Much has been said, shouted, sneered and hissed among traditionally published authors and those who choose to self-publish their work. In writing groups and online workshops, self-published authors lament frequently about how snobby traditionally published authors are toward writers who choose to publish their own books.

It’s not snobbery. Yes, there is a bias, but until recently it’s been well-founded and understandable. For most authors this bias has never been issue of “I’ve published with a real publisher so my writing is better.” The amount of time and energy that goes into honing your craft until it’s good enough to snag a “real” publisher requires serious dedication and perseverance. When an author who has put in that time and effort sees Joe Newb write a book in a couple of months, edit it in about the same time, and then try to market it as top quality writing, it’s rather annoying.

Consider the doctor who puts years of study into his craft. After successfully completing his internship, passing all of his tests and spending great amounts of money, he hangs his hat in a private family practice. He struggles, but manages to form a small base of patients and he’s just able to pay his bills and keep his head above water. It’s not what he thought it would be in medical school, but he’s there, doing what he loves to do and it will get better as he hones his skills and becomes a better doctor.

While leaving work one day he pauses. Next door a man hangs a sign announcing a new medical practice. Interesting. The doctor introduces himself and the man says that he’s read all the books on medicine, and practiced a few times on his kids, so now he’s going to try it on his own. What? No experience, no study? No, the man figures he’ll never become a doctor that way, as he’s never been very good at studying or taking tests. Plus, he can make far more money without worrying about procedure and silly things like rules. He’ll charge less for surgeries and prescriptions because he doesn’t have the loans to pay like other doctors. We can understand why this highly trained professional would want to pop the man for such idiocy.

This is an extreme example, and not likely to happen because we have laws against practicing medicine without a license, but when an author has put years of time and effort into writing in order to produce the best work he can, the slap in the face he feels is the same. This is what it is like to see Susie Housewife put out a book after deciding one day she had the time to put pen to paper. Her six months of figuring things out just hardly seems fair, does it?

It used to be that a fiction writer worked, studied, and practiced to hone her writing skills, and then to produce a novel which she submitted to publishers. There was a bar, a level of excellence, or at least competence, that one had to reach before becoming a published author.

Not any more.

With the increased popularity of self-publishing and the scent of legitimacy it’s gained, why bother waiting that long? Why waste your time with the frustrating process of traditional publishing? You can have your book in your hands in weeks, rather than years.

Why? Because publishing your own book does not make you an author. It makes you someone who wrote something and then paid someone to put it out there for sale. Does that mean all self-published books are crap or that all self-published authors are not in fact authors? Certainly not. Non-fiction authors have been self-publishing for years and most of these books are professional and they sell very well. Recent changes in the industry have also added some legitimacy to self-publishing that wasn’t there before. We are seeing literary agents and traditional publisher change the traditional model by offering self-publishing services and this raises a number of points in favor of going it alone.

However, it is important to remember a few points that separate the professionals from the hobbyists. There is an art to the craft of fiction writing as well as guidelines or “rules” which are there for a reason. Without a professional editor (as in someone who has studied and learned all of the tiny details that make a book worth reading) our shelves, virtual and physical, are full of typo-ridden, adverb-laden, dodgily plotted nightmares. And this folks is where the sneering and snobbery comes in. When a reader buys a book she feels was a waste of her money and energy enough times, she becomes…cynical. She eyes the self-published titles with disdain. How many times would anyone intentionally set themselves up for disappointment?

Now that there are enough panties bunched up, as I prefer them to be, let’s clarify again that neither method is necessarily better, because it’s like comparing apples to oranges. Actually, let’s compare the benefits of self-publishing to the reality of traditional publishing:

The Basics

To traditionally publish a novel means to have a publisher, a company which edits, prints and markets books, pay the writer for the right to publish her work. The publisher pays for cover design, editing, and packaging the book. The writer is expected to pitch in to sell the book as well, but behind her is the work force of a company whose goal is to make money.

Writers who decide to publish a book on their own are self-publishers. The writer is the publisher, the editor, the distributer, and the marketing team. It is on the writer to decide on the number of books he needs to have collecting dust in his garage. Of course, with POD technology and e-books, this isn’t as common a problem as it once was, but that doesn’t mean the books are selling better, just that the author doesn’t have to hoard them somewhere until they sell.

I should add that traditional publishing is changing, with some traditional publishers, such as Penguin, offering a self-publishing branch and agencies such as Bookends, LLC and Dystel and Goderich, offering to do that work for self-published authors…for a fee.

Time

Self-published writers don’t have to wait. They can have their book in their hot little hands in a matter of weeks. With a traditional publisher, it can take years for that book to materialize. So that makes self-publishing better, right?

No, it does not. Traditional publishers take a while to put a book on the shelf because they take the time to make sure it is perfect. This is what we like to call “quality control”. But, who needs perfection?

You do. Whether you publish traditionally or go it alone, a good writer takes the time that is necessary to ensure he is selling a quality product. Nothing is perfect, but we should strive to move as close to it as we can.

Quality

Any self respecting author wants their book to be as good as it can possibly be. Traditional publishers retain experienced editors who will go through a manuscript line by line looking for nits like grammatical errors, characterization issues, plot holes, and much more. Although some crap does fall down the traditional pipe now and then, this quality assurance is the major difference. Self-published novels don’t typically receive this extra attention. We simply cannot edit our own writing to the level that an editor will. Why? Because it’s our work. We don’t see what a fresh eye will see and let’s face it, after months of looking at the text we begin to see things that aren’t there…like perfection.

Self-publishing has always lacked quality control, and this is why the industry seems biased against it. It doesn’t mean that there are no quality self-published books out there, it means that now, instead of the agents and publishers going through the slush pile for that gem, the reader must wade through heaps of crap to find it. If more writers focused on craft and on putting out a product of the highest calibre, then it wouldn’t be as hard to find quality in the self-published shelves, and more readers might return to buy future books and to try new authors. Perhaps I’m crazy, but wouldn’t that benefit all of us?

