
One starting point are the craft posts here on WU. The insights of some of my fellow contributors here blow me away. The message always is to aim higher, and better still you can find out how.
Congrats on your upcoming debut, very exciting.
An excellent post. No holds barred. Just the way I like it. It will be interesting to see what this industry will become in 10 years as things settle down.
A lot of self-publishers talk as if traditional publishers are dinosaurs that will become extinct and that self-publishers with their revolution in ebook and ease of publishing will take over. They seem to ignore the fact that traditional publishers have embraced, some slower or faster than others, ebooks and while it statistically takes longer for a larger organization to reinvent itself to take advantage of the new ways of doings, that doesn’t mean that they can’t. Once they make the adjustment though, they still have the skills and knowledge that make a real difference. They know books and the craft. And in the end, that is what it’s all about despite the new wrapping paper. People don’t read books because of the technology, they read it because of story, plot, characters, craft, all the things that make a good book.
“seventy percent of trade book sales are of print editions”
I’d be interested to know what happens when you strip out the best sellers. It’s hard to imagine traditional print debut novels get much shelf space these days when retailers can pick from titles with proven sales records.
Fascinating post tentalizingly hung on the One Percent vs. 99 Percent paradigm. It hovers around an essential question: what makes for a good story that will sell and land you in the “first class”. Your answer: “memorable characters, unique premises, story worlds instantly real, plots that grip even when slow, gorgeous writing, and themes that surprise, challenge and change us. ”
So, according to you, that’s the ticket for the first class. Or is it?
I agree that this is what describes a “good story”. Unfortunately, with the digital revolution, such tickets have grown scarce.
Why? Because of the tsunami of self-published authors and the accompanying tide of titles overwhelming everyone and everything.
Don, I think you don’t make enough of the problem of “book discovery”. Before the digital revolution changed the game, we had three types of gatekeepers, each ensuring high quality in writing.
First, the “literary agent barrier”. When you jumped that barrier – i.e. got a contract with a good literary agent – then you faced the next barrier, a contract with a respected, traditional publisher, preferably one of the big ones. Once in a publishing house, there was a third barrier to jump: get out and stay out of the midlist and hit the top.
Three barriers, all gone now. So there are no gatekeepers on quality, and now the publisher may sit happily back and let the Kindle Store churn out winners like Amanda Hocking or Hugh Howey. Some of those authors will allow publishers to pick them up whole (like Amanda), some will resist and keep a piece of the cake, staying “hybrid” (Hugh).
I’d love to know from you Don how you see your role as a literary agent in this totally changed world. Do you scout the Kindle Store in search of big sellers that are also well written (according to your criteria)?
Ah, Claude, but now we have the only gatekeeper who counts–THE READER. By cutting out literary agents and out-of-touch publishers in NY, we cut to the chase. The READER will determine what is good and what isn’t, what they want to read and what they don’t. That’s what makes Maass’s class system kind of pointless. What HE deems to be that good read probably isn’t going to be what the majority of readers would deem a good read. He and other industry professionals of the old publishing paradigm are still holding onto that gate with both hands (and white knuckles)–but readers like mine (who, granted, aren’t into LIT-tra-chure, but just want to escape into a good read that gets them to think and maybe even changes their outlook on life) aren’t particularly flooding to read the books that were deemed acceptable reading material by the old-fashioned gatekeepers who tend to be looking for this year’s bestseller to put out in multiple re-iterations in 2-3 years. By then, readers have moved on to the next best thing. That’s the joy of the digital age, things don’t happen at a snail’s pace anymore. It’s really a very exciting time to be in publishing, whether a DIY like me who has no intention of ever going with a publisher (having heard the nightmare stories from recent selfies who were hugely disappointed with what they got) or someone who chooses to go with an agent or publisher and take a slower, more traditional route to finding their readership.
Everyone has to find what’s comfortable for them, though, and there are some authors who would never be comfortable as indie. And that’s fine. They’ll still have New York agents and publishers–if they can make it through the gates.
Kallypso Masters
USA Today Bestselling Author
This is one of the best posts I’ve read in the past five years to explain clearly and, I think, without bias, the state of the industry. And I truly appreciate your analogy about the class system (not caste system). It is spot on.
Hi Everyone. I must now return to my regular work, but before doing so I’d like to comment on our discussion itself and offer a forecast.
