Indie authors – unstoppable?

18 May 2014

As usual, I attended the London Book Fair in mid-April (the last time it will be held at Earls Court in west London due to the fair’s ballooning size). In part this was to meet with authors and talk business with our partners. However, in addition, with its excellent seminar programme and hundreds of exhibitors promoting new products (e.g. in ebook conversion), the LBF is an ideal venue to explore new trends in the world of publishing.

One phenomenon really starting to have an impact is self-publishing. In general publishing, the number of so-called ‘indie titles’ is growing in double digits annually with self-published authors likely to account for half of all books listed on Amazon within the next year or so.

This upsurge could be seen at the LBF where the seminars aimed at authors were packed tight with crowds of attendees listening outside as well.

LBF-author-seminar

So far, self-publishing has not really affected scholarly publishing because of the gatekeeper effect of the peer review process. Nonetheless, with more and more scholars working collaboratively and going down the Creative Commons route to produce course book material (for instance), that situation is likely to change.


Making the most of social media

19 April 2013

Many authors I know wouldn’t touch Facebook with a bargepole. Indeed, some of our authors won’t even be photographed let alone appear in an interview on YouTube to promote their books. This is a nuisance in marketing terms but until now I haven’t thought this to be a real problem; shyness doesn’t effect the quality of their scholarship.

Now I am not so sure.

What made me think again was attending the recent London Book Fair, at which I attended what I thought it was a seminar for publishers (the session being called called ‘How to Build Social and Brand Equity on a Shoestring’). It wasn’t, not really; authors were the prime focus of the session. (This was in line with a huge increase in author-centred activity at the LBF and elsewhere, as discussed here and here, and – with regard to self-publishing – here. Self-publishing is also something this blog has explored before, in a series of posts starting here.)

author-seminar

At the seminar, a literary publisher from Cromer in Norfolk was joined by three of his authors to expound on why getting published requires that you ‘get’ social media. Of course, academic authors might argue that the worlds of literary fiction and scholarly discourse have little in common and they are right, to a point. That said, I suspect that authors of all types can learn much from what the panelists said.

Unfortunately, I didn’t record the session but here are some of the points made.

  • Like it or not, social media are unavoidable. Used intelligently, however, they offer the best means for authors to reach the widest possible readership. This is because branding and identification, not the hard sell, is what drives most people to follow an author.
  • There is no point being half-hearted; get your numbers up. For instance, Salt Press may be small but on Twitter it has 86,571 followers while one of the authors present reported that she was linked to over 1,000 (or was it 10,000?) people on Facebook.
  • How on earth do the panelists keep up with such a huge circle? They don’t, not necessarily; it is usually enough to tune into the conversation every so often. Time management is crucial.
  • When questioned if they really wished to expose themselves to a whole lot of strangers, it was clear the panelists were only showing their public persona to the world (or had, say, separate private Facebook accounts). As they also warned, don’t go public with something you would want to stay private.
  • Of course, the key requirement of social networking is that you participate but you would be wise to (mainly) only say things that matter. How many people care if you are waiting for a bus?
  • Social networking is not one-way. Show generosity, for instance by offering advice or pointing people to another author’s work.
  • One way to build such numbers of friends and followers is by searching for interest groups (Twitter’s search functions are especially powerful). However, you need to know what you are searching for.
  • Another way to build a following is to ensure that many of the people whom you meet in person become members of your social network; point them towards your online presence. Collecting other people’s business cards is no longer enough.
  • But to succeed in building a following and then benefit from it, you must understand why people are interested in you, why they follow you. It is unlikely to be your persona only (though this can play a role); more likely it is something that you are seen to be offering them. In short, social networks are all about belonging. People are drawn to you because they have a stake in you or your work.
  • The essence of what you are doing with your social networking is creating a brand. Part of your work here is not only to inform people what you are doing but also to communicate your persona, even the philosophy and principles guiding your work. It may also mean talking about experiences as well as end results. And, just like (say) Apple, your purpose is to build brand loyalty, create a little passion.
  • What is imperative here is brand consistency. Think about the ramifications of what you do and say, and be consistent. Here it is easiest if your public persona and your private self are much the same but as a result you can do much damage to your prospects if you are not true to yourself.
  • Learn, then, to handle mistakes; they are bound to happen and are unlikely to stay hidden for long.
  • Some of the panelists preferred Facebook, others a personal blog; the publisher seems to choose Twitter. What was clear with all of them, however, is that they used multiple channels to present themselves.
  • Social media have great reach but they are most effective when there is confluence between the different channels, when (say) tweets, a Facebook item and a blog post build on each other to promote an event.

Largely, that is what I am trying to do here – with this post on ‘Getting Published’, on related news items on my work website, with a tweet here and there and corresponding entries on a work Facebook page. Sorry but there’s no clip on YouTube.

Just how effective it all is … well, that is another matter. One thing to consider, however: even if there is a problem with the messenger, that doesn’t mean you should ignore the message.


