Reflections on RWA Nationals

Quite a few romance writers and bloggers have already weighed in with their own insightful posts about last week's Romance Writers of America's annual national conference, with posts that range from the enthusiastic—Jenn Northington's "The 11 Best Things I Heard at the RWA"; All About Romance's day-by-day posts, the first one here—to the analytical—Suleikha Snyder's "RWA 2015: A Tale of Two Conferences"; Jessica Tripler's "Socioeconomic Class at RWA" to name just a few. Lots of food for thought, and for future action on many fronts.

I was wearing three different hats during this conference—a local Chapter Leader (as Treasurer of the NECRWA); a romance reviewer and blogger (RNFF); and a writer of a soon-to-be-self-published historical romance. This made for a rather disjointed conference at times, rushing from a workshop entitled "Not So Fast: Finding Success while writing in the Slow Lane" to a Chapter Leadership Networking Event, then on to "50 Shades of Love: Writing the Multicultural Romance"; from a retreat for not-yet-published writers to a General RWA Membership meeting to a workshop filled with advice about writing queer romance in a "post-gay" environment. Now that I've had a few days to reflect on the hectic experience of conferencing in the midst of the bizarreness of Times Square (did you know that its legal in NYC for women to go topless? and that people will pay to get their pictures taken with one who has painted her chest like an American flag??), these are the moments/events/ideas that are sticking with me:

• Learning about servants, music, fabric, interior decorating, and dancing with my fellow Regency romance writers at the Beau Monde mini-conference. I was really looking forward to getting dressed up in my newly made Regency ball gown and dance those Regency dances at the Beau Monde's evening soiree, and, despite my embarrassment at the fact that the majority of my fellow attendees were not in period garb when I waltzed into the Marriott Astor Ballroom that evening, I did manage to screw up my courage and trip the light fantastic for a few sets. Thanks so much to Susan De Guardiola (of Capering and Kickery) and her dance student ringers for stepping out with me and with my fellow Beau Monders.


• The continuing split in knowledge/understanding between those who have been traditionally published and those who self-publish. There are a lot of writers who are doing both, but for those who "grew up" publishing via one method and not the other, there can often be a big disconnect about what can and will lead to success in the other. Perhaps not surprisingly, the above-mentioned workshop on being successful while writing in the "slow lane" included panelists who had all been traditionally published (with only one who was a hybrid author), while the panelists on "The Midlist Guide to Making Six Figures in Indie Publishing" all spoke about working 50 (or 80, or 100)-hour workweeks to keep their readers interested and their businesses going. I didn't attend any workshops on hybrid publishing, though; perhaps the disconnects were less obvious among those who have followed both paths.


• But the national organization continues to adapt (if slowly) to the burgeoning shift in the romance market toward self-publishing. Self-published authors were once barred completely from the "PAN" (Published Authors Network) listserv and group; more recently, self-publishers were allowed in, but had to earn $5,000 on a single book title, in comparison to the $1,000 a traditionally published author had to earn, to qualify. But now, even that disparity has been erased; now, any author who has earned at least $1000 on a published book, whether published by a traditional house, a small publisher, or by him or herself, can join this elite subgroup within the national organization.

• Many bloggers have written about the high profile diversity in romance played at the conference. There was not just one, but four different panels on the whys and hows (and how-nots) to increase the diversity of romance characters, and the number of authors of color, in the field. Four authors of color (Alyssa Cole, Lena Hart, K. M. Jackson, and Falguni Kothari) put together a slick brochure, one that looked like a supplement to a Romance Times magazine, to distribute to attendees, which included "Do's, Don'ts, and Why nots!" as well as a good dollop of humor ("Celebrating the MOST used stock couple in any one genre!"), to jumpstart people's thinking about this important issue. What most bloggers have not mentioned is that the RWA Board announced at the General Member meeting that it had just approved the creation of an ad hoc committee on Diversity in the organization. No mandate or goals for said committee were mentioned, however. It will be fascinating to watch both activists on the individual and small group level, as well as this ad hoc committee on the national level, to see if their goals and end results converge or diverge over the next few years.


