Any disadvantage to self publishing a first book if hoping to traditionally publish later books?

Woollybear · May 25, 2018

People say it takes a few years to get up to speed on being a good writer. Maybe not for everyone, maybe for some people more than others, and I'm guessing that's me, too. And then I see people talking about trunking their first novel, sometimes saving the ideas in it for later works.

OK, Here's my question. I know I'm on a learning curve, which I like a lot, and also I know that I will want to move on to my second book soon, as soon as I am not learning on this first book anymore. It's planned to be the first in a trilogy. It's a complete story, just not as good as it would be if I was a better writer.

In the near future, when I fail to get an agent or publisher, because of the amateur writing, what is the drawback (if any) of self pubbing the first book, then working on the second ... presumably with better chops?

Then, when I query the second book, which is planned as the second in a trilogy, could the publisher (because I will be wildly successful querying etc at that point

) be able to also pick up the first book?

Seems like this could work, but people often trunk their first novels. I don't want to do that. Why not self-publish then get to work on book number two and continue on that learning curve?

cornflake · May 25, 2018

Patty said:
People say it takes a few years to get up to speed on being a good writer. Maybe not for everyone, maybe for some people more than others, and I'm guessing that's me, too. And then I see people talking about trunking their first novel, sometimes saving the ideas in it for later works.

OK, Here's my question. I know I'm on a learning curve, which I like a lot, and also I know that I will want to move on to my second book soon, as soon as I am not learning on this first book anymore. It's planned to be the first in a trilogy. It's a complete story, just not as good as it would be if I was a better writer.

In the near future, when I fail to get an agent or publisher, because of the amateur writing, what is the drawback (if any) of self pubbing the first book, then working on the second ... presumably with better chops?

Then, when I query the second book, which is planned as the second in a trilogy, could the publisher (because I will be wildly successful querying etc at that point ) be able to also pick up the first book?

Seems like this could work, but people often trunk their first novels. I don't want to do that. Why not self-publish then get to work on book number two and continue on that learning curve?

I don't understand a bunch of things along this line of reasoning --

if you suspect the book you're working on won't be up to scratch, your solution is not to fix it but to... publish it? Why? Why would you want something you know to be substandard published under your name? What would be the point of that?

Also, you're hoping to query the second book in a trilogy, because you're giving up on the first one? Why would agents or publishers want the second book of something? Why would you plan to do that?

Why would 'the first part of this, which I didn't polish, is also available, but it's been published,' be a draw, not something to put them off the second?

lizmonster · May 25, 2018

I understand the appeal, but there are a few issues with your plan.

1) A debut author is a really valuable thing to a trade publisher. If you've already self-published, you're not a debut anymore.

2) AFAIK a publisher is unlikely to pick up a self-published book unless it's both done very well (I hear numbers like 10K+ thrown around), and has a potentially large untapped audience.

3) Publishing the second book in a series when the first has been published by someone else is an incredible longshot. Publishing the second with a trade pub when you've self-pubbed the first one is an even longer shot, unless your first book is the big seller posited in 2).

I'd also say if you believe you're still learning (and taking your word for that), you're not going to want to self-publish yet. IMO self-published book should be as polished and professional as a trade-published book. There are a lot of good reasons to self-publish, but "I'm in a hurry" is almost never one of them. Your work has taken you a long time - take the time to make sure it's published well, however you choose to do it.

Woollybear · May 25, 2018

Cornflake - Um, let me try again.

I can't imagine that even my best work on my first novel will be competitive against an accomplished author, and I also imagine that publishers want the best work available. Like, maybe I'm the equivalent of a good high school athlete, but not ready for the olympics.

But, it's still a story and why not publish it anyway? Why trunk it?

When I've done every fix I can think of, and the option is to stick it in a closet or stick it on the web, and I feel like the next best step for me is to move on to the next story - Why not do that?

^^ So that's one thing.

But yeah, the thing about maybe getting picked up later is more like, I've also heard that having a near-trilogy or trilogy can be more marketable. AND,I imagine I could un-self publish and rework book one, to a higher standard, with all my new shiny skills that I will definitely have in a year or two.

... is there a downside from the publisher's perspective, to looking at the second book in a series knowing the first is already self-published?

