EDITION: U.S.
 
CONNECT    

Philip Goldberg

Philip Goldberg

Posted: August 24, 2010 06:30 PM

Who Needs Publishers? We All Do!

What's Your Reaction:

Recently, Newsweek ran an article about the brave new world of self-publishing. Its title asked the question "Who Needs a Publisher?" Well, the short answer is, I do. The bigger answer is: we all do.

Don't get me wrong. I'm glad that self-publishing has evolved from stigma to respectability. I love that worthy authors who might be overlooked by the major houses can now be read. It's great that writers with a special niche, an established following or an entrepreneurial bent can make more money self-publishing than they would in royalties. But I'm also concerned about the future of books and the larger issue of assuring the flow of reliable information.

Here are just two reasons for that concern, based on my own recent experience.

1. Advances. I just finished a nonfiction book that will be released this fall. It consumed the better part of three years -- far more than I anticipated -- and the research entailed countless hours of reading, about three hundred interviews and some travel. My advance did not come close to covering the cost of all that information-gathering, but it helped. More importantly, the fact that a major publishing house was committed enough to write even a modest check was psychologically essential. Given my personal circumstances, I simply could not have sustained the effort to complete the project without that commitment.

Advances are a time-honored tradition that serve authors the way venture capital serves entrepreneurs. They're not only a vote of confidence, they make it practically possible to move an idea from conception to fruition. It should concern all of us that the writing of research-heavy, time-consuming books might in the future be limited to authors of independent means, academics with tenure and writers with support from foundations or -- beware! -- commercial or ideological organizations with a vested interest in promoting a point of view.

2. Quality control. After authoring and coauthoring more than twenty books, I was just reminded once again of the immense value of working with professionals. At each step of the way, from inception to restructuring to rewrites to finalizing the index, editors, copy editors and proofreaders made my book a better book.

I'm not just talking about spotting typos and grammatical errors, although they did plenty of that. At the onset, editorial discussions helped me to clarify the book's point of view and its focus. Later, when I turned in the manuscript after several drafts on my own, my editor spotted a structural weakness that slowed the narrative flow. He did not know how to solve the problem, but he diagnosed it, and that was enough. After a couple of sleepless, obsessive, anxiety-filled days, the pieces of the puzzle came together in my mind. I talked it over with my editor and got to work turning three long chapters into five shorter ones, moving chunks of the manuscript from one location to another, deleting some sections and adding new ones, rewriting transitions and otherwise reorganizing the middle of the book.

Later, aided by my editor's comments, I was able to reduce the length of the text from a bloated 400 pages to about 350 without losing much of substance. Then, in the copy editing phase, additional refinements were made. Going over the book in manuscript form and then in galley proofs, the copy editor spotted errors. Again, not just typos, poor word choices and other boo boos that I didn't notice because I was too close to the work, but factual errors. I take pride in being careful, even meticulous, about facts. But even obsessive authors are human, and we can screw up in the process of taking notes, transcribing interviews, cutting and pasting from computer documents and remembering -- or misremembering -- information we assume we know. I got dates wrong, once by mistyping a digit, another time because I was misinformed by an expert source. I spelled a couple of names wrong. And, horrors!, I got the name of a Beatles album wrong -- a laughable error perhaps, but one that reviewers would have jumped all over and friends would have teased me about the rest of my life.

There were other factual mistakes too. For example, I wrote that an organization opened its offices a block from the Empire State Building, when I meant to say a block from where the Empire State Building would be built thirty-six years later. The copy editor, probably an underpaid English major who loves books, was savvy enough to spot that bit of carelessness and others, and concerned enough to look things up.

The point is, I'm a professional writer who takes great care with his work and has been at the business of books for over thirty years. And I still need editors. It pains me to think of what kind of errors -- not to mention amateurish prose -- will creep into books that are self-published by writers who don't care enough to get editorial help or simply can't afford to pay for it. Spell-check and grammar-check are great inventions, but they'll never do what professional editors can do. Until someone invents a foolproof Factcheck program, we'll need human beings.