• The panelists in the workshop on "Writing Queer Romance" focused on our "post-gay cultural moment," arguing that in the wake of the Supreme Court decision legalizing gay marriage, and the more widespread acceptance of LGBTQ identities in wide swaths of American culture, romances featuring queer characters no longer have to be just about issues of coming out, or about problems of acceptance. How about a story about a lesbian couple, with one partner who wants to have a baby, but the other doesn't? Or have major philosophical or moral differences about adopting vs. giving birth? Even if the conflict is about being queer, it can be less about major homophobia, and more about the micro-aggressions LGBTQ people experience in their day-to-day lives.

After sitting in on this panel, and the one panel on diversity I was able to attend, it felt to me as if LGBTQ romance is farther along, acceptance-wise amongst readers and writers of romance, than is racially and ethnically diverse romance. Queer Romance panelists Sarah Frantz Lyons and Radclyffe both spoke about moving beyond the need to justify queer romance's mere existence, something that romance about and by people of color is having to work hard to do.


• The Chapter Leadership Networking Event on Saturday afternoon consisted primarily of a bunch of topic tables, the subjects of which reflected the current problems and issues facing local chapters today. "How to attract and keep members"; "How to get published authors involved"; "Chapter Finances"; "How to recruit chapter board members"; "Dealing with Difficult Personalities." Thanks to my fellow chapter officers for sharing complaints, and solutions, to the many difficulties chapters are currently facing, particularly in the wake of the recent changes in RWA bylaws.


• The most difficult panel I attended was also in many ways the most encouraging: "Writing Through Depression." Five well-known romance authors sat in the front of a hotel conference room and shared their experiences of what is often a shame-ridden, hidden illness. The panelists asked for no tweeting of particulars during the session, which means no blogging after the fact, either. But I did want to give a big "thank you" to both the panelists and to RWA for challenging the stigmatization around this important issue. Those of us who grapple with mental health issues really appreciate knowing that we are not alone.


Other RWA attendees, what did you take away from this year's conference? And for those who didn't attend, what are you curious to know about what did (and didn't) happen?

Duke's UNSUITABLE lecture series #4: Courtney Milan on Self-Publishing

RNFF readers will remember my post last fall about speaking at the inaugural meeting of Duke University’s  “Unsuitable” events series, talks by professionals in the romance field that engage students and members of the Durham community in a discussion of women’s interests and popular fiction. As I live so far from North Carolina, I’ve not been able to attend any of the subsequent talks in the series, but I’m pleased to report that students from Duke instructors and romance authors Laura Florand and Katherine Ashe’s “The Romance Novel” (HST 248S.01) class have offered to give RNFF readers a sneak peak by reporting about “Unsuitable” events and speakers.

Please join me in welcoming guest blogger Katherine Berko, who will talk about attending UNSUITABLE #4 on March 2nd, a talk by romance author and self-publisher Courtney Milan.

“UNSUITABLE Event Number Four: Publishing Without a Publisher” was about to commence at Duke University, and New York Times-bestselling historical romance novelist Courtney Milan sat in a midnight blue dress, a few scraps of scribbled notes in front of her, ready to enlighten both undergraduate students and Durham locals about her journey to becoming a self-published author.  Little did audience members know that Milan was about to give them a combination math lesson, autobiographical story, and business speech, cracking jokes all the while.  Yet what less could be expected of a woman who studied chemistry and math as an undergrad while simultaneously running a data collection for HTML, went to law school, served as a clerk for Supreme Court Justice O’Connor, taught as a professor of law, and who now had done a full 360, choosing to write romance novels in the heart of the Rocky Mountains?  How did she manage to do all of that?  Well, as Milan unashamedly admitted, “I’m really smart.  I’m a girl so I’m not supposed to say that,” she chuckled, “but I’m actually really smart.”

Milan began her talk by explaining how the ability to publish a book digitally has revolutionized the self-publishing world.  No longer are a minute percentage of people self-published; with the popularity of digital books, it is increasingly easy for writers to self-publish their work.  Milan elaborated on the pros of being self-published: the first pro she shared was that there is a direct-financial benefit to digital sales.  With a publisher, an author gets around 17.5% of the purchase price in revenue. But when self-publishing, an author receives about 70% of the purchase price.  Another benefit to self-publishing is the increased author control over publication timing. Milan explained that books get published much quicker sans publisher because there are no committees to run them through. Publishers also often do not share important data with their authors, such as where books are selling, where they aren’t selling, etc.  This brought Milan to her next point: the publisher’s goal. 

