Tell Me the Truth Now

>I'm pursuing traditional publishing because I want the affirmation from publishing professionals that my novel is good.

>I am going the traditional route because I prefer having a real book not a digital copy. I like the way they feel and even smell. Besides once you been published traditionally you know you've accomplished something big. At least that's how I see it. And until they can come up with digital signing what good is a digital copy at a book signing?

>I've done both, and think there's solid reasons for either avenue. Traditional publishing brings credibility, distribution, and promotion that self-publishing doesn't. You'll notice that the vast majority of self-publishing advocates have already built their platforms through traditional publishing. I self-publish certain niche titles, but use traditional publishing for wider material. Being exclusive only limits your options…

>Maybe I'm just too old school, but to me, traditional publishing is an acknowledgment that you have actually crafted something worth reading. Who else is going to tell me that my book is ready for the general public?

Following the self-publishing jihad, when I had good request rates from my query, but nothing great from those requests, I should have just published it myself.

Instead, I went back to the drawing board, tried to find out what I wasn't seeing, and revised yet again. I think in the end I'll have the best book I can, even if it never does see the light of day.

I believe there are professionals for a reason. I wouldn't do my own plumbing, and I have no desire to do my own publishing.

>I want to pursue traditional publishing because I don't just want to be published, I want to be published well.

>I’m pursuing traditional publishing for the legitimacy that it would give me and my book. I believe in standards.

>Several reasons. I enjoy the interaction with the publishing industry and community as a whole. I enjoy agents and editors and believe they provide valuable services for authors.

I do not believe every writer is cut out for self-publishing, and both sides have their pros and cons. Traditional publishing is, in many ways, the avenue through which I've discovered the majority of authors that I love and admire. And there are also many publishers that I have long dreamt of being published through.

>I'd say it should stay with traditional with all the spelling errors today… it is needed. there are also many that take words out of context and their grammer 'like mine' sucks lol Traditional NEEDS TO STAY

>For me, the more the merrier! There is nothing more that gets my creative juices going than collaboration. I've always imagined the traditional publishing route to be a group of people moving towards a common goal.

That traditional agent who gets the traditional publisher to invest in a traditional editor and traditional printer – you know it's not about "traditional". It's about team work. It's about allowing others to be a part of something they feel is greater than them.

That feeling of excitement and buzz when you've got a team that believes in you is what I want. If you label it as sliced cheese, I'd want to be a sliced cheese author.

Wow, really went into left field with that…

>I should proofread my comments more thoroughly in the future…

>I'm pursuing traditional publishing because I didn't dream about being self-published as a kid.

On another note, I recently downloaded a self-pubbed eBook by a well-established, respected author. It is so full of errors and inconsistencies I didn't make it past chapter three.

>I love my agent and my editor and there's no way I could write the books I do without them.

>Traditional publishing offers a professional level of support for authors. I want to do more than publish a book; I want a career in writing, and I know I'll need the guidance of a good agent, the skills of experienced editors and quality publishers to help me accomplish that.

>I want the editorial support and accountability that comes from traditional publishing.

And self-publishing to me will always have the stigma of attracting even crappier writers than those who are published through the traditional route.

I'd rather fail at trying to be traditionally published than have a self-published novel.

>I'm going the traditional route because I don't want to have to deal with cover art, hiring an editor, and convincing stores to stock my book.

And I want my book to be awesome, and I recognize that no matter how much I read books and study craft, most editors have probably read more books and studied craft longer. They DO know how to make my work better than I can make it on my own.

>I'm pursuing traditional publishing for several reasons. Regardless of the growing popularity of ebooks, I still want to see my book in hardback/paperback form in real bookstores. I also want to be able to focus more on writing, so I would prefer that the professionals deal with producing the book and marketing it (though I understand the growing role of authors in the marketing portion). Lastly, I am still relatively new as a fiction writer, and though I believe I am talented, I know I still need the help that a professional editor can give me. I don't want to self-publish if it means a second-rate quality job.

>I pursued traditional publishing because:

1) I want a traditional publishing house behind me lending me credibility as an author.
2) I want my book professionally edited.
3) I want a cover designed by a team of experts who know what will help a book sell.
4) I'm not a marketing whiz and want a publisher's promo pros getting my book into stores across the country.
5) I want my mom to be able to walk into her local bookstore and see my book on the shelf.
6) I want to walk into my local bookstore and see my book on the shelf. =)

>I am waiting while my agent shops my MS, and every month that goes on I wonder if I'm on the right track persuing this–but it's my first, best choice for my books to get the best possible accessibility and visibility.
I will self pub if they aren't picked up, but it's by far my second choice. I want my books in stores,in stands in airports, AND on little handheld devices!
Aloha
Toby
http://www.tobyneal.net/

>I didn't seek to self publish but I got caught in a publishing scam with Publish America. When they said "Traditional Publisher" I thought that meant that they were a publisher like any other. I thought Traditional meant that they followed the standards and practices as other publishing houses. Boy was I wrong! These people prey on people like I was, that were excited to write something and believe in it with their whole hearts, and were "green" about publishing. There should be laws-which there aren't! These places are parasites to the publishing world! I'm not downing anyone for self-publishing their books but these "traditional publishers" I have a problem with. They don't pay their authors-instead they suck money out of them with lures of book expos and having big time authors endorse their books with the dream of making it big in the book world.

>From the heart, I long for my traditionally published book. I dream of the day I walk into a bookstore and hold it. However, the bookstores from my dreams have both closed their doors. There is still one I frequent that seems stable for now. And I do have it in me to wait patiently for the traditionally published method to come to fruition, but in the meantime it would be great to have a real reader or two, something or someone to pass the time between point A and point B.

Is everyone going to make money in self-publishing? No. Is everyone going to make money in the traditionally published marketplace? No. I think at the end of the day this is about what it's always been about, connecting with readers. In the old model you had the biggest distribution possible through the big six because they could launch your novel all over the states and the world for that matter– the internet does the same thing.

The only thing standing between a writer and his/her potential readers is brilliant marketing, or a miracle, either or.

It's been surreal watching my friends self-publish left and right (and most of those were in the last month alone)! Some of my blog followers are openly announcing they're no longer looking for agents. It's a scary new literary world.