Coping with rejection

22 March 2011

It’s been months since you submitted your book proposal and the mail you received today is almost a relief after all the silence. No. The press to which you offered your book (and in which you invested hopes and dreams) says ‘no’; they do not want to publish your book. No solid reasons given. You are not sure they even looked properly at the darn thing (but they do say ‘sorry’ in a nice way).

It takes more than time to write a book. It also takes courage, stamina and self-belief, all of which may leach away in the face of (constant) rejection. And, let’s be clear, rejection is the norm. The spurn rate is much higher with journal articles (many journals rejecting as many as 95% of the articles submitted) but the norm is rejection for a book manuscript, too. Luckily, there is (or should be) more than one press or journal to offer your work to.

How then to react to rejection, and to move on positively?

Is it actually ‘no’?

Of course, ‘no’ can come in different shades of black. Sometimes the rejection will not be outright; you may be invited to ‘revise and resubmit’. If so, you may enter a process of ‘acceptance creep’, a period of dialogue during which you revise your work to meet the publisher’s requirements. In essence, you have a tiny toe in the door and over time you can work and wiggle to get first a foot in the door, then a leg and finally all of you – of your book – through to the sunny side of publishing.

However, if you have received a blunt ‘no’, then you need to move on; there is little point arguing with the publisher. Rather, be pleased if the publisher chooses to tell you in any detail why your book has been rejected; such feedback is invaluable. On the basis of the knowledge of the industry, some publishers also helpfully suggest alternative presses which they think might be interested in your work.

Where now?

If that publisher’s rejection is final, pause a moment. Do not immediately rush off and submit your manuscript to the next publisher on your list. Reflect on the likely reasons that your proposal was rejected.

  • Was this publisher indeed the right one for your book?
  • Was your approach to them handled correctly? If not, what can you learn from this?
  • Was there a problem with the peer review process? It is not unknown that a scholar’s work ends up being judged by a bitter enemy, for instance, or one approaching the topic from an entirely different standpoint than the author’s. Knowing this won’t improve that reader’s report but it will help you face others in the future.
  • Is there something wrong with your text itself? On a sliding scale of fixability, common problems are shoddy presentation/spelling, bad writing and poor scholarship.
  • Is the big problem financial rather than content? For instance, is the readership/market judged to be too small or will your book be too expensive to produce?
  • Or is it (simply, sadly) that you personally are the problem, your authorship isn’t believed in?

Only if you take this time to ask the cruel questions – asking exactly what went wrong – can you move on and do something effective about it. Otherwise in all likelihood you are condemning yourself to another round of rejection.

Responses

How ever much the rejection hurts (and you may want to shrug the whole thing off as a bad dream), for the sake of your writing career you need to be decisive in response. You have several choices, depending in part on what the original problem was.

  • You can abandon the whole thing. This is clean and simple but a drastic, wasteful decision if you have spent months or years working on the book. At the very least, salvage something from the wreckage (the makings of a couple of journal articles, for instance).
  • You can simply resubmit/argue the merits of your proposal to the same publisher. People have succeeded here but personally I think it is a waste of your time and of your creative/emotional energies.
  • More productive instead is to find/approach another publisher. If so, however, then you need to find out in what ways the new publisher is different from the first. What effect will these differences have on your revised proposal? In other words, will you ‘sell’ your proposal to the new publisher any differently? At the same time, you should ask yourself how generally might your proposal be improved, no matter which press you approach?
  • But a quick response may not be possible; you may need to rework the book (or at least rewrite the book concept). In this work, any critical feedback you receive from earlier rejections (e.g. from readers reports) can be worth gold.
  • Improving the economic prospects for the book might be all that is required, of course. Publishers invariably say that subventions don’t affect their decision-making but that is nonsense; of course they do – at least in instances where there is no issue with the scholarship but rather the likely production costs are too high (say, with a book full of colour pictures) or expected sales are too low (the market is too small). In such instances, a publication grant can make all the difference. Indeed, let’s be clear: there are some publishers whose entire business plan depends on such funding (and here I don’t mean vanity presses, either).
  • Finally, you may decide to self-publish. Received wisdom denies any place for self-published academic works (let alone recognition in job and funding applications) because of the lack of peer review. However, the ground is shifting here; we are seeing experiments with ‘soft peer review’, the rise of collaborative writing based on the Creative Commons approach, and other developments resulting from the rise of the internet. That said, self-publishing is not something to venture into lightly. There are many issues and considerable costs or extra work involved, as can be seen in my series of posts dealing with this issue.

In short, you need to gather as much hard information as possible and then do some hard thinking. But, hey, you are a researcher. Isn’t that precisely what you have been trained to do?

Good luck!


Substantive editing

27 December 2009

Eventually, once you have satisfied the Style Nazi, editing of your manuscript can proceed.

