Not that I’m anywhere near being ready to have to make this decision, but I’ve often debated between querying my writing or just self-publishing it. Part of it is just the nerves that come with putting something very dear to you out where people can judge it. Part of it is listening to agents, editors, publishers, and writers who’ve already faced and made the decision. Part of it is listening to, “The sky is falling,” rhetoric from people both inside and outside the publishing industry.
Self-publishing has made small waves, with authors occasionally winning traditional contracts for successful self-publishing efforts. e-Books are making larger waves, in part because both traditional and self-publishers can create e-Books. It’s sort of fascinating to watch things play out.
But it does have me wondering: Who really should have the say on what’s going to be worth reading? We’ve always assumed it’s the publishing houses, because they’re supposedly trained or experienced enough to serve as the “best choice”. And agents, editors, and writers often share their thoughts on the published books they’ve been reading, so it’s safe to assume they’re probably in the larger group of us who read.
But they’re a section of it, and publishing houses have a history of passing on manuscripts that have later turned out to be The Next Big Deal. It’s a hazard of calculated risk-taking, I guess. It’s more that they’re making the decision of what they’d be willing to take on the production cost for. Self-publishers make the decision that they’re willing to take on the production cost for their own manuscripts. To me, that’s the real difference between the two.
But when it comes down to what’s going to be read, it seems like it’s the readers themselves who ultimately make that choice. Regardless of the publishing source. Regardless of the format. Readers will read what they want to read how they want to read it.
So, who really should be deciding what’s publishable?
