Donna already stated her thoughts on Diane Pershing’s original June article, and it sums up a lot of my thoughts. But today I read Ms. Pershing’s response to Deidre Knight’s Call for Change. And that’s when I pretty much came to the conclusion that Diane Pershing and I have something in common after all.
- Main Entry: an·tip·a·thy
- Etymology:
- Latin antipathia, from Greek antipatheia, from antipath?s of opposite feelings, from anti- + pathos experience — more at pathos
- obsolete : opposition in feeling
- settled aversion or dislike : distaste <his well-known antipathy to taxes>
- an object of aversion
(Emphasis mine.)
Yes. Distaste. That is what seems to seethe under the surface of every single word she writes about epublishing. Not hatred, not jealousy… distaste. During my brief tenure in the RWA, every single copy of the RWR that contained one of her passive aggressive missives made me furious. Because above everything else in professional interactions, I value honesty and logic. I have seen very little of either.
Now I am hardly a Rah Rah All Epublishing is Teh Win sort of person. The epublishing model is ripe for and rife with abuse. Some of it malicious and some of it well-meaning, but the end result is still the same: people without sound business sense and with no real publishing experience can set up their own publishing company from their living room and people will come. They’re selling dreams, which are a lot more in demand than bridges, and people gobble them up en masse.
In the end, only the author can decide if the dream of being published is sufficient reward to offset the fact that their royalties never break 2 digits. (However, I do not share Diane Pershing’s apparent distaste for hobbyists–as long as those hobbyists know up front that they’re never going to make a living, which might be something that requires that phantom education the RWA touts as one of their main goals.)
I think it’s clear that some epublishers and small presses with a digital focus are solid businesses that offer the possibility of earning potential. I know it’s true because I’m a relative newbie (first published short story in June of 2008, first category novel with Samhain in October of 2008) and I’ve seen 3 books from 2 publishers earn that (arbitrary?) benchmark of $1000. The first one took 6 months, the second took 2 months, the third took 1 month. Donna & I are not some overnight hit or bestselling behemoths who have been around forever, but rather two people who started small and saw the return on effort increase over the course of a year. We’re not outliers or an anomaly, and I think that makes our experience valid and relevant.
Of all the things that made me roll my eyes about the slightly defensive response this morning (aside from the gall it takes to claim you’re supporting all of your membership in the midst of an epic explanation of why it’s not your job to support the minority) was this gem of a passive aggressive parenthetical insertion:
(Emphasis, once again, mine.)
Well, Ms. Pershing, perhaps you should not base your illogical assumptions on the fact that members you’ve spent the last year smacking with a verbal stick repeatedly in an attempt to drive away aren’t jumping through the hoops required to join the Club For Super Special People. If this is the sort of logic driving decisions in regards to epublishing, it’s no wonder the rules are riddled with contradictions, loopholes and absurdities like the fact that an author can be Published, Unpublished or Other. (Really? Published can’t just be a yes or no status?)
Why am I not a member of PAN even though I’ve already stated that Donna & I have had three qualifying books in the last six months? Well, first off I let my membership lapse, partly to stop the damn RWR from showing up with its infuriating articles. But if I’d decided to stay, I still wouldn’t be a member of PAN because the PAN rules state that authors can only qualify off the profit of a book if one of the people taking a cut from that profit is an agent. Donna and I fall under the anthology rule and therefore we have to make $1000 each on any book we want to use to qualify. (Edited to note: we probably will make $2k on some of our books in time, too, but I’m too annoyed by that additional hurdle to join now.)
I wonder what they would have told us if we’d earned that $1000 in an advance? Does a publisher have to give us a $2000 advance to meet their minimum standards to be a qualifying pub? Does the fact that we get 50% royalties but can do twice as much work and therefore make pretty much the same amount not factor into this? (Short answer: no.)
I’ll be perfectly blunt: I think the RWA as an organization has the right to do any damn thing they want. They’re not the government. They’re not oppressing me. However, the fact that they are engaged in so much backtracking and double-talk means that they’ve turned their rules and standards into a mess of contradictions and shoddy logic, and it’s not benefiting any of their members.
If the RWA wanted to wear their antipathy openly and back it with clear, consistent rules, I might rejoin, even of those rules failed to benefit me as an epublished author. My Special Snowflake Author Ego heals. My logic-demanding brain, however, has had enough of watching the rules shift constantly as the RWA (from all appearances) attempts to exclude an entire path to publication without actually admitting they’re doing it.
And having written 1001 words on the subject, I have to end with this:
It’s not you, RWA. It’s me. I like you as a friend. You’re like a sister to me. Let’s have coffee next month, totally. Here’s my number…no, really, phone numbers only have six digits these days!