Thanks to everyone who commented on this post. The conversation has been civil, balanced and informative. Among other things, I have some new fiction to check out. How cool is that?
I hoped that my “class” system analogy for the digital “revolution” would provoke people (“Class”…”Revolution”…get it?) and it did. Many got the analogy and the underlying message: It’s not an industry that makes you successful but how you write your fiction.
Self-publishing folks were not amused, especially by an implication they saw that self-published fiction is lower quality, and they came forth to bristle, sling statistics and correct, point by point, errors in my “logic”. (Is the literary device of analogy “logical” by nature? It would seem so!)
I took a couple of digs at the Big Five too, but notably not a single fellow gatekeeper felt the need to come forth and defend “trad” publishing. Huh. Folks must feel pretty secure behind the walls of Jim’s “Forbidden City”.
One point is happily undisputed: Great writing is the most important factor in success. It’s a primary message at WU, I think, and it’s nice to see that affirmed by all. That some feel sour that less-than-great writing seems to get the support of Big Five publishers only underscores the agreement.
Finally, while I have presented my cheeky view of the state of the industry today, I did not predict where I think the industry is going. So here goes: As the strategies, costs and experience of the indie movement evolve, it will start to look more and more like traditional publishing, albeit more digital and online. Indie authors will become more dependent on third party services to do the collection of things that we call publishing. The true cost structure of independence will bring profitability down as more sophisticated competition heats things up.
Meanwhile, print publishers will learn new digital strategies and, slowly, be forced into–hear me now–paying higher digital royalties. Competition will make it necessary, and indeed it’s happening around the edges already. A more profitable picture for authors and better online strategies by “traditional” publishers will make that option newly attractive and its downsides less depressing.
The indie movement and the Big Five, I think, are both headed to the same place. Possibly they will converge, we’ll see. The sense of revolution and warring classes that we feel now isn’t natural and, ask me, exists because neither side of the industry has yet figured out the best way to publish in the 21st Century. When they do, they will look a lot alike.
One thing has never changed, though, and will never change: It’s authors and their terrific storytelling that get readers buying books, and nothing else.
Thanks again all, see you here at WU in future months with more advice on craft.
I ended up writing my own blog post in response to yours. Food for thought, indeed.
I use my pottery work as an analogy. There are ceramics artists and there are production potters. Stratifying them into classes doesn’t make a whole lot of sense, because their work serves different purposes.
In my metaphor, your ‘freight class’ is all beginning potters, who make work almost by accident and who haven’t yet mastered centering the clay on the wheel. I would no more buy their wares than I would buy the cliche-ridden, poorly edited book, regardless of genre or publication method.
http://ljcbluemuse.blogspot.com/2014/02/thoughts-on-new-caste-system.html
LJ-
As a collector of ceramics, I love your analogy!
“Great writing is the most important factor in success.”
If there’s one central message I’ve taken from reading your books, Don, it’s this. It’s become my motto.
:)
As I expected he would, J.A. Konrath effectively fisked Mr. Maass’s post. Anyone interested in the discussion should read it.
http://jakonrath.blogspot.com/2014/02/fisking-donald-maas.html
Well, that was a spectacularly unpersuasive fit of name-calling, notably devoid of facts. Is Konrath’s fiction as poorly written as his blog posts?
Have to agree the post came across as mean-spirited, overly defensive and sour grapes. Seems like Don’s post was taken as a dig on self-publishing as a whole. Didn’t read that way to me. As usual, Maass speaks the truth as he sees it, eloquently and kindly.
Not to change the subject,but definition of ‘terrific storytelling’ worries me more than current trends. Our criteria belong to 20th century.
As a former big 5 sales rep turned author, this is the best post I’ve read about the current state of publishing. And one of the few that does not try to pit traditional against self-pub, when in many cases the hybrid authors see much of the success. Their are benefits to both worlds in my opinion.
I decided to take the traditional publishing road because my goals as an author are first and foremost to reach as many readers as possible with the best book I could write. For me, that means working with an agent and the resources provided by a traditional publisher (editor, copy editor, cover art, marketing). I have a 2 and 3 year old and deadlines every couple of months this year. While many have the time to be their own publisher (and are very good at it), I don’t. In the future, if I do have the time and wish to self-pub, I plan to keep my agent. Without her, I don’t think I’d take as many risks. It helps to have someone give a very honest “this works” or “this doesn’t”:)
I wish it didn’t pit trad against indies, but a direct statement that indies are all in freight class where only formulaic, problematic writing lies is flat-out insult, no matter how nicely couched and side-stepped in the comments.
