What are eBooks?

[cfFairy]

Hello there! So, I'm taking a writing technology class at my university and was given the assignment to look into a technology that is of interest to me. Since I'm a writer, I chose ebooks. So my question is, what exactly are ebooks and how would I go about making one?

[HarryT]

Sorry, we don't do people's homework for them. Do your research and THEN come back here and ask if you have any specific questions.

[cfFairy]

Fair enough. New question then; I've talked to some fellow writers (published writers) and they seem pretty against the whole self-publishing idea. It's better to go through an agent or manager or whatever. I have to admit though, none of them clarified why it's better to go with the agent route. Is self publishing just not a good way to go or is it a good way to get started? Any opinions or thoughts would be greatly appreciated.

[eschwartz]

If you ask someone who was published through the Big Publishing Houses, "does it make sense to self-publish"...

... you are going to get a VERY biased answer.


The self-publishing industry is in competition with the trad-pub industry.
#1 rule of business -- don't advertise the competition.



Since self-publishing seems to be alive and well, (thriving, in fact) I would venture to say it might indeed be a good idea.

The real secret is that your chances aren't very good as a trad-pubbed author, and they aren't very good as a self-pubbed author either.
Both compete against video games/TV/movies for peoples' attention spans.

But there are plenty of success stories in the trad-pub industry, and there are plenty of success stories in the self-pub industry.

[Cinisajoy]

In the world of books the chances of getting a traditional (big 5) publisher are about 1 million and a half to one. I am probably be generous.
If you want to self publish, your odds of making money are about a million to one. Your odds will go up slightly if you are willing to work 15-18 hours a day, 7 days a week, know where your strengths and weaknesses lie and at the very minimum pay for a proofreader.

Seriously if you want to make it in the publishing world, I would highly recommend 2 blogs.
JA Konrath's self publishing and Russell Blake's.
His latest blog was wonderful.

[cfFairy]

Originally Posted by Cinisajoy

In the world of books the chances of getting a traditional (big 5) publisher are about 1 million and a half to one. I am probably be generous.
If you want to self publish, your odds of making money are about a million to one. Your odds will go up slightly if you are willing to work 15-18 hours a day, 7 days a week, know where your strengths and weaknesses lie and at the very minimum pay for a proofreader.

Seriously if you want to make it in the publishing world, I would highly recommend 2 blogs.
JA Konrath's self publishing and Russell Blake's.
His latest blog was wonderful.

Thanks! The Blake blog was indeed wonderful and both had some great stuff.

[FizzyWater]

I'm not an author, so what I've heard is second-hand, but I understand that Kristine Kathryn Rusch's blog on writing is supposed to be a great resource as well.

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by cfFairy

Fair enough. New question then; I've talked to some fellow writers (published writers) and they seem pretty against the whole self-publishing idea. It's better to go through an agent or manager or whatever. I have to admit though, none of them clarified why it's better to go with the agent route. Is self publishing just not a good way to go or is it a good way to get started? Any opinions or thoughts would be greatly appreciated.

It's elitism.

Previously, very few people had the means to publish their book by themselves and get it out into the world. You had to be selected by a publisher, who would then handle almost everything, except the actual writing (which would have been done already, obviously).

So, getting published meant to be good enough (in the eyes of the agent/publisher) to be selected and printed. It bequeathed a certain status to be published.

Now, anyone can write whatever they want, and have their ebook created automatically by their writing software. Scrivener comes to mind, as do some plugins for Word and LibreOffice. If one has the knowledge, there are also programs to tweak the layout of the book after creation, such as Sigil and Calibre's ebook editor.

Will the self-published book be good, and look professional? Possibly, yes. Possibly, no. It depends on the writer, if he/she has the knowlege to make it so, or if he/she doesn't have it, hire people to make a professional ebook for them. Those people don't care about your story; they only make the layout look good and work correctly most devices.

Upload the book to Smashwords or another site that can sell it, or your own site if need be, and you're published. Nobody will stop you, and nobody says that you can't publish this or that because the quality is not good enough.

Thus, 'being published' has lost a lot of its status, and the traditionally published writers resent that.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

So, getting published meant to be good enough (in the eyes of the agent/publisher) to be selected and printed. It bequeathed a certain status to be published.

Which is still the case, of course. Although there certainly are good self-published books out there, the overwhelming majority are complete crap. Being traditionally-published still imbues status to an author.

Successful traditionally-published authors sometimes switch to self-publishing in order to gain more control over their work, but I'm sure that the overwhelming majority of self-published authors would like nothing more than to be offered a publishing contract by a traditional publisher.

[DiapDealer]

I think we should stop at, "There certainly are good self-published books out there." The "crap" followup is hardly relevant. Especially since I would quantify the vast majority of ALL books (regardless of how they were published) as being crap. Crap; meaning books I'd choose to have tender pieces of my anatomy removed rather than have to read them.

