Leopold McGinnis: I think the problem with self-publishing is that it does take a lot away from writing time. It can be a fun, creative process too, but it takes a lot of time. It's the promotion that really takes all the time. It's just impossible to get your books into stores. Local books stores might take a couple, but you'll have to visit each one and meet with the consignment person. Local papers will REFUSE to review a local indie book. There's no support for it.

But consider too, how much time is wasted submitting to places! There's talk of multiple rejections here, but how much time and money is spent sending things out, waiting for a reply, revising, blah blah blah. I find it takes less effort to publish my own work (not including promotion) than to send it around 50 places until somebody accepts. I really don't have time for playing lottery with my work. I'd just like to get it out there.

Michael has a strong point too. There's just a lot of work that's good but isn't accepted by presses. Revising your work until it's published doesn't necessarily make it better, just more like what the presses want to publish. I started self-publishing when I realized I could send out a 1000 submissions and never be accepted. In fact, self-publishing has really increased interest in my work. My stuff can be 'out there' and nobody was really interested in publishing it. But once I put my own money and time behind it I found it suddenly only took me two or three tries to get something published.

Honestly, I don't give a fuck what anybody's perception of self-publishing is. It's my work and I believe in it enough to put it out there. If people want to turn up their noses because of the WAY it was published, then let them. They have closed minds anyway. I've published 2 novellas and a 500 page novel by myself. My books look better than most books by corporate presses (I illustrate them, etc...). I'm very happy with that.

The fact is, the quality of writing in a book is NOT what sells a book. It is marketing. Even the books I've self published that I've sold have sold because of the way I've presented it or packaged it, or because of the theme of the book. It's sad, but that's really the way it is. The biggest obstacle for writers is promotion. That's my opinion from doing this for about 3 years.

Well, I've said enough. Good discussion.

Zachary C. Bush: Leopold, you make some interesting points. Much to think about! I like how you see these things...always open to new ideas. And yes, that is sad that it is all about promotion...Things for me to ponder more in my cave. Ah, these things are not so black and white, now are they?

Ed Churchouse: i can't afford £12 right now. but that's not to say i wouldn't pay it, if i could. bet they make enough out of it to warrant doing it, mind you and i bet they wade through some rubbish getting there.

the idea, for me, would be to get paid to just write. because i love sitting down, i think.

for that, you need a patron of some variety. got one spare?

i appreciate the effort and time people put into (self) publishing - any decent writing - poetry, especially - looks good when printed well. but i'm not a publisher, or much of an editor, or a businessman. i'm happy talking about it, "promoting" its ideas and (lack of) technique, but i'm too feckless to have enough discipline.

Michael Grover: Leopold does the fact that you can send out 1000 submissions and never be accepted make you a bad writer? I don't neccesarly think that it does.

Ed are you really none of those things or are you just meerly accepting the fact that you are not?

David Blaine: I think that twelve dollar fee sounds quite reasonable. I believe we are all artists, but I believe we all have day jobs, except maybe for Mike. But publishers aren't artists. They could be, but the publishing part is their day job. How long would it take you to read a book, really read it and analyze it, criticize it? At least an hour or two? Twelve bucks? What will you do for six bucks an hour?

But before submitting you should have an idea of whether your work is not only good, but whether it fits in with what this company has published previously. My first rejection slip just said, we don't publish religious poems. I should have known, if I'd just checked their work before submitting and wasting their time.

Most people are publishers because they love the art of literature. But it's their way to make a living. I think they give you as much as they can, but they still have to make a living.

Now compare that to what we do at Outsider Writers. None of us are doing this to make a living. We're all writers, plus we work to earn a paycheck, and then we come here and try to do what we can to support other outside writers.

Here's your best deal fellas!

