Yes, we are all independent

We're all independent, we authors. Whether we are self-publishing, or publishing with trade presses, or a mixture. Some people use the word "indie" for self-publishing, which reveals a misunderstanding of what being a "published" author is. And, for those of you who are looking for a publisher for your work, it's important to know.


Authors are independent. We're self-employed. No one can tell us what to write or even when, though we may well have discussions about it. If we want to write something that someone doesn't want to buy, whether that someone is a publisher or an actual reader, we all have to decide what to do about that - and we can choose to self-publish. Self-publishing authors also have to make decisions which may involve balancing the desire to attract readers and the desire to write exactly what they want, or ignoring one of those factors. It's what we all do in one way or another, as writers. No man or woman is an island. We're all inter-dependent in some ways, and independent in others. No?

I've written books for Walker Books, Hodder, Barrington Stoke, Egmont, Hodder Wayland, Snowbooks and some book packaging companies. Some of those have been simultaneous. I've never had problems moving from one to another and running simultaneous contracts, writing the sorts of books I want for the sorts of publishers who publish them. Neither I nor any of those publishers felt constrained in any way. These are business arrangements, entered into voluntarily, and some of the people I've worked with have become friends. They certainly haven't ruled me.

Yes, published authors have editors but not once has my editor ever forced a change I didn't want - not once in all my books and with any of my editors. Good editors show us how they think our work can be better but, if we disagree, they cannot force us to make the changes. There is, however, a sense of being part of a team, I agree. But I'd argue that a team needn't be a constraint, or, if it is, even that may sometimes be a price worth paying for the support.

Yes, a contract may include an option clause but an agent can get you out of a option clause. I regard option clauses as a statement of positive commitment, not a shackle. If they are handcuffs, the handcuffs are made of sugar strands. They break.

Yes, our contracts include details about foreign rights and many things we can or can't do. (Almost all of which are up for discussion and many of which my agent and I have had changed.) But that's because we've entered a commercial agreement for that particular book, and we have voluntarily sold something limited to the publisher, in return for certain services and commitments. Self-publishing authors also agree to contracts with Amazon or Lulu or Smashwords or whatever, or contracts with their cover designers or formatters etc. That's what you do when you buy or sell something. What we don't do is sell our souls, none of us, or not unless we want to.

I'm free to diversify, to experiment, to stretch myself, or to stay doing what I've been doing. OK, so I sometimes have to persuade people to go along with me, but that's fine. OK, so I have some obligations, but don't we all have obligations, unless we're utterly self-centred and arrogant? We have obligations to our readers, don't we?

So, authors are all independent. We're all free, not slaves.

And, incidentally, the more I allow a publisher to handle the publishing for me, the more free I am to write. Which is what I'm about to do. There are no guarantees that what I write will be accepted by a publisher - because it's new territory for me - but then I'll be free to decide what to do about that.

So, I don't need to call myself independent, because I am anyway. I'm happy just being called a writer. That's all that matters to me.