PDA

View Full Version : Stockholm Syndrome? Really?



Sheryl Nantus
01-23-2014, 08:01 PM
A faboo post by Jennifer Armentrout on self-publishing, trad publishing and all that discussion that's been going on lately...

http://www.jenniferarmentrout.com/stockholm-syndrome/

Love, love, LOVE!

Because in the end it's what YOU choose to do. No one else can walk your walk or choose your path for you.

Excellent read.

Marian Perera
01-23-2014, 08:12 PM
I saw the Stockholm Syndrome comments, not to mention others comparing trade published authors to victims of domestic abuse who had to take whatever crap our publisher/batterer dished out. It made me so livid I had to step away from the Internet.

Thank you for posting that link, Sheryl. It's good to have someone acknowledge that we each have a different path, and we're not stupid or abused for choosing commercial publishing any more than a self-published author is for choosing self-publishing.

amergina
01-23-2014, 08:19 PM
That's an awesome post.

robjvargas
01-23-2014, 08:25 PM
She got her Gremlins reference wrong. Mogwai reproduce when they get wet. Feeding after midnight makes them... well... gremlins. :D

But it's still a great link.

Marian Perera
01-23-2014, 08:31 PM
That being said, and now that I've had time to think about it...


Each decision an author makes in terms of their career is the decision they feel is right for them, if that means signing with a NY publisher, a small press, or going indie, and that’s all that matters in the end, because really, other people’s opinion’s on it are pretty much just people talking from their asses. I think it's a good idea to consider informed opinions under certain circumstances. We've all seen situations in the Bewares forum where the author felt a press was perfect for them when everyone else saw big red flags. But that's the exception.

Snowstorm
01-23-2014, 08:32 PM
Terrific vent! Thanks for posting the link, Sheryl Nantus!

Dave.C.Robinson
01-23-2014, 09:22 PM
I'll admit it, I self-publish. I do it for my own reasons, and I don't expect those reasons to apply to anyone else.

Having said that, I find that more and more I want to separate myself from many self-published authors, and not for their writing, but for their behavior. I spend too much time on one forum where every time anything to do with publishing is mentioned, a group of self-publishing boosters come in and attack the commercial publishing industry like rabid piranhas.

I'm actually surprised they haven't used the Stockholm Syndrome analogy.

Thanks for posting the link

MookyMcD
01-23-2014, 09:27 PM
That blog post was genius. Thank you for posting.

Liosse de Velishaf
01-23-2014, 09:40 PM
Stockholm Syndrome? I feel like half the people who use that term don't know exactly what it means...


Nice rant.

Shadow_Ferret
01-23-2014, 10:57 PM
Maybe its because I'm not published, self or otherwise, nor do I really have much knowledge about that side of writing, but that blog post just seemed really rambly to me.

Kylabelle
01-23-2014, 11:07 PM
There were a lot of references to other online posts or comments, here there and all over the place, which did tend to slow the pace of the read down. But it seems the post's main points are finding lots of support. And I definitely agree with the blogger that accusing authors who are working with trade publishers of suffering from Stockholm Syndrome is absurd.

IMO it's hard to understand how emotional these issues are for some people if you're not directly involved. I was trying to explain to a friend the other day -- someone who is not on AW and is not a writer -- about the polarization that arises and the apparent evangelism about self-publishing, and it was very difficult to convey because from her point of view, what's all the fuss about anyway?

heza
01-23-2014, 11:45 PM
I liked the post, and not just for the Supernatural gifs.

I honestly don't understand fanaticism. I don't think there's anything in my life that's so important to me or that I feel so weak about that I have to tear down other people for not thinking the exact same way that I do about it.

People are perplexing sometimes.

GardeningMomma
01-23-2014, 11:45 PM
I don't think I would ever self publish because I'm too stupid.

I think it would take a great deal of work to learn the ins and outs of it. It surprises me that anyone would think people who do are lazy.

(Sorry about the early ener, there. I just got rounhouse kicked by a toddler who saw a shiny object.)

Manuel Royal
01-24-2014, 12:13 AM
Although the style, tone, spelling, grammar, formatting, graphical elements, and use of the divisive term "traditional publishing" made the blog a headache-inducing read for me, there was a valid point made: that multiple options exist, and each writer has to find the right path for a given work. Agreed, "Stockholm Syndrome" seems a ridiculous and hyperbolic description of the writer-publisher relationship.

