How Types of Publishing are Dividing Authors, and Why They Shouldn't

If you've been looking at getting published, you've probably seen the Great Debate of Publishing: Self-publishing or traditional publishing.

You've seen people put forth clearly drawn opinions that traditional publishing is better, or that self-publishing is the saving grace of writers. You've seen blogs that say that traditional publishing locks authors in and prevents them from earning what they should, and you've seen blogs that say that self-publishing tends to be poorly written crud.

But now people are beginning to draw a new line: stop insulting other authors! It's a breath of fresh reason, thank goodness.

More and more writers are becoming aware that the divide is helping no one, and that neither form of publishing is inherently better. Why? Because publishing isn't a one-size-fits-all industry. Sometimes, self-publishing really is the correct option. Other times, traditional publishing is.

It's not about how you publish; it's whether or not how you publish is right for you.

Personally, I see the decision analogous to deciding whether or not to hire a wedding planner: Do you have time to do this all yourself, and do you know where to go? How many people are likely to attend (niche audience=small wedding; genre/general audience=large wedding)?

Your agent, by the way, would probably be most comparable to a marriage counselor in this analogy.

Let's look at each with the assumption that this will be the only type of publishing you do:

Self-Publishing

• You'll need to hire your own professional editor, and force yourself to follow the advice. This includes finding an excellent editor with whom you work well, but you also get to choose your editor.
• You'll need to find an artist for your cover design, or design it yourself. Both options take time, and many authors have difficulty designing covers, which marketing has shown to be a major part of how customers decide which books to purchase. You'll probably have to pay the artist for professional-quality work, but yours will be the final say, so your cover will be exactly as you want it.
• Marketing is entirely up to you. You must toot your own horn. Most likely, you are e-book only. This means intensive social networking, paying for advertisements, blogging, creating websites, and other forms of advertising; handing out free books and arguing with Amazon for the right to offer your book for free for a couple of weeks; analyzing your own sales, and knowing without anyone else to guide you what will work best as far as getting your book out there. If you attend a book signing, you can only offer your customers bookmarks, cover art, and other non-book goodies to be signed unless you purchase a quantity of your own book through a POD (print-on-demand) publisher, which is a significant investment. Bookmarks are lighter to carry than books, but more likely to be lost before the reader gets home.
• If you have a niche market, you have a built-in audience, and as long as you provide high-quality work, your sales will probably be steady. Your e-book format is likely to appeal to your readers, who may appreciate the convenience and who are used to being able to find their niche market only through digital format anyway.
• You will probably have much higher royalties per book sold. You will not get any large chunks of money in the form of advances, but then, you don't have to earn out your advance before getting royalties. This means a more continuous stream of income. 
• As the market evolves, you will face more challenges gaining respect from critics, family, and professional organizations than through traditional publishing. The barriers are eroding, but they aren't gone.
• You get your work out now. Self-publishing is much quicker than traditional, even with the same amount of editing.
• Most self-published authors do not have as large an audience as most traditionally published authors. There are many exceptions, and you can become one. Some self-published authors earn much more than traditionally published authors, because the higher royalties add up. Selling even close to the same quantity as a traditionally published author will produce much higher income. Advertising and quality product are critical.

Traditional Publishing

• Editing is one of the services your publisher provides. You don't get as much choice in who you work with, but you know your editor probably has experience and has already been vetted by the company, and if your book isn't quite up to standard, it won't go out. Not all publishers provide the same quality or quantity of editing services; which publisher you work with will determine how much editing is provided.
• Cover art is one of the services your publisher provides. You may or may not have a say in what it looks like, but the product will most likely be professional and vetted by marketing experts.
• You will have to do most of your own advertising. This includes intense social networking, paying for advertisements, blogging, creating websites, and other forms of advertising; handing out free books and arguing with Amazon for the right to offer your book for free for a couple of weeks. 
• Your publisher will provide some advertising, and will help get your book out into the hands of critics and customers, providing wide-spread distribution.
• You have the advantage of having a physical product. The 'browser effect,' where customers can actually pick your book up off of shelves, will improve your ability to attract new audiences. You can attend book signings and be able to sign your actual book. This does, however, mean having to haul heavy books around.
• You may qualify for an advance to help defer the costs of advertising (or, you know, live off of if it's large, but those are becoming rarer and rarer.) 
• You may be able to gain a contract for several books, meaning more-or-less ensured income, and an extra reason for the publisher to push your name.
• You can hand your book to your family members and say, "here it is."
• Most self-published authors do not have as large an audience as most traditionally published authors. If you fall into the middle of the bell curve, you will probably make more money via traditional publishing. This is, again, not always true.