Miles Bell: My point wasn't I couldn't afford 12 bucks. (Though I don't have a job, I've got the cash). I'm not sure if I'm willing to pay it on the off-chance. Like I said, it's probably a silly hang-up. Ideally I'd like to find a publisher that won't charge. I don't want, or expect, any money for having a chap published by someone else. Just wouldn't mind not having to pay for it myself. But I'm also willing to pay to get a book done rather than slog it out round endless rejections and shots in the dark. Cos I don't believe countless rejections makes you a bad writer, neccessarily. Just not the right one for that time and for those people. And lots of sending stuff around the place feels like work to me, whereas writing never does.

The original question involved whether self-publishing makes a book less viable or viewed differently. And it's got to be the writing that counts, ultimately. All the rest is marketing. Todd Moore told me he put lots of things out himself, Xeroxed things sometimes, just to get them out. I'll do the same if I have to, give it away if I have to.

Not that I'm intentionally placing myself in the same league as Todd Moore, you understand

Zachary C. Bush: Again, I will re-state for the hundredth time that a small "reading-fee" of a manuscript is not paying to have your work published. These "real" presses that might have a reading-fee are not charging you a thing...and they are printing nearly 400 first round copies....with no charge to the poet. Anyways, as I said. Whatever I am stating is apparently not making much sense to a few and that is ok.

I will move on from it and get back into the topic at hand. I am not sure why I am even reverting back to this sub-topic so much. However, I like with David Blaine said about it. He kind of hit the nail on the head.

What I meant by "real" press....are presses that run on their own financially or through state/art-grants...whether in our mainstream literary world our in our underground lit. world. This was not a comment on supposed "tiers" of publications. As, the name does not matter as much as the words within the books themselves.

Miles Bell: Zachary, I understand what you're saying. I can follow your argument quite well. I was maybe arguing with myself on this board how much of a difference it makes paying a reading fee to have a manuscript read by a prestigious press than sending it to someone who will read and decide for free. Maybe I should've kept this musing to myself. It's not paying to be published, I know. It's paying to be considered. And I'm not sure how many times I'd pay the money to try and get a manuscript published that I know is good. Of course the choice is always with the writer, right? Which is what I am, first and foremost, not a planner, publisher, marketeer, designer, or a man who decides which poems get made into books to make money and which go in the dustbin.

And I'm done with this sub-plot!

No, I don't think self-publishing is bad, if the poems or novel is good. No idea what is taken seriously, though it's obvious a "name" press will carry some kudos. It's in their bet interests to not only make books that will sell, but that have some artistic merit.

J.D. Finch: I think that in the past those that self published looked like fools when they used a vanity press, and frankly, I don't think you can name one successful book that came out of the hundreds of thousands of deluded writers who thought self pub was their ticket to fame and fortune, when the only ticket they got was from parking their car in the street overnight because their garage was full of unsaleable books.

If by self publishing though, we're also talking about the Kinko writer/poet and now Lulu and other POD services, I think there's an element of romance and excitement involved. It's no secret that writers and artists lack a business sense and are crappy with financial concerns, so now that we don't have to spend thousands of dollars to get our stuff to readers, we actually look like we know what we're doing, while creating art.

The public at large still looks askance at a writer who isn't represented by a known publishing house, but I think this will change. There are always a few books that start out self published, that eventually get their author an actual contract and as more writers use POD this number will grow, adding an element of authenticity that vanity publishing never had.

Zachary C. Bush: Karl, what say you of all these words? Or, just in general...pertaining to all of these topics and sub-topics of Capricorn?

Misti Rainwater-Lites: The only reading fee I've ever paid is to Nerve Cowboy. I'm pretty sure it was $10. I sent them two different poetry manuscripts which were both rejected. I'm opposed to reading fees simply because I'm broke. If I have an extra ten or fifteen bucks laying around it's going to be spent on a trip to my favorite used bookstore or porn warehouse. Beer and tacos. Whatever.

I put together my first chapbook a few years ago. I put it together at Kinko's. I remember feeling like a rock star 'cause after a poetry reading six different poets bought copies and they actually asked me to sign 'em! I thought they were joking at first. I treated my husband to Mexican food after the reading. That was bliss.