Editing in fact is not one thing. Transformation of your manuscript calls on two very different types of editing: substantive editing of the initial (delivered) text focusing on its structure and argumentation, and copy-editing of the finalized (restructured) text focusing on its language and ensuring that it complies with the publisher’s house style

Substantive editing is the aristocrat of editing and, sadly, it is rare. For me, this has been epitomised by the editorial work of Joanne Sanstrom at Berkeley, now retired. As I understand it (though just how real this picture is, I don’t know), Joanne worked with each of her authors, line by line, ensuring that their text flowed logically, its argumentation structurally coherent, clear and consistent, all of this presented in language that was fresh and alive. In my mind, this is substantive editing (with a dash of copy-editing) at its greatest.

However, my understanding is also that Joanne only edited about four books a year and editing was pretty much all that she did. There is no way that this level of perfection makes economic sense in today’s publishing climate – indeed, I doubt that it ever did, even in the golden age of scholarly publishing a few decades ago. Each of these four books would have needed to sell tens of thousands of copies to cover Joanne’s salary and ancillary costs. Such levels of sales have rarely happened.

Any book will be the better for undergoing a mindful edit such as Joanne’s but sadly, in almost all cases today, it never happens. Because of the economic pressures on publishers, in recent years there has been a decline in the amount of structural revisions made to manuscripts after their final delivery. Instead, the tendency is for structure and content to receive feedback (not editing) before final delivery. Quite often publishers rely on any concerns regarding structure, argumentation and coherence being raised in the peer reviewers’ reports, and perhaps in additional comments from the commissioning editor (which may have been made after only a hasty skim-reading of the work). And that is about all the ‘substantive editing’ that a manuscript will get.

This degradation of the added value that publishers are supposed to offer their authors is one reason why some people argue the merits of self-publication and question if publishers have role to play in the dissemination of modern scholarship. (This is a complicated argument, one that I have explored elsewhere at great length.)

Mind you, I don’t hear too many authors complaining about this situation (though I dare say that’s because of ignorance not acceptance). Substantive editing is not what many authors think of when considering that their manuscript will be edited; rather, all that is in mind is a bit of ‘polishing’, the correction of the stray typo. After all, they are the ones that know their subject. (Unfortunately, knowing your subject and being about to communicate it effectively are quite different things.)

But what is your situation?

Hopefully, you received a detailed and coherent assessment of your text on such structural and content issues prior to final delivery but chances are you haven’t. If not, you might like to use this approach in the finalization of your manuscript.

Take the feedback that you have received from the readers’ reports and commissioning editor as your starting point, adding to this your own formal response to these evaluations. Thereafter, take the time to swiftly read through your manuscript one more time, briefly marking anything for follow-up but never really pausing. Doing this reading at speed reduces your unwillingness to read the wretched thing one more time. In fact, the faster you read, the easier it will be to keep a picture of the entire work in your head, and you will also notice anything that disturbs, distracts, bores or irritates you far more easily.

With all of this input, it should be fairly clear what revisions need to be done. Do them, but do not get bogged down with rewriting text that had nothing wrong with it in the first place. Speed is of the essence.

With luck, after delivering your final manuscript, your text may receive a minimum of substantive editing as part of the copy-edit. Just don’t count on it. As you will see in my next post, copy editors have enough to do already without straying into the byways of structure and argumentation.

(Post #3 of the Editorial section of a lengthy series on the book production process, the first post of which is here.)


Review of ‘Getting Published’ just received

9 December 2009

Today, I was gratified and embarrassed to read a lengthy review of our book recently published in the Journal of Scholarly Publishing.

There was much to be pleased about in this review by Steven E. Gump, not least this comment about our introduction:

The opening chapter offers a behind-the-scenes look at the various players in the publishing industry and a brief but particularly fascinating section on the state of the global academic book industry (15–9). This chapter should be required reading for all aspiring academic authors.

and this about the importance of (self-) promotion:

One way in which this book stands out from other academic writing guides is that it describes how academic authors can themselves add value by actively promoting their books (chapter 10): ‘you should not leave everything to the unseen multitudes in the [publisher’s] marketing department who are working hard to push your book to the market. As an author, you should get actively involved by creating a corresponding pull ’ (160, original emphases). True, such ideas are not new; but I am pleased to find them receiving such in-depth coverage and attention in a book for academic authors.

But Steven E. Gump is also known for being a stickler for consistency. Here, sadly, he detailed far too many instances in which a word was spelt this way here, that way elsewhere, commas wandered a bit, etc., etc. He’s right; these errors shouldn’t have slipped through. Like all authors, I wanted a perfect book and (as usual) we didn’t quite get there. The final comment, then, is probably fair:

Textual inconsistencies aside, though, I recommend this book for academic authors, especially those in the humanities or social sciences, wanting an insider’s view of academic book publishing in the early twenty-first century. For first-time authors, reading this book will clarify a complicated, lengthy process that is only beginning when the manuscript is finished. Authors will be reminded, too, that, despite hurdles encountered along the way, ‘everyone in the academic book industry … is there for the express purpose of making the most’ of their manuscripts–of making each book accepted for publication a success (19). Just be sure to do as the authors say, not necessarily as they do.

