V is for Vanity Presses

There is a HUGE, HUGE difference between self-publishing as an indie and publishing through a vanity press. So huge, in fact, that the two are not even comparable. An indie author is a professional and an entrepreneur. A vanity press author is a victim of a scam.

A “vanity press” is a publishing company that caters to the vanity of anyone who wants to see their name on the cover of a book. They make their money not by selling books, but by selling overpriced services to naive and starry-eyed writers. If you have any self-respect at all, you should stay as far away from these companies as possible.

I am not an expert on vanity presses by any means, but here are some things that strike me as red flags that a company might be one:

  • They claim to be a “self-publishing” company (an oxymoron if there ever was one).
  • They use the phrase “published author” anywhere in their sales pitch.
  • They offer to publish your book on Amazon (you can publish your own book on Amazon).
  • They offer a “publishing package” that costs upwards of a thousand dollars.
  • They offer a “marketing package” that costs even more.
  • They require you to pay for your own editing and/or cover.
  • They have any sort of affiliation with Author Solutions.
  • David Gaughran has written a blog post lambasting them.
  • They require you to buy X number of print copies.
  • Their sales representatives won’t stop calling you.
  • They claim that they can get your book on Oprah.
  • They claim that they can get J.K. Rowling to review your book.

This is by no means a comprehensive list. If you have any to add, please do so.

The scary thing is that the big-name legacy publishers are not only in bed with these crooks, they’re openly fornicating with them. When Penguin Random House bought out Author Solutions, the largest and arguably the dirties vanity press in existence, they did nothing to clean up the company–in fact, they gave Author Solutions CEO Kevin Weiss a seat on the board! And other legacy publishers like Simon & Schuster responded by contracting with Author Solutions subsidiaries like Archway to do exactly the same way.

Vanity presses are scams. They exist to exploit the dreams and vulnerabilities of new writers, robbing them of their money and their dignity. They are extremely good at giving themselves the appearance of legitimacy, which has been made all the easier by the fact that the traditional publishing establishment has embraced them. You will find them at large publishing expos like Books Expo America. You will find favorable articles about them in venerable trade publications like Publisher’s Weekly. Their poison has infected the very heart of the legacy publishing industry.

At the heart of the indie publishing revolution is the idea that no one should come between writers and readers. Vanity presses violate that principle in every possible way–they are blood-sucking parasites with no respect for writers or for readers. For the sake of your career, for the sake of your books–hell, for the sake of your own self-respect–you should stay as far away from them as possible.

Why I won’t be signing up for KDP Select

In the last couple of weeks, there’s been a lot of discussion about Amazon’s new Lending Library program.  Just a few days ago, Amazon opened it up to indie writers with the KDP Select program.  By signing up, writers gain access to Amazon Prime members (US only), where readers can borrow the book for free and Amazon still reimburses the writer.

The catch?  Two, actually: writers agree to make their books exclusive to Amazon for 90 days, and payment for all KDP Select authors comes out of a monthly “fixed pot” of $500,000, where every writer gets a cut according to what percentage of the Lending Library downloads were for their books.

Reactions from the indie community have been mixed.  Within only a few hours, several thousand enthusiastic writers had signed up (the current number of participants is ~50k), but many others remain cautious and aloof.

The full range of reactions can be seen in the Kindle Boards thread.  Guido Henkel does a good job pointing out how the numbers don’t add up, while David Gaughran offers a compelling analysis that likewise dampers enthusiasm for the program.  On the Smashwords blog, Mark Coker pleads with writers to keep their options open, while at Writer Beware, A.C. Crispin points out some disturbing language in the terms & conditions that essentially amounts to a non-compete clause.

I’m sure that many others will weigh in on KDP Select in the coming days, and I look forward to reading their analysis, but I’ve already decided that I won’t be signing up with the program.  Even if no one else signs up, with 50k writer splitting a $50,000 pot, the average monthly paymentis only going to be $10.  Unless you’re one of the lucky bestsellers, you’ll probably make even less than that.

But the real reason I’m not signing up is because I don’t feel that it serves my readers.  If I put any of my titles through KDP Select, I’d be giving Amazon a 90 day exclusive, which means that my readers would be forced to either buy through Amazon or wait three months to buy my books.  I don’t feel that that’s fair to my readers, especially in territories where Amazon levies a $2 surcharge.

