Why give any money to the publishing industry when it's

I'm Black so they'll publish me on principle.

>>7672597
You bring up an interesting point but I don't have an answer for you.

>>7672597
>Do you guys seriously think these people are the judges of what is and isn't worthwhile art?
Literally no one thinks that. Publishing is about profits over everything else.

>>7672599
http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/nov/30/marlon-james-writers-of-colour-pander-white-woman-man-booker-event-brief-history-seven-killings

>The 2015 Man Booker prize winner Marlon James has slammed the publishing world, saying authors of colour too often “pander to white women” to sell books, and that he could have been published more often if he had written “middle-style prose and private ennui”.


He is a SJW of the highest degree, but he fucking hates the publishing status quo.

>>7672605
good thing I'm writing sci-fi

>>7672619
You must have missed what happened with the Hugos and the World Fantasy Award, and you better fucking believe publishers paid attention

>>7672604

Publishing a book on your own, even in tjhe internet age, is known as vanity publishing ffs. Everyone on /lit/ shits on it and sees it as a sign of failure. Almost as if they can't objectively judge books or something....

>>7672624
I didnt pay full attention, guess its worth looking into.

>>7672625
The Martian was self-published and bro walked out with a movie deal.

>>7672605
>James wrote: “While she recognizes how much she was pandering to the white man, we writers of colour spend way too much time pandering to the white woman … astringent, observed, clipped, wallowing in its own middle-style prose and private ennui, porn for certain publications.”

James is truly /lit/ tier

>>7672629
You're statistically better off working at a part time job in order to afford lottery tickets.

>>7672625
As someone who has worked at a vanity publisher of "whos who" books ala Foucaults Pendulum, I assure you it is not

>>7672641
I admire bohemian authors

>>7672625
It's only vanity publishing if you aren't successful. Quality basically isn't a question at all when it comes to what is or isn't "vain". I wrote a book that I knew no publisher would touch so I put it up on amazon under a pseudonym. I don't really care about the "vanity" label at all. It's just a meme spread by the industry to protect its "legitimacy".

>>7672659
Which book?

>>7672597
>Why give any money to the publishing industry when it's a bunch of ivy league roasties with vanity jobs and investment banker husbands
True.
>and a feminist agenda?
Lol virgin

>>7672660
http://www.amazon.com/The-Magnificent-Third-Rail-Retrospective-ebook/dp/B016605O6C

It's absolutely nothing like any book that's been published in the last 20 years.

Somewhat related bros. I'm reading Savage Detectives and alot of the first third of the book revolves around literary journals where new and masterful works are either presented or discussed.

Is there anything like that for males with literary pretensions aged 22-40? I agree with publishers being shit (look at walmart books for sale) but is there any source outside /lit/ that discusses literature in a structured critical way?

>>7672676
> #1,848,563 Paid in Kindle Store (See Top 100 Paid in Kindle Store)
>#862 in Kindle Store > Kindle eBooks > Literature & Fiction > Literary Fiction > Satire
>#2876 in Kindle Store > Kindle eBooks > Humor & Entertainment > Humor > Satire
>#3765 in Kindle Store > Kindle eBooks > Literature & Fiction > Genre Fiction > Satire

Mirin

>>7672626
> guess its worth looking into.

Don't. There is zero information about this issue anywhere that isn't explicitly in service of the author's political agenda.

>>7672717
Even wikipedia?

The WFA controversy I can understand. Although I have nothing but respect for Lovecraft and his work I can understand the administrators wanting to change things up to better reflect the times. Besides, its not like there arent so many other good sci-fi authors to choose from as the bust.

The Hugo thing...idk, its sketchy as hell on both sides.

>>7672676
>>7672682
So Amazon publishing is legit? How do you get the word out?

>>7672717
>>7672731
What happened? Give me a quick green text

>>7672746
>"sad puppies" group believes that Hugo awards are rigged by leftists so that only women and minorities can win
>they proceed to openly try to rig them in the opposite direction
>"rabid puppies" group takes it even further and tries to rig the award in favor of right-wing authors
>much gnashing of teeth on all sides
>award is stripped of all respectability, so outcome doesn't even matter

Ultimately it comes down to whether you believe Sad Puppies was correct in their conspiracy theory, although of course no evidence is ever presented for any side.

>>7672738
You basically have to pay for your own ads and put it out for free for a few days if you're unknown. There are a bunch of sites that'll promote free ebooks on twitter and their own sites which helps to make them visible. That and you have to send a bunch of review copies out to bloggers who review indie books, though they take a long time to actually get to you even if they do agree to review your book.

I didn't really know what I was doing when it came to a lot of that stuff so I'm still waiting on reviews from a few bloggers because I sent out review copies after I published the book. It's probably better to send them out before you publish it.

>>7672763
Cool, thanks for the headsup anon, and congrats!

>>7672676
>It's absolutely nothing like any book that's been published in the last 20 years.
yeeeahhhhh... reading the preview of this bile and this is all i can think of
https://youtu.be/w5R8gduPZw4?t=152

>>7672760
Interesting, I wonder if they were correct

I wonder how long had it been since a white male won

File: jim butcher.jpg (5KB, 150x188px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 150x188px

>>7672793
Uhhh dude the award results are public.

http://www.thehugoawards.org/hugo-history/2015-hugo-awards/

Skimming down I notice Jim Butcher, of Dresden Files fame. This is popular with lefties, but AFAIK it isn't explicitly political.

>>7672818
I simply didn't care enough to look into it, thank you for the spoon feeding though, anon

>>7672788
I'm not saying it's better than everything published in that time period. Just different, which it is. It's not even "I'm clever" so much as "I'm bored of the typical book/story so I'm willing to color outside the lines even if everyone hates it".

I don't I don't really care.

It is kind of funny how women complain about the gender imbalance in stem etc but there's no hue and cry when there's an dearth of males in some plum job like book publishing. IIRC the only whining is that there's not enough black people or trannies involved.

>>7672914

Eeeek! Virgin!

>>7672679
No

File: TAR DED.jpg (29KB, 205x227px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 205x227px

>>7672676

>7672676

noice adumbrated recursive eterni-dubs my mangs but ur marigold mangarrolously mongoloid-gay AF mangum osup aint 2 robuste-rose but 4 rote-sub besuitor eisejeuxtaposin'

>>7672944

Well at least I haven't been culturally enriched by a train of bbc

>>7672717
Oh no I might have to think critically about what I read.