tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post7418653756108800028..comments2024-03-28T02:00:11.260-05:00Comments on A Newbie's Guide to Publishing: Konrath and Eisler vs. Richard Russo and the Authors GuildJA Konrathhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08778324558755151986noreply@blogger.comBlogger63125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-90370553555400244652014-01-22T17:36:40.194-06:002014-01-22T17:36:40.194-06:00Fascinating discussion. I appreciate the candor he...Fascinating discussion. I appreciate the candor here. No one has mentioned the role of literary agents. I assume it must be going through the same convulsions. Are agents too, about to become irrelevant? They play no role in the new wave of publishing, as far as I can tell. Dave Jarretnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-67462336408233790462014-01-03T13:20:08.805-06:002014-01-03T13:20:08.805-06:00Amazing how far eBooks have come along in just fiv...Amazing how far eBooks have come along in just five years and it's scary to think where they will be in 2020. Interesting point he makes on being innovative in this business or be left behind. Thanks for posting!<br /><br />Joseph Forte<br />At the WindowAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12666624126317280333noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-89098417023955006032014-01-01T06:58:05.431-06:002014-01-01T06:58:05.431-06:00I think that the music industry compensation to wr...I think that the music industry compensation to writers of lyrics and music scores offers a good business model to emulate.<br /><br />Modifications would be required to accommodate the authors. It would require a host of local 'writers' unions' across the globe to be affiliated. Each nation would have a national writers board that would represent the nation's union as bargaining agent for the Writers Compensation Agreement with digital, broadcast, libraries, schools and legacy publishers.<br /><br />Can you see how this makes sense?<br /><br />Start with a business model that has experience and expertise (lawyers, business agents, organizers, auditors) and modify to fit the writers' marketplaces and consumers.<br /><br />It would especially be important to bring writers across the world to the global market in the language that customers require in each local market - through literary translation engines that is best manged and affordable through the international writers' union head office services.<br /><br />Just my 2 cents.<br /><br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03128032877805031635noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-15582342600114614812013-12-30T10:14:58.760-06:002013-12-30T10:14:58.760-06:00Hey, Joe, as far as 6c is concerned, "someone...Hey, Joe, as far as 6c is concerned, "someone is going to figure out how to introduce ebooks to new readers and will make a fortune in the process."<br />Book Bub has already done that, more successfully than anyone else. Actually they seem to have a monopoly and they wield that monopoly like a dictator. <br />I'm not knocking them. I've used their services with great success. I've tried some of their lesser competitors and they pale by comparison. I'm just looking forward to the next innovator. Mark Edward Hallhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09348437062900925019noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-27886659260536185452013-12-23T04:10:18.566-06:002013-12-23T04:10:18.566-06:00Since 1996 I worked hard to get published and was ...Since 1996 I worked hard to get published and was represented by a respected NY agent for awhile. <br /><br />While I received lots of interest from editors, we could never actually close a sale. Agent and I went our separate ways. After years in the trenches, I finally had to say uncle. I tossed my rejected, no longer submittable backlist on the shelf and gave up on writing.<br /><br />Fast forward to 2012. A friend suggested I try again, so I looked at Amazon and KDP. In November of that year, I self-published the first novel of my backlist for .99, and kept on going. <br /><br />Now a year later, am I doing as well as Joe and some others? Not yet. Give me time, boys! I'm right behind ya! lol! <br /><br />I've published 11 ebooks, cracked the number #2 best seller list for my genre several times (still working on #1 though), and...oh yeah...I pay bills with ebooks that are $2.99 and under (well, my latest release is priced at *gasp* $3.99, but it is longer than the others.)<br /><br />Is it all coming up roses? No, some months get pretty tight and it's juggle the finances like chainsaws time, but ya know - life happens! It's not like a legacy publisher would have my back. I'd be working just as hard at promotion and marketing as I am now and probably panicking more because I had already spent the advance that would have to be paid back.