Even If It Were Free . . .
After yesterday's post on how you would change publishing if you were in charge, I started thinking about e-pubbed books, self-pubbed books, traditionally pubbed books, changing media, and particularly Lurker Monkey's comment (the Monkey Man is nothing if not brilliant) . . . and then Richmond Writer's (great thoughts!). Here's his comment:
And I'd figure out a way to combine the written word with available media technology into a new medium that consumers would go crazy for, and suddenly demand for written stories (noticed I didn't say "books") would skyrocket.Then I would try to write the best of these things I could. So not much different in that respect.
Really like the idea there. Here's Richmond's:
The drawback is that fewer books would be published traditionally. This would in turn expand the e-market which eventually would be able to grow into something respectable. Once it gets respect it will be an effective gatekeeper for those of us who want to simply pick up a good book to read.
I still (as I often do if you are regular reader of this blog) come back to the time factor. On Facebook, I have 400+ friends, give or take. Probably a core 100 are my friends in real life and my friends in cyber life . . . People I know. People if they blew through town I would invite to meet me for coffee, whatever. The other 300 are either readers . . . or other writers. And so on my home page, I see announcement after announcement. This author's e-pubbed or self-pubbed release, this author's print release, etc.
And I have to say . . . sometimes when I go to the self-pub/e-pub link, I most seriously think, "NOT EVEN if it were free." Even reading the first three pages are three minutes of my life I can't get back (which is why I CURSE George Lucas, because the third star war movie--sequentially--is 2.5 hours of my life I can NEVER get back).
Think of things you get for free. Junk mail. I don't want it. Free samples of products I won't use. Mini-cups of oversalted and over-preservative-filled foods in the aisles of Costco. Free doesn't mean "Woo hoo! Let me take some of that." (Aside: Did anyone TASTE the backwash Starbucks gave away for free as instant coffee--FREE doesn't make it good, folks!)
I know there is a segment of people who would think, "FREE! I'd download it, listen to it, etc." But as for me, I am still looking for SOME sort of gatekeeper. If you have ever read slush . . . then you KNOW. A process exists for most art because it separates wheat from chaff.
I know people talk about iTunes and indie music. And yeah . . . there are some great undiscovered bands out there. BUT, would I want to listen to my tone-deaf neighbor doing covers of Frank Sinatra recorded in his bathroom? Um . . . no. Even free . . . there is definitely content I don't want. And there remains a core delusion.
Before I get some angry rant response . . . no, do I really care that some guy on Facebook is self-pubbing a book with two typos on page one, and sentences so poorly constructed I can't fathom why he thinks he it's the GATEKEEPERS and not HIS WRITING that kept him from a traditional deal. And if he wants to give that away . . . then I hope he's having fun. But in the end, I bring it back to time. Not even free. (Let alone, that I do think he's charging for his e-book.)
And I will also say . . . TIME is why I don't feel that "it's decent enough to pub" is enough for me. I want there to be something to strive for in quality. The "it's free, so really? What do you want for free, cheap entertainment?" doesn't work for me. Not today. Not with multi-tasking and so many demands on my TIME.
So I think I am all for Richmond's idea. And Monkey Guy's. A combo of the two of them. Richmond Lurker?
What about you? What do you think the role is of gatekeeper?
28 comments:
If anyone wants to *try* a pseudo slush pile, head to agent Nathan Bransford's blog where almost 1000 people have already posted their first paragraphs. I'm reading as many as I can to be a gatekeeper in my mind (oh, I am so many things in my own mind). I'm thinking - would I keep reading? Is it well written even if it's not my favorite genre? Does it even sound like the beginning of a book?
In the sampling I've read, of just one graf, there are typos, backstory dumps, and grammatical errors. There are people who posted a page as a single paragraph. It's both scary and amusing.
To me, the gatekeeper's role is to make it just a bit easier for that next level of gatekeepers.
Ultimately, readers have to be their own gatekeepers.
Amy:
Brilliant comment. Yes . . . I mean, I gatekeep according to genre and storyline, generally. I don't read romance at all. Don't read spy novels, generally (a few exceptions). I like a quirky hero. I gatekeep by my preferences . . . and then am hoping that yes, that previous gatekeeper meant that I have a REASONABLE expectation of reading something I will enjoy. I may not--and that's fine. But nor would I want to weed through 1,000 first paragraphs to find a handful of well-written ones.
I agree with Amy. We have to be our own gatekeeper. What might be one persons treasure, another may hate the job of scooping it up and tossing it into their neighbor's yard.
The fact that it is free doesn't necessarily make it horrible. I seem to remember being allowed in your world without a ticket.
