I’ve gone to two conferences this year that were dedicated to books, reading and writing--the Virginia Festival of the Book in March 2010 and Bouchercon in October 2010. The VFB did something different this year. It held a series of sessions solely dedicated to publishing. Bouchercon addresses this issue every year in various ways.
Some of the information provided simply depressed everyone who heard it, but it should’ve surprised anyone. At Bouchercon, the panelists asked, “Is publishing in free fall?” Last year, 2009, the bottom line stank for authors and publishers.
Only ebooks expanded in sales. This year, 2010, looked better all the way around.
Clare Eddy did say that as much as 10% of the market next year will be taken up by ebooks. Digital does allow authors to serve smaller audiences. It can provide writers with multiple revenue streams. This digital thing caused considerable consternation, especially among the older members of the audience, writers and readers both. She did there would be a place for physical books, even if such books were, rather insultingly, referred to as “dead tree” books.
While I have a Kindle, as much for space reasons as anything else, I am ambivalent about digital books. I’m more saddened about the demise of the independent bookstore, but the seem doomed. The collapse of the wholesale market over the last ten years means that sales reps cover huge territories and don’t specialize in books anymore. That, the big box stores like Barnes and Noble, and Amazon.com have put paid to them. At least Kindle might allow long out of print authors and books back into “print” again.
Is publishing in free fall? The answer is no. There are two huge caveats. Publishing has always been difficult. The lead time now, if you make it, is one and one-half years for a book and between four and twelve months for short story. Furthermore, nobody knows where we’ll be in five or ten years.
(If you want to talk about a really long lead time, try academic reviews. Your book comes out. It probably won’t be reviewed in a prestigious or middling journal for three years. So much for tenure, sports fans.)
The VBF sessions dealt much more with the nuts and bolts of publishing, most of which I’ve heard before. Think in terms of “What’s in it for me?”. The “me” in that question is the publisher, editor, or agent, not the author. When trying to publish, an author needs to consider his or her audience, to target agents, editors, and publishers selectively, and to help people out. Always be professional. Be well mannered. Being nice is 80% of being professional.
In other words, don’t send a contemporary romance to Tor Books or Minotaur. The first does SF and Fantasy, and the second does mysteries, including historicals. Don't send a historical mystery to agent or an editor who deals in children's literature or literary fiction.
From Bouchercon came a blunter message. Yes, publishers have priorities, and I may not be it. A good story will be required. Can the publisher do well with it? Does it fit with the publisher’s current line? Does the story duplicate anything within the current process? On that last, if yes, then unless it’s really good, the book will be rejected. Whatever else an author does, don’t try to chase the market. All editors and publishers are trying to guess what people want to read.
Katherine Neville once said, rightly I think, that writing is an art, and publishing is a business.
The VFB sessions focused more on marketing the book, thus yourself. Carleen Brice was excellent on this point--think about your expectations. Media exposure doesn’t naturally equal sales of your book. Rebecca Skloot added that while online networking makes that exposure easier because it expands potential contacts, happy accidents still have to occur. Furthermore, you still need clips to build up your bio.
(Unless those "clips" are in field, forget it. They're worthless as credentials. I met a gentleman at Bouchercon who writes Victorian mysteries. He's written over sixty books. So he had can deliver the goods and clearly knows how to be professional. Does that count toward publishing his mysteries? Not on your tintype.)
Okay, I get the message. It's punishing out there in publishing land. It gets down to these two things. One, it’s still the old Roman way--know someone who knows someone. Two, major media is a crap shoot.
The importance of radio in book promotion struck me as odd, but it makes sense. Radio has a shorter lead time than print, and that makes it more helpful. It’s not just big stations like WCBS or networks like NPR that are good. Small stations are helpful, too.
The major points I took away from these sessions were these. Publishing is brutal, and authors are seen as interchangeable. Yet, I have to demonstrate, markedly, how I and my book are different from everything else. I’ve got to be myself, yet I have to fit in an identifiable category. The time to publication, serendipity itself, is long. If I get published, then I’ve got do most, if not all, the marketing work myself, yet I daren’t come across like a used-car salesman. (Not that I would. That’s gross.) With my next book, I’ve got to top myself.
Um, I think this means I have to be Wonder Woman. Where's my magic lasso?
Small wonder so may people, in all parts of publishing said the same thing my master’s advisor did--have passion for your project. That passion will get you through all rest of the nonsense. It's true. It's what got me through my dissertation. (Don't go looking for it, please. I'm so much a better writer now.)