I have been wrong before. I maintained a false attitude about Harlequins and got schooled as to how wrong I was. I got royally schooled at Princeton about inspirational romances and the community of women who read them, and the corporations who distribute them.
So I think I may have been wrong about self-publication. Yes, there is no curation and some of it is outrageously crapalicious. Indeed, there is a stigma to flipping a book over and seeing “iUniverse” instead of “HarperCollins” or “Berkley” – like flipping a greeting card over and not seeing “Hallmark.” iUniverse, in my mind, often meant, “In my universe, I couldn’t get published.”
I think I am wrong about that attitude, and will be proven wrong soon enough.
In the future, self-publication operations will have to be included in the discussion as to where publishing is going, and how it’s going to change, mostly because the structural foundation of distribution and marketing as we know it is changing faster than expected in a sour economy.
Distributors are going under and everyone suffers. Why else were there February paperbacks still in drugstores in April in Walgreen’s in Florida? Mass market authors with March releases got screwed in a place most often seen in erotica, and it weren’t pretty.
Publishers are downsizing left and right in all departments, and the promotional efforts fall even more on the shoulders of the author now. And recently authors have started to speak very candidly about what they spend their funds on, and how much it all costs.
NOTE: This is not to say that publishers aren’t doing jack shit, because I know that many publicists inside houses are working their asses off – because they have a miniscule budget with which to promote and a fuckton of books about which to bring in the funk.
What’s that song with Miley Cyrus whining how it’s all about the climb? When the climb is never-ending and looks from all angles like futility, it’s time to stop and look for other options to ascend.
If publishing houses are streamlined and cut back to the point where they are places of curation and production, and the majority of publicity and marketing shift to the author, self-publication firms should be welcomed to the discussion about the future of publishing simply because it will become a viable, profitable choice.
This article in the United Airlines Hemisphere magazine discusses self-publication as sort of a work-around to avoid the “high barrier to entry” in print publishing as fewer acquisitions are made in the face of dwindling profits.
Of course, undermining its own point, the article highlights three books that achieved “legitimacy” by… wait for it… being acquired by New York publishing houses. Two of the three authors featured, Brunonia Barry and Lisa Genova, hired book publicity firm Kelley & Hall, which sells itself as a firm which takes self-published novels and scores deals with NY publishers. So: good self-pub novel plus publicity firm equals potential million dollar Big Pub deal. It’s the same end point: big money in NY Print.
The Washington Post published an article by Eric R. Danton from The Hartford Courant in March that examined self publication as it compares to indie rock bands and bloggers. Josh Jackson of Paste magazine is quoted in the article discussing the parallels between bands and writers:
Bands have the comparative luxury of writing songs and then performing them before they ever record them, which helps hardworking (and lucky) groups build audiences for the albums that might eventually follow. Writers, by contrast, traditionally have relied on finished products, such as books, to build their audiences, although that’s starting to change as more post their writing on blogs.
“Maybe that’s where the parallel is,” Paste’s Jackson says. “You have bands going out and playing live shows, and you, as an author, can congregate an audience through a blog….”
The Washington Times also featured an article this past Friday 22 May which included the Bowker statistic that:
Traditional publishers released fewer books in 2008 than in 2007 — 275,232 new books, a drop of 3.2 percent. However, on-demand publishers, the route many writers take to self-publish, released an astounding 132 percent more — 285,394 in 2008.
The idea that self-pub isn’t the doghouse of dreck is important. With that slow disintegration of established distribution channels and the shifting roles of author and publisher, self-publication may ultimately be an equal option independent of big houses for writers to publish and distribute. Eventually, perhaps with some form of (please God) curation, the self-pub stigma will disappear. And as it does, profits will speak louder than reputation.
Everyone’s role is going to be redefined in the next 5 years, I think, and the old publishing model and path to publication won’t remain, or even look like itself. Defining what it means to be an author, a publisher, or a reviewer, even, will be a changing task as the economy and the changing landscape of book sales force a whole mess of navel gazing. Self pub is often accused of being the formal output of the relentless navel-gazer – if that’s so, and if they’ve learned anything from the process of self-publishing and self-evaluation, they may end up ahead of the game.
