So many things are on my mind while I eagerly await the final round of copy edits. I've been working on formatting the book for e-readers. Waiting for a camper to get in stock. Looking ahead to a short vacation. And reading a plethora of articles about the rise of indie authors, which I will soon be one.
As expected, when you read blogs, forums, news articles, press releases, etc., you see two sides of a story and the truth lies somewhere in between. Reading from the viewpoint of the e-revolution, which includes indie authors and electronic book sellers, you get a celebratory feel. Life is good. Publish your book and hit the lottery.
There are a lot of success stories in the Indie world and it is the selling point for that side. Though the reality isn't quite that rosey.
The viewpoint of traditional publishing is, as expected, all doom and gloom about independent publishing. According to them, the average author sells 50 copies. Since they can't seem to provide the reader with the source of that information, I tend to think they pull that number out of their head.
Like I said, somewhere in between these viewpoints lies the truth. But the argument that intrigues me most is the one that the traditionalists use the most: There are no gatekeepers in the Indie world, therefore the market is flooded with crap.
I can give them that point, but that is just one side of the argument.
In traditional publishing the path to paper is over-populated with these gatekeepers. An author pens his story and his query and submits it to the first gatekeepers, the agents. Stories of great author's that almost didn't get published because an agent wouldn't pick them up are all over the place.
Another gatekeeper is the publisher. Stephen King was turned away by how many publishers?
I guess my point is that these traditional gatekeepers buy into a book based on what they think will sell, and they are often wrong. Just as they will publish books that don't sell, they don't publish books that will sell.
As an indie author, I am circumventing the gatekeepers. There is a way into the building that isn't guarded (yet), and folks like me are taking advantage of it. We are going straight to the readers; the ones who care more about what they buy as opposed to what will sell.
The reader is the curator. If readers don't like my books, they won't sell. If my books are good, they will sell. In one way, it's not that simple, but in another it really is that simple.
This method of publishing is a win for both parties involved. The reader gets a book for a reasonable price and the author gets his stories off his desk and into the world.
Traditionalists don't like it, because it threatens their world, and in some cases their livelihood. So when they paint the cover, it is dark and scary.
Indie's love it because it is cheap and easy. So their painting is all butterflies and rainbows.
When the broth boils away, we are left with gatekeepers and curators and the reader's may end up deciding which is better.
No comments:
Post a Comment