Quite. And I’m quite sure that – given how most of my posts seem to be written before dawn – Steven E. Gump would find many more errors strewn through this blog, too.


The death of community and consensus

18 September 2009

In a series of recent posts, I have explored the issue of self-publishing from many different angles. To recap these posts have been:

A wider issue

There is, however, a wider issue with self-publishing that troubled me as I began sketching out the series – its impact on the wider scholarly community and the often-unstated consensus that gives coherence to this community. Unfortunately, while this issue troubled me, its shape was – and still remains – unclear. Hence, what I write today may be reworked at a later stage.

Broad communities

Among the reasons why you might consider self-publishing your scholarly output are:

  • This is where the future is (the slow death of the publishing house in its present exclusive form and the gradual adoption of open, collaborative forms of authorship)
  • Altruism (the free exchange of information/research)

Certainly, these ideas and ideals are common among people engaged in such collaborative endeavours as Wikipedia, in the Creative Commons movement, and in open-source publishing more generally. These are indeed broad communities given coherence and energy by their mission.

So what’s my problem?

My problem is that these interest groups have many scholars among their members but they are neither scholarly groups per se, nor are scholarly concerns as such a central concern for them. Moreover, they may function as communities but they are not and do not represent the interests of the wider scholarly community in its entirety.

Elements of the scholarly community

Of course, I run the risk here of invoking an ideal – the scholarly community – that is not grounded very much in reality. That said, despite its fragmentation into fields, factions and fashions, I think that we can discern the outlines of a scholarly community found around the world (areas of it global, others firmly anchored in a local setting). In part, this is defined by:

  • The pursuit of knowledge
  • A spirit of questioning and exploration
  • Scientific inquiry framed by an intellectual discourse and grounded in the application of commonly accepted methodologies
  • (In most cases) collection, analysis and presentation of evidence that is observable, empirical and measurable (sometimes derived from experimentation)
  • Information exchange and debate
  • Scrutiny and validation by one’s peers
  • Advancement on the basis of merit
  • Collegial responsibility

The last two points are of course debatable. No doubt some people would add a few other defining characteristics as well: greed, envy, in-fighting, etc.

Where self-publication doesn’t measure up

But, if the above features are reasonably correct, where is the difficulty in placing self-publication firmly within this community?

Scholarly endeavour is not rewarded equally so let’s not get too starry-eyed here. Nonetheless, I guess that in one way or another my misgivings all relate to (lack of) scrutiny and validation by one’s peers and what this implies. A few points:

  • Some presses are less rigorous than others in enforcing scholarly standards but there is a general consensus among them on what the standards are. Realistically, can these standards be provided by the ‘wisdom of crowds’ instead?
  • If no common standards are applied to measure all scholarly output, can there be any coherence to the body of knowledge or confidence in its veracity?
  • Peer review has its faults but replacing it with a ranking system derived from social networking would have quality losing out to popularity as the main determinant of worth.
  • Peer review is a semi-altruistic activity; although a notional payment may be received, it is an important way for scholars to contribute to their field and thus build a ‘community of excellence’. Replacing it with social ranking would likely be divisive and encourage scholarship based more on activism than on the pursuit of knowledge.

In addition, there is the issue of value to consider. Publishers exist in part because they offer quality in return for payment (sales finance the editorial input). However, a tenet of open-source publishing (home of many self-publishers) is that information should be free. While there can be debate about the correlation between the price charged for a publication and its intrinsic scholarly value, it is undeniable that not charging for a work makes it far less likely that there will be any (impartial) editorial scrutiny of it beforehand.

As such, in my mind self-published works have a place in the scholarly world but not an important one. Certainly, they may be good for specific individual scholars but as a phenomenon they do not meet our collective needs; they do not measure up.


Making the self-publishing decision

9 September 2009

In most cases, self-publication is not simple, easy or cheap. For these reasons, in the past week or so, I have tried to explore the issues, present the options and offer you as much advice and information as possible to help you make an informed decision if this is the publication route for you.

But enough mythering on the matter. Now it’s decision time.

If it were up to me, I’d make a gut decision based on all the input I’d received. But let’s assume that you are more analytical, concerned to make an intelligent decision. If so, then it should involve answering these questions at least:

  • What are your aims and motives?
  • How will you measure if your publication is successful?
  • How suitable is your text?
  • What you can manage and afford?
  • What format do you want to self-publish in?

Understanding your aims and motives

Sorry but, if your sole reason for self-publishing is stubbornness – that you have already invested far too much time in writing your manuscript and are loath to admit that the effort has been a waste of time – then grief may be the end result. You need to have a positive reason to self-publish, one that gives you a reasonable expectation of success.

Such positive reasons could be that:

  • There is an interest in your research but only from a small audience.
  • You want to throw an intellectual grenade into your field, which is in the thrall of a small elite that even dominates what is published.
  • None of the literature for a course you are running meets your needs.
  • Professor X is retiring and a festschrift would be an ideal way to honour her achievements.
  • You love getting your hands dirty and want to learn more about how books are made.