Money

Self-published writers can publish for free make more money on each book sold. Sure we can, but the books have to sell. Although traditional publishers require the author to promote and market the book, publishers can get our books into places we just can’t on our own. Book stores are reluctant to shelve self-published books because of the lack of quality assurance. Stores want customers to return. If the product isn’t up to par, this won’t happen. Just like any other business, the consumer dictates what will be on those shelves. While the traditional publishing house has proven to consumers that they produce quality books (for the most part) this hasn’t been true of self-publishing. If a self-published writer wants his books in stores, most times the store will require the writer to supply the books leaving the risk of losing money with the writer.

Some companies require the self-publisher to spend quite a large sum of money to have the books produced. Traditional publishers charge the author nothing. They pay the author. They also provide experience in cover design and marketing and have contacts which aid in boosting sales. All of this is paid by the publisher. Self-publishers have to do all of this alone. It’s only fair to add however, that with the changes occurring in the publishing industry, this could change. Book stores may opt to stock self-published books, but that’s not what I’m referring to. With e-books and online retailers like Amazon, does it matter anymore whether your book is on a real shelf in a real store?

Creative Control

“The editors at traditional publishing houses will tear apart your manuscript and leave nothing even resembling you behind.” Oh, please. The truth is, when a book has been edited properly, as is normally done with a traditional publisher, the editor removes the bits that overshadow the author’s voice or vision. What remains is actually the author without the burdens of things like overwriting and poor characterization. There is no such thing as an over-zealous editor. The heavier they are with their red pen of doom, the better for our books. An editor is necessary no matter which method of publishing you choose. Say it with me now, “An editor is my best friend.” Remember that.

“Controversial books are either toned down or rejected by traditional publishers. Self-published authors can publish what they want.” This is a myth. Writers should not go into self-publishing believing that because the writer retains control over content and cover design, things will be honky-dory and sales will skyrocket. The reality is that traditional publishers embrace controversial subjects, because let’s face it, controversy sells. What they do not embrace is a book about a controversial theme and nothing else. Readers won’t embrace it either. Many writers mistakenly believe that because the subject will curl a few toes, they don’t have to focus on the technicalities like good writing and an engaging plot. There must be a purpose behind the controversy. Self-publishing won’t change that. A book will not succeed without a story. (Of course there are some bestsellers you might argue have no story, but they are the exceptions, not the norm.)

Accessibility

“Traditional publishers have handed off acquisition duties to agents, who are now responsible for deciding whether or not a book is fit to publish. So self-publishing is the only way a new author is going to see her book on a shelf.”

Before recent months I might have told you this statement was nothing but crap. Now, I say there is a grain of truth in it. First, let’s clarify that before agents, it was publishing companies' editors and interns doing this job. Nothing has changed except that now, the door between author and publisher is manned by someone who gains something from our books getting published. How is that not better? If we publish, the agent makes money. Under the old system, it made little difference to that person manning the door. The pay check still arrived whether they accepted a manuscript or not.

Now to the grain of truth: Agencies and publishers are beginning to offer self-publishing services along with traditional services. Is this better?

Well, it leaves writers with a lot of questions and at the moment, very few answers. Some of you see this as a conflict of ethics. You’re not wrong, in my opinion. But the decision to use or not to use these services lies with each writer. If you feel you can do the work yourself and don’t see a need to pay someone to self-publish your work, then you should ignore the new publishing models and self-publish without the aid of an agency. That’s your right.

Some writers though, may feel they cannot do the work alone. If they’ve queried and gathered rejections from what seems like every agent on the planet or they don’t have the skills or the resources to go about finding an editor, or lack the marketing savvy to make their book a success, or creating a cover that is professional and appealing to readers, their only opportunity for entering the illustrious published authors club might be this new publishing model. The choice is yours.

By comparing what used to be two entirely different publishing methods I hope to illustrate that neither model is perfect. Writers must accept that publishing isn’t going to be easy no matter which path you take. If it is easy, you’re probably doing it all wrong. Manuscripts must be polished and we must work to meet a level of excellence in order to make it above the slush pile. This is a good thing. Readers appreciate such hard work and will be loyal to authors who prove they’ve done it. By loyal I mean not just buying that first book, but also the second and the third, and then telling all of their friends about it.

The author who self-publishes without a well thought out plan, who simply wants to leap over the step of honing his skills and ensuring what he’s writing is actually worth reading, is not an author at all. He is lazy and in most cases, arrogant. This writer is the type that has tarred self-publishing with the vanity publishing brush. He wants his book on a shelf, being bought and earning him a quick buck, no matter what the reaction of readers might be. He doesn’t want success in terms of a career, but wants to sell as many as he can before cranking out the next piece of shit. He may even have hopes that through self-publishing, he’ll break into a big deal with a traditional publisher. It’s happened before, so why not for him?

To catch the interest of the big traditional houses, the author must show high enough sales. Rarely has a self-published book sell more than 100 copies in its lifetime. This might change. We’ll have to wait and see. There are self-published authors currently selling heaps of e-books, but these authors for the most part, began with a traditional publisher and after building their reader base, moved to self-publishing. This makes a huge difference in success.

While it would be nice to step over the traditional publishers and speed up the process, the reality is the process we so despise is there for a reason. The traditional model has much to teach self-publishers in this respect. On the other hand, the traditional model could stand to learn a lot about adaptability and ambition from the self-published authors emerging today. The bottom line is that writing good fiction is work whether you have a publisher or you do it yourself.

Everyone wants to write a book, but that doesn’t mean they should publish it.