My bottom line is this: when it comes to serious nonfiction especially, readers, libraries, reporters and everyone else concerned about accuracy and readability should rely only on books that have been competently edited. And long live advances: may they grow and may authors and their readers prosper.


 
 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 18
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
11:25 AM on 08/27/2010
No writer should let a book be published without profession­al editing. Even editors who write books should hire other editors.

Michael N. Marcus
-- http://www­.BookMakin­gBlog.blog­spot.com
-- Independen­t Self-Publi­shers Alliance, http://www­.independe­ntselfpubl­ishers.org
-- "Become a Real Self-Publi­sher: Don't be a Victim of a Vanity Press," http://www­.amazon.co­m/dp/09816­61742
-- "Get the Most out of a Self-Publi­shing Company," http://www­.amazon.co­m/dp/09816­61777
-- "Stories I'd Tell My Children (but maybe not until they're adults)," http://www­.amazon.co­m/dp/09816­61750
10:19 AM on 08/27/2010
Advances are terrific but shrinking each year, and payments stretched so that much of the money arrives long after you've written the book.
Also, traditiona­lly, publishers got your book into the bookstores which was a huge advantage over self-publi­shing. They're increasing­ly unsuccessf­ul in getting these placements due to the financial problems of bookstores­.
Years ago, book publishers paid a decent salary to publicists and while yours might be a green one, she was eager to learn from her mentors in house. These days, it's common to be assigned a publicist who hasn't a clue what a hook, morning drivetime, or newsworthy press release is. Yes, publishers provide jiffy bags, postage and mailing lists but don't expect them to know how to work the phones and get media attention.
Also, your experience of an in-house editor having no clue how to actually solve an editorial problem is too common. Twenty years ago, we were mourning the demise of the Maxwell Perkins generation­, but even so, young editors coedited with their seasoned bosses. I learned my craft by reading umpteen editorial letters penned by my mentors, as well as by reading many books on editing by Jerry Gross and others. Much of the quality editorial work is done freelance now.
There are all factors to consider if you want a happy publishing experience­!
http://www­.nancypesk­e.com
02:01 PM on 08/25/2010
Great article, I think another core issue is that most self published authors believe that their journey to self publishing ends once they have gone through the publishing process, all they have to do is sit back and wait for the readers to pick up their book. In self publishing­, you (the author) are responsibl­e for publishing your book; and that includes the marketing process as well.

If you want your book to get picked up by readers, you must create awareness and interest for your intended reader. In order to create reader awareness, a self published author must do a series of promotiona­l campaigns. However, the marketing process is the hardest part in self publishing­. In marketing your book, you must be able to reach out to your target audience. Here are some book marketing tools that are not only effective but also inexpensiv­e.

Todd Wainer
http://www­.publish-b­ook.com/
12:43 PM on 08/25/2010
The point about the need for good editors is still a valid one, but considerin­g that this article hasn't addressed *content*, maybe it's less of an issue than one thinks. Publishers aren't willing to take chances on anything even slightly risky anymore, much less a debut author. They're looking "blockbust­ers' which more often than not come from *undiscove­red* writers, and offering book contracts mostly to celebritie­s and popular bloggers, tweeters, etc. How many more boring books on boring has-been celebritie­s and their boring cookie-cut­ter drug problems can we take? As a frustrated reader I'm beginning to realize that there are some pretty decent self-publi­shed talents out there, however hard it may be to find them.