There are many good and valid reasons for pressing on where no traditional publisher is willing to go. Just make sure that yours are sustainable.

Defining success

Your measures of success should be directly linked to your aims and motives. For instance, the course that you ran was so much easier (and popular, too) by using course material tailored to its contents, or the highlight of your professor’s retirement function was the look on her face when presented with the festschrift.

Assessing your text

Be stubborn in achieving your aims, in the pursuit of success, but please show a little flexibility and freshness in your judgement when reassessing your manuscript. Perhaps there is something useful to be gleaned from that abominable peer review report. Maybe you should ask the opinion of your colleague, even if he does wear the same shirt several times a week. Above all else, as urged in my earlier post, be ruthlessly honest with yourself.

Determining resources

Once your basic material is good, there is likely to be a clear correlation between the effort you put in and the impact your work achieves. However, only you can decide what is the right level of sophistication to aim for. In part, this determination depends on what is appropriate but equally (if not more) important is what you can manage and afford. Try to be realistic about estimating what investment of time and money it will cost to reach your target. Then double all your estimates, and for good measure double them again. Here, the ballpark costs detailed in my earlier post may be useful, likewise the discussion on doing it all yourself or employing others to do some of the work.

Deciding on format

Print or electronic or both formats? And if print, are we talking about laser printing, photocopying, single-copy digital printing or long-run lithographic printing? The electronic choices are equally difficult. Take inspiration from my post on these formats but above all else draw a straight mental line between what you aim to achieve and the best form(s) to achieve it.

Decision time

On this basis, you should be able to make a decision. If that is to go ahead with self-publication, then I am certain that your chances of success and self-satisfaction will be much higher because of the research and analysis you have put into making this decision.

And if you decide not to proceed with self-publication? No, your time and effort have not been wasted. You will have learned much about writing, about what readers and publishers want, and (not least) what is really involved in the entire publication process. This is precious knowledge (even wisdom) that will shape your future writing and generally be immensely useful for you in building a successful academic career.


DIY or working with partners

6 September 2009

The refuge of the poor and miserly is to do it yourself. There are limits, however; none of us would contemplate a DIY approach to brain surgery. Self-publishing is a lot simpler – and has less lethal consequences than brain surgery if you get it wrong – but here too some people will decide that the DIY approach is not for them.

So what hired help is available for self-published authors?

Freelancers

To some people, the publishing world may seem to be run from an office suite on Fifth Avenue (it isn’t) but the work is done elsewhere, much of it by freelancers. Hence, one approach to outsourcing (some of) your self-publishing work is to hire the appropriate skilled practitioner to do a specific job – a copyeditor to clean up the text, for instance.

The problem with this approach is that, unless you already know the person and the quality of their work or take the time to do a thorough investigation of potential candidates, you could as easily hire a substandard copyeditor, typesetter, etc. as an exceptional one. On the other hand, if you get it right, the results can be out of this world. One small problem: the cost of using such freelancers can also be out of this world.

Author-pays presses

The alternative approach is to go to a single provider. In this respect, authors are particularly well served these days; a whole new industry catering to their needs and dreams has been spawned by the internet. There are several companies that offer assistance to self-publishers, usually employing print-on-demand (POD) technology to do so. Among them are Lulu.com, mentioned in an earlier post.

It varies what such author-pays presses (or ‘POD publishers’) offer and what they specialize in. Some offer a standard package of services whereas others allow you to pick and choose services from an à la carte menu. All typically offer to print and sell your book for you, charging a flat fee for printing plus a commission on any sales that they facilitate. Quite a few companies also offer editorial and typesetting services. Their prices are not necessarily lower than those of freelancers but convenience is one of the attractions of such presses.

As with freelancers, standards vary between companies so you need to enter into such arrangements with your eyes open.

Vanity publishers

Is there a difference between such author-pays presses and the vanity presses of ill repute? Yes, but you need to watch out for the differences. Essentially, author-pays presses offer services to self-publishers in return for payment; the author stays owner of his/her work. If you want ten copies of your book, you will pay this much for the printing and shipping. If someone else orders your book, you will be paid the difference between the sale price (including shipping) and the printing cost minus a sales commission.

Contrast this with vanity presses, who usually masquerade as orthodox presses and expect the author to hand over their manuscript for ‘normal’ treatment except that it is the author who pays (indeed, pays a premium price for any work to be done). Moreover, a vanity press usually takes ownership of the author’s work in exchange for the false prospect of eventual royalties.

Doing it yourself

For many self-publishers, however, actually doing everything themselves is an essential (and existential) part of their role. There can be painful financial outlays, much work, and huge frustrations involved in designing and producing your own book. But also the project brings excitement, the work taps previously unknown wells of drive and creativity inside you, and there is much pleasure and satisfaction to be had from knowing that the final product is yours and yours alone.

As detailed in my previous post, however, there are also costs in doing it yourself – real costs in time, effort, equipment, software and training.