The problem is with the new writing freedoms we enjoy with the connected world, we took on some responsibility. Or rather, we didn't. No one is willing to stand up and say, "Nice try, but that sucks."
If you get enough NTBTS, you will be more willing to close your own gate and I won't have to look for someone to watch out for me. Rejection, done properly can be a great lesson in gatekeeping.
I guess I missed my chance to be Queen of the Universe yesterday--drat.
Anyway, if the gatekeepers weren't strict I imagine that nobody could make a living at writing. So many books would flood the market that the profits would spread too thin. And people would probably stop enjoying reading, since the writing would be of a lesser caliber.
And I find as I get older, I am more of a strict gatekeeper with my own time. When I pick up a book, it has to really grab me and keep me, or I'll stop reading. I used to stick it out on principle.
As much as I dread trying to get past the gatekeepers, I'm thankful that they're at their post. In order to pick up a self-pubbed book, I have to know why that person needed to self pub, and it has to be a really good, compelling reason.
Time is everything, and I'm already dividing it between multiple people. For me to give my time away to a stranger, well, that stranger better bring something great to the table!
Allen:
Good points. As I mentioned yesterday--check out Electric Spec . . . free content . . . some really great writing.
And I self-gatekeep all the time. We all do. Maybe over time, there will indeed be an erosion . . . and the better free stuff will rise to the top, and then, in turn, it will start to be able to charge. Is that possible???? I don't know!
E
Heather:
That is my sentiment pretty much. It's been amazing to watch so much content given away for free--I never buy a newspaper anymore. I read them online. Every once in a while, I think of upgrading at the NY Times to a paying thing where I can get access to some other content. But even then, I think . . . I don't have TIME to do MORE reading of the daily paper. So I take a pass.
E
I think one of the great gatekeepers is and always will be word of mouth. When I want a new read, I check my list of titles I've picked up on blogs, then head over to Amazon and before I buy, I skim through the reader comments, look at the other books they've read and liked. All this points me either toward purchase or away from it. Like you, I'm extremely selective when it comes to using my life energy and the hours of my life. I'm also picky about who gets my money.
I give away free content almost daily on my blog. I write the blog to attract readers who I hope will be interested in my books (when I get past the publishing gatekeepers). I post flashes occasionally on my blog, and I write for free for some online publications, though I am selective, as I want my name associated with other good writers and stories. It's a slow process, but then so is publishing, so I figure by the time I have a book published, I'll also have established an audience.
I must say that Lurker Monkey's idea is super intriguing to me. I too think along these lines.
A good point. I've read a couple self-pubbed books (and self-pubbed one myself) and that's a dicey proposition. You run the risk of novels all being like indie films and self-produced music. It's not that they're necessarily bad, but they tend to have smaller audiences. The musicians make their livings through touring (maybe not a bad thing) and the indie filmmakers 99% of the time are hoping they'll get picked up by studios so they can then go make big budget films.
Lurker & I have discussed the multi-media format for books a bit and I'm actually a little skeptical. Not skeptical that a lot of people will like that, but skeptical that it's for me at all. It reminds me of all the extra "features" DVDs have added and how little I'm interested in them (the only exception being deleted scenes and some of the behind-the-scenes things in The Lord of the Rings disks). The DVD market has started offering versions, the multi-format ones with deleted scenes, behind the scenes, video games, etc., and a slightly cheaper DVD that just has the movie. And I buy the cheaper one in most cases because, even when I MIGHT watch all the extra crap, I'm likely to only watch it once.
So I'm skeptical if book buyers, who already bitch about $24.95 for a hardcover, would really be interested in paying $34.95 or, like the price of a video game, $49.95, if the book has life links, a video with the author, pages of marked-up manuscript, and an audio component. (And from a business POV, if those do take off, will authors still get 10% royalties or are they going to get arm-twisted into splitting royalties with the video game designers, audio people, layout people, and the publisher, who is no claiming to spend more money on the product development. We'll see.)
Beth:
I agree. I know if someone recommended some amazing free e-book or self-pubbed book, that recommendation, if I had similar taste, would carry a lot of weight with me.
A local woman wrote this book:
http://www.connielapallo.com/
She came to my book club, and she was a very compelling and fascinating speaker. I don't read historical fiction, generally, but the story of how she came to write the book and blend true stories into it . . . was enough to make me buy it (and it was self-pubbed). However, when you see the YEARS (and I mean YEARS) of research that went into it--and the fact that it is well-edited . . . and so on . . . this is a book whose word-of-mouth has carried it.
E
Mark:
Very interesting take. I, too, have only very rarely watching extra footage. I would be more compelled for, say, a movie by Terry Gilliam, who is nuts and wonderful and spills into his films, not to mention the LOOK of his films. So it would have to be for something special, something I am a more ardent fan of.
