I think the author/publisher role may indeed be making a comeback.

Perhaps a group of writers could form some kind of collective where they enforce mutually agreed upon standards, cross-promote their stuffs, etc.

That could be pretty cool with the right people.

Still, there are a lot of headaches that a traditional publisher takes on. Not sure I’m ready to abandon ship just yet.

Doesn’t that sound silly? It’s sort of a circular reference, isn’t it? Back in the days of print, before there were electronic publishers, the only people who published were the people who have the means to reproduce their copy on some medium, such as paper or lambskin. When someone wanted to get something published, they had to appeal to the likes and dislikes of the publisher or have the means to hire someone to print it for them.

However, it’s important to remember that the idea of getting a book published also embodies the process of getting the book distributed to people who will sell it. Today’s book publishers often seem to have an inside track on book distribution.

With the advent of the World Wide Web, publishing has become electronic, which has thrown the whole distribution game wide open. Suddenly there are new players in the market hungry for electronic books to sell.

Nevertheless, what’s really at the root of the stigma that is attached to “self-publishing”? Why does it so often seem to be regarded as low-quality publishing?Perhaps the big name publishers somehow promote that myth in order to further their own sales.

It’s interesting to note that if you look back at some of the books we consider classics today, the authors were actually publishers themselves. Not only did they publish other people’s works, but also their own. For some reason, some of these works are now considered classics. The question is, would they have been published at all if the authors had not also been the publishers?

My advice is to follow the example of these people: attempt to own the means of production whenever possible. If you know your market, this is the clearest path to success. If you can’t own the means of production, at least know your market. If your access is blocked, find another way in.

After all, if you have a desire to say something that is truly important, isn’t it better to get it into the hands of those who are truly interested in reading it?

Lastly, you may note in reading between the lines of what I’ve said above, that I have omitted any reference to making money off of what you have written. Should you be willing to write for free?

If you understand your market, and your desire is to get something said, then it may be necessary to get it published without charging money for the work.

On the other hand, if your desire is to make money by working as a writer, it may be necessary for you to write about something other than your heart’s desire. Again, if you understand your market, you can learn how to serve the needs of the market through your writing abilities.

Sometimes it’s not possible to make money by writing about your heart’s desire, but that does not mean that publishing the work yourself in order that people can read it makes it any less of an important work.

Do what you love, and the money will follow.