I'm prolific. I love to dream up new ideas. I'm already a decade ahead if my publisher allows me to print one novel a year. And that's if I had a publisher, that alone can tack on a timeframe all its own. That's a hard pill to swallow, but the ultimate trophy in my eyes is traditional publishing.

And on a lighter note, I miss the days of writing for my friends in school and having their immediate feedback. I felt so much more like a 'real' writer back then. It's so hollow in this space between here and publication.

I suppose writers will do what they've always done, write.

>Self-publishing? Writing is edits, edits, edits, and how far would a narcissist like me get if I only had to answer to myself?

Traditional book vs. E-books? No contest! You can find a world between the pages of a book. With an E-book it's just not the same.

>There are a lot of reasons, first of which is time. Yes, I know that even in print publishing authors are expected to do a lot of the marketing, but a publisher and agent aid in navigating the rest of the process. Book covers, editorial process, and even a little bit of marketing are done via team effort with the author, meaning I don't have to spend as much time arranging all of that on my own. I don't have to hire a graphic artist for a cover. I don't have to locate an editor that I can work with.

That's not my primary reason, though. I consider myself a smart guy, a very smart guy. I can pick up numerous disciplines both technical and academic, but the publishing world is very confusing. I don't really get it, and in order to become skilled in that world would take a lot of time and failure. I want to give my writing the best possible chance to succeed, and that means going with the experts. Agents and publishers know what they're about, and I would be foolish to think that I can pick up the nuances of the industry by simply self-publishing. While blogging, tweeting, and other social networks of the day have given a good amount of transparency to the publishing industry, there are still facets that are unrevealed to the public. Those are the areas I believe are most important to the success of a book.

Lastly, faith. I believe that the publishing industry evolved the way it has for a reason: it works. There are so many factors to consider when it comes to publishing, it's simply too complex a system to believe that self-publishing can be panacea and elevate all authors to bestseller status.

>Self-publishing for e-readers has been very lucrative for a small a small group of authors in the last few months. However, for the vast majority of authors trying to sell books, self-publishing won't bring much exposure and it won't earn them much money.

The case-studies for self-publishing success are  J.A. Konrath and Amanda Hocking.  These two authors have been very good at self-promotion and their books are better than virtually all their self-published competition.  These authors distinguish themselves from commercially-published authors on the basis of price; their books cost $3 or less.

Amazon pays a 70% royalty to authors who self-publish on Kindle and sell their books for between $2.99 and $9.99.  By contrast, a hardcover royalty is usually 10-15% of the cover price and a mass-market royalty is usually 6-8% of the cover price.  That means a royalty on a $3 e-book is close to the same as an author earns selling a $15 hardcover (which has a $25 cover price).

$2.99 was a great opportunity when very few people were selling books in that price range.  This high royalty made it very easy for self-published authors to undercut the price of commercially-published books, because these authors were able to keep a much larger percentage of their readers' money.  This arrangement was also very beneficial for Amazon and BN because it attracted a huge cadre of value-conscious consumers to e-reader platforms.  However, Amanda Hocking's success story is now common knowledge, and everyone with an unpublished novel believes they can replicate that success.

These authors don't have the imprimatur of New York publishers.  They don't have authoritative praise from critics or famous authors.  They don't even have professionally-designed book covers.  So they use price to compete.

That means it's very hard for an unknown self-published author to price a book at $2.99 right now; most other self-published books that are ranked high in Kindle sales are priced at $0.99.  But if you sell a book at $0.99, you get only a 30% royalty, or 33 cents per copy.  It's very difficult to earn a substantial amount of money at that price, with that royalty, and the 70% royalty is no longer the game changer it seemed to be six months ago because most authors can't earn it.

E-book growth has been huge in the past few years, but we shouldn't overstate its market-share.  For a published author, bookstores are still roughly 70% of the market, and e-books are only about half of online sales.

That means that, while a $.99 cent self-published John Locke title may be selling as many e-books as the new Michael Connelly, the Connelly book is selling the same number in hardcover as it is in e-books on Amazon.  And brick and mortar bookstores represent nearly triple the total online sales.

Meanwhile, the attractive 70% royalty rate doesn't benefit Locke, because that rate only applies to books priced between $2.99 and $9.99.  An author of a bestselling hardcover like Connelly makes ten times Locke's per-copy royalty, and sells five times as many copies.

Locke claims he sells an e-book every ten seconds.  If that's true, he'll sell about three million copies in a year and he'll earn a million dollars.  That's ten times as many copies as a commercially published author has to sell to make the same money.

Nearly everyone who can publish with a commercial publisher goes that route, especially in fiction.  And there are good reasons why this is the case.

>I'm pursuing traditional publishing because I trust its process the most.

>Oh – and also, I want to work with a team of professionals on my book and I don't want to have to pay them all in order to do it.

>I hope to continue to be traditionally published because:

1. I need an editor
2. I need a marketing expert
3. I need the affirmation of my work
4. I love being one of a team
5. I need sales people
6. I need a lot more brain power than just mine in the whole book creation process

Guess I'm just a very needy person. (And these are also the reasons I love to work with an agent!)

>I want traditional publishing because I want the benefit of years of experience and knowledge behind my work. I've seen friends self-publish and they haven't polished their work. I want mine the best I can get it to be and that comes with people who know what they are doing.

>Personally, I'm going the traditional route because I want an advocate on my side. If I go through a literary agent (my biggest hope) or eventually get an editor, I'll know that they chose my book BECAUSE they love it. I'll know they see something worth fighting for within the pages. If I do self-pub, then yes, I see merit in it but will anyone else? Plus, with the literary agent I hope to acquire, they are a sounding board and a friend to help me through the publishing process – and as a college student, I know I'll need all the help I can get. So…traditional publishing all the way!!!

>I chose to go with the traditional publishing route because I knew my limited knowledge of the industry would never lead itself to a well-done self-published book. I didn't have the marketing, design and editing skills to pull it off.

>I'm pursuing traditional publishing because it just seems more professional. Traditional publishing would confirm all the hard work I have done.

>I am pursuing traditional publishing because it is more professional and I want someone with knowledge in the business to promote my work. If a traditional publisher accepts my MS, then I will know that it is marketable.