The goal of a publisher is to maximize income, not necessarily for the author but instead for the company.  Milan confided, a twinkle in her eyes: “Hypothetically, you can sell more copies than your publisher.”  Then she shared numbers for a recent novel of hers, which happened to be both self-published as well as published through a publisher.  From July through September of 2014, Milan’s publisher sold 1,845 copies of her book.  Meanwhile, in the same time frame, Milan managed to sell 10,363 copies!  Let’s not forget the catch: Milan only gets 17.5% of that $1,845 that her publisher sold!  How could anyone make a living on that?  Luckily, Milan’s savvy brain also snatches 70% of that $10,363 she managed to sell.  Of course, it’s not this way for every self-published novelist out there.  As Milan admitted, “No matter how you publish, it’s not easy.”

Milan explained of the hundreds of thousands of brand-new books published every year, 50% of them do not sell a single copy.  Daunting?  Of course!  However, this should not frighten writers from the realm of self-publishing, as many of the authors of the aforementioned digital books write poorly Some of those non-selling books are good, though, and yet they still do not sell.  Why not?  Milan explained, “If you want to make a living as a writer, you must think of yourself as a small business and think of your work as an art.”  A big reason why many self-published authors don’t sell is because “something about their business sucks.”  Milan instructs listeners that all businesses require capital when they first start out, and becoming a writer is no exception to this rule.  Then Milan reminded her audience that yes, while writing requires capital at the start, a writer does not have to be best-selling to earn that investment, and then some, back.  “50 Shades of Gray has sold a fuck-load of copies,” Milan said, eyes bulging.  “That means 1.4% of the world population bought a copy!” However, Milan then went on to reassure people that they need not sell their book to 1.4 % of the world in order to be successes. To make a living, one only needs 0.0001% of the world’s population to purchase one’s books: not so bad after all, right?  

Why did Milan ultimately crossover from being with a publisher to self-publishing?  She was a success with HQN, one of the best publishers, and quit!  Everybody was shocked by what she did. But Milan had already published four books with HQN, so she had avid followers, which are the key to success.  Milan quit because she’d made very little money from her traditionally-published books, and her publishers pissed her off.  They tried to remove all the elements in her story that somebody could object to. For example, they asked her to remove a gay character from one of her novels.  Milan objected: “These elements are often what we get most excited about.”  She also emphasized that while most publishers are this way, there are still some good ones.  Another reason Milan left was it’s easier to take creative risks without a publisher, be that risk a character in the story or a cover.  Romance novelists often despise their covers, which are selected by their publisher and who can blame these novelists?  Who would want an image of a rapist advertising their book?  A novel’s cover is its marketing device.

Milan told people to understand that: “Super successful self-published books would generally be successful if published by publishers.”  Essentially, Milan explained that a writer should choose whether to self-publish or go with a publisher based on his/her temperament.  Ask yourself: are you a person more stressed by responsibilities or by not being in control?  If the answer to the question is the latter (which happens to be Milan’s answer), then self-publishing is for you.  “The amount of non-writing stuff you have to do is huge,” Milan explained.  This  “stuff” includes finding somebody to design your cover, somebody to edit your book, and many other tasks.  Milan’s biggest hurdle as a self-publisher is finding good people to work with who will not quit.  She pays her workers a lot of money because she is “hard to work with.”

As a closing piece of advice for aspiring authors, Milan said the best person to receive guidance from is somebody who succeeded in marketing their book last year as a new author.  This is because the book market is extremely volatile.  And to make writers feel better about themselves Milan reminded, “The world sucks right now for both types of publishers.”  This is because everything is constantly changing.  However, on the bright side for novelists, “Authors, in general, are being treated better because of self-publishing,” Milan happily told her listeners. So go forth, remember to view your writing as both a business and an art, and look to your temperament to decide what publishing is best for you.

Katherine Berko is a New York City native attending Duke University. She loves to write and hopes to one day publish her own books. Aside from writing, Katherine also enjoys singing opera, as she graduated from LaGuardia High School of the Arts. She travels as much as she can, from the ruins of Machu Picchu to the pagodas of Myanmar.

The Gold Rush of Self-Publishing?

