Chuck Wendig offers a dissenting opinion on the common “the cream will rise” argument for filtering quality work in self-publishing:
If I take 10 randomly-selected books from the bookstore and then I choose 10 random self-published books, I genuinely believe that the bookstore books will at least meet the standards for being well-put-together and, to boot, will be books I don’t like based on subjective definitions. But I’ll bet you that at least half of the self-published books fail based on errors that any C-grade writer or publisher should’ve caught and fixed.
This is a key point that often gets glossed over in the trad pub vs. self-pub debate. Traditionally published books must meet certain standards of technical and mechanical competence; self-published books have no such standards.
Trad-pubbed books are primarily criticized on a subjective basis: on an artistic rather than technical level. Twilight—or, in fairness, Freedom—may be the worst books ever written, but their problems don’t include things like verb tense disagreements or head-hopping.
Self-pubbed books often fail to make it past that first hurdle. Even when properly proofread, they fall apart at the gray middle levels between science and art: the places where editors and beta readers would say, “Jane is acting out of character here,” or “Cut this infodump,” or “The build-up to the climax needs more suspense.”
But it’s all moot, because the trad pub vs. self-pub argument has become so heated and so much about the writers that it’s forgotten what really matters:
This attitude is great for writers. “Who cares? Poop out a book!”
This attitude sucks for readers. “I just bought this book. And I think it’s made of poop?”
One Very Important Thing traditional publishing offers to readers is the assurance that a book has not only been proofread, but has received editorial feedback from several to dozens of readers before it’s launched into the world.
And as Chuck points out, there’s no evidence that the cream rises on Amazon. The great anarchic muddle of self-publishing is still at a loss for subjective quality filters.