So I did two different chaps at Kinko's and then upon completion of the National Novel Writing Month competition in 2005 I discovered lulu.com. I published my first NaNoWriMo novel, Nova's Gone Potty, there. I've lost count of the projects (mostly novels and poetry collections) I have published at lulu.com. I've deleted several projects. Christopher Robin is the only person I know who owns every book I've ever published, including my Kinko's chaps. Christopher helped me make it to Vegas last year so that I could read my poems at the Freakin' Frog. I sold four of my poetry collections there.

So no...I have not had raging success at lulu.com but I never really expected to. Some deranged part of my brain that buys into "The Secret" and the American dream (HA) does fantasize about someday logging into my lulu.com account and discovering that I have sold MILLIONS of books and can spend the rest of my days on a white sand beach in Cabo San Lucas. Seriously, I do dream of someday making a living as a writer. It's the only thing I really give two shits about. I've been fired from almost every job I've ever had. I am not good at faking it. I am always getting caught writing poems on the clock. I've done all kinds of weird shit on the clock. I have no love for the clock.

I sent a manuscript to Manic D Press a few months ago, not really thinking anything would come of it. I'm going to buy a dollar store frame for my rejection letter the next time I see a dollar.

The thing about me is that I'm all about the instant gratification, which is why I edited and published a print poetry zine called Instant Pussy. I get tremendous instant gratification from lulu.com. I've whored my books tirelessly at MySpace and Craig's List to minimum success. Ain't no shame in my game. It's not really arrogance, it's just that I don't take myself too damn seriously. I know the cards are stacked against me. I'm not an academic poet. I'm not good at infiltrating cliques, like the ones around Albuquerque. I abhor provincial poetry cliques. Too incestuous for my blood. People either like my stuff or they don't. I don't try too hard to convince people to like me or my poetry and novels. Basically, I'm missing the ass kissing gene.

Zachary, thanks for your kind words. Now I see why you said my ears must be burning! I've enjoyed reading your poems at MySpace and can't wait to sink my teeth into your chapbooks.

Regarding e-books at lulu.com...if I remember correctly and I probably don't because my memory is shot all to hell these days, the only one of my books that is available as a download is Pussy Lickin' Good, the anthology of the first year of Instant Pussy. I'm not making any money off the download or the print book because I did not claim any royalties for that project. I didn't claim any royalties because I was not able to provide contributors with copies. But yes, when you set your royalties you can make your book available as a PDF or paperback (or hardback) and claim however much money you want to make from the different options.

Karl Koweski: There's certainly a lot here to think about and digest. I like the round tables because everyone is right and no one is really wrong. We all come at this thing from different places and directions to arrive in the same small press area and maybe learn something from each other. It's why Outsider Writers exists.

Zachary C. Bush: A general question to pose: Miles and anyone else: How do you feel about authors using services like LuLu.com? Any thoughts?

I know that Misti has enjoyed producing her work through this service and is satisfied. I am not so sure I would like to use this service, not because it is not an interesting, but just personal opinions.

Anyways, that aside-- what do you you all know of LuLu.com in general and people who might have used it and done well with it-- outside of Misti? This is a fairly new concept I believe and a lot of people are into it...

David Blaine: The only thing I have against lulu is that they charge a lot for smaller books. They have a five buck fee to bind a book, plus a couple cent a page. You mark it up a buck and it's seven dollars. They charge a few bucks shipping and handling, the customer is paying nine to ten bucks for a chap book and the author's getting squat. It's not tennable for the market. For a novel, it might be competitive, but do you really want to self publish a novel?

As for public perception, you can PRINT at lulu and still put your own press name on the book. Mamoth Publications. Sounds fine, don't it? How about Acme Press, or Big Creek Editions?

Pat King: I really enjoyed hearing about Misti's experiences with lulu. I was actually worried that I might have offended her with some of my earlier comments. No, often the poet has no choice but to self-publish because there is such very little demand for poetry right now and everyone in the small press world seems to be writing it.

