I am definitely an "audience" writer. If I didn't have an audience, I wouldn't write. And then reputation to a lesser extent. I want to be proud of what I write, and have others think it is good, but I am not above writing pure entertainment. Money is at the bottom because — this is writing. It is extremely hard to make money writing fiction. But I think art adds value to our lives and artist deserve to be compensated. If only the general population agreed.
An interesting read, but all of it boils down to sales. You need to have a book in a form that readers can buy. You won't have audience, money or reputation without them. Integrity of your work only enters the picture if you go with a conventional publisher. But that's not a guarantee of fulfilment of any of the other motivators. Ask most authors of fiction in Canada. You might sell only a few hundred copies, which is a ticket to skyrocketing to obscurity. If a publisher won't take your work, you need to find an alternative. Then, you have a shot at audience, money and reputation, while preserving your integrity.
Skyrocketing to obscurity. That, I suppose, is the fate of most of us. It is the fate of most people who do get traditionally published, let alone those who do not. Still, there is a route other than sales, and that is patronage. There is nothing new about patronage in the arts, and all those obscure Canadian fiction authors made most of the meager money that they made through government patronage (by far the worst kind). I think anyone taking out a paid subscription on Substack is engaging more in patronage that purchase, and I am fascinated by that. But Patreon does seem to demonstrate that distributed patronage does work. For some it provided a six figure income. Probably more for the Jordan Petersons of the world. So you might get money and an audience without something that people can buy. But I agree you won't get much of a reputation, at least in conventional cultural circles.
Sometimes, though, I wonder if the door to which I am trying to find the key actually has anything behind it anymore. Perhaps it is now full of falling leaves and rising damp.
To get past the sense of falling leaves and rising damp is a goal of most authors, whether you're published or unpublished (and especially as you age). Each work is a challenge to meet the vision you have for it. If you have a contract with a publisher, you fret about meeting expectations -- both the publisher's and your own. If you don't have a contract, you wonder why you're bothering with the pursuit, and yet, if it's in you, you keep on writing because you feel you have something to say and share. Eventually, you figure out something: either you're commercially viable by mainstream standards or you're something else. If it's the latter, the work gets harder and you have to decide if you want to continue or look at alternatives.
Mind you, there is also the element that I understand that publishing industry far better than I used to. I know what it likes and does not like. If I had known that when I started, would I have written something different? I don't know. But if you know it well enough you can at least ask yourself if there is an intersection between what it wants to publish and what you want to write. It is a question I never thought to ask when I started. I'm trying to figure out if I care enough to ask is for my next project.
I would say, always write what you want to write. What the publishing industry wants is always open to change and you can't predict where it will go next.
I sense that what you value most in your desire to land a conventional publisher is acceptance. That implies validation, even though that can be short-lived. Is everything after that less important or worth leaving to chance?
For me, the greater goal is audience. I want my stories to reach as many readers as possible, because I think they are important and the people I am writing about should be remembered. I don't care how I achieve that.
Or write the intersection between what you want to write and what people want to read, or the intersection between what you want to writer and what the industry wants to publish, if there is one.
It's not so much acceptance, though we all do crave that, and there is no point pretending we don't. But for me it is about participating in the conversation. Except I'm no longer sure the conversation exists anymore. So maybe my hope is to ignite it again. Why dream small? :-)
Thoroughly enjoyed this read. I'm sure we could all draw our own personal Venn-style diagram of how these motivators fit together for us. I have been heavily in the audience camp, with a bit of integrity thrown in, but the money aspect has been growing in importance year-on-year, whether I like it or not. Trying to find a way to have all these pieces slow together without overloading one of the others is the real trick, I feel.
Hi, Mark, I have been following your blogs since I took a technical communication course back in 2013(?) and my teacher recommended it. I am a full-time teacher of writing at a rural community college and I was teaching technical writing at the time. I mostly teach first-year composition now.
I self-published a novella back in 2010. I used Lulu to do it and then had it listed on Amazon, etc. It felt really good to me to be in control of the entire process, though as you describe, it didn't open all the doors for me. I only ever sold a handful of copies to friends. I do most of my writing for myself (through journaling), so audience hasn't been a primary consideration for me. Usually I'm writing for me. Come to think of it, neither reputation nor money are primary considerations for me. But I would say that integrity is very important to me, and I would add authenticity. If these criteria are on a spectrum, then I've been firmly on the side that favors integrity over everything else.
But I realize that paid writers, the kind that make their livings through writing, whether it be via self-publishing or traditional publishing, are a different animal. I haven't evolved into that animal yet, and perhaps I never will. I guess there's no easy way or shortcut. Like your invocation of Everest, it's a pretty daunting task that relatively few people will accomplish. Most never try, and those who do are not guaranteed success. More starkly, some of those who try die on that mountain ("Into Thin Air" comes to mind).
I'm also an amateur musician. Iggy Pop said of the death of Kurt Cobain that he was reminded how "dangerous the profession [of music] is for the practitioners." I think the same could be said of writers. William S. Burroughs also said something to the effect that writing is a dangerous business and few survive it.
Anyway, I'm curious to see how you progress. Having been in the "integrity" camp for so long, I'm opening up to the traditional paths to see if I can also climb the mountain. Maybe I'll see you on the Hillary Step. Don't forget your oxygen tank!