About Bree
Very articulate Bree, and I have to agree with your Very Important Point:
Quote:Well, Ms. Pershing, perhaps you should not base your illogical assumptions on the fact that members you’ve spent the last year smacking with a verbal stick repeatedly in an attempt to drive away aren’t jumping through the hoops required to join the Club For Super Special People.:End quote
I’m a totally newbie author. When my first month ebook sales made me eligible to join PAN, I looked into the RWA . Surprised by the controversy I discovered, I still asked around for reasons to join. The only feasible suggestion I heard, considering the attitude of the leadership, is if I’m a member I can help to change the system from within.
While I agree working from within is best way to make an impact, at this time I feel like my time is better spent writing another story, than trying to be the new kid on the block that no one wants to play with.
Viv
Bree,
I totally agree with you. I have been a member of RWA since 2002. I have been a member through all the bricks life has thrown at me. I made the decision to submit to sell to an epub before I even considered print pubs.
My reasoning was that even with the help RWA had given me I was still to green about the ears. Through epublishing I would learn and grow. And I have. I have grown and learned that NY advance paying publishers are not the only way to make my dreams come true.
As far as to RWA’s treatment of it’s epubbed members. All I can say is that when my membership expires in October of this year, they will have one less to kick around.
Leila Brown
@Viv While I agree working from within is best way to make an impact, at this time I feel like my time is better spent writing another story, than trying to be the new kid on the block that no one wants to play with.
Honestly, that’s pretty much how I feel. There are days when I want to jump on the Change Boat and fight, but seriously. I can be alienated and condescended to without paying for the privilege.
Antipathy is a good word–and a perfect description.
“only the author can decide if the dream of being published is sufficient reward to offset the fact that their royalties never break 2 digits. ”
I’ll be the first to admit that I could probably make more money working a 40-hour job in an office somewhere, but my publisher and my book, Ransom, earned enough to qualify for RWA’s published status in the first year or so after my book was published.
That was before RWA changed the rules to exclude POD. And I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the mass-production rule was put into effect immediately after some E-book publishers of GAY romance (mine among them) qualified for Professional status.
My being e-published led to a contract with Running Press for a mass-produced romance novel. No agent or RWA involved. I’m really curious to see how RWA will contort the rules to exclude LGBT romance without appearing to be discriminating.
RWA’s a dinosaur, and from observing the politics from the outside, it’s having an internal tug-of-war among its members. But since I have never yet seen any hint that a writer earned a bigger advance, better terms, or anything substantial from RWA membership, the whole organization looks more and more like a kaffeeklatsch than a business organization. The exclusion of epublishing–yes, it’s ripe for abuse–but let’s not forget that about half of ALL new businesses fail within the first year or two, for the same reason e-pubs go under–is ignoring reality in favor of acting on what the RWA old guard wants to believe.
As our recent economic troubles vividly demonstrate, ‘faith-based’ business decisions lead to disaster. E-publishing isn’t going to go away if RWA closes its eyes and hides under the blanket. And POD publishers may well find themselves better able to ride out the current financial storms, since they have no need to maintain inventory or finance massive production runs.
Interesting times….
I think the RWA needs to wake up and realize that more and more people are turning to ebooks.
I am not a writer but am an avid reader. I love anything that is slightest bit paranormal and am pleased at the amount of books available today but often I order ebooks from Ellora’s Cave, Samhain or other ebook publishers. I can get a couple of books for what you normally spend on mass market paprbacks. I have an ereader that I love so it’s very convenient for me.
While I still love the feel of a book in my hand (especially relaxing in the tub or around the pool) my ereader is so much easier to take on vacation because I am not loaded down with books.
Authors are so awesome when they rant. Very well said!
@Lee
I’ll be the first to admit that I could probably make more money working a 40-hour job in an office somewhere, but my publisher and my book, Ransom, earned enough to qualify for RWA’s published status in the first year or so after my book was published.
Just to be clear, I in no way meant to imply that everyone makes less than $100 on their books. Obviously I don’t find that to be the case. But I have books that made less than $100 over the course of 3 or 4 months and I, personally, find that to be an unacceptable return on effort most of the time. (Not always, though–in one case I wrote a story knowing I might not see more than $25 but I did it for a specific reason, knowing it up front, and enjoyed writing it enough to not care.) However, I recognize that other people may not share my focus on money, and I don’t think that makes them any less valid. To each their own.
I don’t think epublishing does itself many favors when epublished authors refuse to admit the downsides of the business. Not in the eyes of people trying to discredit it, and not for themselves. If there was one thing I would love to see more than anything, it’s more open and honest transparency. It’s hard to communicate information about sales and money and difficulties had with a publisher without coming off as unprofessional and tacky, and with this business as small as it is, no one wants to be That Author.
Bree, I just have to say that your post put a smile on my face. Very well said.