At this point in my career, my goal is to build up a dedicated fan base that looks forward to each new release.  To do that, I want to make my books available in as many places as possible.  Even if I’m not selling all that well right now at Barnes & Noble or the smaller retailers, it’s not worth it to cut those readers off and tell them to go to Amazon or wait.

However, the KDP Select program does foreshadow the next big phase of the ebook revolution, and that is the move to subscription services.  I expect that in the mid- to near-future, we’re going to see a lot of ebook lending models arise, kind of like Netflix for books.  The big question in my mind is how the writers are going to be compensated.

Like David, I have a lot of concerns with KDP Select’s “fixed pot” model.  Besides the lack of any guaranteed or minimum rate of compensation and the general opaqueness of the system, it fundamentally pits writers against each other in a zero-sum game, where one writer’s gain is another one’s loss.  To me, this represents a giant step backward.

When a reader finds something they like, they’re more likely to try out another book just like it.  This is how readers have historically found new writers, and it fosters a sense of community, where writers work together to reach out to new readers and expand the scope of the genre.  The “fixed pot” model disincentives all this and replaces it with a Machiavellian system that, at its worst, works against the natural advantages of the medium and undermines the genre community.

For all these reasons, I won’t be signing up for Amazon’s KDP Select.  The exclusivity hurts writers and readers, the numbers just don’t add up, and the “fixed pot” model represents a fundamental shift in bookselling that I cannot support.

Worldcon 2011: Friday

Wow, it feels like the second day of Worldcon was forever ago.  Usually, Friday is the first real day of a convention, but since Thursday was the first full day of Worldcon, that wasn’t the case.

I don’t remember a whole lot from it, but there were a few really awesome panels.

In the morning, I went to a social networking panel with Tee Morris and Cory Doctorow, among others.  Awesome, fast paced discussion–pure gold, every second of it.  The main takeaway I got was to try out everything, but only stick with the things I actually enjoy.  There are lots and lots of ways to use social networking tools, and if something is compelling but not enjoyable, it’s not much better than a life-killing addiction.  Also, Facebook is the equivalent of high fructose corn syrup.

In the afternoon, I went to a panel on romantic elements in science fiction, with Louis Master Bujold on it, among others.  She made perhaps the most interesting point I heard all weekend: that in romance, women typically write about love and life, whereas men typically write about love and death.  SO TRUE.  It happens all the time in my own work, to the point where you can set your watch by it.

After a long and tiring day, I took off a couple hours before the parties just to decompress (and also blog about Thursday, as you may have noticed).  Got caught up on David Gaughran‘s blog, which as usual had some interesting analysis about the latest news in the ebook revolution.  And then…well, let’s just say I got into a little bit of a discussion with a senior editor at Tor about ebooks and whether it’s a good idea now to self publish.  His parting shot: “You’re not going to win this argument!” To which I wanted to respond: “I don’t care about winning it with you; I care about winning it with the readers.”

Seriously, when it came to ebooks and epublishing, almost every editor, agent, and author at the convention either had deer in the headlights syndrome or was in outright denial.  It’s gotten to a point where they can’t ignore it, but literally everyone who brought up the subject on a panel either dismissed all successful indie writers as outliers, or brought up the flood-of-crap argument that so many people have already debunked.  I don’t think the publishers are quite as stupid as the record labels in the late 90s…but seriously, they aren’t much better.

Not that I was purposefully trying to be antagonistic.  I only brought up the subject with that particular editor because I knew I didn’t have a chance with him.  For the most part, all I did at the con was listen and observe.  But man–there’s a lot of willful ignorance out there.  And after a while, that made me a little disillusioned with the whole convention…but more on that later.

Suffice it to say, Friday was a long and eventful day that went by so quickly I’ve forgotten almost everything else that happened.

Publishing in 2016 by David Gaughran

If you’re a writer with any interest in indie publishing at all, David Gaughran is someone you should be following right now.  He’s an up-and-coming Irish writer with a better handle on the changes in publishing than most.  I’m about halfway through his book Let’s Get Digital, and it’s quite good.

For today’s post, I asked him if he could map out some of the major competing predictions for how the ebook revolution will play out.  At this point, no one really knows, so any person’s speculation by itself isn’t all that useful.  He responded with an excellent analysis which I think you will find quite fascinating.

So without further ado, here he is!

