|
Harry -
I can tell you how *I* do it - I pay a professional editor for her services.
At one time, I would've agreed w/ you absolutely, Harry. Self-pub, until fairly recently, has been the province of the also-ran. However, since consolidation began in publishing, the major houses have turned to a business model that matches that of the film industry. All they want is blockbusters, prestige titles, and genre fare that earns predictably. The midlist is all but dead, and there's *lots* of really good work out there that's been shoved to the margins just because 1 person in the publishing chain has decided it won't earn enough to suit the megaconglomerate's profit requirements---in other words, hundreds of thousands of copies. Publishing houses are no longer the best judges of quality, but they're very good judges of profitability. And I don't fault them for it, they will always be there and will always dominate, just as the mainstream music labels and movie studios do.
Even so, filmmakers whose work doesn't fit into any of the 3 (extremely limited) desirable categories can go independent, but what options do authors have? Film enthusiasts who want more variety can seek out indie films, but what options do readers have? Hopefully, now that authors have the tools at their disposal to go independent, an indie movement in authorship can take shape at last. And sure, there will always be a certain amount of not-ready-for-prime-time stuff out there, but the same is true of the indie film and music movements and it hasn't slowed their progress or hurt their accomplishments.
To stifle an entire independent movement on the basis that *some* of its product is likely to be of poor quality is throwing the baby out with the bath water.
|