>I self-published my first book and made all the classic mistakes with it. I want to go the traditional route this time because I learned a lot of lessons (helpful to either approach), because the traditional path still offers the largest network of personal contacts, and because this path still holds a lot of weight/clout as a recognizable achievement that few people attain. That latter distinction still means a lot in the publishing world. The self-pub world is becoming too much a "me too" path. I want my work to stand out.

>I'm still a "wanna be", but I'm working hard to hook an agent because I still feel that's what will bring me validation. Plus, I don't know all the ins and outs of this business and it would be nice to have someone on my team who could direct me when needed.

>It's all about the libraries for me. I write MG, and I want my kids (and their friends)to be able to check out my books from their school libraries.
Oh, and the advance checks aren't bad, either.

>I'm sticking with traditional publishing for now because I'd like to learn from the pros. But, I've noticed a shift. Many agents are less responsive. I used to get a mix of form and helpful rejections dotted with requests for fulls or partials. Now, many agents don't respond at all. Sorry, but that's just rude. I know agents are flooded, but becoming a locked gate rather than the gatekeeper will only drive writers to the path of least resistance, self publishing. That means many books will never reach full potential and that is a shame.

>I want to be traditionally published because while I'm willing to work hard I don't want to go it alone. I'd like to have that "stamp of approval" from a traditional publisher as well as the marketing and distribution. Although there have been a few big successes with self-publishing, I think self-pubbed authors are going to have a much harder time being taken seriously by readers, reviewers, etc.

>Wow, Rachelle, you've gotten a lot of comments already today. And I didn't read a single one, b/c I wanted to comment w/o being influenced by others. The absolute first answer that popped into my head was this:

I CAN'T DO THIS ALONE. AND AT THIS POINT IN MY LIFE, I DON'T WANT TO.

>Traditional publishing still has something to offer, a wider distribution than I get with self-publishing. However, that does not mean I will not pursue self-publishing until and unless a traditional contract is offered. Any contract would have to offer me more value than I can get with self-publishing, and it would be nice to get the kind of recognition that one still finds with traditional publishing. It's not all about money.

For me, it's about creative freedom and getting my name out there. I can have both by self-publishing and pursuing traditional publishing.

>I believe there is a time and place for self-publishing but in all honesty..I am pursuing the *traditional* means because I believe in going back to basics to build a foundation THEN you use other means AFTER the foundation is established. That goes for anything in my life, not just my writing.

There are definite reasons for all the steps in traditional publishing and I feel I need to follow those steps BEFORE I can pursue other means.

>Off the top of my head (or heart, as it were):
1. Validation
2. Confirmation that my book is good BEFORE it goes to readers, because if a bad book with my name on it goes out, my future works will have a harder time.
3. The thought of doing it all myself is overwhelming. Even hiring out the parts I know I can't do, like cover art.
4. I'm currently being pounded on what seems like all sides to self e-pub, which makes me more resistant and, frankly, angry.

Looking back at those, I'd say #3 is the main reason, and #4 a distant 2nd.

>I learned so many things when I pursued traditional publishing over the last ten years. I don't think I would be the writer I am today if I hadn't tried. I learned to write 25-word log lines, short and long queries/back cover blurbs, short and long synopsis, and how to edit my writing (with the help of writer friends, CP's and beta readers). I became a better writer . . .

BUT I decided to self-publish my middle grade story.

Why? Editors and agents simply weren't interested. Most thought it had 'potential' (std query rejection lingo), but it wasn't post-apocalyptic, vampire, "boy", (insert current 'must have') book.

My previous books (5 of them) were practice books. THIS book spoke to me. I HAD TO GET THIS STORY TO READERS.

Electronically self-publishing has its drawbacks when trying to sell to the younger market, and I believe I'm slightly ahead of the curve. Technology is advancing rapidly and so many kids have various electronic devices, so it's only a matter of time.

My local paper (500+ K distribution) featured me in an article about the emerging publishing technology, but I was more excited when a young 11-year old boy REVIEWED my book.

Why? This was my target audience, plus it was a boy reviewer to boot, since my MC is a girl.

Am I making money at this? No, not yet. I paid for my cover art and I'm giving away more books than I'm selling. What I hope to gain is readership, since I have five more books finished and will be releasing them throughout the rest of 2011.

I'm in it for the long haul. Very few writers are overnight successes and those that are have been working hard at their craft for years.

Is print publishing dead? I don't think so. I do think publishers need to rethink how they do business though.

Should everyone self-publish? NO! It's not about 'paying your dues' so much as 'learning your craft'. Most first books written are dreck, I know mine were–heck, even my current first drafts are dreck! It takes time and a million words to learn to craft a good story. Anyone on the street can write a novel, but telling a story is a whole 'nuther pony trick.

M. A. Golla

>I want to work with a fabulous editor! Also, I do not want to be the only party interested in marketing my book.

>For the smell of the binding. The feel of the paper. The imprint of a real, live publishing house on the spine. For the knowledge that without the agent and editor(s) my book wouldn't be half as good. For the thrust of traditional marketing that may someday land my book in the hands of someone who otherwise would never have picked it up, and whose heart may be touched forever because of it.

That's why.

>Wow, some really great responses out there. And I agree with the validation factor of traditional publishing. Sorry, I'm going to call it traditional because publishing houses have been around for a long, long time, and that's traditional in my book.

And I think validation goes a lot farther than vanity, or lack of self worth. It has to do with readers because, after all, that's who we write for. Otherwise, its basically just journaling. I don't think I would pick up a Jane Austen novel and look at it with quite the same reverence if I knew she had paid someone to publish it for her. Knowing the blood, sweat and tears that she endured to get that published when her surrounding culture was saying "not likely" makes the read so much sweeter. It's victory.

>I'm after a traditional publishing deal because the subject matter of my book requires it, plain and simple. I have self published and I encourage all writers to do this at least once. It is a rite of passage that provides an author with a hands on opportunity to glean a greater understanding of the complexity of the business of printing and selling books.You really do garner a renewed respect for what agents and editors do on behalf of authors they sign. Most writers have no concept of monumental task of marketing and promotion and the degree to which these two areas of publishing affect the sale of a novel. To put it succinctly, it is a reality check and a cure for pie in the sky dreaming. I am now a cured and clean vessel because of this experience and I may do it again in the future, my primary focus is the traditional route.