Okay, now let's do something "innovative": Let's look at combining the two:

Say, as an author, you have a few books published traditionally. Four or five of your books have gone out of print, and the rights have reverted to you. Plus, you have a new series that doesn't really fit the typical scheme of your publisher. You decide to continue the series your publisher already has, and they're willing to take you. But you also decide to self-publish your out-of-print books online, and begin self-publishing your new series (after checking your contract and discovering that it does not, in fact, violate any clauses or such.)

Traditional and self-publishing:

• You do most of your own advertising. But, your traditionally published books also gain advertising from your publisher, and it helps. The 'browser effect' on sales means that more people are able to pick your traditionally published books up in a bookstore. You have a wide distribution.
• Your e-book sales are boosted by readers who research you online and discover that you have another series that they purchase. Thus, your self-publishing sales are boosted by your traditional sales.
• Your e-book audience begins to branch out and purchase your traditionally published books, because although they may cost a little more, they really like your series. Thus, your traditional sales are boosted by your self-publishing sales.
• Your advances from your traditional publishing may help cover the costs of your self-publishing covers  and editing (whether or not the publishers intend this to happen). You will earn higher royalties from your self-published books, and begin earning them immediately, giving you a steady income instead of having to wait much longer periods to receive money for your work.
• You will still have to purchase your own cover art and editing services for the self-published works. However, you will have had exposure through traditional publishing to what goes into professional work. You may or may not be able to make independent connections through the agency, but you will at least know what to look for. Also, your publisher will handle your editor and your covers for the books you publish through them, giving you a little more time for writing.
• You will have physical books to give your family, and the respect that traditionally published authors gain without having to work through the barriers self-published authors often face.

To me, the answer is clear: it's not an either-or industry. For me, I will want to publish traditionally first. Perhaps I will begin to self-publish as well, but I don't plan on giving up one for the other. I know highly successful authors in both fields, some who do both, and some who have become highly successful in one but find themselves eyeing the grass on the other side. 

Would you consider doing both? Why or why not?

Publishing Industry News

What's been going on in the past couple of weeks in the publishing industry?


Industry News

Amazon pushes its ad-supported Kindle to consumers. This lowers the price of most Kindle products, with only the Kindle Fire lacking advertising sponsors. Experts also estimate that Amazon eats a $10 loss on each Fire sold. Consumers can also purchase 'ad-free' Kindles, but these are no longer considered the standard model and are more expensive.

The Google Nexus 7 Tablet will advertise its e-reading compatibility, and recommend ebooks.

New Leaf Literary & Media spins off parent company Nancy Coffey Literary Agency. The two literary agencies will continue to work together, with New Leaf handling sub-rights for Nancy Coffey Literary.


NewsCorp, which owns amongst many other companies HarperCollins and TV network Fox, will be splitting its publishing and media businesses.

California libraries will be lending 10,000 self-published books from Smashwords, and will allow library patrons to upload books to Smashwords for self-publication.

The Authors Guild, nine indie publishers, and Readerlink (a wholesaler) all submit protests to the DOJ against the settlements with Hachette, HarperCollins, and Simon & Schuster, based on the idea that the settlements will encourage predatory pricing by Amazon and will eliminate competition.

Odyl is launching the Facebook app Riffle, which it hopes will become the Pintrest of books.

Industry Blogs

QueryTracker's Publishing Pulse for 6/22.

What's the purpose of a query letter? It's not to tell the agent what happens in your book; it's to sell the manuscript to the agent. QueryTracker helps us write our "novel summary" paragraph by reminding us what it's all about.

QueryTracker also defines when and how to use dialogue tags and punctuation. Use dialogue tags when you're not sure who's speaking. Don't have long conversations without tags. If you put in body language or physical action, you can probably skip the tag altogether, but make sure you end your sentence with a period if the sentence is really over.

Ash Krafton on QT tells us where writing contests come in: the feedback helps us polish even if we don't win, and it looks good if we do. It's a good way to test the waters and discover if you're ready to submit to agents.

Everyone knows to start a story with active writing. But does this mean action? Not always; active writing is hook-you, grab-you-by-the-brainstem-and-rope-you-in, can't put it down writing. That doesn't necessarily mean a car chase or a death-defying stunt. Agent Kristen reminds us of the difference between the two. Sometimes this even breaks the show-don't-tell rule. If the author pulls it off, then the rule should be broken -  only if the author pulls it off! A reminder that rules aren't laws.

She also offers fantasy writers a blast of hope: apparently agents have been looking for epic fantasy lately. But if you're an urban fantasy writer, it's a tough market.