<br /><br />I did have an issue with piracy. Why my $0.99 - $2.99 ebooks were being pirated, I have no clue. But they were and had a daunting distribution when I discovered it. But my mild-mannered Clark Kent alter-ego is an accountant. I crunched the numbers and came up with some analytics that I think you guys would find intriguing - numbers don't lie and they make really pretty bar graphs (but that's a discussion for a different time). <br /><br />The interesting sidebar here is when I discovered the piracy it was around the time where the "Authors Guild" started hooting and hollering that piracy does hurt. So, I reached out to them - hey, I'm an author, please help. Got the same canned response of nothing you can do, don't stress over it, think of it as free advertisement. <br /><br />Why was I NOT surprised at the double standard?<br /><br />It's the bandwagon they think they can jump on and there will be people joining them. Those who don't jump can be scared into a hail mary leap.<br /><br />I survived, I'm still fighting the good fight, and just pulled off something that would make legacy publishers cringe. One of the top authors in my genre has been on Amazon longer, has more books, and of course a huge readership - but suddenly our works were going head to head. Now, legacy publishers would see that as competition. She's the enemy! Gotta beat 'em in the ratings! It's a numbers game!<br /><br />Did we square off for a duel? No we teamed up and are working together. We cross-promote our works to our readership, we chat and compare notes about sales and promotions, we work together on release parties, etc. <br /><br />I'm happy to report, sales are taking a nice jump for both of us. <br /><br />Like I said, I'm not close to the sales levels of Joe and other authors here. But check your rearview mirrors because that's me right behind ya. ;)<br /><br />Now if the Authors Guild and legacy pubs would pull their heads out for air long enough to realize that the wailing and gnashing of teeth isn't going to change the economy or the market, maybe they could figure out a viable plan.<br /><br />Okay...who am I kidding? lol! While they're screaming about what they cannot change, I'm going to go work on what I can change - writing more books and gaining more readers. This year was good for me in the publishing biz and next year will be even better!<br /><br />Thanks guys - love the posts and the great information. Peace!<br /><br />Cheers,<br />Kathryn LochAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08182611786934034268noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-10320093526656461112013-12-22T05:55:33.419-06:002013-12-22T05:55:33.419-06:00Hi Sven/Coolkayaker1, why would you say that “anyo...Hi Sven/Coolkayaker1, why would you say that “anyone” can partake in the lottery of self-publishing, while only those “selected” can partake in the legacy lottery? After all, anyone can submit a manuscript to a legacy house, and everyone who has ever submitted a manuscript to a legacy house has indeed played that lottery. If the manuscript was rejected, that player lost. The way you’re describing it screens out a massive percentage of losers, and thereby makes the legacy system’s odds seem much better than they really are.<br /><br />But even if we ignore all the initially rejected manuscripts and focus only on those that have been “selected,” the odds of even modest commercial success in the legacy system are still statically tiny. Alan Spade is right when he says the legacy world trumpets the big winners like siren songs to lure new players. If the odds of success in the legacy system really were remotely attractive, the legacy houses would publish data. Instead, they do all they can to conceal it.<br /><br />Not that there’s anything wrong with a “longer odds, larger potential payout” system. It’s just important for writers to understand that this is what the legacy system represents relative to self-publishing. And again, it’s important to remember that the financial element is only one aspect. There’s still time to market, control over the business, flexibility, and similar such items that will matter to different degrees and in different ways to different writers. Discussing the two systems purely in terms of the financial odds is like discussing the merits of two restaurants solely in terms of their entrees, while ignoring appetizers, wine selection, service, ambience, location, etc. Discussing only the one can be misleading.