Have you self published? Would you consider it? Do you think the stigma of “vanity press” will ever go away entirely? What’s your take?
Oh dear Lord…what a way to divert the conversation!
April, I apologise for calling you ‘privileged’. Clearly you have experience of racism, and I do not.
I still think your analogy was foolish and offensive – and hyperbolic. Whatever point you were trying to make is lost when you compare two things which are so completely unalike. Self-publishing has a bad rep because of the actions of self-pubbed authors. ‘N*gger’ has a bad rep because the actions of racists towards black people. Self-pubbed authors are responsible – to an extent – for how they are seen. Black people aren’t. And that’s why I find that comparison offensive.
“the only people youâll find arguing in favor of continuing to use the term in question are those who wish to maintain the status quoâ-and the stigma. “
Did you miss the fact I’m self-published? Or that I’ve been arguing that self-publishing should not carry the stigma that it does? Did you miss *why* I am so opposed to the term ‘indie’ – which is that it has acquired an even greater stigma, and that all that’s happening is that people are now confusing vanity publishing/self publishing/‘indie’ publishing more than ever?
I don’t want to preserve the status quo. I just very strongly disagree with you and Zoe’s method of trying to change it.
“Indie authors are authors who have *chosen* to self-publish, not *resorted* to it.”
Well, aren’t you speshul. I didn’t ‘resort’ to it. I chose to self-publish for all kinds of reasons. I just don’t feel a need to call myself anything other than self-published.
I’ve said before – call yourselves what you want. But you don’t speak for self-published authors as a group, and you’re not doing writers like me any favours by statements that *you* don’t have to be self-published, but the *others* (who aren’t ‘indie authors’) do. I’ve got epubbed and trad pub credits as well as self-pub titles. I don’t have to prove a damn thing to anyone – or have a tattoo to remind myself of the party line.
There’s no party line, Ann. Tattoos are a celebration, which is why I used the metaphor. Some of us on this planet have been given a great gift – from the gods or God or genetics or faeries or whatever – that of being able to express ourselves with words in a way that moves and entertains other people. I feel blessed and grateful for the talent I’ve been given, or inherited. I want to put my stuff out there. I’m excited about it!
Where’s your joy? I’ve been reading your free stuff this evening. You’re damned good. YOU have been blessed with an amazing talent. Yet you’re here quibbling about labels with other writers you don’t even know. So again I ask you … where’s your joy?
Oh, lord, it’s late, and I’m easily entertained. đ
In summation:
1.) Crap abounds, regardless of its source. But crap backed up by a recognizable name is more likely to be given the benefit of the doubt and treated as potential intellectual nourishment.
2.) Nobody gives a royal rip what authors call themselves, self-pubbed or not, because we’re all viewed as drama queens and self-styled divas . . . and this discussion essentially proves why.
3.) Just write the best damned book you can and spare us the labels. I identify myself as That Weird Old Lady Who Loves What She Does, Can’t Do Anything Else That Might Be Considered Even Moderately Productive, and Is Stupid Enough to Think She’ll Someday Be Able to Afford the Cost of Cremation, at Least, Before She Kicks the (Delusional) Bucket. How unfortunate I can’t even condense that into a manageable acronym.
4.) I also have books you can read, Barbara, but I’m going to make you guess their titles and publishers because I’m just that way.
It’s been a slice.
WryHag,
If I hadn’t had my personal integrity attacked on a well-trafficked blog in order to prop up Ann’s own moral fortitude, I wouldn’t have cared one wit about labels. “Indie Author” is what I like and use for myself but I don’t pretend everybody should like it or use it. What I expect though is that random people on the internet who don’t really know me shouldn’t come out fists flying with insult and outrage over a personal word I use to describe myself and what I do.
