Nathan Bransford wrote a post today titled Who Should Have the ‘Indie’ Label: Self-Publishers or Small Presses?.
Here’s my comment on the post:
Thank you for coming to my rescue.
My first novel is coming out with a trade (traditional, whatever) independent publishing house this year. I find I have to spell this out very carefully lest people get the wrong idea.
By using the term “indie author”, self-published authors are effectively trying to suggest that they’ve been through some sort of objective, independent critique and passed muster…i.e. that someone is invested financially in their work other then themselves.
This trend says to me that self-published authors are lumping themselves with me because they’re ashamed of being self-published.
Why should they be ashamed of being self-published, for goodness’ sake? People are more and more willing to buy self-published books, and it’s a good thing.
On an egocentric note, I’m proud a stranger was willing to invest in something I created. It feels selfish of authors who haven’t gone through that procedure to pretend they have.
I didn’t talk about linguistics there, because my comment was already getting too long (Who mentions linguistics in blog comments, anyway? Someone who wants her book to fail, that’s who), so let me say it here: if the accepted term for “self-published authors” is now “indie authors”, and it looks like it is, I throw up my hands. I’m a descriptivist; you have to be these days in linguistics. Doesn’t mean I have to like it. Doesn’t mean I’m not really annoyed.
What do you guys think? I really encourage you to both comment here (to uh, help me out with the old ego, you understand) and to go parse the comments at his blog.
To “indie authors”: what would you call me, and why? Come on, sock it to me.
[update]
I’m c/p’ing a comment I saw later on Bransford’s post and my response, to further the discussion.
Will Entrekin said…
The problem with the “self-publishing” label is that, for many years and until very recently, there was a continual stigma against any author who chose to publish without the backing/support of some sort of press, small or corporate. This has diminished over the years, but has not yet disappeared; consider the article concerning Jacqueline Howett (sp?) last week, run by the web division of a major newspaper in which the author took the opportunity to swipe at all so-called “self-published” authors, who are not “vetted” by publishers . . . you can imagine where her argument went.
I think it’s unsurprising those associated with corporate publishers are so concerned about such labels, and so quick to call independent authors “self-published.” It’s like the “death tax” versus the “estate” or “inheritance tax.” Regardless of stigma, there is always some perception/connotation that goes along with words or phrases.
I’m an independent author (go Team Indie!).
My response:
Here’s the thing: nobody’s saying that self-published books are necessarily bad or that being a traditionally published author makes your work necessarily good.
HOWEVER, for the vast majority of books, the fact that an objective, independent entity is willing to invest large sums of money in your work speaks to its quality, or at the very least, its readability.
An illustrative example: if you look at the AAR listings of agents, you’ll find a huge mix of what particular agents will cover. Some will only cover specific genres, but the vast, VAST majority are practically begging for good literary fiction. They list it in all caps, or draw attention to it with asterisks, or something.
What does this tell you? That most literary agents are book nerds, that good literary fiction sells like CRAZY, AND that most (999,999 in a million) people cannot write good literary fiction — which are all facts the self-publishing community doesn’t like to talk about.
Let me say again: I love that people are willing to buy self-published books again. I don’t have an ebook reader yet, but when I find a good self-pubbed book in a format I can read, I buy it immediately. I want to support the self-pubbing industry. I subscribe to self-pubbed book review websites.
Be realistic and honest with yourselves: denial won’t get you anywhere pleasant.
And then be all like, “Yeah, I’m self-published, what’s your problem with that? Read my book and tell me I suck *then*.” Then when they read it and think it’s amazing, be really smug.
not very alice 
Catana
April 6, 2011
I’m finding the hoo hah about definitions increasingly amusing, as everybody tries to claim exclusive territories. I plan to self-publish all my writing. I also consider myself an indie author- to be. I’m not ashamed of “self-publishing,” and I’m not aware that anyone else is. Lest we forget, “indie” is short for independent. What possible reason can there be for denying that self-publishers are independent? Is it really that difficult to make a distinction between independent authors and independent publishers? If your book is published by any publisher at all, indie or traditional, you are not an “indie” author. Taking the position that self-published authors are “lumping themselves” with you has far more to do with ego than semantics.