==================================

Publishing in 2016

Predicting the future is always a mug’s game, as the historical advocates for paper clothes, jetpacks, time-travel, and hoverboards will tell you, if you can find them.

But Joe has been kind to me here. He’s not asking specifically for my predictions of what publishing will look like in five years. Rather, he wants diverging views of how things will play out, and the logic behind them.

I‘ve tried to be fair here, and made what I think are quite strong arguments for things I don’t think will happen, but the whole exercise is probably colored by my own views. Feel free to disagree in the comments. I’ll probably join the chorus of boos.

There are hundreds of potential scenarios, but here are two competing visions of publishing in 2016.

SCENARIO #1 – The Empire Strikes Back

Publishers were slow to embrace the digital future, but they learned. They stopped chaining the release of the e-book to print versions, instead releasing digital when ready (sometimes a year ahead of print), vastly reducing publishing time, and allowing them to build up an audience of fans, some of whom would also go on and buy expensive limited edition hardcovers, which proved very lucrative.

They also greatly increased the revenue split with authors which had two effects. First, they stopped losing writers to self-publishing. Second, writers became more motivated to go out and directly promote the book to readers – as the returns they got from each copy sold increased.

Finally, as most agents stopped accepting submissions for anything other than their publishing arms, instead scouring the Kindle Store for prospective clients, the gargantuan slush pile moved online. The ensuing decrease in quality of the average self-published book made readers actively avoid indies and cry out for some form of quality seal.

The publishers, keen to exploit their position as trusted tastemakers, banded together with furloughed newspaper reviewers to create “curation” sites, where readers could safely browse only “quality” works.

The online retailers, fearful of losing customers to the new, popular curation sites, started granting concessions and building storefronts for all the publishers, vastly reducing the visibility of self-published work.

The only indie authors that thrived were the expert self-promoters. As soon as they struggled out of the morass, they were co-opted by the large publishers, while the rest only sold a handful of copies to family and friends.

When enhanced e-books took off, most self-publishers couldn’t afford the initial investment to create all the extra audio, video, and gaming components that readers demanded. Ironically, the first indies to monopolize the e-book market – writers of thrillers, fantasy, and science fiction – suffered most.

Publishers, after merging with gaming companies, returned to their former position at the top of the pyramid, the retailers now cowed and forced to operate on the publishers’ terms, as they controlled all the top quality content.

WHY THIS WILL HAPPEN:

Once the format battles are settled and once the e-reader device war is over, the next fight will be over content. The large publishers still own most of the content, and are getting new content submitted to them every day, mostly by authors who would license it on pretty much any terms.

Publishers are locking down not just current rights, but lots of future potential rights, and e-books will never go out of print like books used to, meaning that authors without some kind of “sunset” clause will never get their rights back.

Some publishers are in trouble, but some are doing quite well out of the digital revolution. Some will learn the lessons, some will compete at lower prices, some will bring digital versions out first. And we shouldn’t forget that most of the major publishers are owned by large conglomerates with very deep pockets.

WHY THIS WON’T:

Any battles between agents, publishers, and authors are only a side-show. The real battle for control of publishing is between the tech giants: Google, Apple, Amazon. Apple are sitting on a cash pile of $78bn. Google have the resources to compete with anyone, in any area, once they make it a priority. Amazon have a lock on the market now and are investing most of their considerable revenue in aggressive expansion.

The notion that readers want “curated” selection is outdated. That has been chipped away at for years by the millions of books available on Amazon. The prize usually goes to the bookstore with the largest selection. Nobody can compete with Amazon here now, and it’s hard to see who can (outside of Google and Apple) in the future.

Readers are voting with their feet. Amazon are on the way to controlling over 50% of the overall US book market by 2012. Readers clearly want an uncurated selection.

This idea of a flood of terrible slush drowning out all the good work is built on a fundamental misunderstanding of how people actually buy books online. Most readers (around 80%) go to an online store with a purchase in mind (usually a recommendation, or another work by an author they have previously enjoyed).

They may add more before they pay, but these are things that caught their eye along the way (as recommended by a powerful algorithm based on their buying and viewing history). That won’t change. In fact, those recommendations will get smarter.

And I’m not convinced that enhanced e-books are the way of the future. Readers want to read a story. I think they will find those extras intrusive. Books may become like DVDs – with extras that can add to the enjoyment of a book after you are done reading, but not something that would normally make or break a purchase. Children’s books may be different, and when that generation grows up they may well have a different idea of what a book is or should be, but that’s far past 2016.

