Author Laura Lippman, who will be MWA president next year, commented on her blog about the reaction among self-published authors to MWA's decision. She wrote:
As the incoming MWA president, I have no voting rights, no role in policy-making. I am the happiest little figurehead you ever did see. But I served two terms on the board and I know how much work board members put into the organization. I also feel genuinely sad that so many self-published writers feel slighted by MWA's policies.No, it's not about merit. It's about professionalism. And while being paid for one's work isn't the only way to be professional, it's an awfully good way to start.
[…]I can't persuade people that MWA's policies are not the equivalent of censorship, that MWA isn't trying to prevent anyone from publishing, much less trying to block their right to self-expression. I'm not sure I can even persuade folks inclined to think differently that self-publishing is not synonymous with vanity publishing. No matter what I say, there are going to be some self-published writers — differently published? — who insist that I belong to MWA because I'm scared of a true free market, in which I would have to compete with all writers, not just those chosen by the — take your pick of adjectives — insular, out-of-touch, arrogant mainstream publishing industry.
This much I can say: MWA didn't change the game. Harlequin did. All the organization did was apply its existing policies to Harlequin's changing business model. And if you can't see how Harlequin's pay-to-publish program is designed to prey on writers and their dreams — well, then I'm not really sure that you're cynical enough to write crime fiction.
I’ve always had a great deal of respect for Laura Lippman the few times I had met and spoken to her, and now you see why.
“I also feel genuinely sad that so many self-published writers feel slighted by MWA’s policies.No, it’s not about merit. It’s about professionalism. And while being paid for one’s work isn’t the only way to be professional, it’s an awfully good way to start.”
First of all, self-published authors don’t “feel” slighted, they “are in fact” slighted. MWA excludes all self-published authors from membership, period, end of sentense. This is a de factor pronouncement that self-published authors are not equal. The last time I checked, a blanket derogatory attitute towards a group of people constitutes a slight.
As to the comment–“No, it’s not about merit. It’s about professionalism. And while being paid for one’s work isn’t the only way to be professional, it’s an awfully good way to start”–if it truly is “about professionalism,” how can MWA prossibly take a position that no self-published authors are professionals?
The MWA is essentially a guild. It exists to promote its members and protect their rights. It is defined as an organization for professional writers. By definition, professionals make money from their writing. Why is that hard to understand?
That definition does not stop anyone from being a good writer, or even a great one. It just means that if you’re not paid a certain amount, you are not a professional.
Now I am not a professional writer and don’t know MWA’s mind on this, but it seems to me that the blanket refusal to sanction self-publishing houses is because many of those houses exploit people, and denying them recognition may prevent some hopeful writers from using them.
Everyone who thinks MWA is wrong, by all means go and pay for Harlequin’s editing and self-publishing services. Let us all know how that works out for you sales- and profit-wise
It wouldn’t take much to make the situation right between the MWA and Harlequin. All that has to happen is for Harlequin to choose to behave ethically.