I'm really interested in "hybrid" publishing, if I understand the term. Established, trade-published writers are using self-publishing (on their own websites or elsewhere) for shorter pieces, ancillary works, and other things that might not fit into normal commercial bookstore-distributed publishing, but work great online. New self-published writers (sometimes, anyway, if they're writing good stuff, and can get some attention) are establishing fan bases that might help get a trade publishing deal -- or might make them decide to remain self-published for the sake of having more control over their work. I wonder what it'll all look like in another ten years.

I imagine some years from now, the best of what's being self-published will be remembered and the rest forgotten. There were lots of pamphleteers in the days of Poor Richard's Almanack; most of them now known only to literary historians of the period.

J. Tanner
01-24-2014, 12:19 AM
I'm actually surprised they haven't used the Stockholm Syndrome analogy.

They have. Barry Eisler, Joe Konrath, and Mike Stackpole all made the comparison a few years back and I expect that's what the title references. More recently, they seem to have mostly dialed back to a more "no single path but I'm doing better self-pub" position, but those essays are still on their blogs.

Jamesaritchie
01-24-2014, 12:21 AM
Unless you're very weak-mined, everything always has been, and always will be, about doing whatever you want to do, however you want to do it. And, as always, anyone can have an opinion of what you do and how you do it, and nothing is likely to change that opinion

Why do so many people spend so much time worrying about what others think? Why are so many flame wars started because someone disagrees with you?

I like traditional publishing because that's still where most of the money is, and I believe in gatekeepers. I like self-publishing because it's a great second life for my books and stories after they're run their course with traditional publishers.

On the other hand, I don't read self-published books by unknown writers : 1. I don't need them. My TBR pile of books by known writers is around three thousand titles, and growing. 2. Hurt feelings or not, I've been trying to read self-published books for a decade and a half, and in all that time I've found two that I could get through. One of these was absolutely brilliant, but it's a numbers game. To me, they are like reading a slush pile. A good book in there, but I flat don't have the time or the need to find it when I already have a ready source of books I love. An endless supply, in fact.

So what? Self-publishing is just that, it's about self. So is traditional publishing, for that matter. You have the right to self-publish, or to publish traditionally, but neither writer has the right to say anyone else has to like or respect their choice, like or respect their book, or anything else.

And what the heck difference does it make? Write your book, put it out there however you want to put it out there, and hope people like it. Asking or expecting anything more than this changes nothing.

Liosse de Velishaf
01-24-2014, 01:29 AM
Unless you're very weak-mined, everything always has been, and always will be, about doing whatever you want to do, however you want to do it. And, as always, anyone can have an opinion of what you do and how you do it, and nothing is likely to change that opinion

Why do so many people spend so much time worrying about what others think? Why are so many flame wars started because someone disagrees with you?

I like traditional publishing because that's still where most of the money is, and I believe in gatekeepers. I like self-publishing because it's a great second life for my books and stories after they're run their course with traditional publishers.

On the other hand, I don't read self-published books by unknown writers : 1. I don't need them. My TBR pile of books by known writers is around three thousand titles, and growing. 2. Hurt feelings or not, I've been trying to read self-published books for a decade and a half, and in all that time I've found two that I could get through. One of these was absolutely brilliant, but it's a numbers game. To me, they are like reading a slush pile. A good book in there, but I flat don't have the time or the need to find it when I already have a ready source of books I love. An endless supply, in fact.

So what? Self-publishing is just that, it's about self. So is traditional publishing, for that matter. You have the right to self-publish, or to publish traditionally, but neither writer has the right to say anyone else has to like or respect their choice, like or respect their book, or anything else.

And what the heck difference does it make? Write your book, put it out there however you want to put it out there, and hope people like it. Asking or expecting anything more than this changes nothing.


Well, I think part of it is because someone who is new to the game doesn't have that knowledge or that distance from the issue. And they may not be aware of how to get that knowledge or objectivity on the issue.

bearilou
01-24-2014, 03:09 AM
So...does this mean that I'm the only one who read the Kensington Publishing 'article' as a publicity grab by posting something contentious and designed to enflame both sides of the issue?