Nevertheless, i didn’t have to play into it, be emo, or help derail the thread. I’ve seen Ann’s antics on the interwebz before, I should have rolled my eyes and moved on.
“So again I ask you … whereâs your joy? “
I appreciate the compliments about my writing, but spare me the amateur psychology, please. My ‘joy’ or otherwise isn’t any of your damn business.
Zoe, you suck. You went right to ad hominem and stayed there, the mark of someone without a moral leg to stand on. So piss off, do what you like, and I’ll keep pointing and laughing, okay? Call yourself a baboon’s erection for all I care.
LMAO Ann. Um, okay. Look I’m not sure where you are getting your “ad hominem” from, since you right off the bat claimed I was dishonest, trying to fool people, trying to look better than I was, and defrauding readers. You further attacked my intelligence point blank. You couldn’t just agree to disagree on labels or tell me the phrase that upset you to begin with. Nope, you had to take the scenic route.
Either way, I’m sure anyone who can read, and who has come into contact with you anywhere else on the internet before has seen your special brand of “debate” and “telling it like it is.”
Oh and you just added that “I suck,” and I’m assuming you mean as a person since you’ve never been inside my bedroom. And oh yeah… you questioned my morality yet again. To hear you tell it, I may as well have horns and a tail. Or excuse me, a baboon’s erection.
WryHag – no fair, I’m clueless as it is! (Or so my husband is often saying, I retaliate by throwing the Percocet bottle at his Mensan head, the jerk:) ) And I like your name, I’m thinking of changing mine to Cranky Bitch.
Zoe, funnily enough, whenever your name is mentioned, like it was here:
http://dearauthor.com/wordpress/2009/01/06/breaking-the-sky-is-falling-will-publishing-innovate-or-deteriorate/
(I notice you distinguished yourself by the moderate tone you took…oops), it’s always about your method of publication.
When people mention *me* it’s either to rail about what a c*nt I am, or how great my writing is.
Seems to me, a writer should be better known for their writing than how their single book is going to be released. But then you strike me as someone who kinda likes writing, but who really, really wants to be published. I’m the other way around – would kinda like to be published, if I could get away from the cliquey BS that being published (even self-published) involves, but I really, really love to write. And to be read.
So excuse me if I don’t engage. with you and your friends any more because I’ve got some more stories to release on Lulu. I think that probably takes me to over 3 million original fiction words on line and available for free or very little. When I’m on my deathbed, I very much doubt the shame of being ‘self-published’ as opposed to ‘indie published’ will weigh heavily on my soul. I think the letters from my readers and the friends I’ve made from my writing, will be what I’ll cherish.
Good luck. Time will tell if your efforts are worth it. Maybe you’ll rediscover the pleasure of writing in the process.
Well, Ann, I’ve never called you a C*nt. But judging from a lot of your invective on the many places you’ve gotten into cat fights on the internet, you don’t seem to believe anyone has a right to hurt feelings but you. That tends to annoy people. You say something mean and people are silly for being hurt by it, someone says something mean to you and you go to terror level orange. If you could either easily take what you dish out or stop dishing out what you can’t take, online communication with you would be far less bothersome to people.
Thank you *once again* for assuming things about me you do not know. First I must be being dishonest because I’m “hiding” behind an imprint label, and now I must just have some real big “ego-reason” that I just “need” to be able to run around identifying myself as “being published.”
I don’t even know where to classify your “really wants to be published” comment. All I can say is please stop assuming things about me you do not know. A few posts up you told Kel to spare you the amateur psychology, and yet…
Just saying.
I have no need for the social status of “being published” but thanks for throwing around more invective, even if you’re being slightly more subtle than your earlier comments about sucking and baboon erections.
If you hear more about my method of publication it’s because the places that you’ve seen me, that’s what the topic of conversation is, and I’m also involved in communities that *revolve around* the whole concept of *being indie.* So it shouldn’t be surprising that this is a topic I talk about a lot.