If indies had been spared that, we probably would have been more “amused” to use Maas’s word.
As a young writer who was lured by the shiny promises of fame and fortune by self-publishing gurus only to hit the cold, hard wall of economic reality, I agree with most of this post. However, I think your class system combined two distinct things that are only tangentially related: literary quality and commercial success.
In your post, freight class books are the equivalent of old dime novels and don’t do well, while first class fiction is brilliant and easily nets royalties and accolades. But even in the traditional publishing trade, pulp novels with one-dimensional characters and cliched plots make the bestsellers lists, while many brilliant should-be-classics collect dust on the shelves.
It’s true that publishers don’t make decisions based on sentimentality, but they also don’t necessarily make them based on quality. They make them based on what fits their release schedule and what they believe will sell. They need books of a certain quality–readable, interesting, easy to fit in a marketable genre. They don’t need books of a very high quality. In fact, the most high quality, innovative fiction often isn’t marketable at all.
Not that the self-publishing route is any better, mind. Potential readers select books based on (a) what their friends are reading, (b) covers, (c) one-sentence hooks, and (d) the reviews that float to the top on Amazon. The writer’s skill doesn’t even factor in until they open to the first page, and then it’s just a trick of keeping them interested until the end of the preview.
The top-selling self-published novels are the likes of Fifty Shades of Grey, and the top-selling traditional novels are the likes of Twilight. They are hardly the cream of the literary crop. I wouldn’t say authorship is a meritocracy so much as a merciless game of crowd-manipulation and chance.
Well said and very good points, indeed. In the end it’s just business.
Agreed. I think you hit the nail on the head.
Awesome rebuttal, Tamara.
Excellent post, Don.
I’ve been in this biz for 20 years, and I’m familiar with First Class, Freight, and everything between. I have both indie and Big 5 publisher books launching this year. Just my humble opinion, but I think this is a painfully soulless, simplistic, and inaccurate take on the state of the industry. Meanwhile, most of what Konrath says in his rebuttal is just as lopsided, and I find his tone really tiresome.
I promise you, my darlings, there are no rules, no railcars, no right way that applies to everyone. Traditional publishing is not the evil empire and self-publishing is not Satan’s duodenum. There is no Berlin Wall separating the two. Conversation that pits one against the other, generalizes about one or the other, strives to vilify or deify one or the other — it’s not helpful to authors who should be calmly weighing the benefits of each for every individual book. Posts like this are a questionable use of time that could be devoted to writing. Or better yet, to READING. (Remember reading?) Or walking the dog. Or playing darts. Or calling your mother. The list of worthier endeavors is long and inviting. To thine own self be true.
I’ll just return now to my own little corner in my own little chair while the thundering blowholes blog each other to orgasm.
Very illuminating, helpful perspective. Thank you.
I was just thinking through a response of my own when I read yours. You are right on target.
WHAT SHE SAID.
Peace, Seeley
Good points and well taken. This subject is too big to categorize so curtly. Publishing is not black and white– it’s mostly gray.
Another great post and I’m loving all the comments. (Loving them so much that my lunch just got cold while I was reading through them.) While I can see that the classes you’ve introduced are almost designed to create controversy, I agree with the overall message.
Step 1: Write a phenomenal book.
And so next time someone asks me why I’m bothering with all this revision when I’ve already finished my novel and could just self-publish it and rake in the moolah, I shall point them in this direction.
“It’s authors and their terrific storytelling that get readers buying books, and nothing else.” –
somehow this seemed lost within the article as a whole
and tells me finding and choosing my paths is more important now, in my 60s, than when i was decades younger
being able to share, at whatever level i am, is more important than attaining an acceptable (to someone else) level to be allowed to be heard
there is a democratization going on that, as expanded freedoms usually have done through-out history, creates chaos with choice, uncertainty with opportunity
i opt for the options and range of choices being added today to traditional publishing, ebooks – subscriptions services – audio books – blogs, than not having them
despite your consistently eye and ear catching style of writing don, i feel your analogies and perspective didn’t quite jive with your over-riding important theme :
“It’s authors and their terrific storytelling that get readers buying books, and nothing else.”
but without this freedom of discussion, the closed social alternative would be an even more terrible problem…
Konrath’s style rubs me the wrong way, too – but the facts are indisputable. He has a considerable number of novels in multiple genres “out there”, and his sales rankings are freely available to anyone who cares to display those novels on Amazon. Ditto for Barry Eisler. Ditto for several of the people who praise Konrath’s advice.
