Here's a questtion for you aspiring writers. I've often thought about this, would you rather be a largely successful commercial writer and get like 3 million dollar book contracts but have the quality of your work suffer because you have to pump out three books a year like james patterson or dean koontz and eventually become a parody of yourself as a writer. Or have a cult status as a writer making almost nothing and need a second job but you have loyal fans and are regarded as a good writer still.
I invest a lot of time and effort into developing the skills and understandings that would benefit a writer of the second class, and when I visualize my plans they tend to be more focused on developing into a writer of the "infamous" style.
money
money - hands down.
I love you, Renfield.
Personally, I'd like people to read my work. Whether its 3,000 or 3,000,000 isn't that important. I'd hate to be on a time hack all the time and I'm totally okay with the fact that I'm not likely ever going to be purchasing a yacht with money from writing.
Okay. 30,000 minimum if we're being honest. But even then, less about the money and more about the gratification.
I'd rather have people steal my books than have them spend their hard earned money .
You know, "commercial authors" get to choose how many books they write each year. It's not like they're a slave to their publishers. If they are asked to sign a contract that specifies the amount of books per year that they write and don't want to write that many, they can choose to not sign the contract and ask for it to be changed. So I choose money and a large readership (which both go hand-in-hand) on my own terms. If my own terms lead to a cult following (which I more or less already have but not to a large degree) rather than a succesful career as a commericial writer, then so be it. It's not so black and white. And most commericial authors release 1 book a year (or perhaps one book every few years). Anyway, my books are too weird for me to be succesful as a commercial writer and forcing myself to write mainstream books would be torture, so I'd pass on that.
Well, as I see it, there are two ways to be able to write whatever you want.
You can just do it and never care what anyone thinks and not worry if it ever gets published and probably make no money doing it, but hey, it's pretty much a hobby for you anyway, so who cares.
Or you can make a million bucks writing what you think will sell, become world famous, have movies made of your work, and then you pretty much get a guarantee that whatever you write will get published and purchased. And then you have the freedom to write exactly what and how you like, AND you have the freedom to buy a yacht.
Or you can choose to write books that you think would appeal to both you and a large readership which is pretty close to "writing whatever you want."
Before starting on a novel, come up with a high concept for it that will appeal to you as its writer and will also grab the attention of readers based on what the book is about.
The writers that I can count on one hand who make millions of bucks continue to write the same sort of stuff. No one's books have changed radically after they made their fortunes. I assume this is because the books that they were interested in writing and the books that made them a lot of money are one and the same.
FWIW, I don't actually want a yacht.
But I do agree, it's never seemed like "make lots of money OR write because you like it". And let's be honest, it's highly unlikely that even successful authors are going to make "a lot" of money. A lot MORE than I currently make writing? Sure. A lot compared to that 1% we keep hearing about lately? Not likely.
I do not want to be Famous.
Great feedback. You know what really bugs me is celebrities posing as writers when they already have a successful career like tyra banks. Its like they have to write direct sing act and save humanity to feel good about themselves. I personally would rather have a cult following. I think once you earn a certain amount of money for your writing it can go to your headand you think everything you write is gold. There are so many authors who were good once but after writing 20 books it was like they used up all their good ideas but still kept writing. Dean koontz being a prime example.
Celebrities don't necessarily "pose"as writers. It's more like publishing a book is "money in the bank" for them. They can sell more books than authors with household names even if it's their first book.
If you're an author, fame is synonymous with making lots of money and having a large readership. I don't care about fame but making a decent living through writing would be nice.
If you don't want to make money from your writing and you don't want people to read it, then you don't want to be famous. Otherwise, you probably do (although perhaps you want to avoid the many annoying aspects that come with fame).
I just think it would be more pretentious. There's a strong element of self-delusion to pretension, I think I can be satisfied with that.
On pretentious - I refused to tell a soul I was writing a novel until it was finished because I think it sounds so pretentious to say "I'm a writer". Personal hang up.
I always think of Holden Caulfield.
Anyone who's writing a book to make money or have a career or to become famous is a disgrace to writing.
Yes, as with all professions.
If I could go into any bookstore and see a shelf with $7.99 paperbacks with my name on it, all books that nearly any literate person could pick up and find something to enjoy, and get paid solely to hang out riffing out good stories, maybe do some readings where I get to talk about shit I like (i.e my books), man I would do that shit in less than a heartbeat.