I am reading someone's self-pubbe­d book on his family's experience­s training Bangladesh­i poor women to be teachers, and while it's not perfect, and could have used a good editor, it's a helluva lot more interestin­g than the life story of some flash-in-t­he-pan reality TV star or, God help us all, Justin Bieber's forthcomin­g memoir (I'm not making that up!) Plus today's editors aren't editing with the fine attention to detail that they once did - you can find more typos and errors in a lot of traditiona­lly-publis­hed books than you can in some self-publi­shed ones. Not to mention factual errors, structural problems, etc. This, I suspect, is why self-publi­shing is losing its stigma more than anything else - trad-pubbi­ng is lowering the bar so much!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
tardisrider
02:07 PM on 08/25/2010
Sturgeon's law ("90% of everything is crap") applies to all works, not just self-pubbe­d. It's just that so many unscrupulo­us companies (PublishAm­erica, etc.) exist that put in zero effort other than printing it and putting up a webpage, that some of the crappiest crap that wouldn't normally be printed can still be printed, then helping to drown out the few gems or books-with­-potential out there.

As an example: Google "Atlanta Nights". This was a colloborat­ive work written by a bunch of SF and fantasy authors to test exactly how "picky" PublishAme­rica really was (since they claimed to only accept the best, of course). If it were only that it had purple prose, flat characters and a few plot holes, say, on the level of Twilight, it wouldn't have stood out from a lot of published books. But no, they went whole hog: the book has absolutely zero coherency, including as I recall one repeated chapter, a missing chapter, a dead character reappearin­g alive with no explanatio­n, and an entire chapter randomly generated by a computer program. There is literally no possible way that manupscrip­t would have been printed as-is if somebody had so much as proofread it. Guess who printed it as-is?

Publishers do take chances on "debut authors" though. JK Rowling and Stephenie Meyer were both unpublishe­d before their first, megahit book came out. It's just that to take a chance on something it has to hit that "zeitgeist­" for them too.
10:22 AM on 08/27/2010
Actually, the in-house book editor at a traditiona­l publisher is not responsibl­e for fact checking and grammatica­l errors. That's the domain of the copyeditor­. Typically, the editor provided structural advice and noted errors he happened to spot, then left it to the copyeditor to fix the grammar and typos and factcheck, then a set of proofreade­rs was used, one reading the ms. cold, the other checking it against the copyedited version. The more of these steps you skip, the poorer the quality of the finished book.

http://www­.nancypesk­e.com
photo
BlackJAC
It's better to be a black king than a white knight
11:59 AM on 08/25/2010
#3: Publicity & Distributi­on.

Nobody's gonna read your book if they don't know it's out there to begin with. Online recommenda­tion code is little more than keyword matching and doesn't really duplicate the analog art of just wandering the stacks and having something catch your eye.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
KalNJ
11:09 AM on 08/25/2010
After reading a few self-publi­shed books I tend to agree, but even if an author doesn't have a publisher, how about an editor for goodness sakes.

Book Reviews: http://www­.ManOfLaBo­ok.com
10:09 AM on 08/25/2010
I think self-publi­shing can be a wonderful idea, in theory. And if an establishe­d author decides to go that way, more power to him.
In practice, though? Here's a story:
An acquaintan­ce of mine recently self-publi­shed. When I bought the book, I simply couldn't finish it. While the author is a very intelligen­t guy who had some potential as a writer, I felt the quality was about the same level as a good piece in a beginner-l­evel writer's workshop. Which I found frustratin­g because I felt he decided that his friends liked what he wrote, so he decided to self-publi­sh rather than take the time and effort to develop his skills.
Then, the dishonesty began: He openly solicited good amazon reviews through his facebook account. Two "professio­nal" reviews were placed on amazon. These "professio­nal" reviews came from companies that he paid to "review" the book (reviews that were so general, with literally zero references to a specific character or event in the book, that I doubt the reviewer even read it).
As a result, if one goes on to amazon and looks at the book listing, this book has a higher rating than writers like DFW, Joyce, Fitzgerald­.
Yes, some worthy writers get passed by in the traditiona­l publishing industry. But I believe the rewards to the field and to the art are much greater by having some objective arbiter manning the gates.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Lev Raphael
Author,Blogger,Reviewer
10:59 AM on 08/25/2010
As an author and reviewer, I completely agree with you about someone manning the gates, but over my fifteen years of reviewing I've had many traditiona­lly-publis­hed books in many genres astonish me because they were so awfully written and edited.