Finally, owning content is one thing, but you need somewhere to sell it. And the publishers have proved singularly unable or unwilling to develop a retail arm to compete with the giants. JK Rowling may be able to do it, but few other content owners could, and anyway, many analysts feel that she could make more by distributing to all the major retailers.

SCENARIO #2 – A Golden Age For Authors

Authors were slow to embrace the digital future, but they learned. They stopped submitting to agents that weren’t reading their work anyway, and started publishing online. Armed with sales records and a proven platform, they found publishing deals much easier to come by. Some used self-publishing as a springboard to a lucrative deal, others preferred to keep going it alone and keep reaping 70% royalties.

Publishers had to downsize rapidly to remain in business. Those who didn’t went under, with the loss of many jobs. But all those editors, designers, and publicists quickly found lucrative work as consultants, advisors, and service providers to the growing band of self-publishers who made investment in professional quality publications a priority.

The publishers themselves saw the flight of the mid-listers. Those authors saw their advances and royalties dwindle as further bookstores closed, and the surviving ones morphed into general merchandize operations which happened to have a selection of books at the back. Those stores only stocked bestsellers – many of whom remained with the publishers.

Initially, forward-thinking publishers saw great success with converting indie stars to trade deals. With a stellar sales record, and an untapped audience in print, these prolific self-publishers were as close as you could get to a sure thing in publishing, and they made a lot of money for themselves and their publishers, as their readership exploded in print.

Agents had mixed fortunes. Some made money spinning off successful self-publishers to publishing houses but, increasingly, the publishers found they could do this job themselves. Others attempted to move into publishing either as service providers to self-publishers or by launching full-blown publishing companies. Some succeeded, but most did not. By 2016, “literary agent” was an archaic term.

Authors, however, thrived. After e-books began to outsell all print in Christmas 2012, their rosy future was sealed. No longer did they have to submit to the query process or struggle to get their self-published work into bookstores. Everyone was buying e-books, and those who weren’t were buying print copies online.

By 2016, e-book growth had plateaued in the US, with print only holding on to 20% of the market. However, as new markets opened up in Brazil, Indonesia, Mexico, India, and China, authors poured in, leading to a boom in translation and local language marketing services.

This was quickly co-opted by the tech companies who hired armies of translators to clean up the text that the translation software spat out. Authors uploading to Amazon, Apple, and Google began to moan about the week it would take before their books appeared in Hindi, Mandarin, and Brazilian Portuguese.

WHY THIS WILL HAPPEN

The genie is out of the bottle. More and more authors are switching to self-publishing every day. Once they get a taste of 70% royalties, complete creative control, prices they set (and their fans love), and the ability to publish whatever they like, whenever they like, they won’t go back.

Some will get tempted by a publishing deal. However, with each bookstore closure and with each group of readers that switches to e-books or starts shopping for print online, the main reason to sign with a publishing company (print distribution) becomes less and less valuable.

Savvy self-publishers may sign a one-off trade deal to expand their readership into print. And once their new publisher does all the heavy lifting, they can switch back to the more lucrative royalties of going it alone, while keeping their higher profile and new readers.

Publishers don’t seem to be learning from their mistakes. They continue to fight the digital revolution, which is like trying to hold back the tide. Instead of offering writers better terms, they are inserting rights-grabs into publishing contracts. This will come back to bite them.

E-reader ownership has doubled in the last six months. It will explode in the run up to Christmas as all those new models come out from all the major manufacturers. Readers will continue to be lured to e-books by lower prices and greater selection, and the defection of their favorite authors to self-publishing.

WHY IT WON’T

Most self-publishers saw a drop in income when Amazon ran a sale of 600 bestsellers from large publishers in June. All of John Locke’s books were knocked out of the Top 100. Amanda Hocking saw a severe drop in rankings. Joe Konrath’s sales fell by 15%. Other self-publishers reported drops of up to 50%.

Amazon covered the cost of that sale, but it was so successful that they ran another in July, with even more publishers onboard – this time sharing the cost burden. These experiments could show publishers once-and-for-all that Amazon were right, that they would make lots more money with lower priced e-books.

Publishers could drop prices across the board, removing one of the prime advantages that self-publishers have: lower prices.