I bought one of Misti's chapbooks on lulu but there's no way I could afford to buy everything she has up. This might be part of the problem. In the underground, we're pretty much each other's audience. For a novel or short fiction, an indie publisher that can at least get your books into some alternative bookstores/websites can help broaden the audience for a writer. Not that ya'll aren't great! But most of us are seven degrees of broke and can't buy nearly as many books as we'd like.

Yeah, like Karl said, this has given me a lot to think about.

Misti Rainwater-Lites: I know, it's a little ridiculous of me having such a bloated storefront. I just feel very fatalistic. Some people feel the need to pump out as many babies as they can (a couple of bizarre reality shows come to mind, I forget what they're called but these parents have more kids than the freakin' Brady Bunch). My driving biological urge is to get as many of my books as possible Out There before I kick the bucket. Before I flew to Dallas for my sister's surprise 30th birthday last October I wrote an extremely sloppy, nonlinear (disjointed) novel called Thick Lazy Tongue in three days. I was feeling like the plane might crash. I put a lot of myself in that book, lots of crap from my childhood as well as ridiculous crap like a fictional Big Foot encounter and a guy who goes in a bar and rattles off all these drinks (I found this cool website that lists recipes for every drink and shot you can think of) and the bartender doesn't know how to make any of them. No one in their right mind would consider Thick Lazy Tongue Great Literature but I had fun writing it and I still go back and read it sometimes. I've gotten the most compliments on Ebullient Vomit and Arsenal of Spitwads. A few people love Nova's Gone Potty. My favorites are Monkey Bite and Dangerous Hair. Sorry, didn't mean to go off like that blowing my own horn. Just wanted to explain why I have such a bloated storefront. The fatalistic thing plus too much time on my hands. I only like to watch television when I'm eating and I have no money for bowling or any other hobbies. Thus...lulu.com!

Pat King: Misti brings up a great point when she mentions being fatalistic. I think that if we're honest with ourselves, most writers will admit that part of the reason we write is to leave something behind. Ultimately, I feel this is a bit wrongheaded, since the universe has a way of making everything disappear (reading Shelly's poem Ozymandias for a wonderful illustration of this). But I also know that a part of me, albeit a part of me that I fight with, writes because I want to pass something on after I die.

Publishing, especially paper publishing gives us a sense that we have captured a slice of immortality, even if it is only passed on through our families.

William Taylor Jr. I'm not sure if I have much to say on the current subject that hasn't already been touched upon, and quite well, by many others here, but I'll throw out a few of my own thoughts nonetheless.

I believe self publishing has its place and its uses, and it really comes down to what you hope to achieve by "publishing" your work. I self published my first chapbook of poetry. I just typed up my poems, ripped off some artwork here and there and copied, stapled and distributed them free around town. I just wanted to get a little collection of my work out there and see what would happen. What happened was, I got a bit of useful feedback from some people who happened to pick up a copy, I met some other like minded writers and got invited to submit to a publication or two. I considered the venture a success.

In general, the main downside to self publishing as I see it is perhaps the lack of an editor. Very often having someone else to look at your work more objectively can help you produce a stronger collection. Not that I'm advocating making major changes in your work at the whim of an editor. Poetry is a very personal art and your voice can easily be muted by too much outside influence. But I've worked with some very helpful editor/publishers and I think my collections have been stronger because of it. And, like a lot of others here, I really just like to write, and am not particularly well suited for all else that goes into publishing a book. It's very nice to have someone else help out with the design, printing, promotion, distribution, etc. I know self promotion is a very important part of the independent press, and I accept that, but I hate it and am horrible at it, and peddling my works always leaves me feeling like a used car salesman. So it's nice to have some help when it is available..

I also have some hesitation about books, especially novels, being published through POD sites like lulu.com. Print on demand is very convenient and makes your work readily available, but again, there is no quality control, as it were. I'm a bit wary of the instant gratification that such self publishing sites offer. Sure, your book is out there for the buying, but it's just floating about in the ether with a gazillion others. I think lulu might be a better option for non-fiction books, as opposed to literature. But I haven't had much experience with the process, and would love to hear more from people who have used the service.

