Bad sales in self-publishing is because readers are snobs

Captcha said:

I think maybe one of the things that successful self-publishers have taught me is that readers don't seem to want what we've been telling ourselves, and being told, that they want. At least not all the time.


The vast majority of self-published works don't sell that well. But the ones that do sell well don't always seem to deserve it, according to the standard of quality we've internalized. It's hard to accept that maybe there's a lot of readers out there who aren't interested in that standard of quality, and harder to figure out what exactly they're responding to. We often resent people who force us to learn a lesson we aren't interested in learning.

Click to expand...

Good points here!

Until Nova has as many viewers as Toddlers in Tiaras, this is something we're going to have to deal with.

The upside is, Nova will still be on in 10 years.

I read all sorts of books from all sorts of publishers, but my expectations going in are different as are the kinds of books I look for.

When I purchase a book by a well-known author off a best-seller list, or a book I've heard recommended numerous times, I go into it expecting a good read. It doesn't really matter what kind of book this is so long as it's vaguely in a genre I enjoy, b/c I'm trusting the author to do a good job with it.

Am I always satisfied? No, but it's rarely bad enough that I don't finish it. These books have passed through a 'gatekeeper' and even if they aren't up my alley so to speak they meet a minimum standard.

I go into Self-Published books expecting them to be bad. Sometimes I'm proved wrong and the book is a brilliant, enjoyable read. Most of the time my expectations (of a mediocre -at-best book) prove true, I'd say 9/10 times.

But I keep reading self-published books for one primary reason -- sometimes they have fantastic ideas and new things that you've never seen before. Sometimes you run into an idea that is so original and so weird that it feels completely new to you, and perhaps "too new" for the current market. "Too different."

Those are a joy. Self-published works of short stories are also a treasure trove on occasion, if you're looking for a lot of short stories to read with a tight/specific theme. Steampunk, for example, has relatively few "professionally published" Anthologies. Venture into the world of self-publication, however, and you can find more.

But in my opinion and experience (which I realize may be not be popular), most of the self-published books out there cannot compete with professionally published ones. They just aren't good enough, unless you read so much that you've run out of everything else in your genre to check out. I know quite a few authors who think they are and blame outside factors (such as the feeling they MUST 'know someone') for their lack of success.

The other small percentage consists of books that the author self-published from the start (without trying to get through a gatekeeper) and books that are FANTASTIC but failed to get through a gatekeeper for some reason (but probably should have, because they really are good).

But for most of us, it's easier and safer to just pick up books that have been through a professional publisher, only taking risks on a specific subset of self-published novels that involve concepts/plots/characters we are interested in and can't find more of elsewhere.

Sir, Toddlers in Tiaras (or TiT, as we cognoscenti call it) is one of the most incisive works of social satire since "A Modest Proposal."

I just feel sorry for people who cannot appreciate genius when they see it. I imagine they also don't get the cultural significance and heartrending pathos of Honey Boo-Boo....

Verily. Neither can they appreciate the vulgarian yet philosophical elan of Miley Cyrus.

Phaeal said:

I've only gotten burned once since I started reading samples before buying. In a bookstore, sampling's simple. Online, I won't consider buying anything of which I can't read at least a chapter.

Click to expand...

The publishers don't matter to me but the writing does. Lately, I sample everything...even the latest King and Koontz, for that matter. (Bought the latest King. Didn't buy the latest Koontz.)

If a story sounds interesting, I'm willing to try it. If the sample isn't up to par, I don't buy it. I'm surprised when readers hate a story from Page One. They should have sampled the thing first!

I started writing seriously in 1998 and I just sold my first novel earlier this year. Anyone who thinks all it takes to be a great writer is a computer and time is seriously in for a big surprise. Writing a novel is the hardest thing I've ever had to do and if I didn't love it so much, I wouldn't do it. To say that readers are snobs is pretty childish. I've had to learn, relearn, take classes, pray - a lot of that-, get upset, cry, swear I would never do this again and learn some more. Luckily, I got a publisher who believed in me and was willing to work with me. Just when I thought, Yeh!! I arrived!! I realized I hadn't even crossed the threshold. There was so much more to learn and rewrite that I think to myself, what were you thinking????

I've read some self-published books and some, not all, were pretty badly written and I could see why the publisher turned down the book. Sometimes it's just plain bad luck or the publisher can't take that type of genre. There's a million reasons why the book was rejected, but never should the reader be at fault. THat's like saying the reason why Chevy sales are going down is that drivers are snobs. A writer needs to first point the finger at themselves first and see what are they doing that published writers aren't doing and learn from their examples. The waiting time is a great time to learn and rewrite.

