Posted by Duncan on July 15, 2002 at 14:26:55 from 64.12.96.103 user Duncan.
In Reply to: Re: Books - publishers posted by Peter H on July 11, 2002 at 14:44:31:
I have to say that I wouldn't recommned self-publishing. I'm sure there a success stories (normally regarding local interest books with a very clear market, etc.) - generally it's a risk. I've done it (sort of) with music - producing CDs. But then, I have a very clear 'market-place' (after concerts, and on the internet to people who've particularly looked up my music, etc.) - with books, it's harder. A book I had published last year by a small publishers probably has sold some copies on the internet both through the publisher and through online booksellers (such as Amazon) but, I would imagine, not enough to break even. The publisher bombarded various places with flyers, got the library distributors buying, got an American distributor, etc. These things are not easy to do one's self. Similarly, when the risk is entirely yours, a vanity publisher might not make such a good job of the finished product as people who have a stake in its success or failure. My book was an academic book with a specialist subject area which is both a blessing and a curse. It obviously has a much narrower potential market that a story (for instance) but people will come looking for a book on a specialist subject. There are many children's books on the shelves of bookshops (not all of them very good, but there you are) - it is unlikely that people will go searching the internet for a children's book (unless they're looking for a specific book).
It is interesting that there seem to be so many writers on here. I suppose it's not that surprising that AR should both inspire and appeal to writers. One also gets the impression (from some of the fine words of defence) that there are a number of people involved in publishing on here too! Perhaps we all ought to get together!!!
I have to say I've nothing but praise for the publisher of my book - they have taken on a risk and I can't say with any certainty that it's paid off for them just yet; but then it was never going to be a best-seller, I think it's done enough to justify its existence.
If the SA books had not become the big successes that they did, would they be any less worthy of existence as books? I know its probably foolishly idealistic on my part, but we do seem to commodify books over much. Perhaps it can't be helped, but there are great books (and other works of art) whose existence can surely be justified without recourse to their financial gains. As things are currently arranged, a publisher cannot afford to run with many books because they OUGHT to be published rather than that they will sell, but I suspect they can afford some, and perhaps things ought to be arranged differently.
Some very saleable items flop because trends have moved on. A good book will still find friends in 50 years time even if it didn't fly off the shelves this week.
Sorry to bang on,
Duncan