Self-publishing advocate (blogger, etc.) talks about how screwed up traditional publishing is. Then goes on to talk about what idiots the people are who don't self-publish. Then advises everyone who has half a brain to self-publish. Then says something else, though by that time I'm not paying attention anymore.
I've seen this in many places, but what really ticked me off was when I saw it on the blog of someone I know well (and who knows my book is traditionally published). He opined that the only "rational" choice is to self-publish.
In other words, I'm irrational. As is everyone else with books from traditional (large, small, whatever) publishers.
Look, I don't go around saying self-publishers are irrational. I don't say word one about the quality of their books, much less their brains. If people want to self-publish, it doesn't in any way threaten me, so why should I criticize their choice?
Do self-publishers feel threatened by traditionalists? Maybe. Do they feel envious? I don't know. Or are some of them just jerks who like to make fun of what other people are doing?
The reality is, the publishing world today offers a wealth of options. Depending on who you are, what you want, what you're willing to sacrifice (and all forms of publishing entail certain sacrifices), what you hope to gain, and a host of other factors, you'll make whatever decision you make. Sound advice from those who have tried one form of publishing or another is always welcome.
But can we stop acting like children? Can we stop with the name-calling and finger-pointing?
Okay, YA Guy's done. I'm going to go work on another irrational manuscript I irrationally hope someone equally irrational will irrationally decide to publish.