Maxinquaye said:

This maybe should have been put in the 'bad things writers say' thread, but it was so mind-blowing that I think it deserves its own thread.

Palamedes PR did a survey of self-published authors, and the results were, in summary:

http://www.palamedes.co.uk/new-book-pr-research-published/


So, when the self-published writers who decried the gate-keeper function of mainstream publishers for not being able to appreciate true art and genious now say that readers too can't appreciate the same, where does that leave those self-publishers?

Does this 'publish the slush pile offering' actually poison the well for self publishing? Are writers too full of themselves? Is it vindication for the agent system? Or are the self-publishers right?

What think you?

Click to expand...

LOL!! That is so funny!!

Phaeal said:

Sir, Toddlers in Tiaras (or TiT, as we cognoscenti call it) is one of the most incisive works of social satire since "A Modest Proposal."

I just feel sorry for people who cannot appreciate genius when they see it. I imagine they also don't get the cultural significance and heartrending pathos of Honey Boo-Boo....

Click to expand...

The thing about professional written books and self-published books are what I call 'magician tricks'. Publishers and editors know these tricks and teach them to their writers. IF you know the tricks, your book will shine, if not, then it will not shine. Simple things like limit the pronouns, learn to really show when needed and drag out the thing you want to shine. Watch your grammar and don't use the same grammar phrases such as he did this as he did that, or he did this, going to do that too, or using the word 'was' a lot. Get to know the character's despair and problems, learn how to plot and create interesting characters, it's little things that separate the SP writer from the professional writer. Magician tricks.

Dancre said:

Magician tricks.

Click to expand...

Hmm. I'd call those sorts of things 'craftsmanship'.

WriterTrek said:

I read all sorts of books from all sorts of publishers, but my expectations going in are different as are the kinds of books I look for.

When I purchase a book by a well-known author off a best-seller list, or a book I've heard recommended numerous times, I go into it expecting a good read. It doesn't really matter what kind of book this is so long as it's vaguely in a genre I enjoy, b/c I'm trusting the author to do a good job with it.

Am I always satisfied? No, but it's rarely bad enough that I don't finish it. These books have passed through a 'gatekeeper' and even if they aren't up my alley so to speak they meet a minimum standard.

I go into Self-Published books expecting them to be bad. Sometimes I'm proved wrong and the book is a brilliant, enjoyable read. Most of the time my expectations (of a mediocre -at-best book) prove true, I'd say 9/10 times.

Click to expand...

All the above completely matches my own experiences.

WriterTrek said:

But in my opinion and experience (which I realize may be not be popular), most of the self-published books out there cannot compete with professionally published ones. They just aren't good enough

Click to expand...

Certainly. And this is perhaps no surprise, when you think that there's almost no "quality control" in self-publishing, compared with traditional publishing?

WriterTrek said:

The other small percentage consists of books that the author self-published from the start (without trying to get through a gatekeeper) and books that are FANTASTIC but failed to get through a gatekeeper for some reason (but probably should have, because they really are good).

But for most of us, it's easier and safer to just pick up books that have been through a professional publisher, only taking risks on a specific subset of self-published novels that involve concepts/plots/characters we are interested in and can't find more of elsewhere.

Click to expand...

Rarely have I agreed so fully with a long forum post.

I am still reading the self-published books which I (and my friends) win. And I still want to cry because most are so bad. Very often the story starts with a great idea, but that's not enough. I've read crazy-assed POVs which travel all over the place. So much tell-tell-tell I am drowning in a Sea of Tell and I do not mind some telling. Really, I don't. I don't need to see-smell-taste-witness every emotional nuance of every character. It's fine to say he was hurt; she was sad; his mother was angry - just so long as the story moves and flows. The funny thing is that I go into a new book with an open mind and the hope that this is going to be something great - and so far, no go.

So I think I have a new quest. To find the best self-published book ever. I know it's out there.

jaksen said:

So I think I have a new quest. To find the best self-published book ever. I know it's out there.

Click to expand...

Here y'go.

robjvargas said:

Here y'go.

Click to expand...

I can't look. The possibilities are too wonderful. Is it the Bible? That was self published, I think. The Koran? Franklin? Paine?

robjvargas said:

Here y'go.

Click to expand...

*puzzled* I thought it was Atlanta Nights.

robjvargas said:

Here y'go.

Click to expand...

I hate to rain on the parade, but I don't think that was self-published (unless you count the original fanfiction, which was posted for free and also was (at least to my understanding) substantially different). I believe it was first published commercially by an indie press.

Sorry to ruin the fun.

robjvargas said:

Here y'go.

Click to expand...

It's Fifty Shades of Grey. Which wasn't, y'know, self-published.

I think this thread is done.

And I'm going to remind people, once again, RYFW applies to all writers.