A lot of people forget that commercial writers are really fucking skilled craftsman. I could find less words that don't need to be there in a Michael Connelly book than in some literary trollop. Michael Crichton could make me believe anything. I really look up to those career writers. But I don't have the talent/discipline/normal brain to write that widely accessable stuff, not now anyway and probably never.
For me, the idea of writing to appease myself or thinking there's a select few that will "get" my work, that's pretension. I mean those things are perfectly reasonable and I should have those in mind, but it also puts my nose firmly up against own anus, so I try not to actively think those things too much. Aim to conquer the world, not the minds of professors, geeks, or other writers.
The only people who count or who last in any art form are those who created because it burned inside them. I don't know what's pretentious about that.
Thinking that it burns inside you and you count and your art will last is by definition pretentious, whether your claim is true or not. (note: rhetorical "you", not anyone specifically.)
And I'm not so sure if that statement is true or not, but I am biased against idealism and towards crushed dreams.
Renfield, I don't want to get into an argument. Your first contribution to this thread was "money".
I hope "you" make lots of it.
Like Kanye said, I did it all for the glory.
I write because I have an unjustified narcissism about my writing, it is completely delusional, but it is a madness that lures me in, forces me to work on it. Do I want money? Sure I could use it, but even if it weren't profitable I would write, I write because I want people to know how good I am at building plots and putting together words, and there is just something kind of snobby about how proud I am of that.
I mean, even if you don't tell people, "i'm a writer" you still keep that knowledge to yourself and use it to keep a certain distance between yourself and a situation, a dispassionate sort of "research" angle not unlike a sociologist's trip, and that is pretentious even when you don't explicitly rub other people's face in it.
What I mean is: It isn't important what material or interpersonal rewards it gets you, write for how it makes you feel. It makes me feel giddy. Megalomaniacal even.
Renfield, I don't want to get into an argument.
I'm prone to antithetical viewpoints, I can't help myself, but it's purely for sake of discussion. I apologize outrightly for coming off curmudgeonly so often. There's no venom in my words whether joking or serious.
I don't totally disagree with you, but I'll counterpoint it for the sake of dialogue, I am just interested as to why people hold the opinions that they do.
Selling my first two stories had me in burn-rate deficit for years. Publishing without compensation was a slow climb back, but joining the Clevenger workshop (for twice the amount I'd earned) has suddenly positioned me nicely back into cult contention. If I can continue to keep my readership low enough (and I believe I can), combined with my steady sink into poverty, I'm convined a gruesome motorcycle crash or unexpected sucicide will place me right where I hope to be as a writer.
I think writing can mean different things to a person at different points in their life too. For some people, writing is just a hobby hence the creation of fan fiction. Are people who write TV for a living or movies less creative than a novelist? Sometimes a filmmaker can say more with images than a thousand words could. I think writing is ego gratifying, there is no denying that. However, so far in my life writing has meant different things to me at different stages of my life. When I started writing at 13, writing was like discovering a special new talent, a secret toy I could play with, like masturbation but better. Then at 17, I was really pretentious and thought like every high school that I could write the great American novel that would change the world. At 20, I wrote a lot of poetry and short stories and wrote because I felt like it was a passion burning in me and I had to get it out. Doing poetry readings and sharing writing in classes made writing more dynamic than writing secretly in my room. Then in my early 20's being published a few times and actually getting paid for stories made me feel like someone was recognizing my talent and filled me with pride. Then in my late 20's as my writing seemed to be getting rejected constantly I started to doubt myself and my purpose and sought a different career choice instead of just working crappy jobs and hoping for fame to strike one day. Now I'm 33 and I have to say that I write because I have to, it's part of my "soul identity", whether or not it gets published is irrelevant. I believe that it's possible but I am not going to base my reason for being on it anymore. I used to think if I didn't publish a novel before a certain age that my life was worthless and that my entire existence would be meaningless. I realize now that success in any medium takes time and to me, success is just writing one great novel even that touches a person and changes them in some way or opens their eyes. Not just entertainment but something more.
To me being a popular writer versus a good writer is sometimes like the difference between a douchebag rapper with gold chains singing about bitches/guns/bling and an acoustic solo artist who comes out with an album every 5 years when he is inspired by life.