There is no substitute for having a known press backing your work. None. I need the marketing and promotion they provide for my book or it won't reach the number of people it needs to. I have another novel in progress as well as a volume of short stories partially completed and when time comes I will probably query for those as well. Basically, I will query/pester agents until I'm so old I pass away at my desk and they have to pry my hands off the laptop in order to cart me off to a nearby bone yard where I still won't rest in peace however because I didn't get an agent.

>I hope to be traditionally published because of all the research I've done and continue to do, I feel that an agent is someone who knows the industry better than myself. I feel that they have greater expertise in the publishing industry and are better capable to use that to my and their advantage. I also feel that because the know people in the industry that they know who to connect with and to for a given project. I on the other hand to do not. Also, I believe traditional publishing will allow me more time to write (although I will be doing some promotions and marketing taking this route as well) versus if I did self-publishing. If I chose the latter, I think a lot of my time would be taken up by promoting, marketing, production, distribution, etc. Not to mention I would be coming out of pocket for those expenses. So those are my reasons for wanting to be traditionally published.

>Great responses here.

As a traditionally published and agented author, I continue on the traditional route because:

1) VALIDATION matters, as others have said. Many self-pubbed books are poorly written.

2) DISTRIBUTION, relatively nil the self-pubbed route. At least there's a chance of national distribution the traditional route.

3) ELEVATION, the editing process dramatically improves the work.

4) SATISFACTION, honestly, there are bragging rights to being traditionally published. Conquering Mt Everest or something like that. Seeing your book @ Barnes & Noble is awesome.

5) COLLABORATION, it takes a village… and it's very tough to put out a great product alone.

Yes, I'm a preacher… but I believe in bookstores and paperbacks and high quality writing. Even more, I believe in THE GREAT COMMISSION, and every CBA book should further that cause it its own unique way.

Thanks for the opportunity to vent.
Bill Giovannetti

>Great discussion, Rachelle!

I'm working to be published traditionally because I think my work can reach a more varied audience with a publisher's support (in addition to my own online community-building). And while self-publishing appeals to my entrepreneurial side (selling informational e-books, not fiction), I still think there's a stigma to self-publishing that I can avoid by publishing traditionally.

Have a great weekend!

>I would prefer to publish with a traditional publisher, but I have chosen to self-publish because I'm tired of hearing "Your writing is strong; I can't sell it" and "You are a great writer; we don't want it" and "You have a great concept; we won't buy it."

The dues to entry into traditional publishing, to successfully go through the sequential gatekeepers, are too high.

>I would pursue traditional publishing because I would like the affirmation and bragging rights that I made it through the gauntlet.

>I will pursue traditional publication…

…to offer my characters and stories the opportunity to be the best they could be under the tutored direction of seasoned editors and agent.

…to avoid blending into a miasma of mediocre e-books that are flooding the market without sufficient editing. It's embarrassing for every writer, the crap being passed as "published" right now.

…while the publishing industry as a whole is tooth and nail, my limited engagement with it has shown me there are individuals in the industry who are, themselves, kind and encouraging and amazing. I look forwards to meeting those people.

…the day I can gift my book to everyone in my family, and every person I've ever met, wrapped with a bow and stuffed in a stocking…will be a dream come true.

…because I have faith that the traditional publishing model will grow and adjust to our new world. I also have faith that e-publishing or self-publishing will also grow and adjust to our new world. So that both models will be worthy of the creative output of so many amazing authors. That I'm proud to count myself amongst.

>I want to pursue traditional publishing because I want the "writer's life".

I want an agent. I want someone in my corner that will help me make career choices and improve my writing.

I want an editor, publisher, the exposure. It's how I've always thought of my writing career. If I am rejected I will assume that means I am not quite there yet.

>In addition to the reasons above, I will seek traditional publishing because I feel like the audience/readership for the book I'm writing deserves to have a book that is validated,worthy of being published.

It's on a difficult subject and there are only a handful of self-published non-fiction (memoir) books on the topic. So I feel like if a novel came out, backed by a traditional publisher, that these particular readers/writers would feel like their own stories (their life stories) were finally validated.

I'm not sure if that makes sense to anyone but me, but that's my reason.

>My traditional publisher (Tyndale) and my team there are like a family. Honoring that relationship blesses me and my book-writing. But it also stretches me–to listen and to learn.

>Thanks for this reality check: the post and the great comments. I saw more of my own reasons than I realized in there.

For me, it's mainly about the huge and talented team that worked on my book. I did one central job. They did so many others.

I had been following the biz for 20 years and fully expected some version of this. But I was shocked at the number of people at Hachette who got so involved, and how good they were at their jobs.

Beyond the obvious ones, the chief counsel for the company did a thorough legal vetting–just the conference call to discuss her list lasted four hours. (It was grueling and kind of scary, but I felt so much more secure afterward.)

The copyediting went so far beyond what I'd expected. I estimated there were about 10,000 individual corrections in blue pencil, plus I think 800 margin questions I had to respond to. She found things like: On p. x you say the killers spent 4 minutes outside, page y you say this many minutes in the hallway, page z so many in the library, and that adds up to 16 minutes and on this other page you say 17 minutes. Wow. There were countless examples like that. And I'd already had it vetted by several people, in different ways, but no one came close to how good she was.

I learned later that the whole approach to how position the book to publishers and the public developed over a whole series of consultations between my editor, the sales staff and especially the national accounts rep for Borders–and by her pitching it to several influential people at Borders six months before publication, getting them to read it, getting their reactions to that approach, refining it . . .

>I want as many people as possible to read my writing – I think traditional publishing is the best way to make that happen.

>I have been offered a number of self publishing opportunities, but I chose to persue the traditional route for a couple reasons. I don't possess the resources required up front for a first class publication, and second I prefer to focus as much as possible on the writing elements and as little as possible on all the other details that self publishing a quality product requires. Authors have to market their work regardless which route we chose, but the help of an established respected publisher helps move everything forward more efficiently, especially for the first time project.

>I want the traditional publishing for three reason:

1) I want validation. I want someone other than myself, my writing mentor, my crit partners saying, "This is good!" All those people have some kind of personal investment in me. I want to hear from a totally non-biased professional.

