Thursday, September 12, 2013


While reading Chuck Wendig's blog, Terrible Minds, I came across an interesting post on his theory that if you publish your own book you are both an author and a publisher and should both call yourself that and behave accordingly. He does swear a bit so be warned but you can read his thoughts on why self publishers  should rename themselves as author-publishers here.

There are some thought provoking ideas here and, if we are going to be serious about treading newer routes in getting published, we need to look at all aspects of it. Publishing is a business so perhaps if we are considering self-publishing we should remind ourselves of that. It's not just having the thrill of seeing our words in print or in an e-book anymore. It's about sales and that means every aspect of getting a book out to the public - editing, illustration, marketing, all those things which traditional publishers do - come back onto the author. That, in turn, means everything should look and sound professional so, given that producing and marketing a book means, yes, you are both an author and a publisher, why wouldn't you call yourself that? Makes sense to me. What do you think?


  1. I'm running a workshop on September 21 about all this, at Katherine's Place in the hills. 11 Old York Road, Greenmount. Call and reserve your spot. I have been an author/publisher since 2008, and I've never looked back.

  2. Hi Rosanne. I always enjoy your workshops and learn a lot but unfortunately I can't drive at the moment so I won't be able to be there this time.

  3. I agree, Helen - 'author publisher' is a much better term than 'indie author'. It reminds the person that they have a business to run as well as a creative endeavour to nurture.

    I would have liked to do Rosanne's workshop too but I have a previous engegagement of long standing.