<br /><br />As for the “most self-published books are bad, most trad published books are good” meme, I think this would be irrelevant and a distraction even if it could somehow be objectively proven true. What matters to most writers is finding an audience. Whether various critics or anyone else might subjectively deem a book “good” is subordinate to the objective fact of sales. And it’s simply a fact that thousands of authors are making a living self-publishing their books. Some people will find some of those books good, some will find some of them bad (sounds a lot like publishing in general, no?), but the books are finding large audiences and making their authors money. Isn’t that what matters?<br /><br />A last thought: you describe publishing decisions as involving a kind of fork in the road — you go left or you go right, and you’ll never know where the other route would have taken you. True as far as it goes, I think, but as with your “anyone can play vs only a few are selected” argument, perhaps you’re looking at things too narrowly. Some writers prefer one system to the other. Some like to publish different ways with different books. Some writers start in one system and migrate to the other. It’s only either/or if you look at it from an inch away. Pull back a little, widen the aperture, and what you’ll see is increasing numbers of authors moving in various directions — all because of choices that weren’t available to them before. This is a wonderful thing.<br />Barry Eislerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17785333622697500192noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-31671761811391502512013-12-21T20:37:05.376-06:002013-12-21T20:37:05.376-06:00"Ebooks are the best thing to happen to reade..."Ebooks are the best thing to happen to readers since the Gutenberg Press"<br /><br />What a great line. And it makes me wonder if all the monks who spent years slaving away at making copies had panic attacks when the press came along.Eric Daughertynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-37263575962442318192013-12-21T12:48:46.103-06:002013-12-21T12:48:46.103-06:00@Coolkayaker1,
>>Traditional publishing, wi...@Coolkayaker1,<br /><br />>>Traditional publishing, with the gatekeepers that Joe and so many others despise, is a lottery played only by those selected. And those selected have the opportunity to ride it to the moon (or into hell, depending on how the lottery plays for them). The game can only be played in two ways by a select few, not by all. Most have only one option.<<<br /><br />You sound very much like someone who had an "in" into the publishing industry. Let me guess: best friend? sister-in-law? Professor? Father? Next door neighbor? Very nice for you that you had an inside track. Alas, the vast majority of people don't have that kind of luxury.<br /><br />>>Most self-pubbed authors--and the "good" writers among even the readers of this blog are bound to agree--are LOUSY writers. Yes, most (again, not naming names, not even saying it's anyone here). Most traditional pubbed authors are GOOD writers. May not be fantastic, may not have universally liked story lines or themes, but they have wonderful editing and sound "chops" for the craft (as even Joe has mentioned here in the past).<<<br /><br />And I can't read Brad Thor without vomiting. Awful. And he sells what, a million books a year? Most trad pub writers are little more than hacks with good publicity machines. The awful self-pubbers are the ones who don't have readers. At the end of the day, the reader decides. The fact that you don't seem to have faith in them is interesting.<br /><br />>>So, as opposed to this blog, which is not nearly as middle of the road as you are, Barry--it's a bash trad pub, hope everyone self-pubs, drunken sleepover, for the most part--I would think that the numbers, even here in 2013-2014, support a new author with a fantastic book who has edited the shit out of it and thinks it will sell, would opt for the selective, invitation only, potentially Brinks truck to one's driveway, traditional game first. Not last.<<<br /><br />Yes. Let me send my book and wait 5 years for it to get published -- IF I'm lucky enough to get published. Sorry, buddy. I started my business from the ground up 10 years ago with nothing but a notion. I don't need your permission to do something I enjoy and maybe make a few bucks from. I also think lottos are for suckers. <br /><br />>>That said, many will end up in self-pub land, and only a few will end up in Karen Russell-land (Swamplandia! lol). The land of international blockbusters and Hollywood red carpets.<<<br /><br />LOL. Hollywood red carpets. Man, you really sound like someone desperate for fame as a form of validation. Me, I just want to write a good story that readers will enjoy. I don't need Brad Pitt's approval. But you, on the other hand, seems desperate for it. Good luck when they decide you're not worth it anymore. I hear Hollywood is a fickle mistress. One day's hero, the next day's bum.<br /><br />>>As with most decisions in our lives --picking one girl to marry over the other, dumping one job for the other, etc.