Interview With Amanda Hocking [The Guardian]

gothicangel · Jan 13, 2012

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2012/jan/12/amanda-hocking-self-publishing

The speed of her ascent has astonished Hocking more than anyone. She was so elated to receive her first cheque from Amazon, for $15.75, that she didn't cash it and still has it pinned up on a noticeboard above her desk. "It went from zero to 60 overnight," she says. "Everybody was buying my books and it was overwhelming."

In internet-savvy circles she has been embraced as a figurehead of the digital publishing revolution that is seen as blowing up the traditional book world – or "legacy publishing" as its detractors call it – and replacing it with the ebook, where direct contact between author and reader, free of the mediation of agent and publishing house, is but a few clicks away. There is certainly something to that argument. The arrival of Hocking onto the Kindle bestseller lists in barely over a year is symptomatic of a profound shift in the book world that has happened contiguously. Her rise has occurred at precisely the moment that self-publishing itself turned from poor second cousin of the printed book into a serious multi-million dollar industry. Two years ago self-publishing was itself denigrated as "vanity publishing" – the last resort of the talentless. Not any more.

But Hocking's new-found stature as self-publishing vanguardista is not something she welcomes. "People built me up as a two-dimensional icon for something I was not. Self-publishing is great, but I don't want to be an icon for it, or anything else. I would rather people talk about the books than how I publish them."

She also resents how her abrupt success has been interpreted as a sign that digital self-publishing is a new way to get rich quick. Sure, Hocking has got rich, quickly. But what about the nine years before she began posting her books when she wrote 17 novels and had every one rejected? And what about the hours and hours that she's spent since April 2010 dealing with technical glitches on Kindle, creating her own book covers, editing her own copy, writing a blog, going on Twitter and Facebook to spread the word, responding to emails and tweets from her army of readers? Just the editing process alone has been a source of deep frustration, because although she has employed own freelance editors and invited her readers to alert her to spelling and grammatical errors, she thinks her ebooks are riddled with mistakes. "It drove me nuts, because I tried really hard to get things right and I just couldn't. It's exhausting, and hard to do. And it starts to wear on you emotionally. I know that sounds weird and whiny, but it's true."

Devil Ledbetter · Jan 13, 2012

Gothicangel, did you have a commentary on this interview?

I don't care much for Hocking's writing style or her subject matter but that's fine - I'm not her audience. I am not out to tear her down. She has worked hard for a long time to achieve what she has and she deserves credit for that.

But I think no discussion of Hocking gives the full picture until it's pointed out that she owes a tremendous portion of her success to the traditionally published Twilight series. Her books glided in the the coattails of the phenomenon. It left a bevy of undiscriminating readers hungry for more teen vampire romance, and Hocking provided it to them cheap.

If Twilight hadn't happened, Hocking might be just another self-pubbed author with books sales in the low double digits. She capitalized on it, whether knowingly or from pure luck, I wouldn't venture to guess.

Phaeal · Jan 13, 2012

Well, a lot of commercially published authors have also ridden on Twilight's coat-tails. That's the good old "Flavor-of-the-Month" phenomenon, which in fact can last for several years.

Hocking might have had a leg up because she was able to charge so little for her books. Understandably, a reader might be far more tempted to try a new writer if she only had to pay a buck or two, rather than ten bucks plus.

Hey, she did a lot of work. Now she's going to let St. Martin's Press do some of it. So she's hardly wedded to self-publishing, as well she needn't be, however SP fanatics may carp.

Toothpaste · Jan 13, 2012

What I love about her is that she constantly reminds people how much hard work she put into self publishing. That it didn't just happen to her overnight, that it isn't an easy way to make money, and that there are downsides (like the bad editing). It seems to me a lot of other very successful self published authors gloss over those facts (not all of them, but many), making it seem like: "All you have to do is post some words on the internets and you'll be a millionaire!" It confuses people, and gives them false expectations.

Self publishing is totally viable, but it's not a get rich quick scheme.

gothicangel · Jan 13, 2012

Devil Ledbetter said:
Gothicangel, did you have a commentary on this interview?

No. I just thought it might be worth sharing. It's an interesting read.

What I love about her is that she constantly reminds people how much hard work she put into self publishing. That it didn't just happen to her overnight, that it isn't an easy way to make money, and that there are downsides (like the bad editing). It seems to me a lot of other very successful self published authors gloss over those facts (not all of them, but many), making it seem like: "All you have to do is post some words on the internets and you'll be a millionaire!" It confuses people, and gives them false expectations.

Self publishing is totally viable, but it's not a get rich quick scheme.

QFT.

shaldna · Jan 13, 2012

Toothpaste said:
What I love about her is that she constantly reminds people how much hard work she put into self publishing. That it didn't just happen to her overnight, that it isn't an easy way to make money, and that there are downsides (like the bad editing). It seems to me a lot of other very successful self published authors gloss over those facts (not all of them, but many), making it seem like: "All you have to do is post some words on the internets and you'll be a millionaire!" It confuses people, and gives them false expectations.

