Me, with all my stupid, lofty principles of writing for the sake of writing the story I want to tell and all I'm doing is failing.

You need to define what failure means to you, though. For a lot of people out there, you're a success -- three published novels and good reviews.

The thing about publishing, whether it's traditional or not (and the same is true of any art form), is that only some works are going to be homeruns.

If you're good enough -- or consistently delivering a product enough people want -- you can carry a few hits into a stable lifelong career. Think Stephen King, Nora Roberts. But they also started a long time ago, and had the kind of support from publishers that it's hard to get anymore.

Jennifer Crusie is example of someone who changed her product. Her sales have dropped, and even though I'm willing to read some of the newer stories, I'm not willing to read the collaborations -- I thought they were crap in comparison to her other books.

I don't think you've failed at all, but I would caution that it's dangerous to equate success with "huge bestseller" OR with "undisputed acclaim". Not a lot of people get both, for one, and very few people get either, despite the huge number of books that get published every year.

It's sad, but the market has changed. Not a lot of readers are willing to take a chance on a book that doesn't fit easily into a genre, because there are so many that DO, that they can get automatically.

Also? I'm nervous about Cold Kiss. Yeah, it's YA and it has a paranormal element, but it's not Twilight. There's no ill-fated love (in a continuing sense, or in a "fated to be together through Important Supernatural Goings On" way), there's no hero swooping in to rescue Wren, there's no real triangle. It's not the happiest ending ever.

I'm glad that Harper liked it enough to buy it, and I'm very grateful they're going to publicize it (online), but I have no idea if it's going to be something the target audience actually likes.

Barb, I really don't understand how you see yourself as a failure.

You're a published author, and you're working on two more books right now. I mean, most writers don't even get published. You have several times. And most writers have to work through some books, honing their craft, finding their voice? There are exceptions. What's the ratio, though?

I don't know shit, really, about publishing, but you keep writing and investigate and do whatever sounds intriguing to you.

You need to define what failure means to you, though.

Lewis said the same thing.

For me, it's never been about the money. I can honestly say that. But at the same time, when I started out, I truly felt that if I worked hard, delivered a good product, got some decent critical notice, and hopefully some sales, that it would be enough to build a career on.

Well, I did all those things. And got shuffled to another editor for my efforts because the one thing I did stand my ground on (a horrible title) pissed my editor off enough that she didn't want to work with me any longer. She also has the attention span of a gnat, got bored with the line, and moved on to other things within the house, so it wasn't totally my fault. However, while I worked well enough with Editor #2, I wasn't her preferred flavor of writer and she declined my option book.

Then came the Stars fiasco that ate up more than two years of my career and also dealing with agents who didn't work in my best interests, so there was that.

Stars finally finds its home and I thought, I'd found my perfect editor. And she loves my work. But despite the editor and the house saying they were excited by me and really wanted to help me grow my career, both in YA and adult, what it turned out to be was that they'd grow my career provided I gave them Stars v 2.0 for an option book. I want something different.

I know it's a matter of perspective and don't get me wrong, I'm extremely proud of the books I've produced, both published and unpublished, and I definitely think I've become a better writer with each one, but from the standpoint of three books/three editors, each book selling for a smaller advance than the one before it, still struggling to sell the next book, and still not being able to break into the adult market more than six years after I sold my first book is what contributes to feeling like a failure. Or at least as if I'm going backwards.

Jeebus, I'm sorry for dumping, y'all-- I must be hormonal or something.

What does the adult market mean to you, though? Is it because you want to write stories for adults, or because you think the adult market is more legitimate? (I don't mean that harshly, just honestly.)

If you want to write adult stories, you absolutely should. And the e-pub route might be perfect for that.

I wrote books for adults. I think, like, twenty people have ever read them, and a lot of them are on this board. I wasn't trying to fool myself about whether they were *art* but I did try to write the best books that sounded like *me* in that genre. And I'm glad I did it, even though I'm not making royalties and never garnered a following. It was still writing, and I was getting to do it instead of other things I didn't want to do.

Writing the book of your heart every time and having it sell is a wonderful dream, and every writer has it, but it's just not always going to happen. I hate to suggest that anyone lower their standards, but I would say ... think about how you can tell the story you want to tell in a way that most people will want to read? I don't think it's impossible to do that, and I think it's still valuable.

Is it because you want to write stories for adults,

This and because honestly, I think I'm better at it. I think I tell better stories.

I think, though, as much as I love relationship stories my particular strength in them is the darker aspects-- the psychological twists and turns. And I think with the new manuscript I've really found an ideal avenue through which to explore them without the constraints or expectations that govern women's fiction.

I think from that standpoint, I'm telling the story I want to tell in a way that hopefully more people will want to read and that will satisfy me as a writer.

I also don't mean to sound like an insufferable snob and I'm afraid that's sort of what I'm unintentionally sounding like-- I'm just kind of airing my thoughts out in a safe place. Feel free to tell me to get a grip.

If you do go the self-pub route, I gather that copy editing (as opposed to full editing) is not that expensive. You can get a novel copy-edited for about $500. Full editing is a lot more, though maybe a Buffista editor would take a chance and give you an absurdly low rate on the first enovel with your promise that if it were successful you would pay full rate for subsequent ones.

Losing editing of either kind strikes me as a major downside to self-pub. But maybe that is a way around it.

Amy, first, Cold Kiss is an amazing book, and you're right, it's not Twilight, thank dog. Your characters have agency and voice. They are interesting and can make mistakes and they are smart as well.

Barb, does it have to be a choice? Can you ePub and trad. Pub? I know it takes a lot of footwork to ePub, but I also know the landscape is shifting rapidly, and if a good, reputable author services bureau hasn't formed yet, it should. The up front costs are on you - that's a major difference. And I'm talking well out of my sphere of knowledge now. So I'll hush and listen.

It's not an either/or choice, per se, it's more a question of learning how to negotiate the waters. How to do it without alienating one's agent, taking the risk of a book being e-pubbed and that turning off a potential traditional editor (although now that St. Martin's has bought Hocking's Tryelle trilogy that she e-pubbed, perhaps that stigma is lifting a bit), is there an audience for the type of book I write within the e-format... there are just a lot of questions to which the answers are still evolving.

ahh gotcha!

ETA - if there are writing-equivalent demons to the prevalent BIDs, I believe I have them in spades today. Feh.

Ah, I call it "Billy Walsh Syndrome" after the screenwriter on Entourage that's either convinced he wrote something brilliant or it's total shit. Anne Lamott calls it K-Fucked(KFKD)