Konrath et al. do not claim that the e-book revolution is a gold rush. They claim it is a lottery wherein every book you write is a lottery ticket, so it makes sense to be as prolific as possible – but a lottery it remains.
Maas has, as far as I can tell from the web, NO novels “out there”. Only how-to books on writing novels. How-to advice that has not been put into practice by Maas himself. Now, you can be a fine theorist with worthwhile advice whether or not you are an equally fine practician – I have found much useful advice in Maas’ books myself – but presumably an author with a dozen-plus well-selling novels in the market might also have a few worthwhile experiences to share?
Either way, this whole us-against-them between traditional publishing and self-/e-book publishing seems to me to be a waste of time.
In my humble layman’s opinion (I dabble in writing and do IT for a living), BOTH approaches are rapidly becoming dinosaurs. Book-streaming has begun, and will most likely do to books (or text-stories overall) what streaming has already done to television & radio, movies & music. That means prices are going down – fast. First it was $5 for a novel that was marvelous, way back when a paper novel cost $10. Then 99 cents was the new fantastic. Now you get a “box set”, i.e., a half-dozen or more novels for 99 cents. A box-set of e-novels for 99 cents is only one step away from streaming unlimited books for a fixed monthly fee.
If authors AND agents (AND publishers) all want to survive, going electronic is a foregone conclusion. But how to earn money in the electronic/wired bookworld when streaming makes customers expect everything to be cheaper than dirt-cheap – that is the challenge everyone should apply their mental energy towards solving. Fighting one another over which of two antiquated modes of money-making is more worthy/noble/artistic/you-name-it is like the old story of the people in Constantinople arguing about how many angels could dance on a pinhead while the city walls were being battered down.
Unfortunately, streaming is already here in the form of pirate trying to turn respectable book outlet–Scribd. Even those of us who do not opt in to have our books streamed here are at the mercy of all the pirated copies already there that Scribd either can’t or won’t remove. (I think I counted at least 35 of my four titles up there–none, if any, my most recent versions of any of my first four e-books. Thankfully, last time I checked, they don’t have my new release because I refused to even upload it to Smashwords, much less opt into this mess.)
I would consider responsible, ethical, legal streaming similar to a library with which I wouldn’t have a problem. But at least a library buys a book and shares that single copy to one device/patron at a time (making it unavailable at the library during the loan time). They don’t allow patrons to make unlimited Xerox copies (downloads) of the books on their shelves the way Scribd and other book pirates do. (And I’ve e-mailed back and forth with Mark Coker about that shameful deal Smashwords entered into with Scribd, basically selling authors down the river. No amount of persuasive argument from him is going to convince me anything else happened because authors definitely got the short end of that dipstick while Smashwords will probably benefit nicely from the deal.)
Kally
Kallypso Masters, USA Today Bestseller Author
Thanks for this perspective. Book-streaming’s a new concept to me (I’m usually behind the curve on things), but it makes sense. One question– will streaming alleviate the discoverability issue, or make it worse?
Like so many things up and coming and newly happening, I can only guess based on what I think we know. Abtuse enough, right ;-)
But, my guess, is that discoverability “may” be slightly better for a person like me, unknown, based on both how my wife and I use Netflix and my experience to-date with the free trials offers from Oyster & Scribd.
With Netflix, we try many many titles we would not otherwise even glance at, because it doesn’t cost us extra to do so. And we can cycle through as many movies as we physically are able and emotionally want to.
During the last few weeks, trying out the book subscriptions, I’m finding much the same, with one important difference from DVD’s, I can hold in my collection or library more titles that I can cycle through at my own pace. Again without additional cost.
I can sample books I “might” be interested in. Put a title aside, then return to it later. Most of the books I’ve dabbled in and am continuing with are from authors I didn’t know before.
