I'm not saying that poorly written, unedited, crummy-looking books should be given the same treatment as high-quality books. I am saying that books should be judged on their own merits, not on whether they are published by the author or by someone related to the author, and not by the number of copies that are printed at a time.
My self-published novel, TOO NEAR THE EDGE has gotten good reviews from online reviewers and won a silver medal for best regional fiction in the 2007 Independent Publisher Book Awards (IPPY) contest. It's available on Amazon and other online sites, and I can keep it in print as long as I want. If I want it to sell, I have to promote it, which is harder than it should be due to the bias against self-publishers.
I tried to get in under award thing. My book isn't shortlisted for the mystery awards they list, but I wrote them a very polite email asking if the IPPY would qualify me to be an author at their conference. They replied that I don't meet the eligibility requirements and that awards like the IPPY are not on the list, "since they are primarily awarded to authors from non-traditional publishing houses.".
I've started a new blog-- The Populist Publisher-- where I hope self-published authors can come together to change our image. I invite you to join us.
Well my publishing company, PMI Books, belongs to PMA, and we are reputable-- but clearly, given all their criteria, they aren't going to put us on their approved list.
People say authors only self-publish because they can't get a traditional publisher. I made the self-publishing decision based on my experience with my two published nonfiction books-- one, self-published has sold over 50,000 copies and is now in its 4th edition; the other was published by a major traditional publisher sold about 5,000 copies and is now out of print.
They arbitrarily exclude authors and books based not on the quality of the books but on the publisher and method of printing. Self-publishers need to work together to end this bias against us.
I'm not saying that poorly written, unedited, crummy-looking books should be given the same treatment as high-quality books. I am saying that books should be judged on their own merits, not on whether they are published by the author or by someone related to the author, and not by the number of copies that are printed at a time. I understand that approximately 800 books are published every day and reviewers are deluged with books to review. I figured this would be a chance to go to a regional conference as an author, meet fans, and maybe even get my book in the "book room" to sell. They arbitrarily exclude authors and books based not on the quality of the books but on the publisher and method of printing.
I figured this would be a chance to go to a regional conference as an author, meet fans, and maybe even get my book in the "book room" to sell. That means I have to have been paid at least $1,000 in advances and/or royalties for my book, which had an initial print run of at least 500 copies. Even then, I can't be considered an author at their conference if my book is self-published or cooperatively published.
Are you a self-published author who is tired of getting the door slammed in your face by reviewers, contests, conferences and more just because your books aren't published by a traditional publisher? If we as self-publishers don't begin to work together to combat the bias against our work, we are going to continue to be treated as and feel like second-class citizens of the writing community.
I understand that approximately 800 books are published every day and reviewers are deluged with books to review. Reviewers should be in the business of judging books not judging publishers.
Post A Comment:
0 comments: