Mystery Writers Of America: Real Writers Don't Self-Publish
from the 300,000-sold-and-still-not-a-'real-writer' dept
J.A. Konrath -- whose success as a self-published e-book author has been featured on Techdirt before -- recently kicked out a post concerning the Mystery Writers of America's submission policy as proof that the more things change, the more the "old guard" increases its efforts to pretend that things are still the same.Konrath doesn't speak too highly of the MWA, which seemed to be a rather lackluster writers' association, even back in its heyday:
The only time the MWA got in touch with me was when they needed something--I lost count of the times I was called upon to volunteer for some task or another--or when they wanted me to pay my dues. The dues notices (both email and in person) became so frequent, not only for me but for many of my peers, that it is now a long-running joke in the mystery community. (A friend of mine was even approached during his signing slot at Bouchercon to pay dues, in front of several fans.)After a few years of this, Konrath dropped his MWA membership and joined up with the International Thriller Writers group, which shockingly ("shockingly" added for the benefit of legacy artist representation groups) doesn't need membership dues to survive. Konrath states that the ITW runs such a smart organization they actually turn a profit.
The MWA, an organization that was supposed to exist to help writers, seemed to exist only to sustain itself.
Depsite his negative experience with MWA, he was intrigued enough by its recent press release announcing changes to its submission policy to take a look. Unfortunately, nothing had changed and the MWA is still running in full "legacy mode:"
Self-published books, whether they are published in print or as e-books, still do not qualify for MWA active membership.At this point, another leftover from a legacy industry looks the future straight in the eye and says, "Not interested." And as far as Konrath's concerned, the MWA couldn't be more wrong:
[A]ccording to these rules, someone like John Locke, who has sold close to 1 million ebooks, isn't eligible for MWA membership.If the publishing world, as it exists now, has no interest in the talents and insights of thousands of hard-working writers, it's their loss. This kind of elitist attitude is commonplace with the gatekeepers of industries whose reactions to the destruction wreaked by a digitally-leveled playing field has been a whole lot of "too little" and nearly universally "too late."
How many MWA members have sold 1 million books?
I've sold close to 300,000 self-pubbed ebooks. But apparently that doesn't equate with "professional standards" according to the MWA.
Professional standards apparently mean "You're only worthy if you're vetted by the industry."
This shouldn't bug me. I gave up on the MWA years ago... So if it shouldn't bug me, why does it?
Because I see this same casual dismissal of the future of our industry from the Big 6. They don't see the threat self-pubbing has become, and they're going to go extinct because of their denial.
Seeing a similar attitude coming from writers--folks who should know better because they've worked hard and struggled and gotten screwed over and over again--makes me shake my head in absolute amazement.
There are a lot of self-pubbed authors earning more money than a lot of MWA members. Certainly the MWA could use this new blood to teach longstanding members how to thrive in this brave, new world. And they NEED this information. MWA members have backlists and trunk novels and are getting repeatedly shafted by the Big 6.
How much could John Locke teach them about ebooks and marketing? How about 200 John Lockes, attending banquets, speaking at conventions?
The current MWA guidelines are elitist--they only accept those who are chosen by a few dozen gatekeepers in the establishment.It's not hard to find details of massively successful authors who also had trouble getting published initially. The self-proclaimed arbiters of what is or isn't "real writing" can't even agree on what's worth publishing and yet they still feel they can set the rules and choose which formats are "worthy" of support. That's sad and ugly and more than a little pompous.
The majority of writers I know got offers from a single house, rather than competing offers from multiple houses. Eliminate that one house, and they would still be unpublished. That's luck. If the publishing gatekeepers really knew quality, a truly worthy book would get bids from every major house. That never happens. In fact, many houses pass on books that go on to make millions and win awards.
The gatekeeping system has long been broken, and it's a very poor determiner of quality. The fact that I'm on track to sell more of my rejected novels than I have of my legacy pubbed novels is more proof they have no idea what people want.
But there is good news: the MWA is still reaching out in its own way to aspiring (i.e., "non-traditionally-published") writers:
MWA also mentions in its mission statement that they accept: "aspiring crime writers, and those who are devoted to the genre." Which means newbies and fans. That's fine, but these people can only get an associate membership. Which means they pay, but aren't allowed to do many of the things that regular members do.So, there you have it: if you're self-published, MWA is more than happy to take your money, but is completely unwilling to treat you as a qualified writer. That is, unless you decide to take their chosen route to being a writer, the one that runs directly through one of several publishing houses that are already nearing irrelevance or hanging on the ropes. How pathetic.
Can you say taxation without representation?
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: books, mystery writers, publishing, self-publishing
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Gatekeeper blunders
From Wikipedia
"Decca Records rejected the Beatles, saying that "guitar groups are on the way out" and "the Beatles have no future in show business"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Beatles%27_Decca_audition
So who are these gatekeepers anyway?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Gatekeeper blunders
Hell, if I had enough property to need gates on my fences, I might become a gatekeeper too.
(Or even hire a gate-keeper--like zoo-keeper but sees to the care and feeding of my gates...)
;-P
[ link to this | view in thread ]
In that case how would the traditional gatekeepers feel? Undoubtedly they would call relying on publishers cheating because the author was no longer solely responsible for their own success. Traditionalists would denounce "writing by committee" and refuse to admit anyone who relied on such crutches.
Gatekeepers almost always have the problem of assuming that the old way is divinely appointed and the only true and correct way to success. What it comes down to is the gatekeepers were good at using the old system and they are not sure they could survive under anything else.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Clancy should have then shopped his books around and gone for the best offer for each one.
What gets me is that ebooks still cost so much more than even the paperback.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: What gets me is that ebooks still cost so much more than even the paperback.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ya know...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
There is no spoon
Please clarify. Who are the "gatekeepers" for these self publishing authors in your hypothetical? What gates to they keep that are an obstacle to the new upstart publisher services?
Boy: Do not complain about self publishing gatekeepers, for that is impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth.
Neo: the truth?
Boy: There are no self publishing gatekeepers.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Ya know...
I took a look at the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America and what it took to become a member. They are exactly the same way as this group. You have to be paid by some gatekeepers. So I am looking elsewhere.
What is really funny is that if you write a novel and get paid $2000 by a qualified publishing house, you can be a member. Yet, if you write a novel, publish it yourself on the Kindle and make $200000, you can't be a member because you didn't go through their gatekeepers.
Sad.
I recently learned of Konrath and he is doubling my drive to become a successful self published author.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Depsite?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Copyright middlemen?
That's simply not true. Both MWA and RWA, for example, de-listed Harlequin (Torstar) from their lists of acceptable publishers when Harlequin first implemented its digital publishing arm -- which was quickly revamped to address those concerns and was re-incarnated as Carina Press, which is now recognized by RWA. More recently, both organizations have taken steps to warn authors about certain potentially harmful actions by and the precarious financial situation of Dorchester Publishing, which until recently, was one of the largest independently-owned publishers around.
There is no question, however, that these organizations need to reassess their current definitions and standards. I can't speak to MWA as I'm not a member, but I am a member of RWA and I can tell you that the issue is before the board now and will be discussed at the National conference at the end of this June.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Change
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Self-publishing
http://yep.it/writer
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Quit knocking traditional publishing houses
I think it's fine to self-publish your own book. And if it actually IS a good book, and you are willing to spend a huge amount of time, effort, expense, distributing it, and publicizing it, then you may make some good money. And more power to you. Just don't lambaste regular publishers. After all, without them, we would never have known the pleasure and value of reading books.
Dorothy (Dotty) McMillan author of Blackbird, Creative Ways with Polymer Clay, etc.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Let self-published authors join
I guess my problem is with these groups that don't acknowledge that a good self-published author can be just as good as any best-selling author. Yes, there are bad self-published works, so perhaps there needs to be some form of validation, such as you have to have more than X amount of sales, whether self-published or published traditionally. Having a minimum amount of sales, regardless of who the publisher is, helps these groups keep their prestigious reputation while still allowing serious self-published authors feel the prestige and gain the benefits of joining the group.
[ link to this | view in thread ]