One thing I’m noticing about publishing is that a lot of people seem to be on one side of the publishing divide. There are those who love indie publishing and don’t ever want to go with a NY publisher (or any Big House publishers, but for the sake of this post, I’ll just call them NY publishers), and there are those with NY publishers who never want to indie publish.
I chose to indie publish for a lot of different reasons. Some of which are control issues, some are time issues, and there are other reasons that I won’t get into right now. I’m not against NY publishing. Sure, there are areas of it that I’ve heard or read about that I don’t particularly like, but if the right deal came along that matched my goals, then I’d definitely consider it. I don’t think publishing needs to be all one way or another. It doesn’t have to be solely NY publishing, or e-pub, or even just indie publishing. There’s room to grow in all the different avenues–at least that’s what I believe. There’s different pros and cons to them all, too; it just depends on your goals and wants.
But I don’t get this attitude when someone goes from one to the other. And I especially don’t understand why people consider it ‘selling out’ to have goals or to change those goals. I’ve read a lot about Amanda Hocking (because I <3 me some success stories), and when she went from indie to NY, it seemed like a bunch of people thought she sold out because of it. Personally, when that kind of thing happens, I don't see it as selling out. I see it as people taking another avenue to reach their goals--whatever they may be. Maybe their goals changed over time, or maybe they just evolved. As people learn and grow, so do goals. I don't see anything wrong with that, and in fact, I think it's a good thing. What do you guys think? If an author goes from one way of publishing to another, do you think they're selling out? Do you think having evolving goals is a bad thing?