Alice M.
April 6, 2011
You’re right, it is about ego. Like I said, I’m proud some random stranger thought they’d make money from my work. On the other hand, I signed with my publisher without exploring the Big 6 route specifically because I’m happier with being at a small press.
“If your book is published by any publisher at all, indie or traditional, you are not an “indie” author.”
I’m an indie author in the same way musicians who write grunge music are grunge musicians. I’m an author whose provenance is with the independent publishing industry.
Self-publishing is independent in the same way sleeping is independent. I see no need to label myself an independent sleeper — it’s a given I will sleep my own sleep, just as it’s a given you will independently write. The “self-publishing” label is there to pick out who invested in your work: you.
Catana
April 6, 2011
“Self-publishing is independent in the same way sleeping is independent.” I question the analogy. In what way is sleeping independent? Self-publishing is independent of something specific — second and third parties in the form of agents and publishers who are go-betweens.
“The “self-publishing” label is there to pick out who invested in your work: you.” If you think that investment in your work is the central criteria of self-publishing, then there’s a lot you need to learn. Self-education is a wondrous thing that can disabuse a person of many misconceptions.
Alice M.
April 6, 2011
“Self-publishing is independent of something specific — second and third parties in the form of agents and publishers who are go-betweens.”
Indie publishers are independent of those who control the majority of the market.
“In what way is sleeping independent?”
Authors are always independent. They’re not employees of a publishing company. Calling yourself an “indie author” to mean “someone who independently publishes” makes no sense, and calling yourself an “indie author” to mean “someone who writes independently” is pointless. Call yourself an “indie publisher” if you like. Call yourself a “self-published author”. They’re not mutually exclusive, and they actually mean something.
The term “indie author” is only meaningful when “indie” is used to refer to someone who is being published by an independent entity, i.e. an independent press. The difference is one of agency.
“If you think that investment in your work is the central criteria of self-publishing, then there’s a lot you need to learn.”
Financial investment in the nuts and bolts of publishing your own book is the definition of self-publishing.
“Self-education is a wondrous thing that can disabuse a person of many misconceptions.”
I’ll tolerate snide comments up to a point. I bear you no ill-will whatsoever, and nothing I’ve posted was written with malice.
In the paragraph I quoted above, you used the phrase “the central criteria”. The word “criteria” is plural, as it is of Greek origin. The singular of “criteria” is “criterion”.
I did not assume that you were uneducated because of this mistake. Please grant me the same courtesy. Please don’t assume I’m ignorant; it’s insulting.
Catana
April 6, 2011
We are all ignorant about some things. Nobody, as far as I know, is omniscient. And I do know the difference between criteria and criterion. I also make mistakes in spelling now and then, when writing comments on blogs. Most people realize that we don’t edit comments the way we would edit our serious work, and don’t bother to offer corrections. Doing so is generally considered insulting.
[Alice’s note:]
This is the last snide comment of yours I’ll allow. To publish further commentary, please change the tone of your comments. Thank you.
Jackson
June 27, 2011
Exciting discussion!
I am just in the beginning/planning stages of starting an independent press and I can see where the confusion/crossover can happen. In some ways, the work I’m looking at doing looks a lot like “self-publishing,” but there are some big differences I’ve been thinking about that make self-publishing a different thing than independent publishing.
I come from a community where a lot of my friends are rad zinesters. The whole attitude there is that what a person has to say is important and self-publishing not only removes one barrier to getting the writer’s work out there, but gives the writer sole creative control over the project. This is awesome and important, and something that is distinct from independent.
