Definition Dispute: Indie vs Mainstream

Steven Lake · 10-26-2010, 09:03 AM

Ok, don't ask me why this happens, but I seem to find all the interesting things to argue over lately. Either that or the people with the unusual viewpoints. As such I have a little question. But first, a little background.

Talking with a couple other authors recently at several of the events I've gone to, one of the topics that came up was big house vs small house vs self published authors. Of all the authors I chatted with, all but one thought that you weren't a "mainstream" author unless you were published with a big house. Therefore, anyone *not* published this was, including those published through small house were all "indie" authors.

So, here's my question. Where do you guys really think this imaginary line between Indie and Mainstream exists? I think that any publisher you've signed with, aside from vanity publishers, qualifies you as mainstream, and Vanity on down to Self Published counts as Indie. What do you guys think?

HarryT · 10-26-2010, 10:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven Lake

I think that any publisher you've signed with, aside from vanity publishers, qualifies you as mainstream, and Vanity on down to Self Published counts as Indie. What do you guys think?

I entirely agree with your definition. Any publisher who pays you (as opposed to Vanity publishing, where you pay them) qualifies you as a "mainstream" author, to my mind.

Kemp · 10-26-2010, 11:17 AM

Yeah, I'd have to agree. Indie is technically supposed to mean independent. Now, obviously publishing completely by one's own means (including fabrication) is all but impossible. Still, most everything in indie publishing is done or at least arranged by the author: marketing, editing, proofing, artwork, and so on.

Even if it's a small house, then they still should be offering these services without charging a fee. That doesn't really count as indie.

Lemurion · 10-27-2010, 07:38 PM

I divide it into three.

1) Mainstream: Follows Yog's Law (money flows toward the writer). They don't charge you for anything and they do their best to get your book where other people can buy it. In short, they do what a publisher's supposed to do. This can be a large or small house, POD or offset, advance or royalties only.

Two keys here: they publish your book, you never write them a check.

2) Indie: You do it all as much as possible. You really are your own publisher, you pay for everything, you're in control of everything, and you're doing the best you can to get your stuff out there and sell your book(s) to readers.

3) Vanity: Not according to Yog's Law. You pay them to publish your book. You send manuscript and (usually) cash, they sell you copies of your own book.

Mainstream and Indie are about selling books to readers: A good thing. Vanity is about selling books to writers: Not such a good thing.

James_Wilde · 10-28-2010, 09:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven Lake

... and Vanity on down to Self Published counts as Indie. What do you guys think?

So Indie is at the bottom of the heap, even below Vanity? I think I'd appreciate a slightly higher grade than that.

At least an Indie author believes enough in his abilities to run it up the flagpole and see if someone salutes, and may become very informed about the publishing business in the process. And presumably he's out for sales.

For my money Vanity comes at the bottom of the heap. Any old crap can get "published" if all it takes is money and you're not interested in sales.

Kemp · 10-28-2010, 10:16 AM

Indie doesn't exist as a separate entity from other kinds of publishing. Heck, services like DTP, PubIt!, and Smashwords entail many similar functions as a vanity press without the fees. Granted, they're using an automated system, and none of it needs to be shipped, packaged, stored, or anything else, but still...

Vanity is seen as so heinous (deservedly so) because it's an avenue of profit based upon selling a product to a market. However, instead of discovering solid material for a consumer group motivated by entertainment desires, it primarily preys upon desperation.

It's definitely a little different from the self-epubbing, but they're avenues towards a similar goal for all parties involved.

Steven Lyle Jordan · 10-28-2010, 11:36 AM

I think I'd define mainstream as essentially anything that's physically sold in the Big Box Bookstores... if you can find it at Barnes & Noble's physical stores, it's mainstream.

In terms of books, mainstream seems to only define what is allowed into the traditional sales system that is largely controlled by the big bookstores and the publishers. It is further identified by publisher or promotional materials seen in traditional venues (the stores, newspaper and magazine ads, posters and billboards, etc), something Big Pub can manage whereas indies generally cannot.

Obviously this doesn't include the electronic distribution system, which will let in people (like me) who cannot penetrate the traditional system.

doreenjoy · 10-28-2010, 07:44 PM

Authors argue this topic a lot IME, as a way to separate the wanna bes from those who've arrived. Small presses and indies still count as "published", absolutely. But IMO "mainstream" equals:

* books are carried by Ingrams and B&T (distributors)
* available to retailers at the "big 5" discount (usually a 60% discount; most smaller pubs can only afford a 40% discount without losing money)
* fully returnable by retailers to the distributors (covers reported as stripped).
* ordered in advance, and in bulk, but major brick & mortar chains.

Most industry people I know add that if you're not getting a print run of at least 10k, you aren't really mainstream. My first agent told me that there were certain publishers she wasn't going to send my books to, because if they accepted them the print runs would be so low that "no mainstream publisher would ever touch you after that."

HarryT · 10-30-2010, 08:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by James_Wilde

So Indie is at the bottom of the heap, even below Vanity? I think I'd appreciate a slightly higher grade than that.

