>>I think you're absolutely right. Especially since self-publishing is starting to seem like a desirable thing to do rather than a good way to ruin your career.<<
I've been watching publishing trends for many years. I think the first serious break for self-publishing was the leading edge of electronic publication, which people spent about a decade insisting that it was impossible or pointless, and more years just generally dissing, and only recently have realized that it's vital and they are now panicking. But the people who looked at the internet in the 1990s or early '00s and said, "Hey, let's put literature into this medium!" got the ball rolling. If you wanted to do that, you had to do it yourself, because publishers took a long time to get involved at all.
Once the social aspects of the web really gelled, with blogging and social networks, it became possible to reach a large audience easily -- and anyone could do it. So any writer who had a fan base suddenly had effective tools for connecting with those people, and sometimes the fans proved more generous than the publishers. It still depended on being able to interact closely with one's audience, which some people like and are good at, others not so much.
Now there are more self-publishing options, or publisher-lite options, and people are trying them because traditional publishers have been getting more obnoxious in attempt to keep their nose above the incoming tide. As more writers try self-publishing and succeed at it, they're talking about their experiences; and some of the successes have been stupendous. Even for midlist writers it's worth experimenting with to see whether it works for you.
Then there's crowdfunding, which folks can explore over at crowdfunding, in which the creator and audience connect directly. Crowdfunded weblit is often highly interactive, and people will spend amazing amounts of money on their favorite material because it goes directly to the writer they love. If you've seen the article "1,000 True Fans" about people who'll buy $100+ of stuff a year -- they exist. I have some, I know other projects that do too. (I was kind of surprised by that. I mean who spends $100/year on poetry? But they do.) And this means people can also support the kinds of writing they want, because many crowdfunded projects run on audience prompts for inspiration, then people sponsor what they want published. You want more strong women, people of color, lesbians who live to the end of the story? You can have it.
And then fans want a hardcopy of the most popular weblit, so the creator often goes looking for a freelance editor -- maybe also someone to typeset the book, make a cover for it, whatever else the creator can't do. There are a lot of web-to-paper creative projects on the fundraiser sites like Kickstarter and IndieGoGo, where authors are fundraising to cover the freelance and production fees. That's job creation. It's pretty cool.
It's also massive numbers of writers and readers saying to the conventional industry, "We're not all that thrilled with what you're doing. We want better. So we're going to do it ourselves." And the success rate in that endeavor is rising. The more people talk about their projects, what's working and what isn't, the faster we'll learn what works in alternative publishing today.
Yes...
I've been watching publishing trends for many years. I think the first serious break for self-publishing was the leading edge of electronic publication, which people spent about a decade insisting that it was impossible or pointless, and more years just generally dissing, and only recently have realized that it's vital and they are now panicking. But the people who looked at the internet in the 1990s or early '00s and said, "Hey, let's put literature into this medium!" got the ball rolling. If you wanted to do that, you had to do it yourself, because publishers took a long time to get involved at all.
Once the social aspects of the web really gelled, with blogging and social networks, it became possible to reach a large audience easily -- and anyone could do it. So any writer who had a fan base suddenly had effective tools for connecting with those people, and sometimes the fans proved more generous than the publishers. It still depended on being able to interact closely with one's audience, which some people like and are good at, others not so much.
Now there are more self-publishing options, or publisher-lite options, and people are trying them because traditional publishers have been getting more obnoxious in attempt to keep their nose above the incoming tide. As more writers try self-publishing and succeed at it, they're talking about their experiences; and some of the successes have been stupendous. Even for midlist writers it's worth experimenting with to see whether it works for you.
Then there's crowdfunding, which folks can explore over at
And then fans want a hardcopy of the most popular weblit, so the creator often goes looking for a freelance editor -- maybe also someone to typeset the book, make a cover for it, whatever else the creator can't do. There are a lot of web-to-paper creative projects on the fundraiser sites like Kickstarter and IndieGoGo, where authors are fundraising to cover the freelance and production fees. That's job creation. It's pretty cool.
It's also massive numbers of writers and readers saying to the conventional industry, "We're not all that thrilled with what you're doing. We want better. So we're going to do it ourselves." And the success rate in that endeavor is rising. The more people talk about their projects, what's working and what isn't, the faster we'll learn what works in alternative publishing today.