Overall, I think the world of e-zines and lulu.com makes can everything a bit too easy. I think you tend to put more thought and work into something if it actually tales a bit of effort. An integral part of the writing process is, I think, sending your work out there in the real world and dealing with possible (and quite probable) rejection. The process, in the end, can only make you stronger. (Well, okay, a bit bitter too, perhaps, but stronger nonetheless.)

Good writing will eventually find someone willing to publish it. If you're working under the impression that your writing is being rejected because it's too edgy, dark, or political, you obviously aren't doing your homework as far as finding suitable places to send your work. Or, perhaps, you simply need to hone your craft.

On the subject of reading fees, I avoid them myself simply because I can't afford them and there are plenty of quality publishers that don't charge for considering work. Like Miles, there is a part of me that bristles at the thought of having to pay someone to consider my work. Again, not that there's anything inherently wrong with the practice, but there is a part of me that can't stop thinking, "Man, these people are making a killing by rejecting a lotta folk."

And, lastly, I think it is important for the small press writer to somehow get their work outside the world of small press. We tend to be a poor and selfish lot and tend not to shell out a lot of bucks for the writings of our brethren. It's a good idea to get your work out there, self published or otherwise, to the general reading public and see if they give a damn. A lot of bookstores will accept small press and self published work on a consignment basis. And, if you're so inclined, get out there and read your stuff at an open mic (as godawful as they can sometimes be) or wherever. Reading your work in front of an audience is a pretty good way of discovering if it's doing what you want it to do.

Okay, I've gone on a bit longer than I'd meant. I'll stop now. Thanks for listening.

Miles Bell: Well, Bill, you've covered a lot of things. Much agreement from me, too.

On the subject of Lulu, I bought Eddie Kilowatt's "Manifest destiny" (or rather, swapped it for a chap of mine) and he'd had it done with Lulu. No idea how much he paid/made but it's a good looking book for sure. I've been looking at Lulu's ebooks thing, which seems to be cheap, if not free. But my question is this: is an e-chap even further down the evolutionary/kudos ladder than self-publishing? I might do an e-chap at some point, especially if I have some poems I'd like to share with the "world" but haven't fitted in elsewhere. Seems feasible, if the only end goal is to get poems out there. As for acceptability...we're still pretty much in the early days of what the internet can do, and maybe it won't be nearly as unusual to have books online in a few years, and hopefully they won't be viewed as print books poor cousin. That said, there's nothing as good as having a book to hold and look through for a swell of pride.

David Blaine: Well, not to sound like an off the wall radical, but we don't have to obey the normal rules of cash and currency when trading amongst ourselves. We can trade chapbooks when the full price of buying them is a bit high. Even if you do publish on LuLu, remember, they're just a printer. You can still take your files down to Kinko's and dash off a dozen copies for yourself, cheaper than buying them off of LuLu. LuLu is just a convenient way to publish, initially, for free, and to handle distribution. I know many of us aren't publishing to make money.

Michael Grover: The next chapbook that I publish is going to be by someone else. I am gonna do it myself and edit it. (Because he asked me to.) So we can have the best of both worlds. We can have chapbooks and still have editors. We can be as professional as any slick publisher. It's all about the limitations the individual puts on it.

David Blaine: OK, I'd like to do a sort of poll at this point. Here are the questions/ideas.

!. When I read a chapbook the most important thing to me is the actual content, the writing, the poetry or prose.

(Please agree or disagree, strongly or whatever.)

2. When I read a chapbook, I think better of it if the book was published by an actual press.

(again, agree or disagree with all of these)

3. When a book is self published, I think less of it.

4. When books are self published, I think better of the ones containing poems that were published already in lit mags or ezines.

5. I think self publishing chapbooks is a step towards getting published by a small or other press.

You could just cut/paste with your replies. I'll start with mine.

!. When I read a chapbook the most important thing to me is the actual content, the writing, the poetry or prose.

I strongly agree with this, the content is what I care most about.
I've been disapointed with books as prestigious as "Best American Poetry" and delighted with little handmade pocket chaps.

2. When I read a chapbook, I think better of it if the book was published by an actual press.

I disagree, somewhat. I mean, I am impressed if the author has broken into print this way, but that doesn't change the way I feel about the content. The work's still gotta grab me. If it doesn't, I don't go thinking the book publication was rigged though. I just figure it's not my style of writing.

3. When a book is self published, I think less of it.

This I disagree with. In fact, this is where the rubber can meet the road for me, because I'm going to judge the person as both the writer and the artist. Does your cover art suck, or is it interesting. How's the title/theme? Is there a theme, or did you just toss in the last twenty poems you wrote? How is the format/layout? Does it look like a professionaly produced book? There's no reason it shouldn't. Is the leading edge trimmed or does it fan out like an ammature job? Someone said something about people self publishing for instant gratification. Some have admited to penning a bunch of inferior work quickly for that gratification, but those are peripheral issues. I've done two chaps in the last three years, both with themes, great covers, nice layout. I'm proud of every aspect. I took my time. I wasn't interested in what I could do quickly, I wanted to be able to hand out something that would represent me as an artist, in all aspects.

4. When books are self published, I think better of the ones containing poems that were published already in lit mags or ezines.

Disagree, again. And again, I'm impressed, happy for the writer that she's achieved that success, but it all boils down to the content. I've got to love it, and I've loved plenty of poems that were never published and never even submitted.

5. I think self publishing chapbooks is a step towards getting published by a small or other press.

I agree, somewhat. I'm sure there are a multitude of reasons, and this would be a legitimate one if that was what the artist/writer were working towards.

Michael Grover: 1. Agree
2. Disagree (what does it matter?)
3. Refer to answer #2
4. Uh dosen't really matter.
5. Yes, yes if you are putting your name out there the presses are more likely to hear it.

Michael Grover: I personally don't like e-books. As it is, I spend so much time staring at the computer that my eyes bleed, and that is just from reading e-mail and blogs. I want a hot little book in my hands that I can drool on and add to my ever growing chapbook collection. Okay, here are my answers...
!. When I read a chapbook the most important thing to me is the actual content, the writing, the poetry or prose.

Well, yeah. The cover art, binding, reviews or whatever, that stuff is all inconsequential. It's like a good-looking guy. If he opens his mouth to speak and a bunch of nada comes out, ew. Move on, sailor. The white album is another good example, although it isn't my favorite Beatles record.

2. When I read a chapbook, I think better of it if the book was published by an actual press.

Nope. I've read a lot of crap chapbooks put out by actual presses. Some of the best chapbooks I've ever read and am proud to own are by my best friend Christopher Robin. And I am not endorsing Christopher just because he is my best friend. Part of the reason why he is my best friend is because he is one of my favorite poets. I formatted Freaky Mumbler's Manifesto for Christopher at lulu.com.

3. When a book is self-published, I think less of it.

Obviously not, as I am all about the self-publishing. I think pretty highly of my lulu books and I think very highly of Christopher Robin's, Joe Pachinko's and Tim Murray's lulu books. We all know that the Big Legit Publishers in New York and San Francisco churn out a bunch of shit. Legit shit books have kept me alive. I get sick of 'em and sell 'em to the nearest used bookstore. Then I buy some tacos.

4. When books are self-published, I think better of the ones containing poems that were published already in lit mags or ezines.

No. As far as I know, Joe Pachinko has not been widely published in lit mags and ezines. He has a few publication credits but not a buttload. Joe Pachinko is my personal Lord and Savior. I bow at the altar of Joe Pachinko. I own every book he has ever self-published. The Urinals of Hell. Stumpfucker Cavalcade. SWAMP! The Love Book by Lenore Kandel, which City Lights would not stock, by the way.