I think the selection process still happens there, though, because in order to really get a zine or other self-published work out there in a major way, the writer/artist needs to get their work accepted by distros, bought by stores, entered into libraries, etc. It’s the same process of getting work accepted in some ways, but the author retains a certain amount of creative control. Why would someone want to say their work was “indie” instead of “self-published” when “self-published” comes with the claim that, “this is MY work as I intended it to be seen”? That’s an awesome thing to claim and that person has to get out there and work to get their book/zine accepted just like someone trying to get published
With independent publishing, though (at least the total diy way I am looking at doing it right now) there is a community aspect to it which is really awesome. The folks I am talking to about being involved in my press are all folks coming together over a common goal (producing fiction and non-fiction for transgender youth, where very little exists). this means we will be working with authors and each other to put out content that is good. The authors lose sole creative control, but gain a small community of folks who are rallied around their book.
There is some de-facto “elite” status that authors will get for being published because we will, no doubt, have to go through selection processes, which gives some amount of legitimacy to an author. The fact that, as just a regular people starting a press, we can GIVE that to people, the title “published author,” which is a great thing for someone’s resume, but not meant to be some sort of insider/outsider thing–the insider/outsider thing is created by the industry and we get to kind of flip this around and publish the books we think should be out there but aren’t. The selection process terrifies me, but it’s kind of necessary. Money will be a huge factor in this, but we also aren’t going to want to publish (and have our name on) works that directly go against our mission and goals, and probably (I cringe at this idea!) there will be works we have to pass on because they’re just not good and we can’t invest money in them.
anyway, this is becoming a long response, but I appreciate your post, as I am new to thinking about independent publishing or publishing at all.
Alice M.
June 27, 2011
Jackson,
I find it worrisome that there seems to be a pervasive tone throughout the book world — particularly the independent publishing/self-publishing world — that everyone’s work is good, that everyone is an undiscovered genius, and that anyone who suggests otherwise is immoral. Just because a measure of quality is difficult to pin down exactly doesn’t mean that all quality judgments are useless…!
“probably (I cringe at this idea!) there will be works we have to pass on because they’re just not good and we can’t invest money in them.”
Don’t hesitate to make quality judgments. Rejecting poor quality is not a moral issue. No-one has a right to be published/an agent/good reviews/good sales.
I’ve got posts about judging quality on this blog somewhere. I’ll link them if you’re interested.
Jackson
June 27, 2011
I’m totally interested in the links!
The reason I cringe at the idea is that the whole reason I want to start this publisher is that tons of digging has found me about 8 young adult titles with trans themes. I’m a library student and I work with teens, and it sucks to have no good answer to a reference question that I would dream of getting, especially when I know a million trans folks who could write life-changing stuff for gender variant/trans teens.
So I guess when my focus/goal is to create content where content does not exist, I have a hard time with the idea that I might some day have to turn down content from someone actually willing to write it. I would have no trouble turning down something because it was offensive or bad for other gaping reasons, but to reject someone because their work is just kinda boring or something like that is a hard idea for me to think about, although I know it is necessary for a lot of reasons (money and also setting a high standard for the work we put out)
Alice M.
June 27, 2011
My entirely amateur, uninformed and unqualified opinion is that if you specify in your submission guidelines that you’re interested in all genres but especially in YA either aimed at trans teens or YA that deals with issues of gender variance, you’ll get a much broader spectrum of submissions, and perhaps therefore have a better chance at acquiring well-written manuscripts.
There have got to be talented writers out there who want to write about those issues. You know you have a market all ready for them. All you have to do is make sure they can trust you to do right by their work (produce an excellent product) and give them a professional contract that is financially beneficial to you both.
In other words: if you build it, they will come.
Links, as promised:
1) Amanda Hocking & Dex Raven, Part 1
2) Judging Quality
3) Amanda Hocking & Dex Raven, Part 2
Jackson
June 27, 2011
Yes! I actually already have a pretty substantial network of contacts from being involved in various organizations in the trans community for 7 years–many of whom are writers, poets, performers, filmmakers, artists and other folks who would jump at the opportunity to write stuff for trans youth, so I think I have some pretty good ins for finding folks to submit. I think that’s my main fear–that someone I know or vaguely know will submit something, thinking they have an “in” because they know me and I will have to turn them down (actually, this will most likely happen).
Thanks for the links, those are great!