Rachelle Gardner discusses how agents choose a publisher when there's more than one offer on the table. Is the whole team enthusiastic? Is the editor a good match for the author? What are the contract terms, and what history does the publisher have with this genre? What's the author's opinion? And what's the money?

Heather Kopp guest blogs for Rachelle Gardner with a discussion on why you should go ahead and start blogging, even if you're unpublished. On the other hand, Gardner reminds us that unpublished novelists' first duty is to write, not build a platform, so don't freak out if you're not yet ready to begin the social media crawl.

Nathan Bransford asks a question that's got my curiosity going: Are interactive books like color TV? In twenty years, will non-interactive books be like black and white television?

Buddy Media puts out a cheat sheet for good tweeting, as in when and how your tweets will get the most engagement. Link to the GalleyCat summary since the Buddy Media link requires downloading to see the cheat sheet.


What major industry news have you encountered in the past couple of weeks?

Wednesday Writing Prompt: You wake up here, what next?

It's the beginning of summer (in the Northern hemisphere, anyway). You've been plodding along through work, school, or life in general, and the thought crosses your mind that you might be getting stuck in a rut.

One night, peering out the window, you notice a lighting storm in the distance. It seems to be headed your way, so you unplug your computer and then go to bed as usual. Strange dreams plague you, mostly nonsense, and you're pretty sure at one point you remember something about a giant robot.

Morning comes, and sleep hangs tightly onto your eyelids. You lay in your soft bed, wondering why it seems so much brighter than usual in your room, and why you're still so tired. For that matter, what's wrong with the bed? It's all... sandy...

You open your eyes, and see this:

What happened, and what's going to happen next?

Creating a fantasy language: Lesson 3

Part 3: Making it more complex.
(Creating a fantasy language: (Lesson 1, Rationale, Lesson 2, Lesson 3, Lesson 4, Choosing words, Creating an Alphabet)

In part one of writing a fantasy language, you made root words and began to make vocabulary. In part two, you created the basic sentence structure. The next logical step is to get more complex: begin making more complicated sentences by adding more of what you already have.

Now that you’re getting more than a few words, you’ll want to start reading your sentences aloud (or whispering them to yourself at your desk, whichever). Not only will this help avoid writing things that can’t be spoken, it will also start hinting to you where you need punctuation.

Start with a review, something that you can already do:

You put a ball down on the floor.

ut (you) (male)

Cortan (ball)

nansan (to put down)

ne (a)

ke (the)

bason (floor)

tep (on)

You on the floor put down a ball.

ut tep ke Bason nansanla ne Cortan.

Remember, our basic sentence structure is

(Who) (where) (what happens) (what)

Or, more grammatically: (subject)(preposition)(verb)(object)

This leads to a question, what if it’s the subject to which the preposition applies? For example, let’s say we’re talking about a person on a chair.

at (he)

Witkin(chair)

New rule: when the preposition applies to the subject, each word in the prepositional phrase gains a prefix of the same gender as the subject (in this case, a- for male).

He, on the chair, puts a ball down.

He (the one on the chair) puts down a ball.

at atep ake aWitkin nansanda ne Cortan.

Okay: PROBLEM. I just tried to read that aloud. (Go on, try it.) See what I mean? It’s hard to say. People try to avoid speech patterns that are difficult to say.

So let’s alter this rule.

Revised rule: When the preposition applies to the subject, the preposition and the object of the preposition gain a prefix of the same gender as the subject.

He (the one on the chair) puts down a ball.

at atep ke aWitkin nansanda ne Cortan.

Now read that aloud. For me, this was much easier – and only a one-letter change!

Now let’s see how this combines with a preposition that applies to the object as well.

it (she)

(who)(where who is)(where object goes)(what happens)(to what)

(subject)(subject’s prepositional phrase)(object’s prepositional phrase)(verb)(object)

She on the chair puts a ball down on the floor.

She on the chair on the floor puts down a ball.

it itep ke iWitkin tep ke Bason nansanda ne Cortan.

Now read it aloud.

I don’t know about you, but I had to pause for breath between the prepositional phrases. That’s usually a sign that a comma will be used. Let’s add some punctuation to that:

New rule: put a comma after prepositional phrases applying to the subject.

She on the chair, on the floor puts down a ball.

it itep ke iWitkin, tep ke Bason nansanda ne Cortan.

Now for a little practice:

She on the floor drops a ball on a table.

Cortan (ball)

san (to drop)

ne (a)

ke (the)

bason (floor)

tep (on)

it (she)

Witkin (table)

She on the floor, on a chair drops a ball.

it itep ke iBason, tep ne Witkin sani ne Cortan.