So, for now, I’d say the subscription services bode well for discoverability.
Valid points about piracy – although the jury is still out as to whether piracy hurts or helps an author’s overall sales. You can find quite a few (supposedly) in-the-knows who think that piracy is a kind of promo. And quite a few pirates who claim they would buy if only buying was cheaper/easier/more-ubiquitous than d/l-ing a pirate PDF version.
Either way, streaming might actually be a workable way to fight piracy. Of course, some streaming does offer download-for-offline-use which can be cracked even if DRM’ed – and even if they don’t, you COULD d/l a book by copying it one streamed page after another. But still, it makes piracy a bit harder, and perhaps legal book-reading via streaming a bit more attractive.
Which brings us back to payment. Pay-per-view, pay-per-page, “all-you-can-eat”, or something else … it doesn’t really matter. EVERYONE involved in making and selling text-stories should be frantically pooling their experience and figure out how to survive when readers begin to earnestly expect text-story-content to be priced the same as YouTube vids.
PS : my apologies to you, mr. Maass, for mis-spelling your name in my previous post.
Like most authors, I’ve also been concerned about the price structure and royalty rate and bottomline pmt to me for having work in the subscription models.
I’m participating in both Scribd’s and Oyster’s programs. Have just begun, and have no concrete bearing yet how it’ll actually work out.
But I do tend to think, among the various ways pricing for our products (text-stories) will work out, I’ve read several articles comparing books to pricing for music, movies, videos, etc.
I think the crux seems to be that both music an most You-tube vids are shorter to produce and view/listen than a movie or a book.
So pricing, might lean closer to the movie subscription model than music or videos.
Yes, some book sets have been priced as low as 99¢. But I don’t see large numbers of these, and none that tempted me to part with my dollar.
Books, like movies, take longer to create, and consume.
And a lasting book subscription model, it seems to me, will have to satisfy (as per what I’ve read) three components: reader, writer, and business owner.
The latter has to have content, and the writer won’t (I believe) give away that content in numbers large enough, to satisfy need from the reader.
Some sort of balance will have to work out.
Better paying models will attract and keep better, or more desirable, writers. More wanted titles will attract more and better paying readers. And the right balance will keep a business, well, in business.
“How” this will work out in the near and mid-term future, I don’t know. But I think we’re going to find out. ;-)
As long as the subscription services ask me to opt in and that the participating authors are compensated in some way, subscriptions would be acceptable. I know from my attempts to find something to watch on Netflix (never anything I would care to spend time watching–but I don’t watch much TV) indicate that not everything *I* would be interested in were given to Netflix for distribution.
That might be what Mark Coke and Scribd and possibly Oyster (I didn’t even look at that one and didn’t opt in) aspired to, but until they clean up their sight (and they truly should have just gutted it and started anew–they continue to be a pirate site in the opinion of authors.
But if authors had some control over what was available, we could make sure only our most recent versions are uploaded. If we change covers, front and back matter, or even fix typos or errors missed in editing, we could submit newer versions.
The versions of my books at Scribd were often the very first versions of my first four books when I often rushed to publication before my editorial team signed off on it. They don’t let me do that anymore. But until I made the USA Today list with book four, my readership was small and forgiving. They knew to come back later for updates.
But I digress. Even with my fifth book (my December release), I still revise for the print version a few months after the initial release.
I can see using a subscription service for discoverability, but only with my first two books (free and 99 cents). Knowing that anyone enjoying those two won’t be able to stop there and will then purchase elsewhere.
One thing I’m also looking into is selling books directly to readers via my own web site or a service that does these. Making nearly 100% versus up to 70% of the $4.99 sales would be lucrative. The only problem would be losing the spots on bookseller bestselling lists that lead to readers finding authors in the “also bought” or “also reviewed” and other recommendations on Amazon and other booksellers. But because I have had more than 750,000 books downloaded or sold since 2011 (primarily with the marketing strategies of engaging with readers on Facebook and face-to-face appearances and the subsequent word of mouth among readers of the series), I would think I could overcome such an obstacle.
As I said before, it’s an exciting time in publishing. I’m glad I waited for the indie revolution to share my writing for the first time after writing as a hobby for 20 years. In 2012 and 2013, I grossed half a million in royalties. THAT wouldn’t have happened using the traditional model.