Again, there is no “shame” in being self-published. I’m not sure where you’re even getting that. “indie” is just an affirming label and classifies in a stronger way what it is I’m doing. (like indie musicians, indie filmmakers.) The practice is the same, the labels are different. It’s called self-confidence and the decision not to let “other people” label what you do. If *you* prefer the label self-publishing and think my label is stupid, that is all well and good.
You must have been asleep when April went through her: “When a label has meant “inferior by definition” then when things change labels start changing” concept. That is why. Not because I’m “ashamed” of self publishing. I swear, it’s like beating my head against a brick wall.
I have never LOST the pleasure of writing. I have no idea where you get this stuff, but by assuming things about people you don’t know, you only make yourself less credible. And you have far less right to criticize the intelligence of others.
Oh, also thank you for that little implied jab that just because the only place *you’ve* seen me mentioned, it was about publication method, my writing must by definition be inferior.
At least it’s more subtle than many of your other insults we’ve all seen all over the internet.
But just a question… are we going to be talking about my mama next? Cause if we are, I really want to get some popcorn.
OK, I probably shouldn’t be butting in here (woke with major pain issues) but: suppose I ask Jill Hennessy (yes, we’ve met, talked, exchanged a few emails, etc) about the impending release of her CD, unsigned (which, with my limited knowledge of the music industry indicates indie status) and how she feels about authors applying the same label to themselves. She does have some status as a “Star” and I would tend to take her POV seriously. Would anyone else? Would her opinion carry any weight in this discussion? She’s a very bright lady, she thinks before she speaks, and if she has time to answer (the CD is being released in about two weeks), will her opinion matter on this matter?
As it stands now, I see self-pubbed authors arguing over what to call themselves, with each side taking a position they support with various opinions/citations. Music is frequently cited as a comparison, pro and con. While one TV star’s opinion isn’t gong to change everyone (or anyone’s) mind, is it worth seeking it?
And no, I’m not trying to qualify for box seats in heaven by fulfilling a beatitude, I’m just asking if an outside opinion, by an indie musician of some standing, will help settle the matter? (Assuming she’s not too busy with promotion and performances to answer, but she usually does when my question carries some weight). I can also ask Natalie Gelman, another indie musician, how she feels about authors using the label, but I pretty much know her opinion – she told me independent artists of any stripe should support one another.
So, ladies, would outside opinions from a different artistic endeavor be of any help in defining our labels?
Best, Barbara
Hey Barbara,
I think ultimately opinions are like noses. I don’t need the whole world to validate my label. What gets up my butt is the idea that it’s okay to browbeat someone to change their label cause they think it’s stupid or illigitimate or inaccurate. Who cares? Everybody has opinions. That’s fine.
I think in order for the view of an indie musician to be weighed seriously on the idea of indie authorship, they would have to be aware of why indie authors label themselves in such a way and some of the similarities we’ve drawn with what we’re doing to what has been done in music and film before us.
Either way though it’s another opinion. I’m not sure an appeal to authority really wins anything. For some people maybe, not for others.
I don’t really think most self publishing authors are arguing over what to call ourselves. It looks like there is far more division in this issue than there is. Most of us really don’t care what people call themselves. The issue is merely that because Ann didn’t like my label and thought somehow I was attacking her seriousness as a writer with it.
Yes, my original comment may have been slightly hyperbolic due to excitement over the original post content, but come on…it’s stretching to just assume I think Ann isn’t serious for calling herself a self publisher. I wasn’t even addressing her in my original post.
It’s also a stretch to think I was mocking her for using Lulu. I have Lulu books on my SHELF from writer friends whose work I value highly.
I’ve corresponded with people who have been self publishing for decades (Before we had ebooks and POD technology) and take pride in the term self publisher and I would NEVER say they aren’t serious or that their label is wrong. For crying out loud.
But instead of bothering to find that out, instead we get into a discussion about “me” as a person. My motives, my agenda, etc. etc. It’s rather tiresome. I don’t care that some like the label indie and some don’t. People should use the label that they think best fits them. What I care about is not becoming the latest target of attack for someone who can’t stand for anyone to ever disagree with her.