Self publishing is totally viable, but it's not a get rich quick scheme.

This.

What I like about her is that she's very grounded in terms of her success. She's been very honest about the work it took. I have heaps of respect for her.

Theo81 · Jan 13, 2012

*sigh* I agree with Toothpaste (again, dammit).

Self-pubbing is not a quick trip to riches. JA Konrath's, on his blog, presented the information that one of his books earns $3.50 an hour. You know what $3.50 an hour is? An 8 hour day at the minimum wage in my country. That's for one of the major names of Self-Pubbing with industry experience, with a lot of books available, not random person who may or may not be able to parse a sentence correctly who's put their work up because they ran out of agents.

Lady MacBeth · Jan 13, 2012

shaldna said:
What I like about her is that she's very grounded in terms of her success. She's been very honest about the work it took. I have heaps of respect for her.

I agree. She definitely has perspective when it comes to her success. She worked hard and she knows it. I respect that.

iRock · Jan 16, 2012

Bottom line: Hocking wrote good books that readers want to read.

All the marketing in the world won't shift a shitty book. And those who want to self-pub, who clog Twitter and Facebook with their constant "buy my book!" noise, would do well to remember that.

fireluxlou · Jan 16, 2012

iRock said:
Bottom line: Hocking wrote good books that readers want to read.

All the marketing in the world won't shift a shitty book. And those who want to self-pub, who clog Twitter and Facebook with their constant "buy my book!" noise, would do well to remember that.

Oh allllll the marketting in the world, will DEFINITELY shift a "shitty" book, it will also become many-a movie franchise too. It will also make millions of money. Because tv tropes and writing clichés do sell.

I'm not to bothered by what others choose to read, as long as they enjoy it, who am I to say what is shitty and not shitty? All this snobbery about books. It just makes me think of being in school and there being the music indie snobs who were always bitter and snide to the kids liked dance or pop music. Just tiresome y'know.

Good for Amanda Hocking. She has done pretty well for herself.

iRock · Jan 16, 2012

fireluxlou said:
Oh allllll the marketting in the world, will DEFINITELY shift a "shitty" book, it will also become many-a movie franchise too. It will also make millions of money. Because tv tropes and writing clichés do sell.

I should have clarified: I'm speaking strictly about self-published books. The relentless Twitter spam, messaging people to buy your book, begging to do interviews, faking reviews, etc., will never help if you've thrown a shitty self-published book out into the world. Marketing does not make up for inept story, bad writing, and an error-laden product.

Again, I'm talking about self-publishing.

Good for Amanda Hocking. She has done pretty well for herself.

I completely agree. She's worked hard and produced stories readers like. And she's got a good head on her shoulders. I wish her continued success.

Torgo · Jan 16, 2012

fireluxlou said:
Oh allllll the marketting in the world, will DEFINITELY shift a "shitty" book, it will also become many-a movie franchise too. It will also make millions of money. Because tv tropes and writing clichés do sell.

I'm not to bothered by what others choose to read, as long as they enjoy it, who am I to say what is shitty and not shitty? All this snobbery about books. It just makes me think of being in school and there being the music indie snobs who were always bitter and snide to the kids liked dance or pop music. Just tiresome y'know.

Good for Amanda Hocking. She has done pretty well for herself.

There's no single continuum between a good book and a shitty one. Each book is a basket of various qualities which each appeal to different people in different ways. Dan Brown creates cardboard characters and writes cardboard prose, but these qualities are not what his readership is after. What they want, he gives them brilliantly well.

It's borderline meaningless to say The Da Vinci Code is an excellent book, but if you forced me to it, I'd have to agree.

Although throwing marketing spend at a book can def. help shift the copies you have in your warehouse, you don't necessarily get a phenomenon like Hocking. Those are remarkable to (and coveted by) publishers because you didn't have to spend a lot to make a lot of money. We're more focused on profit than we are on turnover.

Windcutter · Jan 19, 2012

Theo81 said:
Self-pubbing is not a quick trip to riches. JA Konrath's, on his blog, presented the information that one of his books earns $3.50 an hour. You know what $3.50 an hour is? An 8 hour day at the minimum wage in my country. That's for one of the major names of Self-Pubbing with industry experience, with a lot of books available, not random person who may or may not be able to parse a sentence correctly who's put their work up because they ran out of agents.

Well, if you try to assess the same sort of thing using average earn-out for a traditional print book in the similar genre, I doubt the numbers will be in any way amazing. Unless the author is extremely prolific.

scarletpeaches · Jan 20, 2012

iRock said:
Bottom line: Hocking wrote good books that readers want to read.

All the marketing in the world won't shift a shitty book. And those who want to self-pub, who clog Twitter and Facebook with their constant "buy my book!" noise, would do well to remember that.

Put it this way, I've read some of her prose and 'good' is the last thing I'd call it.