2) Following on #1, I want the completely non-biased, professional help from everyone involved in the process.

3) I want to be pushed to bring my novel to the best I can achieve. Somehow, unless I spent tons of money, I don't think that would happen with self-publishing.

>Every time my novel encounters someone from a new and higher level of the publisphere, it gets a little better. I want to publish traditionally because I believe that will be the best possible form of the book. I'd rather go through the rejection, revision, and perseverance and end up with a book I can be really proud of than rush to self-publishing with something that's not totally-awesome-to-the-bone.

In short, I'd rather embarrass myself in private and hold out for glory in public. The world doesn't need to see my drafts.

>As an author who has struggled for many, many years for his talent to be recognized and has finally broken throigh with a traditional publisher, I can understand why so many flood to the self-pub industry, especially at the urging of certain high-profile writers who already possessed a well-known name going in. But the titanic majority of people self-pubbing are getting a wakeup call the size of Gojira to learn that they're not going to perform as well. Not nearly as well. A new successful elite has formed within the self-pub world, a very select few, many of whom are previously traditionally published authors and already have a name and a platform, so anyone going that route had best be very, very well aware of that fact. But the real reason I pursued so long the traditional route without giving up or self-pubbing is simple: it was the path the Lord Jesus Christ desired me to take, and upon which to remain. Had I departed from that path, this blessing would not have come my way. For all of you out there, there are only 3 doors: do nothing, refuse to give up writing and persevere with traditional publishers, or do it yourself. Door 1 answers itself. Both Door 2 and Door 3 require commitment, perseverance, hard work and risk. Regardless of the door before which you stand, follow the heart the Lord has given you, and stay on the path. Enough said.

>I want a writing career. Right now, self-pub is a workable option, but it feels like the Wild West–some people succeed, some people fail. And who knows when the gold rush will die out and leave all the self-pubbers out there in ghost towns? Sure, trad pubbing is a risk, too, but it feels like the safer route for someone who wants to spend a lifetime writing and publishing books.

I feel like self-pubbing right now, especially with e-pubbing now an option, is a free-for-all. It's the dizzying, uncharted, unboundaried world of the very, very new. It won't stay that way forever. It will either remain a very open frontier where anyone can succeed with some luck and lots of work…or it could end up closed off as e-pubbing is controlled further by traditional publishing. My bet is on the latter. So I'm sticking with the stodgy old-fashioned way because I think the stodgy way is going to win out over the frontier. Frontiers never last forever.

>Self-publishing must be held as a viable option, and while those (like the previous Anonymous contributor) continue to attack it, we (writers) as a whole must embrace it and support it. Don't be afraid that it might get lost in the masses of other books…would you rather hope and pray you get accepted by the ever shrinking traditional publishers, or see your book in print and then let the market decide, not a line of "gatekeepers". For me the choice is obvious.

>I want traditional publishing because:

1. I get help/tips/support with how to be a Published Author

2. Several someones who aren't related in any way with me has approved of my writing – and these have seen a lot of writing and I trust their opinions.

And a some various other reasons.

Basically, I wouldn't try my hand at start up a building business on my own just because I'm good at making doors. I'd love to work for a building business, but not run it. I understand that some want that, but it's not for me.

Publishing is a trade – and I don't have time or interest to become an EXPERT in it. Not when I have a day job on full time, and write on "full time", and want a family.

>A fool can spend his own money to self publish garbage. I don't think agents and publishers are foolish enough to spend their money publishing some one elses garbage

>So far, I've only managed to get through half the responses to your question about why we'd still choose to go for traditional publishing and, at the risk of sounding sappy, I agree with everything everyone's said in favour of traditional publishing.The word 'validation' comes up a lot. We work hard at staying buoyant, but the insecurity demon is always lurking. For me the 'v' word is key.

>Because I want the validation that I'm good enough, and I'll never know if I was good enough if I didn't do it. And I'm the kind of person who is patient enough and willing to keep working enough, and who believes determination will help me accomplish my goals, so I have no problem if it takes years to get there.

If I self-published first, I'd never know if I was good enough. I'd be embarrassed at the possibility that I might be putting out substandard work, and more than anything, I wouldn't feel like I'd actually succeeded at this goal I've worked at for so many years.

For less emotional reasons, because I can't afford to self-publish, I don't believe I have what it takes to successfully market myself to the extent that I could sell well, and because I want my book to be carried in bookstores and be available to a wide audience. I also am not comfortable taking that kind of risk on a book I've worked so hard on. If I self-publish and fail, that book is basically dead in the water (unless I can manage to get famous at some point in the future, and really, how often does that happen?). I'm pretty confident in my skills, but I don't want to start at a disadvantage. I'd rather give my book the best chance it possibly has first, and if I can't manage that, then I see it as a statement that my book isn't good enough or professional enough yet, so I need to keep working and learning until it is.

>I am pursuing traditional publishing for several reasons. Sure, it's partly validation that I was able to make it through the slush. But it's also because after my first novel was out being rejected, I moved to a new book and in that process saw tons of mistakes in my first. The process of rejection has made me a stronger storyteller, and I would not have had it with the self-gratification of self publishing.

Also, it's for the team. Agents know the business, they know their job. Some people are capable of self-publishing and breaking out quickly with a platform. I am not one of those people.

As an analogy, I'd rather make the jump tandem with an experienced skydiver, than go it alone.

>I'm pursuing the traditional route with Rachelle as my agent because I want my career to be a marathon instead of a sprint and as much as I thought I knew everything, I don't. A guide (an agent) through the process who can help me where I'm weak and applaud where I'm strong has helped me to focus and raise my game. Self-publishing, for me, would have indulged my weaknesses and I would have wondered why I kept hitting a ceiling. It's not just about the writing.

>J.M. Cornwall: It's not relevant to compare today's "self pub" with writers of the past such as Mark Twain who started by self-publishing.

In their case, history has proven the enduring quality of these writers' work. Validation has come from generations of readers.

We can safely assume that many other writers self-pubbed in Mark Twain's day. We don't know about them because their work didn't prove itself popular with thousands (now millions) of people like Twain's did.

In the end, it's still all about validation and whether the readers like our work and choose to buy it, read it, and recommend it to others. Whether we are pursuing traditional or self-pub, we each choose the route we think will be most effective at helping us reach these goals.