Many would argue that these are worth it.

Decision time

But enough digging, let there be no more comparing of apples and oranges. Now, finally, the time has come to make a decision, the subject of my next post.


Requirements and costs of self-publication

6 September 2009

Not easy, nor cheap

Due to technological developments in the last 25 years, it is far easier today for private authors to prepare, typeset, produce (in printed and/or electronic form) and promote their own work – in other words, to dispense with the services of a publisher altogether. Easier, but not easy.

Self-publishing is not something done in five minutes nor is it about saving money (though an attraction for some authors is the potential to earn more by getting a bigger cut in sales). If you are venturing down the self-publishing route, be aware that you can face a lot of work and considerable costs achieving your goal.

That said, what you face here are different trade-offs: between doing the work yourself and hiring someone else (the subject of my next post), and between producing a high-quality product and turning out something that is (and can look to be) done on the cheap. Obviously, the publication format (discussed in my previous post) also has a huge effect on effort, costs and which skills are required.

In the costs stated below, $ = U.S. dollars. These rates are approximate and based on charges I have encountered for hiring freelancers. But they may also be close to the fees charged by the author-pays presses discussed in my next post.

Editing

Whichever format you settle on, there is editorial work to be done first of all. Anything that you put effort, money and your name into demands respectful treatment. This means that the work you eventually publish – whether in printed or in electronic form – is a coherent piece of scholarship, written tautly and without typos (though in my experience completely avoiding typos is probably impossible).

Therefore, once you have finished revising the text to your satisfaction, it needs to be scrutinized, to be sweated in an editorial purgatory, so that what actually is published is to the satisfaction of your readers as well. This is vital to the success of your work.

There are two kinds of editing involved: substantive editing of your text, focusing on its structure and argumentation, and copy-editing of your finalized (maybe restructured) text, focusing on its language – e.g. finding any typos and inconsistencies – and ensuring that it complies with accepted conventions. (You may find it useful consulting a publisher’s house style; many – like that for NIAS Press – are freely available on the publisher’s website).

Doing this editing yourself requires superhuman detachment from your text; most of us lack this. As a substitute for substantive editing, revisit the readers reports commissioned by the publisher(s) who rejected your work, if you have them, and seek feedback from colleagues capable of commenting fairly and fearlessly on your work (they are often hard to find). And, as for copy-editing, try to recruit your life partner or best friend – or, better still, one of those special people (often your departmental secretary or a maiden aunt) with the uncanny gift of spotting other people’s errors at fifty paces; sadly, all too often, such geniuses only spot these errors after publication.

Doing it yourself is free, though you will be wise to reward the help of Auntie Mame with serious chocolate or other forms of sincere appreciation. A freelance editor will cost you $1,500-$5,000 depending on rigour and how much substantive editing is included in the copy-editing. (I have not heard of any freelancers only offering substantive editing.)

Layout/typesetting

Most scholars using Microsoft Word or another word processor think that this is all that is required to lay out the final pages for printing. This work is definitely something they can do themselves. Think again. The design (or layout) of your book and the typesetting of the actual pages is skilled work that only really succeeds if it is invisible.

Laying out a book using a word processor is a particularly vicious form of torture. Word, for instance, may be full of features but things like the subtle adjustment of line and letter spacing are beyond its abilities.

Laying out the book yourself might cost you nothing but you would be wise to have the following things:

  • a reasonably powerful computer with a large monitor
  • a scanner (if there are illustrations to be digitized)
  • a laser printer (printing hundreds of pages on an ink-jet printer invites bankruptcy)
  • desktop publishing software including a typesetting program like InDesign, an image processor like Photoshop, and a PDF generator
  • manuals/courses on how to use this
  • fonts that you are licensed to embed in high-resolution PDF files

In addition, you will need to:

  • ensure that all of the elements of a book are present and organized correctly (e.g. the copyright page is on page iv).
  • ensure that these include all mandatory information (e.g. an ISBN)
  • adopt a standard book size (anything else is horribly expensive)
  • determine the likely extent of your book (so as to avoid unpleasant surprises – see my later post for a detailed explanation and instructions on how to calculate book length).
  • use a layout and graphical format that is printable (e.g. nothing too close to spine or edges, any images at high resolution, any colour in CMYK format)
  • carefully consider if colour is to be used (and if so where)

Alternatively, you can hire a freelance typesetter to worry about all of these and many other issues. It is common to pay either a flat fee for the entire job or on a  per-page basis (typically $6-$10 per page but inclusion of illustrations, colour, non-Latin text and other potential hassles will undoubtedly drive the price up).

Proofing

Text corruptions can happen when a Word file is converted for typesetting, without this being picked up by the typesetter. For example, recently I converted a Word file to plain text, then brought it into a web page that I was making. Only at the last moment did I discover that all of the superscript ‘th’ letters (in usages like ‘19th century’, which Word automatically converts to superscripts) had vanished.

