With the recent Harlequin situation there have been many discussions and blog articles about ethics and publishing and also about what constitutes a writer. Whether you’re interested or not, whether you agree or not, here’s my opinion.
I disagree with those who say you’re not a writer if you publish with a vanity press, self-publish, or aren’t published at all. If you write, whether it’s a hobby or a profession, you’re a writer. I see absolutely no problem with self-publishing if you make an informed decision about it.
I ran a micro-press for years. People would submit their work to me and if it was accepted I’d format it, take it to the photocopy shop and assemble it into booklets called zines. No one involved had any illusions about making big or even moderate sales. I paid in copies and usually lost money on the zines I produced or sometimes broke even. It was something done for the love. I had a great time and I think those involved would agree that it was a good learning experience for all of us. I felt privileged to have some wonderful stories, poems and artwork submitted to my publications. Personally I don’t hesitate to purchase from independent publishers or self-published people if their work interests me. I’ve read books from both major publishers and small presses that I didn’t enjoy and others I’ve loved. I’ve known self-published authors who printed small quantities of their books (300 or so) and with hard work they sold every one.
To me the problem is a vanity press hinting that if you pay their high prices to have your book published and marketed by them, you’ll hit it big, get noticed by Hollywood, et cetera. Most people who are with royalty paying publishers never become household names, so a vanity press suggesting that their writers/customers will achieve fame and fortune by that route seems objectionable to me.
Social