Hi Zoe.
I think, bottom line, I agree with you that it doesn’t really matter what we call ourselves, how we self-identify. It’s a word, and if it feels comfortable to us, and isn’t a lie, there is nothing wrong with it. Others who find it uncomfortable may use another label that feels better to them. As I mentioned in my previous post, I have talked about this with Natalie Gelman, who vigorously supports indie artists no matter the medium. I don’t appeal to her as an authority, but as someone who lives very much with the label “indie” and understands its nuances.
This discussion was the first I’d read/heard that there was any dispute over labels, hence my initial interest in it. Budweiser could start labeling itself “Beer, With a Bite” and it would still be beer, plain and simple. Microbreweries are still beer, the labels they use for themselves simply that, labels, identity markers. Musicians who are indie are still musicians, many of them gifted, and writers the same. Isn’t it all about the route, the business decisions behind the choice, the product, and not the label itself? Indie implies, in many ways, self published, in my mind. If I’m that curious about a book I’m interested in, I can look at the publisher, not that it will affect my decision to buy or not.
Maybe I’m naive, but I think all self pubbed, or indie, or whatever, writers of quality product should be supporting one another in whatever way they can, each wearing the self-descriptor that feels best to them. Just my little opinion. Best, Barbara
Hey Barbara,
I’m sorry about how that came off the “appeal to authority” line. I think maybe I should have phrased it differently. It seems to me if a big indie musician were to come in and say “Yes I totally see where they’re coming from with the indie author label” that it’s just as easy for someone else to call it an appeal to authority and therefore dismiss it anyway.
It seems to me it wouldn’t “win” an argument. Though I would be interested to hear what they have to say.
And I agree with you. Indies/self-published/whatever putting out good work should be supporting each other rather than bickering over labels. It makes us look bad, especially when we bicker in a forum that isn’t made up of only people doing what we’re doing.
“my writing must by definition be inferior.”
Not at all, and you’ve completely missed my point.
Whenever I’ve seen your name mentioned – and I see it a lot – it’s always in the context of your ‘indie publishing’. So you’re getting a name as a ‘indie published’ author. People are focusing attention on your supposed innovation ( I’m simply not getting into that aspect of it at all.)
But they *should* be talking about your novel – or your next novel. Or your past novels. And what a terrific read it is, and how much they want to read the next one, etc etc. Yet I’m not seeing that buzz when I look up your name.
What’s the point of all this interest in you, if it’s not garnering your readers? You’ve shifted attention off what should be important – your writing – onto your business methods, which are simply not terribly enthralling. They’re not enthralling when Mary Q Authoress babbles on about her new contract with Ellora’s Cave, and while there’s trainwreck value in watching Jamaica Layne ‘promote’ something like Ravenous Press, when it comes down to it, all the matters is what they publish, not how. A few industry mavens will want to talk about RR’s supposed plan to blow the opposition out of the water, but the paying public aren’t going to give a toss.
So what are you – a writer or a publisher? If you’re a writer, then go write. You’re hawking a single novel around the place, but its name is not prominent when I do a google search. You want people to read your book? Write more books. But if you don’t like writing enough to do that, and keep doing it, then how you publish isn’t enough to make this a worthwhile experience for anyone.
I doubt you’ll take the least advice from me, so I can only do what works for me – write, shove it out wherever people will take it, write some more. I love writing, and I love interacting with my readers. The business side of it bores me shitless. More than anything, the whole ‘indie publishing’ concept turns me off because I’m not a publisher, and don’t want to be. I don’t buy ISBNs, I don’t buy bulk orders of my books, and I don’t even take orders directly for ebooks via PayPal. I am not interested in what you are so fanatic about promoting (quite aside from my intense ethical disapproval of your methods, which there’s no point in repeating.) Being self-published, I thought, meant getting right out of the politics of publishing, and labels, and expectations, and here you and your friends are trying to lay that all down on a group of people who are, by definition, allergic to it.
