The Independent Publishing Magazine: Boyd Morrison

Monday 13 July 2009

Boyd Morrison - Self Publishing Success

The internet is a flutter today about the news that self-published author Boyd Morrison with the help of his agent has landed a two book deal with Simon & Schuster. Boyd Morrison has been selling his books on his website and also through Amazon's Kindle. What is very clear about Morrison is he is a deft hand at promoting his books and has an excellent on line presence and website. The deal includes his current book, The Ark, which he was previously giving as a free ebook earlier this year, and another adventure book based on a character called, Tyler Locke.

The Ark will be published in hardcover in 2010.

His announcement from his website

http://www.boydmorrison.com/

"Now the big news: Today I received confirmation from my agent that The Ark will be published in hardcover in summer 2010 by Simon and Schuster’s Touchstone imprint. I couldn’t be more excited! The two-book deal is for The Ark and the next book in the Tyler Locke series, so Locke’s adventures will definitely be continuing. I also have book deals in seven other countries so far. We’re still working on The Palmyra Impact and The Adamas Blueprint, but those will be back in readers’ hands at some point."

...when it comes down to the bottom line, you have to have faith that your work will speak for itself. You can’t force or plan positive word of mouth. It just has to happen, and I was lucky enough to experience that with my books."

Boyd Morrison, from his website and his own words.

And I am reminded tonight of John Lenahan, by April Hamilton, for his latest book sold to Harper Collins last week.

2010, Galleycat Interview.

Comments

7 Comments

7 C O M M E N T S:

April L. Hamilton said...: As I reported on the Publetariat Vault yesterday, John Lenahan's sale to Harper Collins was announced last week also. John Lenahan self-pubbed his book in audio form and released it through Podiobooks.

So it seems that even a big, mainstream publisher like Harper *is* looking far afield of its own slush piles and agented submissions for new acquisitions, *is* interested in looking at self-published works that are not yet breakout hits, and *doesn't* care all that much about the much-vaunted "rights of first publication".; 13 July 2009 19:28
Mick Rooney said...: It all goes to show a good book is a good book, whatever means it reaches its readership in the first instance and it does make me wonder about those publisher slush piles.

I've just been over on selfpublishingreview making a similar comment. For so long publishers have let it to literary agents to do the hard work, now, it seems, they are happy to watch like toads on the riverbank until the juiciest self publishing fly comes along and snap it up.

While I think it is great news for writers like Morrison and lenahan, it smacks at times of publishers shirking the primary responsibilities to celebrate current literary talent and seek out new and unique voices.; 13 July 2009 19:53
April L. Hamilton said...: But Mick, wouldn't you agree that most large publishers have been "shirking the primary responsibilities to celebrate current literary talent and seek out new and unique voices" for quite some time? And haven't they done so in favor of assumed blockbusters, lowest-common-denominator dreck and titles acquired more for the name recognition of the author than the quality of the books' content?

I see this trend of self-pubbed acquisitions as a positive development, since in the case of such books, it's the *readers* rather than the pub biz gatekeepers who are driving the bus. And readers are sick and tired of getting nothing but the same-old, same-old from publishers. There's plenty of poor-quality self-pubbed work out there, to be sure. But there's also a wealth of excellent work and variety that's been rejected by publishers because it can't be squeezed into a one-size-fits-most box, or boiled down to a marketing-friendly soundbite.

Maybe we'll be seeing a renaissance in complex, challenging literature at last.; 13 July 2009 20:51
Mick Rooney said...: "But Mick, wouldn't you agree that most large publishers have been "shirking the primary responsibilities to celebrate current literary talent and seek out new and unique voices" for quite some time? And haven't they done so in favor of assumed blockbusters, lowest-common-denominator.."

Yes, I entirely agree, April. The explosion in self-publishing is a direct result of this. Publishers are continuing to excessively squeeze their list of titles to the nth degree in favour of the 'can't fail to be a blockbuster'. And its gone on since publishers first felt attacked in the early 1980's by the emergence of video, games consoles etc. I've written extensively about this in many of my '...or be Damned' articles.

Maybe this is where we disagree. I believe in initial diversification in the industry, but as a means to change and improvement of a single publishing industry, not as a means to an end. I don't believe in divide in conquer - 'them and us' - otherwise we end up with a book world where there exist the published, and the self-published, which sends the implication that there is something significantly different about both. There isn't, at least at heart - a good book is a good book. Its one of the reasons why I think the 'indie' label can become a misnomer - what does it mean? What are authors trying to become independent of. We need to make sure authors don't become independent of the reader as well as the mainstream commercial industry.

But I do agree Morrison and Lenahan can and have done this on their own, but you see, to a certain point, and then we have the grasping tongue of big toad. Remember, mainstream publishers are only too happy to sit back and watch the small and respectable sales figures and readership build while they crunch away for a time at the balance sheets. To the wider reading world its Faber who take the credit for 'Shadowmancer' not GP Taylor or the 6000 copies he self published initially.

I see this trend of self-pubbed acquisitions as a positive development, since in the case of such books, it's the *readers* rather than the pub biz gatekeepers who are driving the bus.

And this is the strongest advocation for what is happening in publishing today. But what we need is some form of publishing and outlet for all authors which embraces the freedom and lack of gatekeepers that self-publishing offers, but combines the global reach and penetration responsible mainstream publishing delivers.

Be that Google, Amazon, HarperCollins, or some new viral entity, the renaissance will happen.

Long Live The Renaissance!; 13 July 2009 21:53
April L. Hamilton said...: Mick -
I don't think we disagree at all. I'm not looking to see Big Pub dismantled; rather, I'd like to see it continue looking and acting more like the movie business.

In the movie biz, the Big Boys dominate the box office with their largely disposable---but frequently very enjoyable---entertainments. But there are countless indies operating along the fringe, telling nontraditional stories in mold-breaking ways. The god of the former is commerce, the god of the latter is art.

The indie film scene is a permanent home for some (e.g. Todd Haynes, Wes Anderson), but for a great many more it serves only as a training and proving ground en route to the mainstream (e.g. Guillermo Del Toro, Christopher Nolan). And every so often, something so remarkable comes out of the indie camp that it colors a great deal of mainstream filmmaking that follows it.

This is the scenario I'd like to see in book publishing. When you want something profoundly distracting, you see a mainstream film. When you want something profound, you see an indie film. There's room, and I'd argue a need, for both.; 14 July 2009 05:03
Mick Rooney said...: Yes, then we do agree, both have their place and purpose.; 14 July 2009 09:38
viagra online said...: both of them these two books are so incredible, the content, the history, and of course the writer.; 12 July 2010 18:31