Same with a book. If it was some amazing world building (like a Tolkein) . . . I could see it. But for the average book, I read it in a day or so . . . I'm done. I'm not necessarily dying for more of the world. But who knows?
E
I am a gatekeeper. I believe in them.
There is the misconception that everything on the Internet should be free. For instance, our magazine is free for others to read. However it is NOT free. We PAY for our stories so that others can read them. A good friend of ours pays for the hosting of the zine. Think of it like a radio. Free to listen to, but the radio pays for the music they drop.
Not free.
And this month we're publishing great quality stories - even, I can exclusively announce first here - one from a Nebula winning author.
I think as technology and convenience collide with publishing, like it did with cell phones and the Ipod and non-network television, and like we're seeing now with E-readers, we'll see people paying for quality material to read in electronic formats.
Piracy upsets me...but that's taking the convo in a different direction, and it happens to a lot of art forms, not just electronic writing.
Oh, and thanks for the shout out again today, Erica! I commented before reading. :) We have a new issue coming out at the end of the month and, like I said, I believe it's our strongest yet. (Not meaning to brag - our writers deserve all the credit!)
Interesting. E-pubbing and self-pubbing are not the same thing. In any case, I'm really not worried about it. Self-pubbed writers will continue to self-pub if it serves their needs and makes them the profit they seek, whether monetary or otherwise, and e-pubs will undoubtedly grow.
Big e-readers tend to gravitate towards sites such as Dear Author, since they can't browse in the store, so perhaps review sites will be the secondary gatekeeper after the e-publisher. They extraordinarily rarely review a self-pubbed book, so that's gatekeeper enough. Others rely on Amazon reviews and flipping through a book at Amazon, much the same way you flip through a book in the bookstore. Although many of the reviews there are unreliable, generally you can get an overall sense after throwing out the nonsense.
Most people are unaware that Random House edits better than Simon & Schuster, or vice versa, so I expect the same will be true of e-pubs. As far as self-pubs, it will be a harder way for the cream to rise to the top, but if it does, cool. If not, no skin off my back.
Nicola Griffith I believe did a multi-media autobiography. I think it was well received. But she'd been in music before and during writing, plus a lot of other stuff, so there was a reason for it.
I liken multimedia formats to when I read the DAVINCI CODE. I actually read it in one sitting, rare for me. It also had me at the Internet looking at pictures of locations, holding the book backwards in the mirror to break a "code", studying DaVinci's Last Supper in great detail, wiki-searching terminology. I'd call it a multi-media experience. I wonder if some website links or photos in the book might've been cool, but I actually liked my self-directed experience.
I'd love to write a book that had people running to the computer to fact check or look at paintings. I always try to leave room for that kind of indepth though process. For instance, I've deliberately mostly described The Four Horsemen in SCAR by color, hoping readers might put their own slant on them. I know what I think they look like, but I want readers to invest their own imaginations, too.
I wonder how much adding other media might influence/limit/grow that opportunity?
Okay, I'll shut up now. Good topic, Erica.
starbucks:
I thought of bringing up radio. And "free" content comes with a "price" (sometimes)--commercials and ads, having to sit through them unless you TIVO, etc. So yeah, the idea of totally free can be a misnomer.
CONGRATS on the issue! That is awesome!!!!
As for bonus features . . . like you, mine tends to be self-directed. Even if there was content there, unless it was EXHAUSTIVE in every sense of the word, I would assume I could find out more on my own.For example, I have been a hobby reader of quantum physics for ten years now. To the point that SOME science shows that touch on quantum mechanics are way "old news" for me. Or if Paul Erdos was a subject on a film--I have read so much on him that what they would put on an extra wouldn't be enough for me, I would assume. So . . . it's tricky!!!
E
spy:
I know they (self versus e-pubbing) are totally different. I think that was my point of pulling in Richmond's comments--that the respect for e-pubbing would rise and add more of a gatekeeping element to it . . . I have to be totally honest . . . I have been gifted with print versions of e-pubbed books (as in NOT self-pubbed and by a publishing name virtually anyone on this site who ever considered romance/e-pubs would know). The books I got were SO awfully edited that in three cases, I couldn't get to chapter 2 or 3. Between typography issues and so on . . . BUT . . . as time goes on, haven't we ALL seen the cover qualities go up? Better writing? the whole nine yards. That's gatekeeping, in my opinion.
E
Certainly "gate-keeping" is economically necessary for the big NYC pubs. Imagine if they didn't have editors. Who'd buy their books? But I still believe their "gate-keepers" are the marketing department. I mean, seriously, Sarah Palin's book on pre-order?