Maggie Maxwell · May 25, 2018

Generally, first novels get trucked because there's something about them that's not ready for public consumption, even if it's hard to see because of our own skill levels at the time. I'd be humiliated if I'd published my first novel, because I can go back now and see how awful it was. There's nothing that says you can't save the novel for later and redo it or try to sell it once you have your agent. It's better to take it slow and not toss your novel out to the world before it's ready, I think.

That said, for your question, if it were an unrelated novel, it probably wouldn't have much effect on your future publishing attempts. Being the first of a series, though, and you set out to sell the second to a publisher, they're going to want to know how #1 sold. If it's not spectacular, and I'm talking tens of thousands of sales, the sequel is not going to get picked up. If it DID sell spectacularly, there may be a chance they'll want to republish #1. It does happen. Our own S.L. Huang recently did it with her self-pubbed series, but the whole series was done by the time it got picked up. But you have to have a solid first book and solid sales for that book if you want the second one to get noticed by an agent and publisher.

Woollybear · May 25, 2018

Thanks Liz. And Maggie.

That makes sense.

cornflake · May 25, 2018

The series SL wrote that was picked up was not something she was iffy about, in any way, just FYI for people in the thread who don't know her. She worked like heck on the first novel in that series, and everything about publishing it.

She chose and worked on self-pubbing.

Woollybear · May 25, 2018

I'm thinking that self-pubbing might be my calling here. It feels like it might be right, since I'm writing something less for the market and more for ... something else. So, it's nice to get an idea of what that sort of decision constrains down the road.

Plus, learning curve. The characters in the second book are tapping their feet. Growing impatient. There's a scene drawn from Standing Rock and another drawn from Three Mile Island - they are begging me to get going. But that's book two.

Anyway, it doesn't mean I'm not doing my best.

I know you aren't saying that. And I'm happy to let the universe have the first crack at it. Just puzzled that a person would put a creation away, and figured there must be a strategic rationale - looks like there is.

AW Admin · May 25, 2018

cornflake said:
The series SL wrote that was picked up was not something she was iffy about, in any way, just FYI for people in the thread who don't know her. She worked like heck on the first novel in that series, and everything about publishing it.

She chose and worked on self-pubbing.

And she put in the time and effort to do it right.

Woollybear · May 25, 2018

That's a fantastic thread (SLHuangs). I also admire that she's a math geek (I admire all geeks here on AW). Post #1 on my thread here originally had a drafted sentence about making my first book freely available instead of self publishing (which I deleted for clarity in that post) - but I love the idea of using Creative Commons instead. Still free, but through the commons, which I've used for other things.

Wow. So cool. Thanks everyone.

frimble3 · May 25, 2018

Another thing to consider is not the publisher but the readers.
If you publish something that is as good as you can do it, at the time, but you know still has 'growing pains', what's the point in publishing at all?
What if the readers who have paid good money for you to practice on decide that "No, I'm not going to be caught like that again!" and just avoid your stuff in future?
I know that I wouldn't be pleased to be someone's guinea pig.
If you can't possibly make it a stand-alone, how about writing your second book, and use those new-found skills to rework the first one?

Woollybear · May 25, 2018

It's interesting to think about. Heard an old interview yesterday with Philip Roth and he said he hadn't read his first couple books in decades and didn't want to (he was prolific and great for fifty years) and when Terry Gross asked him questions from his first books (which I think he won awards for? so they must have been pretty good.) he said something to her along the lines of 'So, you're going to torture me with my first books anyway?'

IIRC there are authors who flopped with their first series and the publisher kept them on but changed their name to avoid exactly what you suggest, Frimble, (according to the Sanderson series on youtube). So I guess it's a real concern! But creative commons gets past part of that. We all agree it's important to do your best. There's a lot of info online about the mistakes people make with self publishing. I bet there are ways to do a good job.

So many possibilities - I could put it online this minute and it would be available to everyone all over the world immediately. That's simply remarkable and wasn't true thirty years ago. They keep saying that things are changing, and it's true, and probably continues.

lizmonster · May 25, 2018

Patty said:
There's a lot of info online about the mistakes people make with self publishing. I bet there are ways to do a good job.

There are absolutely ways to do a good job. But you really, truly do need a high quality product. If you're self-pubbing for creative control, or because you're a niche, or because your genre does amazingly well, or you just enjoy the whole process, that's one thing. But "because it's fast" is not, on its own, a good reason.