--we will never know what the other route would have brought us. There is no wrong decision because, once we move down a path, the other path will be a lifelong mystery. And that is what makes life so wonderful.<<<br /><br />What makes life wonderful is that the Internet and places like Amazon now allow me a release for my creative juices. Maybe I'll make a few bucks, maybe I won't. The readers will decide. But hey, I'll have a blast writing it. That's not going to stop because you, Mister Coolkayaker1, says I need the express written permission of your NY buddies before I can take a shot at the brass ring.<br /><br />The last time a bunch of elitist jackasses drinking tea in castles tried dictate our lives, we started a war. McVickersnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-87906299580797953352013-12-21T12:21:20.816-06:002013-12-21T12:21:20.816-06:00Hi, Barry. I appreciate your reply. I read it tw...Hi, Barry. I appreciate your reply. I read it twice (maybe even three times), to understand not only the gist, but also the nuances. Thank you.<br /><br />While I disagree with some of it (e.g. "just want them to cease their propagandistic, self-serving twaddle and be more clear and accurate about what they're really trying to preserve, and why"; this could be said, too, of Mr. Konrath's unilateral slant toward self-publishing), you are dead on when you say that I agree your lottery analogy, for both self-pubbing and traditional publishing houses. <br /><br />It is a fact, though, that one of the two lotteries--the self-pubbing lottery--anyone can partake in. Anyone can load their masterpiece into .epub and toss it on Amazon. That is, I'm sure you agree, a fact.<br /><br />Traditional publishing, with the gatekeepers that Joe and so many others despise, is a lottery played only by those selected. And those selected have the opportunity to ride it to the moon (or into hell, depending on how the lottery plays for them). The game can only be played in two ways by a select few, not by all. Most have only one option.<br /><br />Most self-pubbed authors--and the "good" writers among even the readers of this blog are bound to agree--are LOUSY writers. Yes, most (again, not naming names, not even saying it's anyone here). <br /><br />Most traditional pubbed authors are GOOD writers. May not be fantastic, may not have universally liked story lines or themes, but they have wonderful editing and sound "chops" for the craft (as even Joe has mentioned here in the past). <br /><br />So, as opposed to this blog, which is not nearly as middle of the road as you are, Barry--it's a bash trad pub, hope everyone self-pubs, drunken sleepover, for the most part--I would think that the numbers, even here in 2013-2014, support a new author with a fantastic book who has edited the shit out of it and thinks it will sell, would opt for the selective, invitation only, potentially Brinks truck to one's driveway, traditional game first. Not last. <br /><br />That said, many will end up in self-pub land, and only a few will end up in Karen Russell-land (Swamplandia! lol). The land of international blockbusters and Hollywood red carpets.<br /><br />I want to say, as I do not have my ostrich head in the sand completely, that I know some of your own personal backstory, Barry. I know (from this blog in the past) that you turned down the half a million buck traditional deal for keeping your rights and selling independently. Frankly, you faced the toughest decision of all. You are a skilled writer, you have the mainstream "big lottery" chops (and pub bed there in the past, I recall), and yet took the other road, the road MORE traveled (sorry, Mr. Frost) these days. It must have been insomnia producing since you, literally (and unlike most), were on the balance beam and had both lotteries wanting to give you a ticket. <br /><br />As with most decisions in our lives --picking one girl to marry over the other, dumping one job for the other, etc.--we will never know what the other route would have brought us. There is no wrong decision because, once we move down a path, the other path will be a lifelong mystery. And that is what makes life so wonderful.<br /><br />I appreciate your reply, and I appreciate your middle of the road, look at both ends, perspective on publishing 2013. You know it better than anyone else on here, in my (myopic) read of this blog, based on your own experiences and choices. <br /><br />Sven in Chicago. Coolkayaker1https://www.blogger.com/profile/16480679419271233314noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-89211340662482743152013-12-21T11:10:05.880-06:002013-12-21T11:10:05.880-06:00Jesus...I left the Guild in like 1980 when I get s...Jesus...I left the Guild in like 1980 when I get sick to death of these highly successful authors complaining about their film deals and my getting nothing in the way of help on how to improve my chances with publication or getting an agent or getting the attention of an editor - ZERO in the way of practical help and entire waste of money and paper when it comes to their newsletter. I am surprised they are still in business at all. They have never actually helped authors get better relations with publishers, never had ANY influence in getting better reporting out of publishers for authors, Zip, nada, nothing. I have not in these many moons missed them.