Kally
Kallypso Masters
I found this very informative and motivating, as I have been weighing the pros and cons of self-publishing versus the “trad” route. Whatever direction I eventually decide to go in, this post makes me want to do my part for my fiction, to give it a chance at becoming known and loved. To do that, I know I have to serve up excellence.
I get the message about craft. What befuddles me is how some really bad books get so far. My problem is the books I’ve written are too far out of the mainstream’s target zone, not in craft but in ideas. Traditional publishing only wants easily categorized boxed fiction. They say they want new ideas, but not too new or too different. Slipping into traditional, if one is not already famous, is only done by way of prying open a very thin crack. It seems self publishing acts as a fulcrum and gives books such as, 50 Shades of Gray, a shot at the elite class. It’s like Jed Clampett shooting at some food and hitting an oil gusher.
An excellent post, with only one flaw that I can see, which is the implication that authors ‘live’ in a particular class because they DESERVE to be in that class, and that literary/social mobility can be achieved by improving the quality of the writing. Naturally, that’s a pre-requisite, but I fear that in this financially-cautious world the large publishers are likely to reject even well-written works that attempt to redefine genre precisely because they redefine genre. They don’t fit the marketing machine, and so are deemed to be too risky.
I’m a hybrid author, having published with a big 6 or two, but also indie published, and just about to release a novella with a digital-only publisher. It’s ALL good, and yes, the real bottom line is, are you writing a truly great book?!
Your train/airplane allegories are interesting, and somewhat correct. But not completely accurate.
This post left me with a sense of distaste. Somehow, calling writers freight because they use themes that commonly sell doesn’t ring right. Sure, good vs. evil is a common storyline, but honestly, if you write in some genres, that’s going to be pretty standard. And I hate to say it, but being a best seller isn’t a qualifier of sales or quality. The lists are picked in very random ways that has nothing to do with either (like what a bookseller decides on). As a reader, I kind of felt left of this entirely as if I weren’t important — and I’m the one spending the money!
Absolutely loved reading this post, thank you.
This is a clever piece, with an amusing trope. And much of it rings true. But far too many freight- and economy-class books get to “turn left,” strictly through marketing, for what you say to be fully convincing.
The problem is the Progressive ideology of the print
publishers, and their hypocrisy. They are essentially bigoted
bolshevik “gatekeepers” who want to be the sole determiners of who
wins and who loses in the publishing industries, yet who, all the
while, reserve the benefits of a free-market economy to themselves.
Any author who submits material that does not overtly support their
ideology, or which represents an asthetic that is outside the
consensus of what they regard as “literary art” is rejected. And if
such material actually becomes popular, through either print or
electronic formats, these dictator wannabees accuse both the author
and his/her readers of having sophomoric or brutish tastes. But
what drives book sales is readers. People who like to read
enough to always buy books are rarely foolish, uneducated or
ignorant of literary quality. Print publishers don’t trust the
readers, or the natural economic system that is the free-market.
Also, Maass, just like his print publishing masters, never seem to
realize that talent can be developed: that authors can, and need,
to continually hone their writing skills; which electronic
publishing readily provides, but which would be much too costly for
print publishers to risk. Electronic books don’t require materiel
and machinery and large amounts of storage space, and have no
necessity to “move” books that fail to sell. So print publishers
now resist risking new, unproven authors, especially if they are
writing in new and untested genres, or material that challenges
these publishers’ ideology in any way. The quality learning curve
for authors is also much shorter. But in print publishing, rejected
authors can never grow–they are just cut off from public access.
What Maass doesn’t understand is that the only viable place for
cost-effectve literary innovation is the electronic and on-demand
indie print industry. For all intents and purposes, traditional
publishing, and its gatekeeper agent supporters, is all but
extinct. They have been replaced by a warmer, living system, where
authors and readers have direct access to each other, and the
reader decides what is quality writing for themselves. Readers can
also obtain more books, enen in a declining economy. And this is an
environment where both authors can develop therir writing and
reading skills, which can result in the further development of
literary asthetics and criticism that, until now, has been
impossible. Writers and readers are in a much closer symbiotic
relationship with each other now. This will tend to increase
literary quality overall.
“Justice must be done. Love conquers all. Good vs. evil.”
This is exactly what I look for in a novel.
