Huh. Well, okay. I can get with the program.
|Photo courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.
Okay, okay...so that's not exactly the kind of hybrid all those other writers mean. They're referring to traditionally published authors who choose to self-publish some of their work, and self-published authors who decide to go with traditional houses when the opportunity arises.
I haven't tried to hybridize myself (not yet, anyway--who knows what the future might hold?), but I like the idea of it. Because why does it have to be an either/or thing?
I've read passionate posts about how traditional publishing is the only "legitimate" way to go, and equally passionate posts about indie publishing being the wave of the future for "intelligent" authors who wish to control their own destiny.
But must it always devolve into yet another Us vs. Them situation? Don't we have enough of that kind of rivalry? Liberals vs. conservatives, democrats vs. republicans, employed moms vs. stay-at-home-moms, my team vs. your team, dark chocolate vs. milk chocolate, Billy vs. Mark...frankly, all the bickering gets annoying after a while.
Which is why I like the idea of hybrid authors. I guess I'm just a peace-maker at heart.
More and more trad authors are venturing into the indie realm for the sake of control. And there are plenty of indie authors who would leap at the chance to be traditionally published.
Seems to me keeping your mind open to all the publishing possibilities is a good thing.
But, of course, you're entitled to your own opinion. Feel free to share it in the comments. Rant, even, if you feel strongly one way or the other. I rather enjoy reading other people's rants.
If you have no opinion on the indie/trad/hybrid debate, tell me:
What you think of my hybrid camel-sheep*. Cute? Or just wrong?
Milk chocolate or dark chocolate?
Billy or Mark?
Or are you in the "why choose if you don't have to" camp?
*Yes, I know it's only a fuzzy camel, not really a camel-sheep. Work with me here...