@Matt--I am not a big believer in the idea that you have to be miserable to be a good writer but I am also not a big believer in Harvard grads who write creatively for the school lit mag and read sonnets to get laid while waiting for their trust fund to ripen either. Most writers are fucked up in some way or eccentric. Or let's say artists in general...not all of them acheived success in their lifetime. What's tragic is that sometimes they were more appreciated after death than when they were alive. Then there is the Sylvia Plaths and the Ernest Hemingways of writing, success didn't make them very happy, did it? The oven beckons madam and for whom does the bell toll now? I personally have a fetish for famous writer's personal lives and how effed up they actually were. Poor little Emily Dickenson in that cabin all alone writing her dashline poems to God. Just write for you, bro and if it happens that down the line, you get something published that pays well or gives you a sense of acheivement then awesome.
I think the only way you know you have really made it as a writer is if you have stalkers, freaks who would tattoo your words on their skin, who want to fuck you after book signings. ;)
freaks who would tattoo your words on their skin,
Yeah, I had one of those (although I would be hesitant to call him a freak). But he didn't go through with it. I think the poem was too long or something.
While I'd accept all the money, fame, pussy and prestige that came my way, I'd still want to write just because I like doing it.
I don't want lots and lots of money. I don't need it. But I want some. I was surprised when reading an interview with Bret Easton Ellis and he was saying how he has a budget and I was all wtf this is the guy who wrote this and this and this. He doesn't have 'fuck you' money and puts it down to being such a slow writer. He doesn't do the hardback-paperback yearly cycle. But, and my opinion counts because I'm a fucking member here and you're reading this post, I'd rather be in his position than Chuck P's; every book Ellis has written shines with quality and the ideas are fully realised, rather than taking a bit of Portland butter every time it's served and trying to spread it over a mile of bread. So Ellis can only total one Lambo a year. So he has to write some articles about Empire (whatever the fuck that is). So he has to make monthly payments on his hair plugs. So the fuck what?
I could live with that. At least I'd have a fanbase that liked more than the first few of my books. A balance. Not black and white. I want a quality body of work without all the starving artist bullshit. My point, and I could've just said this on line one, and you wish I did, I know, is that you can find a balance because people have before and even if they hadn't, you can always be the first.
@allen--I believe that the process itself is its chief value. I'd be deeply uncomfortable assuming it's somehow more valuable to me than to you or a Harvard grad or Tyra Banks or Dean Koontz or a convict or house wife or business man or school kid. I'd be deeply uncomfortable assuming the motives of any writer based on their income or social status, fandom, or lack there of. I'd be uncomfortable elevating my motives over another's based on assumptions. I respect anyone putting in the time. There are easier things to do.
As a member of Author's Guild, where I get to hang out with the top commercial writers on the planet at meetings and the cocktail parties afterward, I have to say that if you knew them as individuals instead of what you read in magazines, they are more often than not, just people. They are pleased by the acclaim but that is not why most of them write. To denigrate their work and say you can either write quality or quantity is unfair and inaccurate. They all write what makes them successful which is what their readers want to see. If it diminishes in quality, it is only because they have already written several million published words and there are none left that they really can get anything new out of. Some of them are so modest that they would not be noticed in a crowd of 2.
At the first meeting I attended, I met an ancient man, wearing a black beret and carrying an ebony walking stick with a carved handle. I was seated next to him in the lobby of the auditorium awaiting the start of the meeting. I had no idea who he was. He asked me what I wrote and I told him and I asked him in turn the same question. His answer was, "Oh, I have tinkered with a few movie scrips and stage plays."
The meeting was called and we entered the room. After opening remarks by the then president, Erica Jung, she introduced the President Emeritus of Author's Guild and asked him to come up to the stage to receive an award. An old man in a black beret with an ebony walking stick slowly climbed the stairs to the dais.
I had asked Garson Kanin, author of the play and screenplay "Born Yesterday," along with dozens of other screenplays and plays, what he wrote!
To make my day complete, the man sitting next to me introduced himself as Mike. I recognized him from his headshot on his books. Back then, he was a relatively new writer who had written a few medical mysteries, and a book about DNA and dinosaurs. He was the late Michael Crichton. I have never met a more humble and wonderful person. Since both of us came from the healthcare field, we had a lot to talk about that had nothing to do with writing...but then again, everything has to do with writing!
It's funny how many people said money. You little Stephen Kings. You little Dean Koonts. Okay, Stephen Kings.