This year, for the first time, the national conference of the Romance Writers of America featured a series of workshops devoted to the craft and logistics of self-publishing. Courtney Milan and other romance authors who had originally been published by traditional publishers spoke about the pleasures, both intellectual and financial, of controlling all aspects of a book's production after switching over to self-publishing. Authors such as Liliana Hart, who had experienced break-out success with nary a nod from a traditional publisher, described how they had built their careers, and their fan bases, from the ground up. Dorien Kelly and other long-time writers spoke about hybrid careers, and in particular about reaping new income by self-publishing backlist titles long ignored by their print publishers. Chairs were often at a premium at the Self-Publishing track workshops, published and potential authors alike eager to learn all they could about a publishing process that only two or three years ago, most would have turned away from with scorn, deeming it appropriate only for writers not good enough to make the cut with an agent or an editor at a big 6 publishing house.

The majority of speakers I heard tended to focus on self-publishing's benefits. Authors no longer need rely on middlemen to choose their cover designs, to promote their new titles, to communicate with booksellers and readers. Nor did they have to restrict their subject-matter, or self-censor, in order to please editors and marketing departments eager to make their books (i.e., their products) palatable to the widest readership possible. No more need to abide by the often arbitrary rules about what "the romance reader" likes or will tolerate, as if the millions of romance readers all share exactly the same tastes. No more accepting contracts heavily weighted in favor of publishers, or dealing with unscrupulous or unsavvy agents. No more being treated as if writers are the supplicants, publishers the ones doing them a favor by deigning to print their books. Most of the upsides of self-publishing, focused as they are on empowering (primarily female) writers, warm a feminist's heart.

Perhaps I am just by nature a contrarian, though, because I found myself suppressing the urge to caution writers about hopping too eagerly on the self-publishing bandwagon, to examine the process and its claims more critically, lest self-empowerment turn too quickly to self-delusion or disillusionment. Very few workshop leaders discussed the downsides of self-publishing. Milan noted that not everyone has the skills to self-publish, the organizational mind-set or the desire for control. Hart discussed the need to hold off on self-publishing until you have at least three to five books ready to launch, and told audience members to be prepared to offer something new (novel, novella, or short story) at least every month to sixty days, otherwise one's rankings on the all-important amazon.com sales charts would quickly sink. No one mentioned whether a book written and published in a month could match the quality of one over which a writer worked and polished for many months (or even, possibly a year!). Will self-publishing push readers even further into accepting quantity instead of quality?

The new closer relationship readers expect from authors—posting on Facebook, Twitter, and other social media sites not just about their books, but about their daily lives—is even more vital for the selfpublished author. With no publisher to rely on to get a book into stores, or into the hands of reviewers, self-published authors need to cultivate readers directly. As agent Steve Axelrod noted in an interview for the Popular Romance Project, such cultivation requires a completely different skill set than the one required for writing compelling prose.

The personal sharing social media demands may also give many writers pause. Do your children, your parents, your significant other really want the world at large to know about their hobbies, their likes and dislikes, their foibles? And how much time are you willing to spend cultivating those readers, as opposed to actually writing your stories?

Are you willing to be a "brand" rather than a writer? For I heard the word "brand" far more often than the word "book."

Money, as well as privacy, may be a stumbling block, especially for previously unpublished writers. The initial start-up costs required to produce a professional-quality book might seem small for authors already making a living from their writing, but how many writers will shell out several thousand dollars, hiring editors, copyeditors, cover designers, and promotional experts, only to find that their returns do not come close to recouping the initial expense?

  

I can't help but be reminded of the 1849 Gold Rush. So many men left everything behind to fly to California in the hopes of striking it rich. Yet the ones who benefitted the most were not the prospectors, but the ones providing services and equipment to them: the barkeeps and cooks, the storekeepers and laundry owners, the overall makers and the whoremasters. Will it be the freelance editors, book designers, file converters, and authors of books about self-publishing (271 at last count listed on amazon.com, 564 on Goodreads) who end up earning the most from the self-publishing boom? And will it be the female romance authors, rather than male prospectors, who are left with so little to show for their leap of faith into the unknown?

As a reader and a reviewer, I also wonder who will serve as the gatekeepers if and when traditional publishers disappear? If my tastes do not match those of the "average" reader, will I be able to find other sources besides popularity charts to guide my way through the deluge of self-published works likely to flood the market in the coming months and years?

So, am I being too much of a Negative Nellie here? What do you think are the potential up-sides of self-publishing, for romance authors? For their readers? What pitfalls do you see?


Photo/Illustration credits:
Publisher cartoon: David Sipress, The New Yorker
Self-publishing time chart: Ryan Gielen, AppNewser