crowdfunding | Self-Publishing Poll

ysabetwordsmith pointed out this poll on self-publishing, which I visited briefly. After reading a handful of the comments, I was struck by their violence: there's a lot of emotion there in the people denouncing the practice of self-publishing.

ysabetwordsmith said about that: "Any instance of extreme hostility raises the question of why people are being so violent about it."

I think that's a good question. Why do you think some of the people opposed to self-publishing are so hostile about it?

Edit: Please note, I'm not really interested in debating the profitability of the publishing industry. What I'm trying to understand, primarily, is why there's so much vitriol leveled by writers and readers at self-published authors (as in one of the commenters who said of self-published authors that they can "call themselves authors" but they never will be real ones). This kind of extreme behavior strikes me a strange. Particular coming from writers to other writers. And readers—that makes no sense at all. If they don't want to read self-published work, they can just... not read it. Why the anger?

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

/houseboatonstyx here/

I haven't seen publishers commenting on this, but what you say fits the comments I've seen from many writers, most of them wannabees (well, of course most writers ARE wannabees).

One lady, who teaches writing in some sort of community college sort of project in UK, was being coaxed by beta-readers to web her rejected novel. She refused, saying that if no professional wanted to publish it, it must be so bad as to be embarrassing. She had some structured sort of personal requirement of wanting at least some compliments from some agents or publishers before she would consider the book non-embarrassing. As though some sort of imprimature from some super race were required.

A US lady who had one or two books published (loved by a small audience) seemed to feel the same way about her work: it didn't sell well, so it must not be any good.

Others attacked the idea of self-publishing because 'they can call themselves authors'. Apparently this would destroy some standard (of approval by 'professionals') which the wannabees hope to reach someday.

I finally realized that my definition of "professional" is different than most people's definition seems to be. It came about when I got tired of diddling around with writer's organizations that would only let you in if you had X qualifications from their approved markets. I realized that I was wasting time trying to get the approval of people whose rules I thought were stupid.

My definition of professional:
1) You are competent and reliable in your work, delivering a usable/enjoyable product on time and on length; you think of yourself as a pro and conduct yourself accordingly.
2) People pay you for your work.

I have noticed that a great many people who fit #2 do not seem capable of #1. I was shocked, appalled, and horrified by my very first editing experience, which involved working with Big Name Pros. Once I was able to sort out people for whom #1 was also a priority, things went much better.

I'm a professional writer because I do the work and people pay me for it. If other people don't consider that relevant, that's their problem. You want to impress me with my editor hat on? Flash me your manners, not your credits. You'll stand out like an oak tree on a prairie.

Self-Publishing Poll

Re: Hmm...

Re: Hmm...