I think it's outright laughable to say people who write "to have a career" are doing something wrong. Like its so easy to sit down, write gold, and cash checks. I would say that of you do not love to write, live to write, and write whether or not you get money, fame or whatever out of it, you probably wouldn't WANT a career in writing. I mean, if I am an employee somewhere in a half way decent job field, I get paid for coming to work. If I'm a writer, I work a lot and get paid a lot less often, for a fairly long time on the way to becoming a "career" writer.
I'd like a little bit of both. One day I'd like to make enough money where I can move midwest and buy a house and, you know, focus on writing. But I don't want crazy fame! I'm a confident writer and I love challenging writing projects, but the idea of everyone knowing my name terrifies me. I don't want my work judged based on if I'm a literary genius. I want my work judged by how the book made the reader feel while reading it. I don't want to be remembered. I want my characters to be remembered. I want my story to be remembered.
But I want money, too. I can't spend the rest of my life animating in Flash, especially since social games are going the 3D route soon. And I sure as hell don't want to stay in California the rest of my life. I need a starry sky! I need a mountain view or a forest in my backyard! I need cheaper rent!
I daydream about gaining a medium level of success for my awesome YA adventure novels. I'd probably wear a paperbag over my face at book signings.
I agree with Renee. I work in an art field and I sure as hell intend to earn money from it. How is writing any different? It's something I do because I love it, but that doesn't mean I wouldn't love to make a living off of it, too. Isn't that the dream? To make money doing what you love?
I don't think commercial fiction is throwaway fiction. Commercial fiction is fun. It's easy to digest, but that doesn't mean it doesn't taste good.
And I enjoy Dean Koontz. Not his new stuff so much, but his older stuff stick with me to this day.
Can anyone actually picture what Dean Koontz currently looks like in their head? Writers don't really spend a lot of time having their lives in the limelight. If you were a writer and a reality tv star, you'd probably be famous though. If you were a writer and you slaughtered all opposing critics in a series of violent home invasions, then you might be infamous.
just hold their kids hostage until they publish a positive review.
But then you have to always be on the lookout, because obviously your name will get to the authorities sooner or later, but good thing you learned about all of this stuff while doing research for noir stories, and so you stay off the grid and move from town to town, writing, uploading from strange ip addresses, and kidnapping the children of the next critic.
That is infamy.
Oh course I know what Koontz looks like. He's on the book jacket. Okay, that MIGHT be a few years old. I wouldn't know him if he walked up to me.
I'm a big John Grisham fan. Well, I haven't read anything of his in awhile...but I started reading him in grade school, and then went on a tirade after her wrote Painted House because I thought it was the most amazing book and everyone I knew thought it was crap. But the point is...I still have no idea what he looks like. Today that is. I think he was blonde 15 years ago. He might still be.
I think I would know Dean Koontz or Stephen King if I saw them in person. Koontz is pretty recognizable even with the fake hair. Writers aren't pretty and they shouldn't be. If we were, we would be actors or singers lol
No infamy please. I'd rather be like Patrick Rothfuss and Neil Gaiman. They make great books and they have no infamy, at least not any that I've heard of, and they make pretty good money off of their writing! Out of the choices, I would choose the money but there is no way in hell I could write on schedule. I'm pretty adamant about writing on my own procrastinatory terms.
@aliensoul - Speak for yourself. I'm beautiful, damnit.
I prefer to write on my own time, my own schedule, my own content. If it turns a dollar at some point in time....yipppeeee. If not, I will still write. It is who am. It is what I do. It is not pretentious to classify myself as a writer anymore than it is to call one's self a gardener or a baker. If it is where your passion lies, celebrate it! If it is merely a job to you, make the most of it! Though I am not a fan of mass marketed/produced novels, many people are. There is a viable market. I hope to be able to remain true to myself as a writer and appeal to a fellowship of readers. Money would be a welcomed byproduct, however.
Yeah, I'm quite hot enough. Maybe not when I am Stephen King's age, but I've never had a problem finding a date.
Joyce carol oates is a hottie. I was just joking. In the future it will probably be mandatory that you are good looking to get a book published. All cover jacket photos will be superhot and people will only read books by sexy people. Lol
I'm already workin on my pout in preparation.
Neither infamous nor famous. I just want to write. I think every time I write something difficult, I get more brave points.
Wow, I remember this thread. The good old days.
Lol. I'm apparently reviving a lot of things for a brief moment in time, and then letting them die again.