...hm

Filigree
01-24-2014, 04:07 AM
I thought it read a little like a publicity stunt, myself. Kensington has had some developments recently, so they might be likely to make the most of any attention.

Eisler, Konrath, and Stackpole all had commercial publishing credits before they started self-publishing, didn't they? I know Stackpole did. As has been said before, that makes a huge difference.

Marian Perera
01-24-2014, 04:22 AM
Eisler, Konrath, and Stackpole all had commercial publishing credits before they started self-publishing, didn't they? I know Stackpole did.

So did Konrath.

Manuel Royal
01-24-2014, 03:27 PM
Eisler, Konrath, and Stackpole all had commercial publishing credits before they started self-publishing, didn't they? I know Stackpole did. As has been said before, that makes a huge difference.When I imagine self-publishing working for me, it's always after having put out several books with trade publishing contracts, and building a fanbase. (Maybe that's more of a daydream than a plan, given that I haven't finished a novel yet.) But if one were in that position, with fans actually waiting for the next book, the idea of simply publishing it on one's own has a certain attraction. Maybe there'll be a whole new class of trade publishing contracts to take that into account; maybe the big 5 will be more accommodating to try and keep their relationships with popular writers. Just talking through my hat at this point.

ETA: When my first novel is published, I don't know if I'd have the nerve to do any self-promotion. Makes me think of this: short clip from the animated show "The Critic" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07QscWMPVQ8).

Jamesaritchie
01-24-2014, 08:10 PM
Well, I think part of it is because someone who is new to the game doesn't have that knowledge or that distance from the issue. And they may not be aware of how to get that knowledge or objectivity on the issue.

That is an excellent point.

gingerwoman
01-24-2014, 09:16 PM
So...does this mean that I'm the only one who read the Kensington Publishing 'article' as a publicity grab by posting something contentious and designed to enflame both sides of the issue?

...hm
Publicity for what purpose exactly? To get more authors to submit to Kensignton? Or do you mean to sell books? I was confused by his motives for writing the blog. (Not criticizing him, just wondering what the subtext was supposed to be. )

AlwaysJuly
01-24-2014, 09:32 PM
Whatever the subject, some people get the twisty panties about others doing things differently. With parenting topics, which get so heated, it's always amazing to me how irate people get over someone doing things differently than they did. People in general need to get over themselves and their insecurities.

What one person chooses to do as right for them is not a judgment on you and the path you are taking.

bearilou
01-24-2014, 09:40 PM
Publicity for what purpose exactly? To get more authors to submit to Kensignton? Or do you mean to sell books? I was confused by his motives for writing the blog. (Not criticizing him, just wondering what the subtext was supposed to be. )

:Shrug:

No idea. I was confused by his motives, too. Clearly there was one or else why write it to begin with? What was there to gain by him wading in with an opinion that obviously managed to shake up some tree limbs?

I know that I had never heard of them before so I popped into Google and went to the site. Publicity would be the thing that comes to my mind first.

Sandbar
01-27-2014, 10:38 PM
A faboo post by Jennifer Armentrout on self-publishing, trad publishing and all that discussion that's been going on lately...

http://www.jenniferarmentrout.com/stockholm-syndrome/



I could have lived without this comment: I like to think Iím smarter than the average person suffering from Stockholm Syndrome and smarter than the average person writing glittery, golden poop. Because, assuming for the moment that Ms. Armentrout isn't using a term whose meaning she doesn't know, she should know better than to equate a form of psychological conditioning with intelligence. And she should probably know that intelligence isn't the same thing as talent, either. If...you know...she's trying to make a cogent argument.

grayworld
02-02-2014, 03:57 AM
Jamesaritchie said: "And what the heck difference does it make? Write your book, put it out there however you want to put it out there, and hope people like it." (Sorry, haven't figured out how to do a partial quote yet).

I completely agree.

I read Jennifer Armentrout's blog post, the Huffington Post piece that spawned it, most of the related links, and a ton of the comments, yet I saw little mention of the fact that most (if not all) ebook distributors offer a "Free Sample" of some kind to readers. For all of the discussion, there didn't seem to be a whole lot of faith in the reader's ability to see an interesting cover and synopsis, read a sample of the author's (either trade- or self-published) writing, and then decide for themselves whether or not they wanted to spend their hard-earned money. I found that rather odd.