I'm on the fence regarding e-pubbing. I think for the author it helps them get their names out there, and they do go through the process of working with an editor and they're writing (which I'm not doing). On the other hand, I've met an editor from a prominent romance e-pub, and wondered what a degree in nursing had to do with writing. (Minored in English Lit. perhaps? I dunno.)
In any event, I prefer to be my own "gate-keeper." I love indie films over the big studio ones, will check out indie music before the mainstream stuff, and believe that if a person wants to self-pub, that's their decision, and most likely, loss. Seriously, do you know what some of those self-pubs charge? A person would have to sell a gazillion books at $24.95 just to see a marginal profit.
And what's up with authors giving away their books for free? My former-now-defunct publisher is doing just that - set up a web site where you can download her books for free, under the guise of making it easier for people to "enjoy" reading during our hard economic times. What the hell? Isn't that what libraries are for?
I'm with you on the free. It doesn't meant it's necessarily good, which means most of the people who offer things for free are missing the point. Free things are supposed to be good enough to attach a new audience. Not cheap enough think "This sucker will taste anything as long as they don't have to pay a dime for it." Wrong. I'm paying with my time. And considering where I'm at in my life, my time means everything to me.
Gatekeeping is a good way to save everyone's time and I think it should be in place. In fact, I think there are times it should be increased or the same level maintained. I've stopped reading many authors after their fifth or sixth book because the calibre of their writing has gone downhill from the first time I had fallen in love with their series. In cases like that, the gatekeeping has gone by the wayside because it's assumed that the author's name is enough. Ha! Not for me.
The same is true for epubbed and self-pubbed authors. If they want to gain a fan base or keep their name in the fold, then they need to be aware that many readers out there are their own gatekeepers and they won't care who you're published with. They, like me, just want a good book where their eyes aren't left bleeding to get to the end of the chapter.
This is a great question ... Maybe Wikipedia provides one possible answer. The whole encyclopedia is generated by the hive mind. What if there was a way to have art subjected to that same mass filter? In a way, it is already, but I can see a time when people buy books and music based on recommendations and ratings from thousands of other consumers. To some degree, that's already happening.
As for free/nonfree, another great question. I know I bring up the music industry a lot, but they did eventually shut Napster down, and millions of people are happy to buy iTunes songs. Sure, it wiped out a huge chunk of revenue, because who wants to pay $15 for a bundle of nine songs when you can get the ones you like for $1, but it still shows people are willing to pay.
I do think, however, that publishers will have to wake up to the idea that currently priced e-books are ridiculously expensive. They'll have to come down, a lot.
As for self-pubbing, eventually all publishers will be using POD technology (it's already widely used). It's the only economical answer, and once the presses are good enough to handle different trim sizes, colors and formats, even NYC publishers will become "self-publishers" in a sense.
kath:
I could see giving "extra" content away for free . . . but whole books I am not so sure is effective.
E
Marcia:
Very to the point and well said!!
E
Lurker:
And then . . . .
If the publishers use POD to keep ALL our backlists in print, all our foreign language books in print, and so on . . . will they then sign a little wider . . . as well as some cool niches, because print runs cease to be a measure of sales???
That possibility is exciting. I am always a little sad when someone writes my site and tells me they spent more than cover price to get an out-of-print book of mine.
E
Good point. Well said. Props to you for helping me to see something I was not. :)
Have you ever listened to Tara Brach's Buddhist Dharma talks? I get them on iTunes. They are free. And they do a lot to keep me grounded.
But by and large, I probably agree with you.
Realm:
Thanks, Chick! :-)
E
On every level you mention there is a different kind of gatekeeper and they are there for a different reason. Big companies look at the bottom line, does this appeal to a large audience? Not that it isn't good, but can they sell it and sell a lot of it.
So on and so forth. What a company puts in place as a gatekeeper has a lot to do with the audience they are targeting. Why target for high quality if that's not a defining factor for your audience?
With that in mind when I think of free content I can't think of a true gatekeeper. But if an author is offering a free short story then why they wouldn't put in the effort? You are trying to get more than someone to stop to test you out. Your intent is for them to spend their money on the things that have a price. That free read may be your first impression and the last one you can make.
Joe:
Haven't downloaded one yet--but I will! Thanks for the recommendation.
E
Melissa:
That tends to be mine too.
But therein . . . .
A lot of people self-pub without an editor. Or they don't accept criticism and want it entirely their way. If the end result is quality, well, then obviously a lack of editing works for them. But many people likely THINK they are putting their best foot forward when it really could be so much better.
Post a Comment