Physical books from major imprints still matter to the status of authors and to readers. Having a publishing house endorse a work matters because it assures readers that people considered experts determined a book was worthy of significant investment. The physical book matters because it is more costly to produce than an ebook.
Self-publishing, like self-production of any art form, lacks the status of an imprint, and that is unlikely to change. There are exceptions, especially in niche markets. Plus, there are self-published works and small-press works that are letter purchased by the larger houses for distribution.
One of the problems with self-publishing is that too few people pay for editors. (Then again, budget cuts at some publishers have led to a decline in quality, too.) Editors matter. There are copyeditors and design editors at the best presses. The copyeditor fixes the content, including grammar and mechanics. The design editor ensures the various dashes, quote marks, and other subtle features (including hyphenation) are correct within the proofs before a press run.
Never edit your own works. My wife edits my works. If we have more resources in the future, I would hire an editor because an unbiased viewpoint helps.
That’s why publishers are valuable: they provide many sets of eyes.
As a writer, there is something affirming about having a press publish your work in book form. Part of that affirmation is because other people take you more seriously, too.
Books matter a lot in academia, as do journals. And ideally, they are in print form because that’s considered prestigious.
I co-edited a book this year with Dànielle Nicole DeVoss. Type Matters: The Rhetoricity of Letterforms is now available on Amazon ($100 hardback, $60 paperback). You can visit the Parlor Press website at https://www.parlorpress.com/typematters for information, too. This marks my second “real” academic publication, with the first being a chapter on course accessibility for students with special needs. That chapter appears in Making Space: Writing Instruction, Infrastructure, and Multiliteracies edited by James P. Purdy and Dànielle Nicole DeVoss (again, she’s amazing).
A printed book, a book chapter, a printed journal article. These receive status and credit towards tenure. After the printed books, you have some of the academic journals now primarily in digital format. There are some ebooks, too, but not as many disciplines seem to give those the same weight. Why have the sciences done better with open-access journals and ebooks than the sciences? A bias towards “text” and “authority” in traditional forms.
The Public Library of Science demonstrates what all academic disciplines could offer: public, open-access journals. The sciences are leading the way. There are open source journals in writing and the arts, yet the dominance of the book remains firmly entrenched. The small steps towards PLOS-like, led by the Open Library of the Humanities. Many of the open-access journals use the Public Knowledge Project platform.
I have installed and configured PKP platforms for universities, alongside Drupal. The problem with open-access tools, like open source software, is that volunteers leave the projects and development stalls. Moodle has had some issues with stalled development.
Peer review is made easier with online tools. Electronic editions can reach audiences faster, meaning topics can be addressed while they are still topical. Those of us in the humanities need to push for more flexible routes to publication for research.
I’m willing to self-publish non-academic works as ebooks to make sure my words are out there for readers. I understand my works for a general audience won’t advance my academic career.