Reviewing self-pub'ed bks problems

It depends on what you mean by "self-published". If you mean publishing under your own imprint, then it's possible to get reviews, though some reviewers do refuse self-published books of this nature. If you mean POD (not using POD just to print, but using POD to publish), then I don't know of a remedy.

If you're interested in self-publishing, I'd suggest reading Dan Poynter's book and Tom & Marilyn Ross' book before you do anything.

Well, you can self-publish and print the books using POD. Just make sure you own the ISBN. There are advantages and disadvantages to using POD over an offset printer, so do your homework before you decide what's right for you. There isn't a "right" answer - it depends on what your goals and circumstances are.

Before you do anything, read these two books:

The Self-Publishing Manual by Dan Poynter
Complete Guide to Self-Publishing by Tom and Marilyn Ross

Yes, that means Trafford is the publisher and owns the ISBN.

That means you are not really "Self-publishing." It's vanity/subsidiary. Trafford owns the ISBN, and it's listed as a Trafford book.

To really self-pub, you need to purchase your own ISBN and establish your own imprint... read the books -- they are very helpful to understand the pros and cons of everything.

I'm not sure I understand your question. Can you post what you're referring to?

It means they're the publisher. As far as the book trade is concerned, it'll be their book, not yours. All orders must go through them.

WriteRead said:

I read that many editors (newspapers and magazines) won't review self-published books.

Is this true, and if so, what's the remedy for this?

Dan

Click to expand...

It's true that most trade publications and larger newspapers and mags won't review self published books, as well as most vanity press books (and they know who they are). Publishers Weekly, the main trade magazine in the publishing industry has a policy to review self- or vanity-pubbed titles only if the print run is over a certain number of copies and the publisher has a distribution arrangement with a known and reputable distributor. School Library Journal, Kirkus Reviews, The New York Times, and a whole lot of other national papers have a policy not to review self-pubbed books. Why? Because so many of them are terrible. The remedy is to work on your manuscript until it's so good that no traditional publisher would want to pass it up.

If it's meant to be...

I can understand some of the hoops you're jumping through; I've been doing that a lot myself lately. I was balking at the idea of self-publishing because of the fact that to do that, you need to be in the finnancial position to buy a decent amount of books yourself to sell at signing events and whatnot. A recent self-publishing author; http://www.alienlog.com/, visited my area Barnes & Noble, and was kind enough to answer my questions over email, and he suggested self-publishing under my own imprint, buying the isbn, the whole works. Of course, look at his bio....he's a retired Physics professor with a PHD; got money and time to market himself. I'm a teacher at a not very well funded Catholic school with a wife and new baby...so I was thinking about the POD's, their packages, the new "specials" they always seemed to run...

I finally, (thanks to some great advice to Mr. McDonald here), decided to try self-publishing with www.lulu.com. You end buying the isbn, at the very least, you own the rights. Not to make this thread not belong here, but give lulu a try. I cannot give you a guarantee, because I have not yet finished my project with them yet, but it looks very promising.

Anyway, this may be fatalistic, but I figure if it's meant to be that you'll be in the big time, you'll be there, POD or not. The thing is.....if you own the ISBN, you really ARE in control of your own publishing destiny.

Kevin Lucia
www.kevinlucia.net

Regardless of whether you self-pub or POD (I've done both), your market is primarily local/regional. In order for readers to want your book, you must already have a local readership.

If you don't already write for a local publication or haven't already gotten your name out to the public in some way, few will be motivated to buy your book. If you are already known as a writer in your area, you stand a better chance to get your book onto shelves at the independent bookstores and other shops (three in my area now order copies from the POD publisher).

If you are already known locally, you will get readings/signings/lectures at local stores, schools, and libraries. You will even get a few local reviews.

A rule of thumb: If you expect to sell more than a thousand books, complete self-publishing (off-set, from a good printer) will make you more money. If you expect to sell less than a thousand, POD will work better.

I have tried to re-write this so it sounds if not upbeat at least not harsh. I think I am just going to take it out, and say that vanity books (and to a lesser extent, self-published books) have a difficult time getting reviewed because they have not gone though the normal gatekeeping processes of a commercial publishing house.

In the meantime I suppose you could target online or less picky reviewing mags and websites. bookpleasures.com takes POD

Conventionally self-published books (the author owns the ISBN and publishes under his/her own imprint) can and do get reviewed by the big reviewers. It's books with a POD or vanity publisher's ISBN that are automatically tossed aside. Just wanted to make that clarification.