<br /><br />Robert W. Walker<br />www.robertwalkerbooks.com<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-54148908009875133972013-12-20T15:13:36.959-06:002013-12-20T15:13:36.959-06:00Bestsellers legacy published are like the music pl...Bestsellers legacy published are like the music played by the faery's tale flute player. For a long time, they have been used to enthrall authors to the places big publishers wanted them to fall into. <br /><br />We have to remember even bestsellers can be screwed by their publisher. They are not immune, if they don't care. Tell Stephen King about his first publisher... <br /><br />So, yes, there are new models emerging. But remember these new models are now possible because they have changed the balance of power. Authors can now say "no". For one "yes" Hugh Howey has said to Simon & Schuster, how many time he (or his agent) have said "no" in the negotiations with S&S? Alan Spadehttp://emmanuelguillot.over-blog.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-57535935463405429502013-12-20T12:53:23.036-06:002013-12-20T12:53:23.036-06:00One can always fall back on self-publishing.
Many...<i>One can always fall back on self-publishing.</i><br /><br />Many of us who have self-published some or all of our books don't feel as though we're falling back. We're moving forward in a positive, progressive way, taking advantage of the choices that digital publishing has given us.<br /><br />Publishing has always been a tough business, and it always will be, but authors who are willing to adapt to the ever-changing landscape have a better chance at surviving than those who stand rigidly in their ways, IMO.<br /><br />Indie, traditional, there are outliers on both sides. But if you take the mega-sellers out of the equation, what you're left with is the 99% of us who are just trying to put food on the table. Of course we would all like to have a big hit, but we're going to keep clawing and scratching regardless. Self-publishing is not necessarily falling back. It's a choice. The more avenues to get our work out there, the better.Jude Hardinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09994813046526310594noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-59121456667389046602013-12-20T11:48:56.765-06:002013-12-20T11:48:56.765-06:00Frank, that's a great point and you're rig...Frank, that's a great point and you're right, I should have thought to say it myself. So many of these conversations wind up taking an either/or turn -- when in fact one of the best things about the new choices available to writers is that we can pursue them in whatever order, and whatever combination, we think is best. I think Coolayaker would agree, given that she/he offered EL James as an example. And there are so many othersBarry Eislerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17785333622697500192noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-37108608139832801452013-12-20T01:55:09.133-06:002013-12-20T01:55:09.133-06:00Hi Barry,
> Yes, it's true that if your pr...Hi Barry,<br /><br />> Yes, it's true that if your primary goal is James Patterson-levels of financial success, the right lottery to play is the legacy system<br /><br />I'm sure ;) you meant to add that even if maximum payout is your goal, the best route to being traditionally published may still be to self publish first.<br /><br />FrankAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08643429893700999792noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-80688146624147144142013-12-19T17:34:07.600-06:002013-12-19T17:34:07.600-06:00Hi Coolayaker, I'll let Bob address the points...Hi Coolayaker, I'll let Bob address the points about indentured servants, as those were his words. But regarding "All this while Joe and pals continue to make their argument," may I ask, what argument are you referring to?<br /><br />My argument is that writers now have choices we've never had before, that this is a positive development, and that writers should be free to exercise whatever choices make sense for them individually (hopefully doing so in as informed a way as reasonably possible). There's no decision that's right for everyone; there's no one-size-fits-all. Is there something in there you disagree with?