Do you want to be known as ‘Zoe Winters, indie published author’ or simply as ‘Zoe Winters, kickass writer’? I know what I want. Do you?
No worries, Zoe, no apology needed, but thanks. You do make a valid point – it’s just an opinion, no matter who uttered it. And we all know the saying about opinions…
And I really don’t think arguments can be “won.” The individual has too much invested in their opinion to capitulate all that easily. Sometimes “commentary” from an outside source may help influence an opinion, but in the end, does it all really matter?
Our product speaks for itself, in the end, no matter who produced it. To me, that’s all that matters, the work itself, and not the name of the publisher on the spine. I think we agree there, as well. But I will ask Jill what she thinks, but I won’t count on an answer, the woman is running herself ragged at the moment, and post it here – or give it to you privately. Best, Barbara
Ann, on blogs and places about independent/self publishing I think the focus “should” be on the act of indie publishing itself. Just like publishing industry blogs talk about facets of publishing rather than talking about individual books. For example when Nora Roberts posts over on Dear Author, while sometimes someone will mention one of her books or being a fan, that’s not the *topic* of conversation.
If people just randomly started talking about how much they liked my work on a forum or post not even *about* my work, it would feel a little awkward. When I’m talking about a publishing method, I don’t *need* for people to stroke my writer ego that exact second. I have overall wonderful reviews on Amazon, mostly from complete strangers, and even Mrs. Giggles encouraged people to go download KEPT from her blog. And Mrs. Giggles found me on her own.
But when I’m talking publishing, it’s about me as a *publisher* not necessarily about me as an *author.* Or my specific work. To me being a publisher as in the act of publishing, is just as important as the act of being an author. I love both aspects of the process equally. The business hat as well as the creative hat.
If you don’t, that’s fine. We are all different people with different value systems, wants, and needs.
I don’t think my identity as *an author* is somehow more important than my identy as *a publisher.*
It shouldn’t be surprising that when you search out my name you find so much about indie publishing, because I’m actively involved in those communities. But when you search Zoe Winters, one of the first things that should come up is my blog and author profile. On my blog there is a page on what readers are saying at the very top menu bar. Not hard to find.
You must not have been looking very hard. On amazon you can see that I’m normally in the top 2,000 in the kindle store sales rank and out of 19 reviews, only one is mixed. Most of these people I do not know.
So if I’m becoming “known” as an indie, then GREAT, because that’s what I want. I want to be one of the voices in this movement. Because it’s not all just about “me” and my individual fiction right now. It’s about a lot more than just that.
Since the end of November when I began to make it available I’ve had over 5,000 readers (that I can track) of KEPT. I’ve had fantastic feedback. I’ve had newsletter subscribers. I’ve had gushing emails. If I’d been more actively marketing it, I’m sure I would have had more. I’ve been pretty radio silent online for about two months, during which time, my downloads and kindle sales were being fueled entirely by word of mouth and my kindle store sales rank. So saying I’m not making any dent at all for my actual fiction is a bit of a stretch.
But I don’t *need* to talk about that all the time. What’s more important to me right now isn’t just my own success, but this whole movement going on around indie authorship. It’s an exciting thing to me to be a part of. *just as* exciting as my own individual fiction efforts.
And I *am* writing more books. Why are you so concerned with what I’m doing, Ann? Just do your own thing and don’t worry so much about what’s important to me.
Thanks, Barbara, I’d love to hear her take!
For the record, because Ann was kind enough to let me know my name came up here (and I mean that sincerely)…
It may be a bit late for me to comment here but I stupidly lost my email password and so haveonly just been made aware of this discussion. Yes. I had a bit of a tiff with Zoe at DA a while back. A misunderstanding. I would like to make clear here that Zoe and I had (at least as far as I was concerned; I can’t speak for Zoe) patched up our differences and apologized to each other. I certainly bear her no ill will, and wish her the best, and I’m saying that because our argument was brought back up and I thought it would be good to mention.