As for a series...I didn't get a lot of good advice from my former agent, but she did get one thing right. She read the novel I was querying and a synopsis of the sequel and told me they needed to be one book. The story - including the series moving forward - was so much stronger when I bashed the first two books together. If I'd self-pubbed the first book (which was my original plan), I'd have either never seen the possibilities that came out of consolidating the narrative, or I'd have seen them long after the first book was self-pubbed and it was far too late for me to do anything about it.

However you choose to publish, I'd advise you write a few books in the series before you commit. You may see things as you develop the series that you're not seeing now.

cool pop · May 25, 2018

Um, I might be misunderstanding you but in your original post you act like if the first book is bad you can just self-publish and like it's okay if a self-published book sucks. Am I misunderstanding that?

I'm speaking of you saying this, "In the near future, when I fail to get an agent or publisher, because of the amateur writing, what is the drawback (if any) of self pubbing the first book, then working on the second ... presumably with better chops?" Huh? :Shrug:

Am I wrong with what you are intending to say?

Do you realize you just spit in the face of every author who self-publishes and cares about their craft?

If you want to succeed in self-publishing or trade you have to approach both methods like a business. Self-publishing is a serious form of publishing. It's not for just throwing books out there if you expect to make any money and grow a fan base. Serious writers respect our readers and whether you are self-publishing or not you should always put out quality work.

And, if your first book stinks and trade publishers don't want it what makes you think it's gonna do well in self-publishing? You will still have to sell to readers. Unless you knock it out the park with your storytelling then no reader is gonna want a horrible book no matter how it's published.

My advice? If you want a trade publisher than try to go after one from the beginning. The truth is unless you sell a thousand upon thousands (or millions) of copies of a self-published book no agent or publisher is going to be interested in a book where your first rights are already burned.

Can we please retire the notion that self-publishing is easy and any old crappy writer can self-publish? Yeah it might be easy to throw crap out there but if you think it's easy to sell your crap to readers then you're very wrong. It's really offensive to self-published authors who take their craft seriously when people act like self-publishing is something anyone can do well without having to have any writing skills or talent.

Not saying you meant to offend but that part about "putting out amateur writing by self-publishing it" as if that's okay isn't respectful of self-published authors who'd cut off their foot before putting their name on something crappy.

Not cool and I gotta be honest the comment kinda pissed me off.

It might be a good idea to do some research on self-publishing and all the hard work people (who treat it like a business) put into it.

Dennis E. Taylor · May 25, 2018

First, a disclaimer: I've been drinking a lot of wine tonight. This post may be disjointed.

I did something sort of similar to what you're asking about. I self-pubbed my first novel, Outland, after getting no bites from agents. Now, reading the original, I understand why. My second novel, We Are Legion, got me an agent. The agent got me a publishing deal with Audible (but not a print publisher).

Legion was the first of a trilogy, and the trilogy did well enough to get me a contract from Audible for Outland and a sequel. I'm currently re-editing Outland for republication. Actually, I'm currently drinking wine in a concerted manner, but tomorrow I'll... um. Sorry.

Anyway, the point is that agents and publishers are only interested in what sells and what will make them money. They have no hard and fast rules. They'll pick up a previously-self-pubbed book if they figure they can make a buck. The only consideration is: can you make your novel good enough to sell?

It sounds, in this case, like you don't think you have enough experience to make your first novel good enough, so you're questioning if there's any good reason for you to self-pub it. Sure, there are reasons why you might want to do that. And reasons why you might not. On the pro side, you can learn from the readers' comments. On the con side, even if you un-publish the book later, it will still hang around, complete with those comments.

How in a hurry are you? If you plan on a writing career, but have the time, maybe running your first novel past a number of beta readers is an alternative. Or, write your first novel, beta and trunk it, write your second novel, beta and trunk it, and then write your third novel, beta it, and query it. You can always bring a trunked novel back and re-work it if the basic premise was a good one. You will get better with each novel you write, and you will cringe at your early efforts.

One seriously important suggestion, though: don't "waste" the first book of a trilogy on your learning curve. Don't release any part of your trilogy until you are good enough to write a book that will sell. If you self-pub the first book and it bombs, you've nuked your entire trilogy.

Woollybear · May 25, 2018

cool pop said:
Um, I might be misunderstanding you but in your original post you act like if the first book is bad you can just self-publish and like it's okay if a self-published book sucks. Am I misunderstanding that?