<br /><br />As I've said, I think the "Authors Guild" is not dedicated to serving authors but rather to propping up a system that has worked for some authors and that hasn't worked for many others. Beyond this, as I've also said, I don't care how Russo, Turow, or anyone else wants to publish their books. I just want them to cease their propagandistic, self-serving twaddle and be more clear and accurate about what they're really trying to preserve, and why.<br /><br />One can't reasonably argue that Amazon, which has done so much to empower authors and which sells more books than anyone, is an enemy of authors or is destroying book selling. These are canards, whether unconscious or deliberate, and when Russo, Turow et al use their positions to advance these pernicious positions, I think it's useful to push back. That's because I want authors to make informed choices. What we can infer about Russo and Turow's own dedication to authors from their failure to rebut is, I think, fairly obvious.<br /><br />As for the biggest bestsellers all being part of the legacy world, I don't think anyone is arguing otherwise. Indeed, that the biggest names of all are legacy-published is, I think, just a fact -- one of many writers should take into account when deciding how they want to publish their books in this new world of choice.<br /><br />I've often argued that both legacy and self-publishing are lotteries, but with different rules, different odds, different payouts, and different available means of affecting the chances of success. It sounds like you might agree with that characterization -- but if so, you've left out some critical information. Yes, it's true that if your primary goal is James Patterson-levels of financial success, the right lottery to play is the legacy system. But the potential payout is only part of the story. The odds of winning are also something a smart player will want to consider. And, of course, the financial odds and potential payouts are only just part of what most writers will want to consider when choosing how to publish. Control over business decisions, time to market, flexibility... these will all matter a lot one way or another to most writers, too.<br /><br />So I'm not sure what venom you're referring to. Certainly I regularly ridicule Russo and particularly Turow because they say such ridiculous things, but do you really find that venomous -- "full of malice or spite"? If so, I'll respectfully disagree.Barry Eislerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17785333622697500192noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-147010874388194102013-12-19T14:38:11.892-06:002013-12-19T14:38:11.892-06:00PS Your favorite bookseller, Amazon, named Donna ...PS Your favorite bookseller, Amazon, named Donna Tartt's The Goldfinch, which is a superbly written book, as the novel of the year! You may know this. It's an international bestseller. Sales figures still coming in, as it was only released in October, but between her international book signing tour, Charlie Rose interviews, etc., but let's just say, sales are brisk (thank you, Amazon), and the movie rights for a few mill more are just around the corner.<br /><br />What is she selling? A novel that took her a decade to write. It is eloquent, meaningful, will be read still in fifty years, and the prose has been likened to FS Fitzgerald. <br /><br />When comparing the self-pubbed, book every three months club to Donna Tartt's iconic library (of three novels, total), it's apples to zebras. <br /><br />Point is: don't disparage the zebras--they eat apples. <br /><br />There's room in the universe for zebras and apples. I wish only the best of luck and fortune to those that wish to be zebras. It's hard to be a zebra...but it feels good to be one. Coolkayaker1https://www.blogger.com/profile/16480679419271233314noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-81543255546411802902013-12-19T14:20:48.756-06:002013-12-19T14:20:48.756-06:00"They are little more than well paid indentur..."They are little more than well paid indentured servants to NY Publishing". Indeed, they are. As are Karen Russell, Suzanne Collins, Kathryn Stockett, EL James (once she decided to truly sell some books--up to 95 million bucks earned so far), Gillian Flynn, to name just a few of the recent writers (past 24 months) to make a gazillion dollars from their novels. And that's just a few of the women--I left out the guys, which is most of the superstar writers! Indentured servitude, take me away!<br /><br />So, in 2013, the mega-selling self-published authors (like Joe) make a million bucks, and the mega-selling traditional authors make a hundred million (like Stockett, James, and the rest). <br /><br />All this while Joe and pals continue to make their argument based on their lofty percentages compared to traditional publishing. Who cares--it's all about the bottom line total. <br /><br />Why such venom, month after month, year after year. Traditional publishing didn't see your books sell, Joe. Exceptional authors, even today, are selling books and movie rights and becoming filthy, slobbering, don't just buy the beer but buy the entire brewery, rich in a few months. <br /><br />If one has that talent, why lament that they try to see if the gatekeepers in NY publishing and Hollywood will wheel the Brinks truck up to their front door. It's worth a shot. <br /><br />One can always fall back on self-publishing. Coolkayaker1https://www.blogger.com/profile/16480679419271233314noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-31009833336489767182013-12-18T23:48:18.663-06:002013-12-18T23:48:18.663-06:00I have to agree.