For perspective, notice that the classics of literature, going back as far as Gilgamesh and Biblical texts, all feature these themes. There is nothing amateurish or “freight class” about these themes. They are the rock upon which our civilization is built.
I was raised by social scientists. Can’t deny the veracity of what is said here by Donald Maas. However, I think we’re looking at a system that is still getting shaken up. There are two very powerful driving forces in the mix of this social system. One is the burgeoning publishing cottage industries popping up on the Internet. They are truly in nascent form. No one knows how readers will be interacting with online publishing houses and writers collectives five years from now.
The second is the most important piece of the puzzle that everyone ignores — the 20 – 25 year olds of 2014 are going to be the 25 – 30 year olds of 2019. Those kids don’t give a crap about the NYTimes Best-Seller list. They just want good reads (if they want reads at all). I think there’s going to be a lot more folks in the coach class over the next few years who are self-published or hybrid author types, and the First Class lounge is going to start emptying out.
I don’t say this malevolently. I don’t care about stratification in the book world. I just want to work on my novels and make them available to people. At the same time, I think if you look up in the air these days you’ll see that the cards are still rising. When they fall where they may, we will all be strangely surprised.
I’ve read some good stuff here in the comments, and I wasn’t sure I could add anything, but thought I’d take a stab at it. Before self-publishing my book, it made a limited round of editors of Big Five publishers. Some of them didn’t like the book, which is fine and valid. But other comments that were made befuddled me. Some turned away because my book was difficult to market or classify: Was it thriller? Was it women’s fiction? (Apparently, I was instructed, if you want to cross genres, it was best to do so with your SECOND book, not your first.) Some told me that the problem was that a rape scene was too violent. Too violent? And that my bad guy was too likeable, and it was confusing. Confusing? These comments led me to believe that traditional publishing was more about coloring inside the lines, which surprised me. So I self-published, and interestingly readers have responded positively to many of the things editors would have me cut or tone down. Is this typical? Atypical? Who knows. I’m not anti or pro any form of publishing. Whatever method gets your stuff out there to the reading public is fine by me. In the end, authors should stick to their guns and write the book that fuels them and that they’re passionate about. Whether that puts them in Freight or First Class, to me, may be irrelevant.
With all due respect, Mr. Maass, you’re full of it.
Publishing is not a meritocracy–or if it is, it’s tremendously inefficient. I shopped my first project for years, and the only time any agent ever looked at it was when I knew someone at the agency. And both times, I got very positive feedback on the manuscript, but nothing ever happened. If traditional publishing was a meritocracy, blind query letters would work. They don’t.
There’s value in the agent model, and the independent industry does have a lot to learn in terms of branding and quality control. But we’re hardly all freight class.
Passion for your writing subject separates the truly
creative writer from the professional hack writer who produces on
demand. I’ve always tried to follow where my passion took me. It
hasn’t always paid off financially, but I’ve never changed my
working attitude after years of laboring in the literary salt
mines. Frankly, I’ve never been happy with the results of indie
publishers with my fiction and nonfiction that I let them publish
of mine. And my self-published print stuff was maximum work with
minimal results, after giving my all to the marketing efforts.
Print self-publishing is not for the faint of heart. I’m now into
digital e-book publishing through Amazon’s Kindle publishing
program. Results have been slowly building. I’m feeling more
optimistic with my e-books (34 and counting) on my Kindle
bookshelf. My print stuff is still available, but I’m not as
optimistic about what the indie publishers are doing for my books.
Whenever I get the publishing rights back on a title, I put it on
the Kindle. I do my own formatting and my artist wife does my
electronic covers. I’m now feeling a lot more optimistic about my
publishing future. Lastly, we writers need an editor. I strongly
encourage everyone to get an editor. Being a realist, I don’t
depend on my own editorial efforts. Yes, we all want to be writers,
but surely we all need editors. They’re worth every penny spent on
them.
A great read and many salient points. My main issue with your inclusion of the “class system”, however, is the implication that it is somehow new to the publishing world. The reality is, traditional publishers have always been searching for the next “Twilight” or “50 Shades of Grey”, but to classify either of these as “First Class Writing”, well, I’d be surprised if you typed that while maintaining a straight face.