For the record also, no, I am not Ann, and I think anyone with access to our IPs can confirm that. I do happen to like Ann, but I am not Ann.
That is all.
Hey Anion! đ Yep, we patched things up. I knew you and I had had that argument that time on DA (which to be fair to you, I was pretty defensive from the start, had I not been that way it wouldn’t have happened.) But I was *sure* that Ann and I had scuffled too. I could be wrong on that point. But once I’m called stupid for an honest mistake, you can see how I don’t want to even further get into the issue. (not by you.)
What probably led me to believe that Ann and I had scuffled before was in her original post to me where she said:
“I think you meant to say âindie publishedâ as youâve said before – and itâs a stance I think seriously misleads people. An indie publisher is a small press putting their income at risk to publish *other* authors. If youâre only publishing yourself, then youâre self-published. Youâre risking your own money and time for your benefit alone. Blurring the terms debases the currency of terminology.”
Where she said “as you’ve said before…” just made me think she and I had argued about this issue before because it felt very much like dejavu, specifically on DA which was the only place I’d posted where she also posted. If she and I didn’t directly argue, then I’m mistaken, but I do know she and you aren’t the same person. I had thought she and I had gotten into it *in addition to* me and you.
If that was incorrect then I apologize to her for that assumption. A lot of my initial defensiveness came in part from how I read her initial statement and felt she was opening an old can of worms. Though all the other attacks on my integrity/honesty/intelligence/general disposition, etc. didn’t exactly lead to super friendly conversation.
Anyway, good to see you. đ
Zoe, you and I have never, ever interacted before this, and you clearly leapt to an erroneous and insulting conclusion based on no evidence. I’ve *seen* you talking about being ‘indie published’ before. Doesn’t mean I’ve *talked* to you about it. Your views and reputation are as well known as my own.
“though all the other attacks on my integrity/honesty/intelligence/general disposition, etc. didnât exactly lead to super friendly conversation.’
I think it’s fair to say you were the originator of a fair few very personal attacks yourself, and attempting to portray yourself as the helpless wounded damsel is a bit rich.
In any event, our two points of view are irreconcilable, as are our ambitions, so there’s no point in pursuing it. So long as you don’t attempt or appear to speak for all self-published authors again, you and I should never need to interact for any reason. I hope not.
Good luck with your writing and your career.
Ann, actually we have interacted before this, in the link on DA that you posted. It just wasn’t rude. But I’ve watched you call people names all over the internet. Your reputation precedes you and your tone with me in your original post caused me to misremember. I don’t always have the best memory in the world, excuse me for my lack of perfection.
It was an honest mistake. But when you come back lambasting me for my obvious stupidity, you can see where I might no longer care to offer you an apology.
LMAO I’ve never portrayed myself as a wounded damsel, and I won’t pretend to be an innocent who has never said anything even remotely mean to anyone, but I’d love to know what you consider a personal attack against you on my part here. Other than the misunderstanding over us communicating before.
HAHAHAHA @ “so long as you don’t attempt to speak for all self-published authors again” I never spoke for all self published authors to begin with, you just assumed I did. I’m not even sure why the statement: “Be prepared to start hearing serious self publishing authors…” in your head translates into: “you aren’t a serious self publishing author unless you use the label I use.”
I didn’t say that, I didn’t mean that, and I won’t let you chastize me for things I’ve never said or meant. Your personal perception and interpretation of my words are not my personal responsibility. If you need clarification you ask.
I too hope we never interact again, to quote a well known source, I feel very much like I’ve been run over by a truck after interacting with you. That doesn’t make me a ‘wounded damsel,’ just means I’ve had to displeasure of being hit by hurricane Ann.
Be well.
It amuses the hell out of me that after insinuating I’m dishonest, highlighting my stupidity in many different posts, saying I suck and can call myself a baboon’s erection… that SOMEHOW… you still get to take the moral high ground.
UNfreakingBelieveable.
We are two people who clearly don’t get along. There is no need to act like one of us is a saint.