Libraries rock.
I have thirty b...I have to agree.<br /><br />Libraries <i>rock</i>.<br /><br />I have thirty books that I would distribute to them for free, if only there was a mechanism that allowed them to find and take them.<br /><br />When that happens, I'll be near the front of the line too, if I can be!<br /><br />I mean, I was a poor child that read hundreds of books, nearly a thousand or more, before I ever had enough to buy even a single paperback! My love of reading didn't come from a book store at all.<br /><br />It's good to remember our roots, at times, isn't it?<br /><br /><br /><br />P.S. Powerhttp://pspowerbooks.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-18063054514631206752013-12-18T22:50:43.739-06:002013-12-18T22:50:43.739-06:00Just as a side comment about the railing against l...Just as a side comment about the railing against librarians and libraries ... one of my biggest fans only checks out my books from the library. She posts on Facebook every time she finishes one, telling all of her friends what a great book it was. You can't buy that kind of publicity. <br /><br />Whatever library deal you might be working on, count me in :)Sarah Woodburyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04428869371751939930noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-22898068729697881312013-12-16T19:14:36.999-06:002013-12-16T19:14:36.999-06:00If you just glanced over the many, many links in t...If you just glanced over the many, many links in this (part of that whole facts and info behind your argument thingy) I recommend them. Especially the last one which is a Techdirt critique on the AG shutting down commentary on their blog earlier this year.<br /><br />Along with any commentary, rebuttal, dialogue or dissenting opinion. Probably the most damaging thing Turow (or his overly protective minions) have done to the AG's credibility.<br /><br />Hmm. That, along with all his previous spats which very clearly illustrated whose camp the AG is firmly aligned with, may have something to do with the organization's apparent membership woes. Just a thought.David L. Shutterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08357694121376734716noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-5352769152414632242013-12-16T03:08:36.871-06:002013-12-16T03:08:36.871-06:00This blog should be given some kind of AWARD - Alw...This blog should be given some kind of AWARD - Always brilliant! And ALWAYS needed by so many of us.Gretta Curran Brownehttp://www.grettacurranbrowne.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-33131287535116084502013-12-15T17:10:18.999-06:002013-12-15T17:10:18.999-06:00Who was it said life was too short for Finnegans W...Who was it said life was too short for Finnegans Wake! ?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-35561816371063057502013-12-15T10:21:47.279-06:002013-12-15T10:21:47.279-06:00I'm sorry, I couldn't read Richard Russo&#...I'm sorry, I couldn't read Richard Russo's letter because I decided to emulate the Author's Guild and engage in a process of self-renewal. This process involves, mostly, a regimen of calonics, enemas, and mass-quantity vomiting.<br /><br />Frank Marcopoloshttp://frankmarcopolos.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-34827048355380584862013-12-15T03:04:21.390-06:002013-12-15T03:04:21.390-06:00Whoops, I mean they can NOT see past the past.Whoops, I mean they can NOT see past the past.Richard Stookerhttp://www.richardstooker.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11291165.post-14485228688845617962013-12-15T03:03:05.746-06:002013-12-15T03:03:05.746-06:00If Turow and Russo were to turn their guns around ...If Turow and Russo were to turn their guns around and point them at traditional publishers' noncompete clauses, low ebook royalties, semi-annual payments, rights grabs, etc, they would have some credibility for saying they're "renewing" AG. <br /><br />And could make a call to traditionally published authors to rally round their flag for the good fight.<br /><br />But by identifying Amazon, piracy, and even librarians as the boogeymen, they demonstrate they can see past the past.Richard Stookerhttp://www.richardstooker.comnoreply@blogger.com