The highest percentage of authors—even those “picked up” by the Big Five—still find themselves in Freight or, if they are lucky, Coach, but either way the publisher is not working very hard at all to make the authors a known quantity. The lion’s share of marketing and advertising and branding still falls on the author’s shoulders. Yes, there are benefits for the author to such arrangements: brick and mortar placement (for what, two weeks? a month? before they are banished to the remainder shelves?). And how much of a percentage does the author see in the Big Five model? Single digits. A self-published author who has to work their tails off learning Marketing and Branding (which they’d likely have to do anyway if their name weren’t already a household word) garners 70% of the sales profits.
And though there are still dinosaurs who don’t have ereaders, and haven’t given up on book-books, once the current generation turns over, you’ll be more likely to discover Bigfoot than to find someone sitting in a park reading a paperback or (OUCH!!!) a $25 hardback.
Yes, the self-publishing world is far from perfect. I believe the two worlds, however, rather than colliding, must mesh for this all to work to everyone’s benefit. My fear is that monolithic “Big Publishing” is top-heavy with “old-school” purists at heart and the only hope for a new frontier will emerge posthumously.
As is always the case, in any business model where speculation reigns supreme: time will tell.
I agree that only time will tell. But I’m putting my money on the electronic future of indie publishing, because of the control factor and the digital book eventually replacing the print version. Even the oral book’s format future will help eventually push the print version into the museum of publishing, when “they” establish one for sentimental reasons.
Thanks very much for your candid view of the marketplace, and for opening up the dialogue. It’s been very informative to hear everyone’s opinions.
Many of my author friends are choosing to self-pub. Some claim it’s working for them. But self-publishing doesn’t work for me as a READER.
I’m a picky reader. I prefer my fiction in print. Most of all, I hate to waste precious time on a story that doesn’t deliver. So I rarely buy self-pubbed fiction. The wheat gets lost in the chaff.
I know some self-pubbed fiction is just as good as traditionally published work. Some may even be better. But until I can tell good from mediocre to bad, I will rely on a brand.
As the adage goes, you can’t judge a book by its cover. You can’t judge the quality of the writing, and you can’t judge the quality of editing. To be fair, not even a Viking ship, or a penguin or a candle-toting bear is a guarantee. But it’s a start.
Me, I’ll challenge the gatekeeper. I’d like to work with a team of professionals, especially a skilled editor (an author’s best friend.) I’ll work my way to first class, if I can, like every “overnight success.”
That said, I hope self-publishing develops a reliable brand or benchmark to help readers identify quality, well-edited fiction. It would serve readers and writers alike.
Please keep calling it as you see it, Don, and thanks for the “first-class” advice.
Heather, the thing you are overlooking in trad pubbed VS self pubbed are the indies like me who hire a professional team and follow the good parts about the NY model. I have a six-person editorial team–with experts at content, line, consistency within series, and timeline edits. I also hire the best formatter in the business and a cover artist. I would stack my Rescue Me series against anything produced in NY and know it even exceeds a lot of what comes from there because I have creative freedom to be original and give readers surprises they wouldn’t get within a single series with a NY publisher. I’m also able to grow as a writer with each new book. I love how the saga has gotten deeper into the characters with each book.
But I don’t hide behind a publisher’s name to fool readers like you. I’m very honest that I’m proudly indie on my title pages. Luckily that’s a selling point for many readers tired of the same-same old out of NY.
Kally
I believe you, Kally. There’s definitely first-class self-pubbed fiction out there–presumably folks like you who hire first-class professionals. But how does a discriminating reader differentiate quality titles from the not-quite-ready-for-prime-time players?
How do you make sure you outshine the crowd? What works for you, and what recommendations do you have for making good writing easier to find, especially ebooks? Do you think a self-publishing brand or standard of quality would be helpful?
Kally, and it shows in your books. Good job and great comment!
Kally,
It shows in your books. Good job!
Awesome post it is really. Ive been searching for this information
Interesting outlook and article. There might be a fourth class.
Some of us want to have a small following of folks who enjoy our stories. Some of us continue to learn and take classes and share information with other authors in order to improve our storytelling/self-publishing skills. And some of us have no desire to venture into the shark infested waters of the traditionally published. Self-publishing suits many of us just fine. I have no plan to storm the gates of your ivory castle. However, I do plan to learn all I can from you.
You’re right about that.
However, making money off of authors seems to be a popular pass- time does it not?