Marketing does shift shitty books.

shaldna · Jan 20, 2012

Perhaps the following in more accurate:

Originally Posted by iRock
Bottom line: Hocking wrote ~~good~~ books that readers want to read.

Phaeal · Jan 20, 2012

Perhaps the following in more accurate:

Quote:
Originally Posted by iRock
Bottom line: Hocking wrote good books that readers want to read.

I imagine publishers will allow that books that sell are "good."

scarletpeaches · Jan 20, 2012

No, publishers call books that sell saleable.

iRock · Jan 20, 2012

scarletpeaches said:
Put it this way, I've read some of her prose and 'good' is the last thing I'd call it.

Phaeal said:
I imagine publishers will allow that books that sell are "good."

shaldna said:
Perhaps the following in more accurate:

We're not average readers, and we're fools if we think otherwise. We're inherently biased and our standards are vastly different from the average non-writing reader.

Hocking is smart. She's understood one thing: It's our job to write for readers. They are the consumer. Other writers are just a tiny audience and we're silly if we write solely to please our peers.

So her prose isn't literary quality. Big whoop. She's still done her job extremely well. I'm sure her readers think her books are good.

scarletpeaches · Jan 20, 2012

I don't give a rat's arse about not being the average reader. I'd prefer to aim up, not at the level of "good enough"...which isn't.

Well, not for me, anyway.

Kitty27 · Jan 20, 2012

I like Ms.Hocking. She put in work that I am quite incapable of. I am helping a friend self-publish right now and MY DAMN,this is a lot of work. But she's paying me with chocolate. What can I say? I'm easy like that.

I like her honesty about how hard it was and how she doesn't tout self publishing as the road to riches.

Amadan · Jan 20, 2012

iRock said:
We're not average readers, and we're fools if we think otherwise. We're inherently biased and our standards are vastly different from the average non-writing reader.

Hocking is smart. She's understood one thing: It's our job to write for readers. They are the consumer. Other writers are just a tiny audience and we're silly if we write solely to please our peers.

So her prose isn't literary quality. Big whoop. She's still done her job extremely well. I'm sure her readers think her books are good.

Ya know, I'm kind of sick of seeing this. This is not to bash on Hocking, but the idea that "real readers don't care if your writing is any good or not, it's only us writers who notice things like bad prose and flat characterization" is crap. Sure, there are undiscerning readers out there, just like there are people who would rather eat McDonald's than anything else. But readers do notice writing quality even if they don't have the vocabulary or analytical tools to describe it in more detail than a five-star scale.

Dan Brown and Amanda Hocking are popular for the same reason McDonald's is popular. More power to them, but it's not because most readers are too dim to know good prose from fast and cheap.

Aerial · Jan 20, 2012

Amadan said:
Dan Brown and Amanda Hocking are popular for the same reason McDonald's is popular. More power to them, but it's not because most readers are too dim to know good prose from fast and cheap.

I'm not sure the fast and cheap comparison is completely accurate, but I do think the adage "Story trumps everything else" applies here. Readers will overlook a lot of flaws if they are enjoying the story. The only question is how big the pile of "everything else" has to get before a good story is no longer enough, and that differs from person to person.

Aerial

Phaeal · Jan 20, 2012

scarletpeaches said:
No, publishers call books that sell saleable.

If I were a publisher, "saleable" would qualify as "good" to me -- "good" for my bottom line. St. Martin's willingness to part with an advance of more than two million bucks for Hocking's next series testifies to the press's belief that her writing is "good" enough.

Poor "good," such a promiscuous word. I bet it hangs out by the railroad tracks with "nice" and "bad."

Rhoda Nightingale · Jan 20, 2012

Y'know what?

I saw Ms. Hocking's book on the shelf at Barnes and Noble the other day, and the first and only thought that came into my head was, "Good for you, kid. I hope I'm up there next to you one day."

Every interview or blog post I see with her, she continues to strike me as mature, well-grounded, and hardworking, and I plan to support her regardless of the quality of her prose.

Also, I want a Smiley with "What Toothpaste said" on a little sign.

Windcutter · Jan 20, 2012

scarletpeaches said:
I don't give a rat's arse about not being the average reader. I'd prefer to aim up, not at the level of "good enough"...which isn't.

Well, not for me, anyway.

But a boring book and a well-written book can be the same book even for a discriminating reader.
* * *
As for Ms Hocking, I'll be totally honest, I envy her prolificacy.

Interview With Amanda Hocking [The Guardian]

Toughen up.

Come on you stranger, you legend,

Whatever I did, I didn't do it.

THE RECKLESS RESCUE is out now!

Toughen up.

The cake is a lie. But still cake.

Out, damn'd spot! out, I say.

That's how I roll

That's how I roll

Formerly Phantom of Krankor.

The cake is a lie. But still cake.

Whatever I did, I didn't do it.

That's how I roll

So Goth That I Was Born Black

There is no spoon.

Whatever I did, I didn't do it.

Vampire Junkie