As I've mentioned before: in my eyes, being competently proofed, edited, and lovingly vetted does not automatically move a book off of the crap pile (I'm looking at you, Snookie). The volume of crap is only relevant if one is in the habit of choosing books _entirely_ at random (or sees validity in comparing "worsts").

As to status imbued: well that's just centuries old dogma that's slow to change. I doubt highly that the successful independent authors of today who've chosen to sign contracts with traditional publishers have done so to gain "status." They've already earned that, or traditional publishers wouldn't be flirting with them in the first place. Most of them eventually sign with traditional publishers because it eases their workload (and their initial solo success means they gain access to publisher resources without giving up all of their autonomy or all rights to their own work for life).

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

I think we should stop at, "There certainly are good self-published books out there." The "crap" followup is hardly relevant. Especially since I would quantify the vast majority of ALL books (regardless of how they were published) as being crap. Crap; meaning books I'd choose to have tender pieces of my anatomy removed rather than have to read them.

As I've mentioned before: in my eyes, being competently proofed, edited, and lovingly vetted does not automatically move a book off of the crap pile (I'm looking at you, Snookie). The volume of crap is only relevant if one is in the habit of choosing books _entirely_ at random (or sees validity in comparing "worsts").

We have discussed this previously, and I'm afraid we must still agree to differ about it. I regard the publisher's role as a "gatekeeper" as important; I know, for example, that I can buy anything that Baen publish and it's at least 90% likely that I'll enjoy it. That's important to me; others have their own way of finding decent books and it it works for them, that's great.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by HarryT

We have discussed this previously, and I'm afraid we must still agree to differ about it. I regard the publisher's role as a "gatekeeper" as important; I know, for example, that I can buy anything that Baen publish and it's at least 90% likely that I'll enjoy it. That's important to me; others have their own way of finding decent books and it it works for them, that's great.

There's nothing to disagree about. I'm right.

You are part of a rare and small contingent of readers who "buy by publisher (or even know who the publisher of a particular book is)." The vast majority of readers buy/read books that a) are written by an author they've previously enjoyed; or b) catch their attention (through recommendations, buzz, descriptions, samples, marketing, etc...). Both will still work to help them find books they'll enjoy regardless of the publishing method.

I'll happily concede that the worst traditionally-published books are, on average, marginally better than the the worst independently published books, if you'll concede that such a comparsion is silly and pointless for the vast majority of readers and book-buyers out there. Unless, of course, you see anything productive about a "my worst is better than your worst" argument.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

There's nothing to disagree about. I'm right.

You are part of a rare and small contingent of readers who "buy by publisher (or even know who the publisher of a particular book is)." The vast majority of readers buy/read books that a) are written by an author they've previously enjoyed; or b) catch their attention (through recommendations, buzz, descriptions, samples, marketing, etc...).

I'll happily concede that the worst traditionally-published books are, on average, marginally better than the the worst independently published books, if you'll concede that such a comparsion is silly and pointless for the vast majority of readers and book-buyers out there. Unless, of course, you see anything productive about a "my worst is better than your worst" argument.

Yep.

There's a lot of paper/published crap out there as well that was selected by a publisher.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

You are part of a rare and small contingent of readers who "buy by publisher (or even know who the publisher of a particular book is)." The vast majority of readers buy/read books that a) are written by an author they've previously enjoyed; or b) catch their attention (through recommendations, buzz, descriptions, samples, marketing, etc...).

You said in your earlier post:

The volume of crap is only relevant if one is in the habit of choosing books _entirely_ at random

but that's effectively what I'm doing what I buy Baen's "Webscription" package (or whatever they're calling it these days) every month. I am buying, sight unseen, whatever books Baen have published that month, and I've discovered some great authors that way.

I'm happy to accept that I'm in the minority in doing so, but I'm very happy to have Baen's editorial team filter out the crap for me. It's a system that's worked for me for close on 20 years now, and one I'll stick with.

It's not my only source of books, of course. I do buy other books based on recommendations, etc, but my monthly "dive into the unknown" with Baen is an important and enjoyable aspect of my reading experience.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I'm happy to accept that I'm in the minority in doing so, but I'm very happy to have Baen's editorial team filter out the crap for me. It's a system that's worked for me for close on 20 years now, and one I'll stick with.

Fair enough.

But you did present the "this crap-pile (that you don't go wading blindly into) is bigger than this crap-pile (that you don't go wading blindly into)" as more of an all encompassing maxim than a personal opinion. In your case, Baen is your filter... not all of traditional publishing as your post suggested. I'd wager that your 90% success rate would drop considerably if you started buying traditionally published books completely and utterly at random (which is the only way the size of the crap-pile to be waded into should ever matter to anyone).