>Why I am pursuing traditional publishing:

1) It's the best fit for my project, in terms of market, material, editing, packaging, distribution, and audience.

2) It's the best fit for me. I work extremely well as part of a creative team; it's what I do every day.

3) I very much respect professionals – agents, editors, graphic artists, PR experts, etc. – and I know I simply cannot do their jobs (or even supervise/ project manage their jobs) and still produce my best writing. Noooo way.

That said, I'm very open to innovations in publishing, such as e-books and/or books with more web integration. And who's to say – someday, I might come up with a different project and self-publishing will be the right route for that. You don't ever know.

My main goal is to continue building a solid, professional career in the company of other professionals whom I admire and respect, and in the service of an industry that I very much believe in… the art of telling stories.

>I think my reason that I'm pursuing traditional publishing boils down to this: there is a level of quality that comes from that team effort where everyone has a vested interest that rarely shows itself in the self-publishing world.

Think of some of your own posts. When does a writer's work really start? Often when a manuscript has been accepted for representation or publication. No one produces a perfect manuscript, and as soon as you get feedback from others, you're going to have to change something to make it better. When you self-publish, you miss out on this honing process. Plus you miss out on all the team experience available for a person who is going the traditional route.

Self-publishers get a fee. Since they have their money up front, and there is little incentive for them to give you a selling cover, a selling interior, etc.

Plus, I like the challenge of making the cut. That means something.

>I want my book to be the best that it can be. And I know that traditional publishing will help me achieve that goal. I can't do it all by myself, and I'm certainly not going to try.

>There are plenty of traditionally published writers who go on to self-publish for many reasons. For me, after having thirteen books traditionally published (anthologies and novels), I wanted to see how the other half lives.

I like having more control and being able to choose my cover. I had no say in any of the covers for the traditionally published books. I did, however, have one thing that most beginning self-published writers don't have and don't take the time to get, a good editor, one I've worked with for years.

Not all self-published books are poorly done and badly put together, as evidenced by the proof of my new novel, which looks as good as any traditionally published book. And not all traditionally published books are without errors or problems, as I can attest from my own experience as a reviewer for Authorlink, and I have reviewed nearly 300 books in the past 7 years.

However, that wouldn't stop me going with a traditional publisher who saw merit in my work and offered me the right deal. I decided I was tired of waiting after too many personal rejections that included comments where the agents/editors were really enthusiastic about the book but not enthusiastic enough, or they loved the book and the story, but just didn't see it as a good fit. I was complimented on my writing and the story line, as well as the execution (plot, characters, etc.), but no one wanted to take a chance, so I took the chance for myself.

Sometimes the validation isn't enough when people like Snooki (SP?) and an MTV reality TV star get the star treatment and good books written by authors with solid track records are ignored. Validation comes in many forms, including self-publishing.

>After going through the publishing process for the first time, I cannot imagine trying to do big revisions, line edits, copy edits, proofreading, cover design, and marketing alone. And beyond all that, there is no way my work would be what it is without the careful prodding and praise of my editor and the many hands that have had a role in the process.

>I have every sympathy with most of these comments, and have seen some truly terrible self published books. On the other hand, I have also read some seriously badly written traditionally published books. I can only comment from my personal experience as a writer, and friend of the writer whose book I decided eventually to publish myself. This after doing the round of agents and publishers on her behalf (she is incapacitated by a stroke) Kathleen is a former prize winning historical novelist, so I thought that it would be easy to find her an agent. Not so- and I was assured by the various agents I contacted that this was nothing to do with the quality of her writing. In the end, I decided to form my own publishing company, using PoD but a scaled down model of traditional publishing: I invested the money and time- employed an editor and a designer and undertook promotion and some very limited local distribution as I live in the area which is the book's setting. After just over a month, I have nearly covered my outlay, although I am unlikely ever to get paid for my time! This isn't SELF publishing, strictly speaking, as I am not the author, and am able to be a gate-keeper for what Trifolium Books UK publishes, but it isn't really traditional publishing either. PoD made it financially viable for me to do it is all! I do understand the desire of a writer for external and disinterested validation, but it is with books, reading and publication as with everything else- we are grown up now, and can make our own judgement: just as I can now read Lady Chatterly's Lover and judge it to be a not very good book- in fact somewhat dull and over-written, certainly not DHL's best, so can we all judge each book, self published or traditionally published, on its merits. For Kindle e-books, you can and should always download a sample three chapters. You will at least find out if the author can write. Many print books also have a see inside option on Amazon too- this is more reliable than reviews as far as quality of writing goes. "Caveat emptor"- at least emptors now have a real choice, not one decided for us by nanny publishers!

>I did NOT intend this post to trash self-publishing or start having cat-fights across the aisle. The sole purpose here is for people to talk about the reasons they're pursuing traditional publishing, and I don't think you have to demean those who choose self-pub to do that.

>Sorry, Rachelle. I didn't think my reply constituted a "cat fight" — just responding to someone who was obviously "demeaning" self-publishing. But, not to worry. I'll just continue to lurk and keep my "disagreement is welcome" comments to myself.

>I think those who are slamming self-pubbing haven't read very much outside of the box. I've recently been reading several indie authors and LOVED them! The books were well written and well edited.

I am pursuing traditional publishing because I want my books to be in stores across the country. I want people who actually still read PAPER books to have access to them. As hard as it is for "us" to believe, everybody isn't glued to FB, twitter and the interwebs all day everyday! I am a newspaper columnist and I meet readers consistently who don't know that I have a blog or even know what a blog is. They want BOOKS. They want to be able to tell their friends where they can buy my books.

That said, if my agent (and I do have one) came to me tomorrow and said she couldn't sell my books traditionally, I would pursue self-pubbing with gusto. I believe in myself. Go big or go home!

>I want the validation. To know that someone besides my husband and my mom thinks I should write books.

>I've carefully considered both options, weighing the pros and cons. I have opted to pursue traditional publishing, but I also have great respect for anyone pursuing self-pub. It's hard work. Honestly, if they can succeed at it, it is an admirable achievement. I'm not knocking it. There's more than one way to do something right.