You (the guy under the chair) drop the table to the floor.

You under the chair drop the table to the floor.

ut (you)

uz (under)

ne (a)

ke (the)

Witkin (chair)

tep (on)

Hoskon (table)

Bason (floor)

ti (to)

You under the chair, on the floor drop the table.

ut a’uz ke aWitkin, ti ke Bason sanla Hoskon.

What new rules did you create for your language? Or try writing a sentence using these rules, and share your results in the comments!

Vocabulary so far:

san: to drop	nansan: to put down	nansanko: to lie down	ko: self	koma: self-aware
uzko: to be sick	kopalli: to self-reprimand	palli: to reprimand	uz: under	syl: to cast magic
sylpana: the magic source	pana: lake	ako: I (male)	iko: I (female)	utu: you (object)
ata: him	iti: her	oto: it (obj)	at: he	it: she
ut: you	ot: it (subject)	der: to cause	ne: the	kes: one
des: two	tres: three	fes: four	res: five	ses: six
pes: seven	les: eight	nes: nine	doc: ten	cortan: ball
hoskon: table	elti: into	el: in	fodratan: anger	fodrishin: hostility
fodrish: hostile	del: to create	witkin: chair	bason: floor	borr: to roll
dupon: bowl	tep: on	laksh: to give	Merin: flower	Stiton: hair

The Word Box: Randomness vs. Chaos for writers

As defined by the Free Online Dictionary:

Randomness:
1. Having no specific pattern, purpose, or objective2. Mathematics & Statistics Of or relating to a type of circumstance or event that is described by a probability distribution.3. Of or relating to an event in which all outcomes are equally likely, as in the testing of a blood sample for the presence of a substance.
Chaos: 
1. A condition or place of great disorder or confusion.2. A disorderly mass; a jumble.3. The disordered state of unformed matter and infinite space supposed in some cosmogonic views to have existed before the ordered universe.4. Mathematics A dynamical system that has a sensitive dependence on its initial conditions.

Today, I'm looking at randomness vs. chaos in the scientific and mathematical sense. Is there a difference between something being chaotic, and something being random? Yes.

Randomness, as summarized in the mathematical lingo, is closest to definition #2 above. It has to deal with the probability distribution*. The point is that truly random things are out of our hands; systems including randomness cannot be predicted because they cannot be controlled.

*To get an idea of what probability distribution is, it's the odds of something happening. Your chances of rolling any given number are theoretically 1 out of 6 on a 6-sided die. However, rolling two dice means you can roll any number 2-12. It's more likely that you'll roll a seven than a twelve because there are more ways to roll a 7 (5+2, 4+3, 1+6) than ways to roll a 12 (6+6). So if you roll one die, your probability distribution says that every possible outcome has an equal chance of occurring (i.e., you're equally likely to roll any number 1-6); if you roll two dice, you're more likely to roll certain numbers than others, according to your probability distribution.

Chaos, on the other hand, is all about not having randomness. The idea is that every teeny-tiny differences in beginning circumstances make huge differences later on, and that the equation is affected by many, many things. It's considered unpredictable because the equation is so complicated that people cannot hope to measure everything that goes into it.

Weather is considered to be chaotic. There are so many variables that it's impossible to predict exactly what will happen. Yet this doesn't change the fact that weather follows patterns and is certainly affected by circumstances.

It's not random (you know in August at the equator you won't have snow), but the difference between a hurricane hitting the coast or missing it may be something tiny (like the heat rising off a concrete parking lot making an updraft that slightly shifts the course of a breeze that warms a current of air that rises up and leaves room for colder air below it...). Systems including chaos cannot be predicted because they are too complicated to measure every bit that goes into them.

What does this mean as writers, in terms of which to use? 

It means that random should be used when nothing influences how something turns out. Obviously what you put in will determine what comes out (you won't roll a 14 on a 6-sided die), but which of the possible outcomes occurs is not definitively controlled. Examples of random things: rolling a die, drawing names from a hat, winning the lottery, possibly meeting a soul mate (depending on world), which genes you'll get from each parent

It means that chaotic should be used when the results are too complex to be predicted. Examples of chaotic events: horse racing, weather systems, the results of a medicine on a new patient, the effects of a childhood trauma on an adult

Taking into account standard usage, you can get away with using random in most scenarios. It's almost impossible to create a truly random system (I could make arguments about rolling dice being chaotic, and I'm sure someone is already debating the randomness of genetics), but as far as most people are concerned, "close enough" means "I can't predict how this will turn out, so it counts."