And, if one of the tech companies gets a permanent lock on the retail market, and sees off all competitors, the first thing they could do is demand exclusivity and cut the royalties, leaving writers back at square one.

***
David Gaughran is an Irish short story writer and novelist. His latest book Let’s Get Digital: How To Self-Publish, And Why You Should is available from Amazon and Smashwords for $2.99. The PDF version is available as a free download from his blog, so you can try before you buy.

Copyright (c) 2011 by David Gaughran.

Blurb for Bringing Stella Home and thoughts on Borders

One of the essential elements for a successful in epublishing is a killer book description, and I think I’ve got a pretty decent one for Bringing Stella Home.  However, I could use some feedback, so if you could read it and tell me what you think, that would be great. Here it is:

It is a dark time for the galactic empire. Rebellions at Tajjur and the New Pleiades sap the empire’s strength from within, while hordes of spacefaring Hamiji warriors from the outer reaches sweep ever closer to the Imperial capitol, slagging entire worlds in their wake.

When the Hameji forces conquer his homeworld, young James McCoy runs away to rescue his older brother and sister, Ben and Stella, from their grasp. Though he faces an enemy undefeated in battle and feared throughout all of inhabited space, James will stop at nothing–not even death–to get his brother and sister back.

Things start to look up when he meets Danica Nova, a Tajji mercenary captain who takes him in and becomes his mentor. James reminds Danica of her own brother, whom she failed to protect when the empire slaughtered her family years ago. Now, she hopes to find some redemption from her demons by saving James from his own.

Unfortunately, neither of them realizes that Stella has become a concubine to the main Hameji overlord–and that Ben has been brainwashed and made into an elite shock trooper in the empath squadron sent to hunt them down.

So what do you think?  Too long, too confusing, too cliche, or too boring?  The genre (if you can’t tell) is space opera / space adventure, so I’m hoping it will appeal to fans of Orson Scott Card, C. J. Cherryh, Lois McMaster Bujold, Star Wars & Star Trek, etc.  It’s also got a slight military science fiction bent to it, though I wouldn’t presume to be qualified to write true military sf.

In unrelated news, I recently did an interview with Charlie of Playground51, which appears to be down for some reason (the link is on my Blog Tour page above).  Topics discussed include how I got the idea for Genesis Earth, which parts were inspired by real life, and thoughts on book promotion.  Hopefully the site will be up again soon!

Also, I’m thinking it’s time to do a major overhaul of my blog template.  As much as I love the current one with the purple stars and nebulae, I need something with two sidebars so that my books don’t push everything else to the bottom.  If you have some ideas for a good WordPress template that still keeps the sci-fi feel of this one, please let me know!  I’m very much open to suggestions.

Finally, since the Borders liquidation is all over the news, I thought I’d share my $.02.  It’s sad, certainly, but I don’t think that the fallout will be nearly as gloomy as Joshua Bilmes claims.

Corporate-run big box stores are certainly on the way out, but there will always be a market for good stories, and in many ways the new ebook technology is causing that market to expand at a wonderful rate.  So while the predictions of the print death spiral appear to be coming true (David Gaughran did a great post recently on that), new models will emerge–indeed, are already emerging–which will fill the vacuum.

The thing that gives me great reason to hope is that these new business models give so much power back to writers.  Instead of relying on the mercies of large media corporations to build a viable career, we can now make a living by publishing independently or going with any number of small independent presses.  Readers have more choices and writers have more options.  It’s glorious.

If anything, the Borders bankruptcy has confirmed to me that I’ve made the right choice to go indie, rather than wait for New York to anoint me before launching my career.  Will I ever go with a traditional publisher?  I’d like to someday, but I no longer feel dependent on the old system to accomplish my dreams.  Instead, it’s my readers who will decide my fate, and that’s exactly as it should be.

So thanks for reading!

Why I am not afraid of the Noise part II

A recent op-ed in the Wall Street Journal titled “Cherish the Book Publishers–You’ll Miss Them When They’re Gone” has ignited a firestorm across the indie publishing community.  The post’s basic argument is that the ease of self publishing and the end of New York as the gatekeepers of quality will make it harder for readers to find the truly worthwhile literature amid the flood of crap that will inevitably overwhelm us all.