Here, sharp eyes are needed. Yours are free but have they already looked at the text far too often to notice all the errors and last remaining typos? A proof-reader will cost you $2-$5 per page.

Indexing

No scholarly book expecting to be taken seriously (and bought by libraries) can omit an index (though it is another matter how ambitious your index is).

Good indexes are tricky to prepare. Please feel free to consult our indexing guidelines on the NIAS Press website.

The rates quoted to me by professional indexers have varied wildly – $2-$20 per typeset page.

Cover

Many publishers won’t let their authors get anywhere near the cover design, so crucial is it regarded to a book’s commercial success. Now you are responsible for producing something that doesn’t immediately scream ‘amateur’ to every bookshop you approach; what is needed is a cover that whispers ‘pick me up’. It must also meet certain technical and legal requirements (e.g. meet printers specifications and include a bar code).

The problem is that you can get a cover designer to do a proper job for about $500. But, if your book is to overcome its self-published origins in the nasty book world out there, then your cover needs to be inspired.

Printing

This is not something that you can do yourself; you are going to have to pay someone else to print your book.

Printing used to be the big barrier to self-publishing because with lithographic printing a minimum of about 1,000 copies of a book had to be printed. This required a huge investment (and a lot of spare space to store the books). Nowadays, however, the digital printing revolution has brought numbers down to single-copy printing at acceptable prices (and of an acceptable quality); self-publication of printed books is now within the reach of most budgets.

If you use an internet-based POD printer like Lightning Source, then you will be guided through the complexities of printing but will need to rigidly conform to their specifications. Set-up charges may be $75 and then you must pay for each printing order, each page printed and shipping (with a 300-page book costing you about $7 per copy), and often an annual file storage charge of $10-$20 charged.

If printing quality is an issue (because of the importance of your illustrations, for instance) and you have the belief and budget to print a minimum of 400 copies, then you are likely to get a better deal, better quality and much more human treatment by approaching a short-run printer. But be warned. ‘Real’ printers can be funny blokes; theirs is an utterly different world than yours. Many of the things that you find crucially important, they will find incomprehensible – and vice versa.

E-Book

You can of course avoid the perils (and costs) of printed publication by going down the e-route. (This option was discussed in my previous post.) However, I would suggest that you will still need to typeset your e-book and, while you avoid dealing with printers marks, bleeds and all such arcane stuff, instead you will need to meet the requirements of e-books (introducing hyperlinks, for instance). Be aware that PDF is not the only game in town (there are over 20 competing and incompatible e-book formats) nor is a computer screen necessarily the only display medium (the Amazon Kindle and iPhone being two other major destinations for e-books).

If you would rather have a professional guide you through the e-jungle, the journey may cost you thousands and thousands of dollars.

Website

An alternative to a proper e-book is to self-publish your work on a website (or even as a blog, wiki or via another Web 2.0 channel like Twitter). Though feasible, the divergence in form of a ‘proper book’ is now so wide that increasingly you will find it hard to gain any recognition for this work.

If you can do all the work yourself and have free access to/use of your institutional website, then web publishing can be almost cost free. If you set up your own website, of course, then you will have to pay small but ongoing charges for the URL registration/maintenance and for a web hosting service. Bare-bones blogs like this one are free to set up and run.

Marketing and promotion

It is not enough to produce your book; you also need to bring it to the attention of its potential readers. Many books have been written on this subject and this blog post is already much too long. Suffice to say, you will need to draw upon all of your hustling skills to bear. By all means produce a flyer, issue a press release, buy advertising space in and send review copies to appropriate journals, and cold-call different bookshops – all the sorts of things that publishers do. But the best use of your time will be to exploit your own connections, to reach out directly to other scholars in your field – via notices to mailing lists and attendance at conferences, for instance.

None of this is easy and I seriously doubt you can afford the services of a publicist.

Sales and distribution

Traditionally, getting copies of your book into the hands of readers and getting them to pay for it has been a huge problem with self-published books. This remains so if you are only looking at the old sales channels – bookshops, library suppliers, etc. – who remain suspicious of book trade outsiders. Likewise, it is difficult to sell directly to libraries as these prefer to order and pay in bulk via a library supplier and try to avoid dealing with individual publishers.

But the internet revolution has opened up whole new possibilities to reach the individual reader, your prime target. Today, it is possible to sell your book directly via Amazon Marketplace, eBay, Abe Books, etc. or indirectly via one of the above-mentioned author-pays presses. And, while it is still not cost-efficient to accept credit card payments directly from individual customers, nowadays internet-based financial services like PayPal make this relatively easy. Amazon, PayPal and the others will charge you for their services but the commission is not a lot.

Note that all of these companies help you process any sales but the actual sending of copies sold to the customer is still something that you will have to do unless your book is being printed and shipped on demand by an author-pays press. (While the business of book trade warehouses is to hold stock and process and orders, I cannot imagine that it would ever make financial sense you to use such a warehouse or for them to take you on.)

