Tuesday, October 4
My stack of finished, but unsold manuscripts remind me a bit of theses leaves--dead and pretty much useless at this point.
Because I have focused on Harlequin lines for so long with their stringent word counts, I don't have a whole lot of other options for the stories they didn't want.
I can self pub them.
I know, I know. Only losers self-pub. Those who aren't good enough.
In a word, baloney.
The romance market is glutted. I personally have a dozen CPs, anyone of whom is good enough to be published by the Big Six, and a couple of them are.
But a whole bunch of those very talented CPs aren't published. And they should be.
Published doesn't automatically mean good anymore. Published doesn't mean diddly. You can pick up a book from a small e-pub that's just awful and you can pick up a book from one of the big houses that's horrible, too. Of course the opposite is true, too.
Self-pubbing gives those manuscripts, which are good, but unsold, a place.
I've always been dead-set against self-publishing. I've always been dead-set against e-pubbling. Not that their the same, they aren't.
But I'm coming around.
For that stack of manuscripts that sit under my bed, with no future but the burn pit, maybe self-publishing them is the way to go. If only one person not related to me or a crit partner would read them, that would feel good.
I wouldn't feel like a loser if that were to happen. It doesn't mean I'm less of a writer, or not good enough. It means that I am willing to take a risk that Harlequin wouldn't.
My friend, Trish McCallan, is being brutally honest about the process. Check out her numbers, stats and all other things of interest to self-pubishing here... http://stumblingthroughself-publishing.blogspot.com/
Do you feel that self-publishing is a mistake? Only for the people who can't write? Or do you feel it's a viable option for your unsold work?