Reviews

It's a matter of time and space. No review source that's any good has enough room to review even a fraction of the books they receive from mainstream publishers. And no reviewer who's any good has time to read even a fraction of the books he receives from mainstream publishers, let alone time enough to wade through stacks of self-pubished books when experience has taught him that 99 our of 100 will be absolutely horrible.

The though is that if a book is any good at all, it should have been published by a legitimate publisher, and this thought is true at least 99% of the time. Most self-published books are horribly written, and like it or not, this is simply a fact.

Good review site have very limited space, and good reviewers have very limited time, and no one wants to review badly written books. Time and space are precious, and there are already far more good books out there than anyone has the time or the space to review.

My Book Review Blog

I have a book review blog where I prefer to review small-publisher, self-published and POD fiction--and sometimes non-fiction that interests me. If I don't have any small press books to review, I generally review whatever I read, and try to keep up a fairly constant flow of activity at my blog.

I never trash the books I review. Although I may mention a flaw or two in a review, if I can't recommend spending the time and money on a book, I won't review it--simple as that. There's too much good stuff available from small presses and self-publishering & POD to waste time writing reviews of bad books. It I think a book's bad, or not my taste, I probably won't finish much more than a page or two. If I don't like a book, I may write you and tell you why, but I won't promise to do so. I don't charge for book reviews ever, although you do have to send me a free copy that I can keep. I don't return any books I receive whether or not I review them. I also don't edit other people's work or advise them how or where to get editing done. I just review books people send me for free--if I like the books.
Also--
I only review books that exist as published, bound books. No manuscripts, pfc files, or ebooks. Just books.

When I review a book, I provide a link at my blog to the book at Amazon.com (if the book is available there) so the reader can purchase it from my site. I also post all reviews at Amazon.com with a link to my book review blog. Anyone interested in my reviewing their published books should contact me at the address I provide at the blog.

Lulu and ERWF forums list places that review self-published books.

Are we talking about fiction or non-fiction?

There are significant opportunities for NON-fiction to do well via the self-publishing route if the author has a platform and is willing to spend the time marketing it, but there are very few examples of fiction doing well via self-publishing.

The business plan of selling a lot of copies of fiction as a means of interesting larger publishers or agents has seldom succeeded, and it would seem premature to go that route if the manuscript hasn't at least been sent out to garner a few rejections from the more traditional route and perhaps run past a critique group or two.

JD

JanDarby said:

Are we talking about fiction or non-fiction?

The business plan of selling a lot of copies of fiction as a means of interesting larger publishers or agents has seldom succeeded, and it would seem premature to go that route if the manuscript hasn't at least been sent out to garner a few rejections from the more traditional route and perhaps run past a critique group or two.JD

Click to expand...

I agree that non-fiction is much more likely to do better via self-publishing, but I'm not so sure that POD (as opposed to conventional self-publishing) is necessarily a bad choice for fiction, particularly if you are a writer like me who detests the whole demeaning business of writing an infinite number of query letters (which I have done and for which I have little talent,) to a great host of agents who reply by form letter that they do not want even to see a synopsis (or do not want new clients, or that what I write--based on reading, or not reading--or having an assistant read, a one-page synopsis) or that my work is "not for them."

I have tried that route and the lack of positive results means either that what I write is crap or the conventional system does not work for me. Rather than continue year after year the same fruitless attempts to get published, I've finally decided that the POD route is better, at least for me.

I know that what I write is not crap. Only one of the many agents I have queried has actually seen a manuscript from me and I have no confidence that she actually read more than the first page, and all she had to say was "not for me." I know what I write is better than most of what actually gets into print going the conventional route. If I didn't think so, I'd junk the word processor and take up finger painting.

At least with POD I have a book in hand to share with my friends and to send to POD and small press competitions. Sure, turning a POD into a best seller is a very long shot; like winning the lottery or getting hit by lightning, but from my experience the needle-in-a-haystack business of finding an agent who will sell my manuscript to a big-name publisher is also a very long shot and there's no actual book to show for it after years of effort.

Wishing for something is to depend on luck, but the definition of "hope" is the expectation of success. Since POD means that some people, no matter how few, will actually read my work, it offers me more reason to hope than does conventional publishing. Conventional publishing seems to me to be merely wishing for success since unless and until a receptive agent happens upon my work no one will ever read it.