It is even possible for you to handle all aspects of sales, not just the dispatching of orders. This would be by having a website with an inbuilt retail module (shopping cart, payment processing, etc.). However, such an advanced website would not be cheap to develop; it would also be a bit of an overkill for the sake of a single book.

Legal requirements

Be aware that as a (self-) publisher selling to a public audience, you will be obliged to comply with various commercial regulations. These vary from country to country but you should expect to:

  • register an ISBN for your book (normally, a small charge)
  • deliver gratis copies of your book to your local legal deposit office(s)
  • register for sales tax

For many countries, this list is much longer.

And there’s more

This has been a very long post to write and yet the above points are not the only ones you need to consider. Moreover, space requirements – and a crass desire to sell more copies of our book (which includes perhaps twenty times as much information as found here) – have limited how much detail is included in the information presented here.

But now, decision time is looming. There is just one more thing to ponder, just who is to do all this work: you, a freelancer or a author-pays press? This is the subject of my next post.


Self-publishing options

3 September 2009

Apples and oranges

An important decision that you’ll need to make is whether you wish to publish your work in printed or electronic format (or both). There is a popular idea that it is easy to publish research on the web, but that is far from true, as shall be seen.

Indeed, people assume that creating an e-book is a lot less hassle than manufacturing a printed book, and it’s cheaper. Maybe. Certainly, if you can do all the work yourself and have free access to/use of your institutional website, then web publishing can be almost cost free. However, the new POD printing technology available today allows tiny print runs (as low as a single copy) at acceptable prices, so physical books are now within the reach of most printing budgets.

The first thing to realize is that the two formats may seem quite different but they have much in common, not least their base scholarship. Briefly put, printed and electronic editions of a work can be a bit like apples and oranges. Both are fruit but they taste differently and require quite different methods of cultivation.

Some of the real differences between the two formats can be seen in the following case study.

An outstanding work, a production nightmare

The following story is about a published (not self-published) book and its published electronic successor. However, much that happened here is directly relevant to your situation of choosing between publication formats.

A decade ago, when NIAS published much of its output via the British publisher, Curzon Press (i.e. before the launching of NIAS Press in 2002), I worked on the publication of an outstanding scholarly work, Robert Cribb’s Historical Atlas of Indonesia. It was a big-format book with colour maps (more than 300 of them) on almost every page. The atlas took an age to produce as the maps needed to be reformatted, and typesetting 327 maps onto 266 pages (some maps spreading across double-page spreads) was tricky work. Nor did Indonesian history stand still (the long, slow fall of President Suharto was in progress) so the odd new map suddenly appeared. Not surprisingly, the printing bill for 3,000 copies was astronomical. However, the atlas was a critical and commercial success, receiving rave reviews and selling out in all its editions.

Currently, we are in the final stages of producing a follow-up work, the Digital Atlas of Indonesian History. This is delivered on DVD together with an 80-page user manual but there is a companion website, too. Each of the 483 maps comes in 5 versions depending on the purpose, and they need to be integrated into text that – if printed – would fill more than 100 pages. Users of the atlas should be able to register their copy, log on to the online edition to access premium content (so, yes, there are two parallel versions of the online atlas operating, one free, the other user-only), zoom in and out of maps, download or print them, delve into their source material, search for them in multiple ways, almost – it seems – eat their breakfast off them. The complexity of the production compared to a printed book is mind-boggling.

Note the differences. On the one hand, we have a static but stable work capable of lasting a hundred years or more if stored properly. It is irrelevant that Curzon Press was bought up in 2001 and merged into Routledge soon after. On the other hand, we have an evolving and interactive work with huge potential for development. However, its initial manifestation is on DVD – a medium with a poor life expectancy and a format likely to be superseded in the future – and its ongoing survival will be online, requiring that NIAS Press (or a successor publisher) continues to exist, pays the bills for the domain name, keeps the website alive and its underlying system software up to date, continues to respond to users queries and feedback, etc., etc. Two radically different platforms.

And yet what we are starting with is an historian who has a passion and ability to communicate his scholarship visually as well as with text, but who still crosses his t’s and dots his i’s as a professional historian. The base material is the same, its presentation radically different.

Now imagine self-publishing such a digital work. People do, but it this not an adventure to be entered into lightly.

Points to consider

More than likely you already have a vision for how you wish your work to be published and, if so, I suggest that you stick to this. If for instance your work was conceived as a printed book, it will be easiest (and the result probably better) to continue down that route.

That said, if in doubt, you will find it useful to consider these issues (expanded on in our book):

  • What format would your readers find most useful?
  • How will your work gain the greatest circulation?
  • Which format has the greatest value to you, personally?
  • What format would best meet your aims and vision for the work?
  • What is the expected ‘shelf life’ of your work, its ‘use-by date’?
  • How important is it to you that your work is freely available in libraries?
  • How technically competent are you to produce the work in either format?
  • Do you need to learn new software?
  • Do you have that time to invest, and would you enjoy the learning process?
  • How much money can you afford to invest?

Now is the time to think very hard.