Another hurdle in the option to self-publish
Journal of the Silent Majority is
finished. My Valley Star Publishing LLC
needed a logo so I chose one dear to my heart and it related to an old Ozark
school, Valley Star, founded in 1897. My
father went there in his youth with my Cherry aunts and uncles. As a toddler Dad took me there one time when
he was hired to do maintenance on the old building. Believe it or not, it has been relocated and
rehabbed at Cloud Nine Ranch west of West Plains, Mo.
LJS Graphics in Kansas City did a
good job and tasking them to produce the logo was just another step in what
many authors have to do to get their works published. I’m finding out that the more I do myself or
have done, the less dependency I have on the antiquated traditional publishing
process.
I wrote about it in a previous post,
but I’ll expand on my thinking about the obstacles of publishing which new dissenting
authors face. Literary agents and
traditional book publishers probably would not be receptive to my history revealing
uncomfortable truths. Perhaps 80% of
literary agents list their genres as gay/lesbian, women’s issues/feminist,
multicultural, ethnic, or gender related.
It would be counterproductive for them to jeopardize their client
relationship with authors who hold different political views. What would their comrades think? Traditional
book publishing appears to be no different.
A quick glance at Writer’s Market
suggests that serious thinking men are as rare as chicken’s teeth: Monster
Trucks, Turkey Hunting, Playboy, Sports, and Hot Rods. One would get the
impression that half the population does not read or think. They are wrong.
It is sufficient to say I won’t rule
out the traditional avenue for publishing Journal
of the Silent Majority, but I’m comforted in what René Descartes said in Discourse on Method: “. . . when it is beyond our power to discern
the opinions which carry most truth, we should follow the most probable . . .
.” Self-publishing appear to be more
probable every day.
The question of biased editing also rears
its ugly head. I ran into that in my second
edit attempt: “That surely didn’t
happen.” “You can’t say that.” “You’re a racist if you say that or use that
word.” There’s the problem in a nut shell for revisionist historians in our particular age. It’s the velvet hammer – conform to our way
of thinking or don’t get published.
Descartes alluded to a related predicament: “. . . there is very often
less perfection in works composed of several portions, and carried out by the
hands of various masters, than in those on which one individual alone has
worked.” The compromises after editing sometimes
causes the author to give up, but I’m comforted by the admonition of
philosopher Larry the Cable Guy; “Get’er Done!”