Joe Konrath fired the opening salvo; in characteristic fashion, he decried the op-ed as hogwash and blamed jealousy among traditionally published writers for the perpetuation of this myth.  He concluded that while the “tsunami of crap” is real, it is ultimately irrelevant.

His advice? “Don’t write crap.”

Michael A. Stackpole responded by examining the much more dangerous fear of authors worried about the coming flood; the fear that their own work is crap, and not worth putting out.  After examining what we mean when we call something “crap,” he concludes that the really bad stuff will sink to the bottom…

…not because of a rising tide of crap, but because they deliberately swim toward the bottom, open their mouths, and willfully suck.

And the rest of us will happily swim past the effervescent markings of their demise, moving on into the golden age.

Kris Rusch’s take on the issue was perhaps the most instructive of all.  First, she used her own experience as editor of The Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction to completely blow out of the water the idea that editors are arbiters of good taste.  Editors buy what they like; when they try to predict what the public will like, more often than not they fail–and when they try push their own reading tastes onto the public, they make themselves irrelevant.

She concluded that the only truly relevant “gatekeepers” are other readers–that word of mouth is still king, and because the traditional publishing system treats books “like produce, taking them off the shelf as if the book will rot after a month,” indie publishing is much better suited to help the good stuff rise to the top.

David Gaughran responded next by pointing out all the ways that indie publishing and the ebook revolution are enriching the literary world.  He concluded that the only people hurt by these changes are the middlemen–that both writers and readers only stand to benefit.

Well.  Like I said, it’s quite a firestorm.

So what’s my take? I already posted my thoughts on why the original argument is invalid–that fear of the Noise, aka the “tsunami of crap,” is a specious reason not to epublish.  However, I think that the real issue goes much deeper than that.

The most fundamental divide between those who embrace the ebook revolution and those who fight it is whether or not they trust readers to find the truly great works of literature on their own.

The obvious question, of course, is what exactly constitutes “great literature.” As a lover of genre fiction, I measure the quality of literature by the impact it has on readers; that when readers can’t stop talking about how awesome a book is, it’s a good book.  For that reason, I’ve never put much credence by Twilight bashers; paranormal romance might not be my thing, but Stephanie Meyer struck a chord in a lot of people, and that certainly counts for something.  In other words, story is King.

Putting it that way makes the argument somewhat circular.  Can we trust readers to find the good stuff on their own?  Yes, because readers read what they love.  But what about that literary piece about a depressed writer who has a sexual affair that completely changes his life?  Well, I guess it just wasn’t that good.  But they would have loved it, if not for all that genre crap flooding the system!

As for readers getting swamped, I think the system itself prevents that.

First, readers browse by means of tags, search terms, categories, top seller lists, “also bought” lists, etc.  They follow book bloggers and take recommendations from friends.  When they find a book with an attractive cover, they click on it, give the book description a cursory glance, and perhaps check a few reader reviews.  If their curiosity is still piqued, they download the free sample to their ereader.

Up to this point, no money has been spent.  Readers can download as many free samples as they want, of anything that catches their fancy.  When they finally get around to reading the sample, they can decide whether they want to buy the book.  If they do, all they need is to click a button on their ereader, and the book is theirs.

Once they finish the book, the ereader prompts them to leave a review (at least the Kindle does this–not sure about the others).  If they enjoyed it, they can give a favorable rating which helps other readers find the book.  If they don’t, they can give an unfavorable rating which warns others to stay away.

What is happening is nothing less than the democratization of literature.  Therefore, it should come as no surprise that those who trust readers will embrace the new system, while those who still cling to editors-as-gatekeepers will reject it at all costs.

But can we really trust readers?  Yes, if we believe that story is King.  If readers and writers are collaborators in the literary experience, and the truly great literature is that which has the greatest impact on its readers’ lives, then it stands to reason that readers must be the ultimate judges of quality.

Therefore, if we truly believe in the power of story, we cannot help but put our trust in the readers.  And if that’s true, why shouldn’t we rejoice in the revolution?

I sincerely believe that we are witnessing the dawn of a great golden age of literature.  The invention of the ebook is at least as revolutionary as the Gutenburg press, perhaps a great deal more.

The only ones who have anything to fear from the revolution are those who have built their livelihoods by pushing their own arbitrary tastes on others.  Frankly, that’s nothing less than cultural tyranny–and with the democratization of literature, we no longer have to put up with it.

Viva la Revalucion!