What is your success?

And maybe that’s something both self-published and traditionally published authors can agree on. Every author must define success for him or herself so as not to let our perceived lack of success—or our greatest accomplishments, for that matter—be defined by others.

Charles Fiore writes today on White Cross blog about the controversy of self publishing and traditional publishing. It is a decision writers must make and there is much to consider before doing either.

So much depends on what you consider success to be. I know people who would never think of self publishing anything. They take great pride in saying they have never self published. 

But I teach people who have wonderful stories to share and they are not professional writers. Most of them would never see their books printed and read unless they self published. 

I remember when I paid to publish my family history in 1998. It was a book for my immediate family and, even it it had been well written, it would not be published for me and sold on the market. It just wasn’t that kind of book.

However, I basked in the success of having my family express appreciation and delight in reading the stories of my grandparents and their ten children.

Even young people in the family enjoy owning the book and reading about their family history. 

I don’t entertain any goals of having a novel traditionally published, or even a memoir now. But I feel quite successful when one of my stories or essays reach the public or when my poetry is enjoyed by others. That is why I write. Not for fame or fortune -- just to communicate something to others. And when I do, I feel extremely successful.
What are your views on self-publishing? Traditional publishing?