Quote:
|
I agree with this. Digital or not, publishers do offer a valuable service, as gatekeepers, editors, marketers....
|
Not exclusively. Think of a mixture of this:
Quote:
Agreed. I think self-publishing will benefit two types of people:
1. Famous authors who have the name recognition, as well as the money to pay for marketing on their own etc. They can now get books right to consumers and not have to split revenue with publishers on e-books. At least once their out of contract.
2. Upstarts. If they're good they can make a name for themselves. May not be able to become famous that way, but can at least have more leverage in contract negotiations by being able to show how many people bought their books they self-published when shopping new manuscripts etc.
|
Consider a joint website run by thriller/suspense writers with the likes of Tom Clancy, Robin Cook, Mary Higgins Clark and others. As a reader you'd have a certain trust in the quality of that site, right?
Now consider this site offers newcomers a chance to publish their first novel. Revised, of course. Nothing right out of the keyboard.
Such a site would play the role of a gatekeeper, and you definitely wouldn't need a publisher for it.
Sure, all of these authors established their reputation through book publishers. Publishers won't become obsolete. But renowned authors may add quite a different, alternative approach, if they're willing to accept the role of
senseis in their own genre. Or
kohais and
sempais, to take into account the relationship between "newcomers" and "oldtimers".