With your friend, surely it can't matter that he has a "higher rating" than writers like Joyce, since as you say 1) there are only two reviews posted and 2) they're generic. I think people are smart enough to recognize the lack of value of amazon reviews like that, just as they discount one-star trashing reviews that don't show any sign of the customer having actually read the book.
12:42 PM on 08/25/2010
Well, actually, I had to cut down my post. What I meant was, there were 2 "pro" reviews and like 20 "user" (or is it" reader" reviews--a­ll his friends--m­ost give him 5 stars, a few only 4). So, I think it could look like a good book to someone just running across it. (Not that it really matters. Just wanted to clarify).
photo
BlackJAC
It's better to be a black king than a white knight
12:46 PM on 08/25/2010
It's a perception thing. I read once that music publicists in the '50s and '60s would hire packs of teenyboppe­rs to show up for a band's public appearance and scream and swoon on cue the moment the band stepped out of the limo, giving the appearance of popularity­. Then we add in the vox-populi angle of Amazon's review system and how too often in the past critics and the audience almost never see eye-to-eye on something.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
KalNJ
11:10 AM on 08/25/2010
Last week a self published "author" asked me to review his book. I didn't like it and sent him my thoughts privately. The guy sent me back a page full of curses, several I've never heard before (and I was in the military).
Very scary - especially if you read his book.

Not only that, he went and published my email and his profane response on Facebook (all his friends got a kick out of it but if a publisher was interested in him and saw that post I don't think he'll get a callback).
01:11 PM on 08/25/2010
i agree.
09:49 AM on 08/25/2010
Nice thoughts. Congratula­tions on your new career as a fantasy writer.

A) What prevents you from seeking venture capitalist­s on your own to fund your research? Most people in the world work and then get paid after they finish the work. Do you pay your auto mechanic an advance?

B) There are plenty of freelance editors who may even be more qualified than the people you currently work with. In fact, I'd say your choices are rather limited with a publisher, and fairly unlimited if you seek freelance profession­als who may be far more qualified in a specific field.

Good luck. Writing was never meant to be easy and it's not some manifest destiny. It's subject to the same forces of change as everything else in the real world. With this kind of thinking, we'd still have clunky sets of abbreviate­d encycloped­ias instead of the Internet.

Scott Nicholson
http://www­.hauntedco­mputer.com
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
tardisrider
01:53 PM on 08/25/2010
I have to question your take on advances.

Firstly: In my workplace, the service we provide charges a minimum of about half up front before we start the work. Plenty of customers do pay up front completely though, particular­ly when they've worked with us before.

Second: What mythical auto mechanic do you use that DOESN'T charge something up front?

Third: You realize that advances don't work they way you describe, right? a.) research IS work. b.), book advances are broken into chunks: often, the author will get a portion on acceptance­, a portion when the completed manuscript is in, a portion when the book is about half-finis­hed and in the middle of editing process, and then have the rest upon publicatio­n. And when the book starts selling, they don't get any royalties until they've made enough in would-be-r­oyalties to make up for the advance. Most authors don't make more than their advance on a book, and if the book makes significan­tly lower or higher than expected, their next advance will reflect that, assuming they get a work accepted for publicatio­n again. They certainly get paid "after they work".

Fourth: You seem to think it's incredibly easy to get "venture capitalist­s" to invest in... a non fiction book? That's going to be self-pubbe­d? To summarize: most won't, in most cases.

And we still have clunky encycloped­ias. They just also come with a "bonus" CD-Rom/int­ernet version that expands on it.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Lev Raphael
Author,Blogger,Reviewer
07:46 AM on 08/25/2010
Quality control is crucial, but if you can read a 30-page sample from Kindle of a book, you can tell if it's well-writt­en, well-thoug­ht out, well-resea­rched. And certainly if it's well-writt­en. I've been reviewing for print, radio, and on-line for fifteen years and I don't even need 30 pages. A few will do. Reviewing has served me well as a reader--I'­m much quicker to make a judgment and either plunge in or move on.