Peace,
Richard

Rick Rofihe vs. Rick Moody — ok UNTIL “Big Jackie D” steps in…

http://www.themanwhofellasleep.com/pictures/derrida.jpg
http://www.americanshortfiction.org/blog/?p=2220

@ Larina – oh, so you SUCKERED me into this side of the debate. I see now. I didn’t realize that publishing online does not “count” towards a PhD. What if you win a Pushcart, or get into BASS after being online, or are in the Dzanc Best of the Web? I guess nothing that comes before the actual print edition matters? What about places that now publish online, universities. Is that just a waste of time then? That’s a shame. I’d say that if you get paid, you get paid. But I wasn’t aware of the intricacies of tenure track positions.

And I wasn’t saying that people are publishing online SO they can teach. I was saying that people like myself are involved with many different aspects of the writing world, and part of that may be teaching.

As far as academia, I definitely think that getting into print is a whole different thing, something I probably should have touched on. You want to be in PRINT with Missouri Review, Granta, The New Yorker, or wherever. I’m sure that many places publish these stories online after the fact, as a convenience to their readers only. And I’m glad that taking in a copy of a journal to a job interview has been a benefit. But that might be a heavy suitcase to lug around, eh?

My dream is to be read, but to write what I want, when I want, and appear where and when I want. In other words, like Mr. Sinatra, I wanna do it, and I wanna do it my way.

Thanks, I’ll surrender the soap box now!

@ Caleb – thanks. I don’t know if I PREFER online, and I do see a need for print, and enjoy being in print myself, but for many reasons, being online can be just just as effective, depending on your goals.

@ David – appreciate the comments. And I too love holding a book. Maybe online fiction, especially flash, is in some ways similar to enjoying movies in the theatre vs. at home. Both are very different experiences, but are there to fill different needs.

@ Cat – I heard about that. And that’s a shame, but we can’t let one nut ruin the whole forest, eh? And what happened to this guy or the work he stole? In the end he was found out, and the original author PROBABLY got some good exposure. But that does suck. I hope if he really SOLD them that he was forced to give that money to Zapata.

@ Larina – how DARE you come in my house and talk to me this way. KIDDING. Let me address your comments. Rebut the rebuttal.

Exposure. I think there are a LOT of great sites, and the discerning reader will find the good ones. In two years I’ve found many great places to publish online and have broken into several (i.e., Word Riot, Dogmatika, and 3:AM Magazine) and am still trying to get into many others. There will be eyes there. Will this reach the vast consumer audience? No. But neither will the tiny run print journals. Mass sales and readership – why that’s talking about being a popular writer, like say Stephen King or John Grisham or JK Rowling. And WHO would want that?

Traffic. Sure, that’s hard to check. I know that Troubadour is just random hits, INCLUDING my own, so it’s probably only a fraction of unique visitors. You have a WordPress, and know we can track visitors. I believe that the hits I see each month (and correct if I’m wrong) ARE for unique visitors. Again, online won’t get you 10,000 viewers, but neither will most small press journals, no matter how prestigious.

Payment. That’s tough. I know. But it’s just very hard to get paid for every story. Many editors are just going to go with authors they know, that will bring in readers, loyal readers. Exposure IS payment, that publishing credit goes on your writer’s resume. And it matters, it can lead to other writing assignments, editors that approach you for work, it has happened to me. And what about that contributor’s copy? Sure, it’s nice. Put it on the shelf. It’s great for the ego, the library, and to show friends and family. But what is it WORTH? Not much, in monetary value, or otherwise. It’s nice to have. There is pride involved, but I’m just as proud of my work up at some online places as I am of my print work.

For me when it comes to my babies, the stories that I really love I want them to be placed in the most prestigious publication I can, or the “coolest” and get paid the most amount of money, with the biggest audience I can get. I’ll take whatever combination of those variables comes my way.

And lots of artists, as well as any other line of work, give their work away. Photographers do it all the time, as do bloggers/columnists, graphic designers, bands, etc. Sure, I agree with you, we SHOULD all get paid. And paid well. But that’s just not the reality of the world we’re in.

I think for many of us, the dream is not only to be a published novelist or short story writer, but to be able to do it for a living. To garner respect, to have a following, to entertain and amaze. Many of us would like to teach. Some us would like to edit and publish others as well. It’s all connected.

Publishing online is just part of this complicated equation.

Great discussion.

Peace,
Richard

The other issue I have is around payment. This is a potentially controversial issue, but writers have been underpaid for so long that they’ve fallen into the trap of thinking, “Exposure is payment.” It isn’t. Because in six months or a year, the editor of that web site is either going to take your story down permanently (bad, bad, bad!) or archive it somewhere that you may or may not be able to find. Now, the payment doesn’t have to be cash. Advertising is expensive and an advertisement can serve as payment with a quantifiable value. Further opportunities to participate with a journal can be payment and can drastically increase exposure to a writer’s work by giving them multiple opportunities to be “picked out of the crowd” so to speak. A contributor’s copy that they can share with people can be payment (even if it’s a .pdf copy). A subscription can be payment. Too few online publishing venues think outside of the box and as a result, take advantage of writers who just want their work to be read. Bottom line: writers SHOULD be paid SOMETHING for their work. What other art form isn’t?

Fun stuff–thanks!