It's not about validation for me, but an extra set of eyes is always welcome so that I can put out my best work. I don't read e-books…yet, but I can tell you that there are plenty of books in print that have errors in them. I'm eager to touch readers with my writing, but I'm a writer, a storyteller, not a publisher. Let's keep it that way. I'm also a team player. I like having someone at my back helping out with the dirty work and sharing in my joy.

Times are changing, so is the quality of writing. Sadly, I see more of that with texting taking over. Kids are completing job applications in text form. Huh, I cringe if I can't locate the puntuations marks on my phone.

Marketing. Editing. Promoting. Distributing. Le's see, with day job, family, writing, why don't I just give up sleep?

>I prefer traditional publishing because I don't want to navigate the publishing waters alone. I want someone who's in my corner and who has my best interest at heart. I also think the final product is more tangible.

>I'm bad at marketing. I'm bad at selling. I'm quiet and have a small voice.
This is why I write, it's the only place my voice is loud and bold and uninhibited. My voice finally matches my ideas.
In fact, the hardest part of traditional publishing is selling myself to an agent.
I need help. My big ideas and big thoughts need a big voice. Mine won't do.
(Now I just need to find that one agent who can hear my voice and give it all I've got!)

>I was always one of those super shy kids who had to be invited to a party formally before I would consider going. I could never, ever invite myself. That has carried over into adulthood, especially as it pertains to publishing. The traditional route means I'm being invited to the party.

However, I absolutely respect people who choose to self-publish. I read two short story compilations this year that were both self-published and they were quite good.

Thank you for keeping up such an awesome blog, Rachelle. First time commenting, but I read every day.

>I want to produce the best books I can and get them to as many readers as possible.

There has been so much on the Internet lately about self-publishing. I wouldn't rule it out for myself, if I don't make it in traditional publishing and IF (only if) I could guarantee the quality of my books.

I am sure there are good self-published books out there, but I haven't read them. I'm NOT trying to be snarky. I simply have a huge TBR pile. I don't have a problem finding more than enough good books through traditional publishing venues, so I'm not looking elsewhere. (If one of my fave authors self-published something, sure, I'd take a chance. As others have said, it's about platform. Also, I would hope it would be the highest quality.)

As a former book reviewer in the mid-2000s, I received many self-published books. The best of them were what I would call "sort of okay," and that's not good enough.

As I've followed various debates on this issue the past few weeks, I keep coming back to this: I'm afraid that many (not all) self-published authors simply do not realize what it takes to write and revise a good novel or nonfiction work.

Again, I'm not trying to put anybody down and hope that I'm not misunderstood, but I've read comments from people who say "I've worked really hard" and "this is my dream." I don't think they're lying, I just don't think they have anyone in their lives pushing them to do better; perhaps they haven't had the experience of having someone push them beyond what they thought they were capable of. I had this in graduate school, and am grateful. However, I will be paying off my MFA student loans for many, many years. (Do I think you have to have an MFA to make it? Absolutely not. Of course, that's a whole other topic. But it does show that I am committed, not just to random publishing, but to craft.)

Many of us who want to break into traditional publishing also are working hard to make our dreams come true. Sometimes it can seem as if some self-published people are just looking for a shortcut, and that rankles. Why? Because books and stories and literature are important.

>Lance, I thought you were going to say something about "…and then I didn't earn as much as if I had produced it myself," or something. Anyway, yes, cool.

Melissa: Thank you for the link to Jenny Bent's blog. It's a great companion piece to Rachelle's post and all of these comments.

I agree with Jenny Bent in that I hate that elitist attitude. (I'm a Midwestern Girl who spent 10 years writing for New York magazine editors, where I experienced a bit of that.) When I think of the gatekeeping role in publishing, I think of it more in terms of quality. (Even when a Reality Star publishes traditionally, you hope that there won't be tons of typos or grammatical mistakes.)

I'm also excited about all the new things happening today–with traditional publishers and others. I think there are a lot of cool opportunities for writers and readers. Again, the bottom line for me is quality. Every story isn't for every reader, but I believe every book (e-book or paper) should meet certain standards for grammar, story-telling, formatting, etc.

>Traditional publishing appeals to me because I don't want to feel like I'm in it "alone." I like the idea of having a team of experts supporting me and helping me to make my book its best.

>Since I had a book that appealed to a niche market, I have already tried self-publishing (with WinePress, a great company). However, I am pursuing traditional publishing now because I am writing books with broader appeal and because I am not good at marketing my own books. I need help in the areas of marketing and distribution.

>Traditional publishing…what's that?

>So I post my reasons for wanting a traditional publishing deal on Twitter/Facebook, and am immediately told I need to follow two well known authors who advocate self-publishing.

*sigh*

>In all honesty, traditional publishing is my dream. It always has been. I want the backing of a professional team (agent, editor, publisher) behind me…or in front of me for that matter. I need the wisdom and guidance of such a team. It would take too much away from my writing to go it any other way.

>Because I equate self publishing with being fleeced by dishonest agents and publishers. The field has zero governance, and authors, new and old but especially new, are prey to scams.
Writer Beware can only do so much, and they are up against it, in many ways.
Also, what do you mean by self publishing? Ebooks? The ones for 99¢?
Well, shut my mouth.
Why bother working for months or years writing a book? Create something funny, frightening, insightful, useful, only to discover it's valued at less than one dollar. That increasingly, readers begrudge that 99¢. Like tunes after the napster era, books should be F R E E.
The lure of self publishing is the cachet of the word "published." Sounds much nicer than saying, "Oh, I write a blog! You want my website address?"
Please.
Publishers, by and large, will not accept unsolicited manuscripts. So newbies need an agent. That's why we read blogs written by agents or staff, thinking free advice and suggestions might help us get published.
As if …
I would want an agent who isn't writing a blog (with an eye to getting published one day).
Meanwhile, agents are overwhelmed, jaded, cynical, or playing Farmville.
There are less and less readers. That ain't doom n gloom, that is fact. Getting published has become an ever diminishing game of musical chairs to see who becomes this years Grace Metalious, Harold Robbins, Jacqueline Susann.
Authors we don't read any more.

>Would you consider Tate Publishing self-publishing or traditional–even though they do require you obtain a marketing agent?

I've been offered a contract by them, twice (about a year ago & then today I was contacted again). I'd like to be published traditionally. For the same reasons mentioned–good quality editing, an agent/publisher (other than me) who love it, and wide marketing opportunities.

