4 Comments

Do small presses sort of act like a minor league system for the big five? That is, people are likely to gain success and establish their credibility/audience at a small publisher, and then land interest from a bigger imprint later on? I sort of assumed that everyone would prefer a bigger press to a smaller one (larger audience/money/whatever), but maybe that isn't the case.

Expand full comment
author

It's not exactly a minor league system, but what you describe could be the end result. I think that a book that really hits big from a small press was probably going to hit big anywhere, and then that author can certainly use that success to level up, so to speak. You might just get a fantastic editor that really improves the book at a small press, but that's not MORE likely to happen at a small press. It's just kismet. I think it's accurate to say most writers would prefer a bigger press to a smaller press as much as it's accurate to say what most people want about anything. Probably true, with vocal opponents. :)

Expand full comment

This was a lot of useful information. Question--why do the big publishers have imprints? And imprints are good, right? They are not small presses; they are part of a big house. Is that correct?

Expand full comment
author

Publishers have imprints to organize their staff and books. Sometimes it's because a bigger publisher bought a smaller publisher and incorporated their brand/branding, but imprints are started from scratch every year. Think of it like cars. Ford has lots of makes and models. That's how you know the difference between and F-150 and Focus.

Imprints are very good. Without them, it'd be a big mish mash. The average reader doesn't think a lot about imprints and honestly probably has only heard of one or two (Knopf is an imprint of Penguin Random House) but agents and editors know.

Expand full comment