However, if you're dealing with a mathematical or scientific issue, your character is more likely to use chaotic if they're a scientist. They probably won't notice (or won't mention) if someone else uses random instead, unless it's a particularly clear-cut case and they're feeling picky.

What does this mean as writers, in terms of plot?


Personally, I want major points of randomness to be foreshadowed beforehand, so they don't seem to be coming out of left field. Minor points can make good plot twists, or be part of the world - but beware of misusing them. "And then she rolled a 7 and won the hero's freedom" will probably leave the reader feeling cheated.

Chaotic elements are when things escalate out of a character's control. Now those are fun. Even better if the character sees it getting out of hand and tries to do something to stop it. Then it becomes a chase of trying to change the outcome by adding in favorable variables to the problem, and those don't always turn out as they should.

I recommend using random elements only to create problems, and never to solve them. As I heard Cherry Adair once put it, your reader will never believe it if random chance helps your character, but will always believe it if chance makes things harder.


Do you have any random elements in your stories? If so, what are they? If not, is there anything that appears random, but isn't?

Wednesday Writing Prompt

Need a little something to spark your creativity? Get the muse going with random dialogue that lets your imagination run wild.

This week's challenge:
Use this dialogue to write a story in less than 150 words (including these, meaning you get 125 to play with):

"You're late."
"Sorry, sir. My time machine broke down halfway back from next week, and I had to walk the rest of the way home."

Post your stories in the comments below, or throw them into your works in progress if they fit!

Creating a fantasy language: basic sentences

Lesson 2
With a little vocabulary under your belt, it’s time to begin constructing grammar. Start simple: How to construct a basic sentence.

(Creating a fantasy language: (Lesson 1, Rationale, Lesson 2, Lesson 3, Lesson 4, Choosing words, Creating an Alphabet)

Chances are, as you created vocabulary, you created patterns in your words. For me, most nouns end with –an, -in, or –on. Adjectives had no endings, and verbs in infinitive form had no endings because they took endings when conjugated.

Let’s start with verbs.

Your first rule is to decide how to conjugate your verbs. When I was learning German, we looked at 6 present-tense ways to conjugate a verb:

to walk:

I walk

you walk

he/she/it walks

they walk

you all walk

(formal) you walk

In this language, I’ve decided gender is important. So I’m going to be more specific:

san (to drop):

I male: sana

I female: sani

you m: sanla

you f: sanli

he: sanda

she: sandi

it: sando

they: sandia

you all: sanlia

you formal: sanla si/sanli si

Now let’s make a sentence. I want to say, “I drop a ball.” The speaker is feminine.

Relevant vocabulary:

iko (I, female)

san (to drop)

a (ne)

cortan (ball)

My sentence is:

iko sani ne Cortan.

Note that I’m not capitalizing the sentence at this point. If you plan on using capital letters (say, capitalizing all direct objects and objects of prepositions), then that is a grammar rule to begin working on here. Therefore, I am not capitalizing the beginning of my sentence to avoid confusion.

Let’s try another sentence.

She makes him angry.

Or, literally, “she causes anger in him.”

it (she)

der (to cause)

ata (him)

el (in)

fodratan (anger)

it el Ata deri Fodratan.

she in him causes anger.

Because I once decided that prepositions go before the verb in complex verbs, I’m following that up by placing the prepositional phrase before the verb in the sentence. This means the adjective gets pushed back to the end of the sentence.

This basic structure can become a rule:

(Who) (where) (what happens) (what)

He falls into a lake.

at (he)

sanko (to fall)

elti (into)

pana (lake)

ne (a)

at elti ne Pana sankoa.

he into a lake falls

You all lie down under a table.

utia (you all)

nansanko (lie down)

uz (under)

ne (a)

hoskon (table)

utia uz ne Hoskon nansankolia.

y’all under a table lie down

What's the basic sentence structure of your language? What rules (or patterns if they're not strict) do you have so far?

Vocabulary so far:

san: to drop	nansan: to put down	nansanko: to lie down	ko: self	koma: self-aware
uzko: to be sick	kopalli: to self-reprimand	palli: to reprimand	uz: under	syl: to cast magic
sylpana: the magic source	pana: lake	ako: I (male)	iko: I (female)	utu: you (object)
ata: him	iti: her	oto: it (obj)	at: he	it: she
ut: you	ot: it (subject)	der: to cause	ne: the	kes: one
des: two	tres: three	fes: four	res: five	ses: six
pes: seven	les: eight	nes: nine	doc: ten	cortan: ball
hoskon: table	elti: into	el: in	fodratan: anger	fodrishin: hostility
fodrish: hostile	del: to create

HTML Tables