At least an Indie author believes enough in his abilities to run it up the flagpole and see if someone salutes, and may become very informed about the publishing business in the process. And presumably he's out for sales.

For my money Vanity comes at the bottom of the heap. Any old crap can get "published" if all it takes is money and you're not interested in sales.

At least some (but not all, of course) books are published independently simply because they aren't good enough to get published professionally. In that respect, one could make a valid comparison with vanity publishing. Your statement that "Any old crap can get 'published' if all it takes is money and you're not interested in sales." would apply equally to sites like Smashwords, don't you think?

Barcey · 10-30-2010, 09:29 AM

I don't see a line between the two at all. A mainstream author could decide to go Indie and I would still consider them mainstream. An Indie author could become mainstream on their own. If an author is published by a big publishing house I don't automatically consider them mainstream. I see mainstream authors as having a large distribution, not who the distribution is going through. I'm just drawing parallels from the music industry though, each industry develops their own definitions.

Steven Lake · 10-31-2010, 08:14 AM

I'm gonna side with Barcey. I know I originally said it was based on what kind of publisher you went through, but I guess I was thinking along the same lines as Barcey, doreenjoy, Steve Jordan and the others like them when I made that statement. as they basically stated what I was thinking, even though I didn't say it directly. Distribution would be a HUGE factor in whether or not you were mainstream or indie, and the type of publisher you go through affects that a lot, even though it wouldn't affect the entire picture, as you the author have some say in that as well based on how you market yourself.

bobavey · 11-01-2010, 01:48 PM

Oops. I've been calling myself an "Indie" author. However, both of my books have been published by a small but legitamate publisher.

Steven Lake · 11-01-2010, 04:57 PM

Well, it really doesn't matter if you're big/small press, indie, vanity, or any other combination there of if your books fit the description set down by Barcey, doreenjoy, Steve Jordan and the others like them, then you're mainstream.

Steven Lyle Jordan · 11-03-2010, 01:32 PM

As it is, the definition doesn't mean much beyond that... especially as long as "mainstream" publishers are letting the standard of quality leech out of their hands, and into the hands of small and indie pubs and authors. If the "mainstream" pubs don't take steps to restore their position as icons of quality, mainstream will become a title no one wants...

Steven Lake · 11-03-2010, 05:33 PM

Actually, I think that the way the big presses are going, they will slip straight out of the "mainstream" category and right into the "pulp" fiction category. Or worse, they'll slide right into the "refuse" fiction category. IE, grind it up, mulch it down, and use it to fertilize your garden. >.<

10-26-2010, 09:03 AM	#1
Steven Lake Sci-Fi Author Posts: 1,157 Karma: 14743509 Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Michigan Device: PC (Calibre)	Definition Dispute: Indie vs Mainstream Ok, don't ask me why this happens, but I seem to find all the interesting things to argue over lately. Either that or the people with the unusual viewpoints. As such I have a little question. But first, a little background. Talking with a couple other authors recently at several of the events I've gone to, one of the topics that came up was big house vs small house vs self published authors. Of all the authors I chatted with, all but one thought that you weren't a "mainstream" author unless you were published with a big house. Therefore, anyone not published this was, including those published through small house were all "indie" authors. So, here's my question. Where do you guys really think this imaginary line between Indie and Mainstream exists? I think that any publisher you've signed with, aside from vanity publishers, qualifies you as mainstream, and Vanity on down to Self Published counts as Indie. What do you guys think?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
NYT: Macmillan Books Return to Amazon After Dispute	kjk	News	7	02-06-2010 12:00 PM
Why is indie music so respected compared to indie publishing?	ficbot	News	32	11-02-2009 06:31 PM
Bookeen and PocketBook in possible legal dispute over 5" model	igorsk	News	26	07-24-2009 09:25 PM
Your definition of stupidity	Alexander Turcic	Lounge	2	03-11-2004 03:55 PM

10-26-2010, 11:17 AM	#3
Kemp Zealot Posts: 106 Karma: 271834 Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Minnesota Device: none	Yeah, I'd have to agree. Indie is technically supposed to mean independent. Now, obviously publishing completely by one's own means (including fabrication) is all but impossible. Still, most everything in indie publishing is done or at least arranged by the author: marketing, editing, proofing, artwork, and so on. Even if it's a small house, then they still should be offering these services without charging a fee. That doesn't really count as indie.

10-27-2010, 07:38 PM	#4
Lemurion eReader Posts: 2,750 Karma: 4968470 Join Date: Aug 2007 Device: Note 5; PW3; Nook HD+; ChuWi Hi12; iPad	I divide it into three. 1) Mainstream: Follows Yog's Law (money flows toward the writer). They don't charge you for anything and they do their best to get your book where other people can buy it. In short, they do what a publisher's supposed to do. This can be a large or small house, POD or offset, advance or royalties only. Two keys here: they publish your book, you never write them a check. 2) Indie: You do it all as much as possible. You really are your own publisher, you pay for everything, you're in control of everything, and you're doing the best you can to get your stuff out there and sell your book(s) to readers. 3) Vanity: Not according to Yog's Law. You pay them to publish your book. You send manuscript and (usually) cash, they sell you copies of your own book. Mainstream and Indie are about selling books to readers: A good thing. Vanity is about selling books to writers: Not such a good thing.