>I'm still going for the trad publishing route, but if my agent doesn't find me a publisher, I'll self publish on ebook.

>When all's said and done, mainstream publishing still carries a hard-won, well-deserved credibility and acceptance that self-publishing, no matter how good the material within, will never achieve.

>Thank you for this post, Rachelle!

I'm pursuing traditional publishing because, if it is God's will, I want to share this story He has given me with others, for His glory and to remind others of His love for them.

~Amber

>Kellye,

I totally agree on you on the quality concern. It irritates me to no end that some “writers” are treating self-publishing (e-Pub) like a get-rich scheme. Flood the market with masses of sub-par books (penny dreadfuls), and cash in on people who don’t know any better? That’s so unethical. And so is this:

http://www.publishingtrends.com/2011/03/the-kindle-swindle/

(BTW, I’m amazed that no agent or legitimate self-publisher has blogged about this topic; it’s relevant. Highly relevant – to all of us who purchase eBooks.)

When Amazon, et. al figure out a way to prevent people from “gaming” the system, only then I would consider e-publishing a viable method of delivery. That hasn’t happened yet.

>I originally planned on self-publishing, but I realized that it is not the proper route for my novel. I would like the message in my work to reach a wider audience, and since my professional job is not in publishing I know I need help with it.

Although I have not shut the door on self-publishing, it will be my last resort.

>I am pursuing publishing because I respect publishers and all the expertise there. I want my book to be published by those experts.

>I am pursuing traditional publishing because as both a librarian who purchases books and an author, I see a higher standard of quality in the writing, marketing, and general design of traditionally published material. I have been burned more than once with self-published materials that were full of errors and poorly constructed. Now I only purchase traditional materials. I want my own book to hold up to those standards as well.

>Melissa, thank you for that link to "The Kindle Swindle." That is amazing, and you're right: It's an important topic for people in publishing to be talking about. This is the first I've heard of it! Going to post where I can. (would love to get in touch with you…if you're on twitter I'm at @kelcrocker)

>I grew up in a town without a library or a bookstore, and I longed for books. I still do. I love them. I love holding them, reading them, seeing them in my home. Books are my favorite decorating item. I spend a lot of time at the computer. When I relax, I want the friendship of a printed book. I love working with an agent, an editor and the joy of book signings where you meet new people who appreciate what you've written.
Last but not least, I would like to lend my support to an agent by writing a book he/she can sell and my bookstore or library can add to its shelves.

>Rachelle – I sent a message to WordServe re: your response to my comment. Hope you get it; if not – in essence – it is a heartfelt "thank you"…:-)

>Despite the current trends to e- and self-publishing, I need to try the traditional publishing route for my own personal goal. I feel like jumping right to self-publishing without going to traditional route first is a cop out. It's like you (general you, not directed to anyone here) don't have enough faith in yourself or in your work, so you just get it out there however you can.

>Holy Canoly!! I hope you've take a week off to read these comments, Rachelle. Did you have any idea you'd pushed such a Hot Button? (Sure you did.)

I hope for traditional publishing because I want "smart friends" to help me make my book the best it can be and then stick their foot in the slamming doors, shouting my name!! : D

>see the validation comment here, and I agree with it. But I wonder if people really understand the implications. We want validation, because we consider self-published novels 'not validated' – not up to scratch.

I've read through the slush pile of Authonomy and OWW and other online writing groups. There's an awful lot of dreck out there. We all know, we've all read it. So the bottom line is, we as readers rely on the publishing industry to sort through that dreck and find the nuggets of gold. I don't know about you, but I'd rather pay $10 to $20 for a published novel that I know has been through the process than lay down .99c for dreck.

And because of that reasoning, I want my work to be gold, not dreck. I want my work to be good enough to be paid for – to have the rush someone else was talking about when someone laid down good money for my hard work.

I don't want to call myself 'published' because I practically gave away my work in desperation. I want to call myself published – and actually be published by a big house – I want to be good enough for that.

>I want to be traditionally published because when I say I've had books published it will seem more worthwill. No offence and I'm NOT saying it's all bad because that isn't true but ANYTHING, no matter how poorly written, can be self-published.

>If I was a killer heavy metal guitarist I wouldn't want my biggest venue to be YouTube.

If I painted in oils I wouldn't want my work stuck in thirty dollar a night hotel rooms.

I don't get into things to lose or to get that 'good enough' badge.

I write. I'm not a salesman, marketing consultant, editor, imaginary entourage or any of that. Other people are better at those tasks anyway, probably with the same degree of focus as I have with my preffered life.

I don't want a book I could have run off a copier, stuck to my fridge with a magnet like a grade school arts and craft project using macaroni, glitter and construction paper.

I want that immortal foot print left behind.

Call it ego, call it exhibitionist, call it narcissistic…I do love it so, though.

>Ok, so I'm not going to read anyone else's comments so I'm being perfectly honest with WHY I'm pursuing traditional publishing. I have several reasons:
1. They know how to market the book to the readership it suits
2. Traditional publishers can get the book into more hands, more places
3. They make WAY COOLER book covers (I'm a sucker for a good cover)
4. But my primary reason, is working in the traditional industry opens a network of people who KNOW the industry, KNOW writing, KNOW good editing and can enhance my book and make it and its message better.

>I like what goes with a name. If I pick up a book by a certain publisher, there's a reputation that goes with that. If you're good enough for them, that's saying a lot.

>Hey, Barbara.
I'm still reading the comments. Best wishes as you continue to write.

>What a mess we've created for ourselves through our lack of commitment to grammatical discipline.

Not all self-pubbed writers lack commitment to grammar or discipline, and it shows. Some writers, like myself, refuse to put out a book that isn't as close to perfect as humanly possible, and we don't resort to self-publishing because we can't get published the traditional way. Your comment is generalized and doesn't reflect the bulk of self-pubbed authors, speaking as a traditionally and recently self-pubbed author.

I would like to propose not to hold back until you get enough amount of money to buy goods! You can get the personal loans or secured loan and feel fine

I like what you guys are doing. Such intelligent work and reporting! Keep up the excellent works guys. I have incorporated you guys to my blogroll. I think it will improve the value of my website. tea infuser