I'm speaking of you saying this, "In the near future, when I fail to get an agent or publisher, because of the amateur writing, what is the drawback (if any) of self pubbing the first book, then working on the second ... presumably with better chops?" Huh? Am I wrong with what you are intending to say?

Do you realize you just spit in the face of every author who self-publishes and cares about their craft?

If you want to succeed in self-publishing or trade you have to approach both methods like a business. Self-publishing is a serious form of publishing. It's not for just throwing books out there if you expect to make any money and grow a fan base. Serious writers respect our readers and whether you are self-publishing or not you should always put out quality work.

And, if your first book stinks and trade publishers don't want it what makes you think it's gonna do well in self-publishing? You will still have to sell to readers. Unless you knock it out the park with your storytelling then no reader is gonna want a horrible book no matter how it's published.

My advice? If you want a trade publisher than try to go after one from the beginning. The truth is unless you sell a thousand upon thousands (or millions) of copies of a self-published book no agent or publisher is going to be interested in a book where your first rights are already burned.

Can we please retire the notion that self-publishing is easy and any old crappy writer can self-publish? Yeah it might be easy to throw crap out there but if you think it's easy to sell your crap to readers then you're very wrong. It's really offensive to self-published authors who take their craft seriously when people act like self-publishing is something anyone can do well without having to have any writing skills or talent.

Not saying you meant to offend but that part about "putting out amateur writing by self-publishing it" as if that's okay isn't respectful of self-published authors who'd cut off their foot before putting their name on something crappy.

Not cool and I gotta be honest the comment kinda pissed me off.

It might be a good idea to do some research on self-publishing and all the hard work people (who treat it like a business) put into it.

Oh, dear, not my intent, I'm so sorry!

I'm told by everyone in real life and even online that publishers won't want my story because it's not what the readers will want. But I believe in it. So, so much.

I'm so glad self publishing is an option. It's simply remarkable and wouldn't even be an option if it wasn't for people that worked in it. Thank you for your hard work.

Woollybear · May 25, 2018

Dennis E. Taylor said:
How in a hurry are you?

I mean, it's a balance. And a long story, and off topic.

Thanks Dennis!

Great food for thought from all. Thank you again.

lizmonster · May 25, 2018

Patty said:
I'm told by everyone in real life and even online that publishers won't want my story because it's not what the readers will want. But I believe in it. So, so much.

Out of curiosity, who's told you this? Because if it wasn't people in publishing, you don't know.

But let's say you do have a book that's so niche that trade publishing is a non-starter. The quality of your product should be the same. I know I'm harping on this point, but truly: you're charging for your book just like Random House does (as you should), and you shouldn't be using paying customers as beta readers. It's one thing to self-pub before you can recognize your weaknesses, but if you already know the book isn't where you want it to be - get it there first.

Woollybear · May 25, 2018

Thanks Liz,

I only haven't affirmed your advice directly because I'm already on board with all that. But

I hear you. The Creative Commons option (or a free download) seems to me to get around the cost issue to the reader.

(To answer your question, the opinion that it's too niche, yeah, it's a variety of people, but also supported indirectly by browsing MSWL. We'll see. I give querying the old college try, who knows, you never know until you try!)

My original question, I think, has been answered. Thank you everyone, so much, and I am particularly grateful for learning of the series by that math gal (SLHuang) some years ago. Fantastic.

VeryBigBeard · May 26, 2018

I like that you're self-aware about needing to learn the craft, but as others said yesterday, the solution to that isn't to self-publish, it's to put in the time on your craft. Most of the time, we learn by repetition, by doing the hard work over and over again until it sticks as instinct.

So if you have a book you're passionate about, and you've seen that it has a place in the market (and most books do, at some level), then put the time in to make it the best it can be. You'll learn in the process.

I don't like the idea that we write books for "practice". Often, that's what it looks like from the far end. I trunked my first project for similar reasons, but I don't consider it practice, exactly. At the time, I put everything I could into it and made it the best I could. As my skills got sharper and I had the privilege to go through a couple workshops and critiques, I started to see that there were flaws int he story that were going to take a ground-up rewrite to fix. And I made a strategic decision to start another project rather than pour more time into that first. But the decision, I think, should be strategic. Part of that strategy might include "I'm still learning; there's a lot in here that's kinda rough," but it should also include other factors. And I like to think we're always learning, with every book, no matter how polished. There's always something. Don't let perfection hold you back from deciding what you can and can't do.