5. I think self publishing chapbooks is a step towards getting published by a small or other press.

Not necessarily...at least, that hasn't been the case for me. Oh, off the subject a little bit, I've heard that Bruce Isaacson of Zeitgeist Press is going to publish a collection of Jennifer Blowdryer's poetry at lulu.com. So that is another way to go about it. Have a friend or editor you know and respect help you put your books together at lulu. Mic Johnson revised Nova's Gone Potty and Ebullient Vomit for me at lulu and I will always be grateful. When one of life's beautiful shitstorms came my way I passed on the WM3 anthology to Mic. He said it's nearly finished and is over 200 pages. It'll have an ISBN which means global distribution. I can't wait to see how it turned out.

Zachary C. Bush: 1. When I read a chapbook the most important thing to me is the actual content, the writing, the poetry or prose.

Content, of course! I would leave the design of the book up to editors and publishers (whether actual press or self-published) but while all that is fine and dandy--I am a poet not a layout and design editor. Content is key! Though, I have different tastes in what I like and dislike so it is all up to personal opinion.


2. When I read a chapbook, I think better of it if the book was published by an actual press.

Uh, well yes and know. Yes in a way, because it would be apparent that the press took an interest and risk in fronting the money to print and promote a poet. BUT, BUT, BUT, THEIR ARE MANY PUBLISHED POETS THAT ARE NOT NECESSARILY QUALITY WRITERS.

No in a way, because I have run across some incredible writers who publish their own chapbooks. This being said, their are many many many poets who published their own works because they cannot get them accepted into presses and journals. So, this is on a case to case basis for actual press or self-published. A question like this cannot be so easy...

I will say that unless I know a self-published poet (which I do know a few) then the chances of me seeing their self-published manuscript is less likely than a small press publication.

3. When a book is self-published, I think less of it.

No. I am going sound like a broken record and maybe it is because I admire two poets that self-publish-- but look at Misti and J.D. Their published work and self-published work rocks my socks off. However, their are many people who flood Lulu.com and other ways of self-publishing and in a way "water-down" the poetry market. This is true though with actual presses. So again, tough question to respond to...

4. When books are self-published, I think better of the ones containing poems that were published already in lit mags or ezines.

No, BUT, I would like to be semi-familiar with a poet before purchasing his book-- even if that means I googled his name and read three or four poems from e-zines/journals. Past publications do not validate the writer to have a sucessful book but it is nice to see a little of their work before hand...this is where a few published poems might help.

5. I think self publishing chapbooks is a step towards getting published by a small or other press.

Well, I don't have that experience at this point with self publishing, but from what I have seen and heard I would have to say "no."

One seems to self-publish because that is their intention or because they have different goals-- obviously that writer might have had some issues or conflicts of interest with a Press.

I think that self-publishing, done right is not a bad idea if you have work that is not appreciated by the Presses-- but I do not think that it will increase your chances of being picked up by an actual press. Poems scatter through independent journal/e-zines might help a tad more BUT that is not a requirment either.

Just a thought--you know the more I think and reflect on all of our comments and ideas-- the more I think...what the hell does it matter???

We are all writers in some form or another and I would like to believe that our goal is to get our words, images, and unique and individual artistic statment or the way we perceive ourselves and the world around us....out to as many readers/people as possible, right? Well then, what does it matter how we do it...whether through the small, medium, large press, or chapbooks.

If our individual or collective message stays genuine and true then I don't give a damn how you, me, or anyone else decides to package and distribute their manuscript. Really, this topic could be discussed forever and still it will come down to personal opinion....likes and dislikes...but what we are doing all ends up funneling down to a love for words! That is all.

I just needed to get that off my chest...

Aleathia Drehmer: I think if anyone as any different closing ideas then they should do it now. This has been a great topic with lots of participation and interest. Thank you all for your comments and opinions.

Last update : 07-07-2007 07:57

Average user rating

   (0 vote)

Display 8 of 8 comments