10-28-2010, 10:16 AM	#6
Kemp Zealot Posts: 106 Karma: 271834 Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Minnesota Device: none	Indie doesn't exist as a separate entity from other kinds of publishing. Heck, services like DTP, PubIt!, and Smashwords entail many similar functions as a vanity press without the fees. Granted, they're using an automated system, and none of it needs to be shipped, packaged, stored, or anything else, but still... Vanity is seen as so heinous (deservedly so) because it's an avenue of profit based upon selling a product to a market. However, instead of discovering solid material for a consumer group motivated by entertainment desires, it primarily preys upon desperation. It's definitely a little different from the self-epubbing, but they're avenues towards a similar goal for all parties involved.

10-28-2010, 11:36 AM	#7
Steven Lyle Jordan Grand Sorcerer Posts: 8,478 Karma: 5171130 Join Date: Jan 2006 Device: none	I think I'd define mainstream as essentially anything that's physically sold in the Big Box Bookstores... if you can find it at Barnes & Noble's physical stores, it's mainstream. In terms of books, mainstream seems to only define what is allowed into the traditional sales system that is largely controlled by the big bookstores and the publishers. It is further identified by publisher or promotional materials seen in traditional venues (the stores, newspaper and magazine ads, posters and billboards, etc), something Big Pub can manage whereas indies generally cannot. Obviously this doesn't include the electronic distribution system, which will let in people (like me) who cannot penetrate the traditional system.

10-28-2010, 07:44 PM	#8
doreenjoy 01000100 01001010 Posts: 1,889 Karma: 2400000 Join Date: Mar 2009 Device: Polyamorous	Authors argue this topic a lot IME, as a way to separate the wanna bes from those who've arrived. Small presses and indies still count as "published", absolutely. But IMO "mainstream" equals: * books are carried by Ingrams and B&T (distributors) * available to retailers at the "big 5" discount (usually a 60% discount; most smaller pubs can only afford a 40% discount without losing money) * fully returnable by retailers to the distributors (covers reported as stripped). * ordered in advance, and in bulk, but major brick & mortar chains. Most industry people I know add that if you're not getting a print run of at least 10k, you aren't really mainstream. My first agent told me that there were certain publishers she wasn't going to send my books to, because if they accepted them the print runs would be so low that "no mainstream publisher would ever touch you after that."

10-30-2010, 09:29 AM	#10
Barcey Wizard Posts: 1,531 Karma: 8059866 Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Canada Device: Kobo H2O / Aura HD / Glo / iPad3	I don't see a line between the two at all. A mainstream author could decide to go Indie and I would still consider them mainstream. An Indie author could become mainstream on their own. If an author is published by a big publishing house I don't automatically consider them mainstream. I see mainstream authors as having a large distribution, not who the distribution is going through. I'm just drawing parallels from the music industry though, each industry develops their own definitions.

10-31-2010, 08:14 AM	#11
Steven Lake Sci-Fi Author Posts: 1,157 Karma: 14743509 Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Michigan Device: PC (Calibre)	I'm gonna side with Barcey. I know I originally said it was based on what kind of publisher you went through, but I guess I was thinking along the same lines as Barcey, doreenjoy, Steve Jordan and the others like them when I made that statement. as they basically stated what I was thinking, even though I didn't say it directly. Distribution would be a HUGE factor in whether or not you were mainstream or indie, and the type of publisher you go through affects that a lot, even though it wouldn't affect the entire picture, as you the author have some say in that as well based on how you market yourself.

11-01-2010, 01:48 PM	#12
bobavey Bob Avey Posts: 117 Karma: 501082 Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Broken Arrow, OK Device: none	Oops. I've been calling myself an "Indie" author. However, both of my books have been published by a small but legitamate publisher.

11-01-2010, 04:57 PM	#13
Steven Lake Sci-Fi Author Posts: 1,157 Karma: 14743509 Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Michigan Device: PC (Calibre)	Well, it really doesn't matter if you're big/small press, indie, vanity, or any other combination there of if your books fit the description set down by Barcey, doreenjoy, Steve Jordan and the others like them, then you're mainstream.

11-03-2010, 01:32 PM	#14
Steven Lyle Jordan Grand Sorcerer Posts: 8,478 Karma: 5171130 Join Date: Jan 2006 Device: none	As it is, the definition doesn't mean much beyond that... especially as long as "mainstream" publishers are letting the standard of quality leech out of their hands, and into the hands of small and indie pubs and authors. If the "mainstream" pubs don't take steps to restore their position as icons of quality, mainstream will become a title no one wants...

Advert

Advert

11-03-2010, 05:33 PM	#15
Steven Lake Sci-Fi Author Posts: 1,157 Karma: 14743509 Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Michigan Device: PC (Calibre)	Actually, I think that the way the big presses are going, they will slip straight out of the "mainstream" category and right into the "pulp" fiction category. Or worse, they'll slide right into the "refuse" fiction category. IE, grind it up, mulch it down, and use it to fertilize your garden. >.<