Harlequin · May 27, 2018

People who are successful at self pub are either incredibly lucky or incredibly prolific. I know there are some exceptions to this but it's a general rule of thumb.

I also think you're maybe overestimating the level of craft needed. A catchy character matters more than a superbly literary sentence. Obviously, both would be ideal, but one can get you published whereas the other (superb craft) you can really do quite well without. Fancy sentences aren't everything:; the storyline can be compelling in its own right. And should be really.

In hindsight that doesn't sound quite right. I guess I just mean that maybe we stress over craft more than we should in relation to its importance getting published.

Woollybear · May 27, 2018

Strategic is a good word. So is the idea of a good character. Thanks.

Book two is growing quite insistent. I can't believe y'all don't hear it yelling at me. It's so loud.

Have a great Sunday.

lizmonster · May 27, 2018

Harlequin said:
In hindsight that doesn't sound quite right. I guess I just mean that maybe we stress over craft more than we should in relation to its importance getting published.

Well...there's craft and there's craft. Without reading the OP's work, I can't say where she falls; I'm willing to believe she's being way too hard on herself, as many writers are.

But there's "this description is a bit clunky" or "the pacing in this section could be improved" craft, and there's "needs a line editor STAT" craft (and all the gray areas in between). The former can work if the story is compelling enough. The latter will get your book rejected within 100 words.

Some writing styles are more smoothly readable than others, and story can make the difference (in either direction) whether the prose is perfect or not. What you DON'T want, should you find yourself wanting to seek an agent or a publisher, is a self-published book with your name on it that's too much on the "story would have been great If Only" side of things.

I'd quantify "stressing too much about craft" as continuing to revise when all you're doing is pushing single words around or reordering the odd paragraph.

Woollybear · May 27, 2018

Wrapping up the 20th revision. Huzzah!

One revision was all about nailing character voice, distinct for each character. One was about looking for telling and converting to showing. One was about addressing 'floating head syndrome' and another looked only at 'ly adverbs.' One was dialog tags.

Beta's got the tenth draft and told me there was no tension. They were right. (But I had nailed the ly adverbs! No complaints there!).

Drafts 11 - 20 were all about tension, arcs, mapping the storyline better to the the three act structure, (emotional turning points, etc etc). I learned about filters somewhere in here.

... learning curve.

I find solace in the idea that we all approach writing differently. :roll:

I don't suggest anyone do 20 drafts. :roll:

However, also, someone mentioned elsewhere that Hemingway rewrote the end to one of his stories 39 times ... so that was nice to hear.

What will sink my novel is either that it is not done well enough (doing my best here!

) OR the themes because ... climate change is a downer, and I don't want to write apocalyptic which is how most climate fiction goes. I'm trying to write enjoyable ... with education slyly tucked in. We'll see. Who knows. Oh also I am not sure my characters have nailed likability yet. I like them, not sure if others do.

Harlequin · May 27, 2018

I guess what I'm thinking of is that I see a lot of writers who take rejections as a critique of their craft, when imo their craft is often fine and it's just a numbers thing or bad luck. Conversely, a lot of the stories or novels that get accepted aren't (imo) particularly better written than the competition. There's just so many other factors that come into it.

Fwiw I do think PAtty's writing is up to scratch from what I've seen

Any disadvantage to self publishing a first book if hoping to traditionally publish later books?

Woollybear

cornflake

practical experience, FTW

lizmonster

Possibly A Mermaid Queen

Woollybear

Maggie Maxwell

Making Einstein cry since 1994

Woollybear

cornflake

practical experience, FTW

Woollybear

AW Admin

Woollybear

frimble3

Heckuva good sport

Woollybear

lizmonster

Possibly A Mermaid Queen

cool pop

It's Cool, Miss Pop if You're Nasty

Dennis E. Taylor

Get it off! It burns!

Woollybear

Woollybear

lizmonster

Possibly A Mermaid Queen

Woollybear

VeryBigBeard

Preparing for winter

Harlequin

Eat books, not brains!

Woollybear

lizmonster

Possibly A Mermaid Queen

Woollybear

Harlequin

Eat books, not brains!