Perhaps I am naive, but the joy is in the journey. We write because we must. We self-publish because it gives us an audience who share our journey through our stories. When an authors work isn't what a traditional publisher is looking for, we can enjoy the benefits of self-publishing. Thirty years ago, that wasn't much of an option. Neither were ebooks. Nor did a writer compete with millions of other writers for a contract. Self-publishing isn't a step down. I like to think of it as a step forward. :)
I am definitely an "audience" writer. If I didn't have an audience, I wouldn't write. And then reputation to a lesser extent. I want to be proud of what I write, and have others think it is good, but I am not above writing pure entertainment. Money is at the bottom because — this is writing. It is extremely hard to make money writing fiction. But I think art adds value to our lives and artist deserve to be compensated. If only the general population agreed.
Excellent essay.
An interesting read, but all of it boils down to sales. You need to have a book in a form that readers can buy. You won't have audience, money or reputation without them. Integrity of your work only enters the picture if you go with a conventional publisher. But that's not a guarantee of fulfilment of any of the other motivators. Ask most authors of fiction in Canada. You might sell only a few hundred copies, which is a ticket to skyrocketing to obscurity. If a publisher won't take your work, you need to find an alternative. Then, you have a shot at audience, money and reputation, while preserving your integrity.
Skyrocketing to obscurity. That, I suppose, is the fate of most of us. It is the fate of most people who do get traditionally published, let alone those who do not. Still, there is a route other than sales, and that is patronage. There is nothing new about patronage in the arts, and all those obscure Canadian fiction authors made most of the meager money that they made through government patronage (by far the worst kind). I think anyone taking out a paid subscription on Substack is engaging more in patronage that purchase, and I am fascinated by that. But Patreon does seem to demonstrate that distributed patronage does work. For some it provided a six figure income. Probably more for the Jordan Petersons of the world. So you might get money and an audience without something that people can buy. But I agree you won't get much of a reputation, at least in conventional cultural circles.
Sometimes, though, I wonder if the door to which I am trying to find the key actually has anything behind it anymore. Perhaps it is now full of falling leaves and rising damp.
To get past the sense of falling leaves and rising damp is a goal of most authors, whether you're published or unpublished (and especially as you age). Each work is a challenge to meet the vision you have for it. If you have a contract with a publisher, you fret about meeting expectations -- both the publisher's and your own. If you don't have a contract, you wonder why you're bothering with the pursuit, and yet, if it's in you, you keep on writing because you feel you have something to say and share. Eventually, you figure out something: either you're commercially viable by mainstream standards or you're something else. If it's the latter, the work gets harder and you have to decide if you want to continue or look at alternatives.
Yup, that's pretty much where I am at this point.
Mind you, there is also the element that I understand that publishing industry far better than I used to. I know what it likes and does not like. If I had known that when I started, would I have written something different? I don't know. But if you know it well enough you can at least ask yourself if there is an intersection between what it wants to publish and what you want to write. It is a question I never thought to ask when I started. I'm trying to figure out if I care enough to ask is for my next project.
I would say, always write what you want to write. What the publishing industry wants is always open to change and you can't predict where it will go next.
I sense that what you value most in your desire to land a conventional publisher is acceptance. That implies validation, even though that can be short-lived. Is everything after that less important or worth leaving to chance?
For me, the greater goal is audience. I want my stories to reach as many readers as possible, because I think they are important and the people I am writing about should be remembered. I don't care how I achieve that.
Or write the intersection between what you want to write and what people want to read, or the intersection between what you want to writer and what the industry wants to publish, if there is one.
It's not so much acceptance, though we all do crave that, and there is no point pretending we don't. But for me it is about participating in the conversation. Except I'm no longer sure the conversation exists anymore. So maybe my hope is to ignite it again. Why dream small? :-)
Thoroughly enjoyed this read. I'm sure we could all draw our own personal Venn-style diagram of how these motivators fit together for us. I have been heavily in the audience camp, with a bit of integrity thrown in, but the money aspect has been growing in importance year-on-year, whether I like it or not. Trying to find a way to have all these pieces slow together without overloading one of the others is the real trick, I feel.
Hi, Mark, I have been following your blogs since I took a technical communication course back in 2013(?) and my teacher recommended it. I am a full-time teacher of writing at a rural community college and I was teaching technical writing at the time. I mostly teach first-year composition now.
I self-published a novella back in 2010. I used Lulu to do it and then had it listed on Amazon, etc. It felt really good to me to be in control of the entire process, though as you describe, it didn't open all the doors for me. I only ever sold a handful of copies to friends. I do most of my writing for myself (through journaling), so audience hasn't been a primary consideration for me. Usually I'm writing for me. Come to think of it, neither reputation nor money are primary considerations for me. But I would say that integrity is very important to me, and I would add authenticity. If these criteria are on a spectrum, then I've been firmly on the side that favors integrity over everything else.
But I realize that paid writers, the kind that make their livings through writing, whether it be via self-publishing or traditional publishing, are a different animal. I haven't evolved into that animal yet, and perhaps I never will. I guess there's no easy way or shortcut. Like your invocation of Everest, it's a pretty daunting task that relatively few people will accomplish. Most never try, and those who do are not guaranteed success. More starkly, some of those who try die on that mountain ("Into Thin Air" comes to mind).
I'm also an amateur musician. Iggy Pop said of the death of Kurt Cobain that he was reminded how "dangerous the profession [of music] is for the practitioners." I think the same could be said of writers. William S. Burroughs also said something to the effect that writing is a dangerous business and few survive it.
Anyway, I'm curious to see how you progress. Having been in the "integrity" camp for so long, I'm opening up to the traditional paths to see if I can also climb the mountain. Maybe I'll see you on the Hillary Step. Don't forget your oxygen tank!
Perhaps I am naive, but the joy is in the journey. We write because we must. We self-publish because it gives us an audience who share our journey through our stories. When an authors work isn't what a traditional publisher is looking for, we can enjoy the benefits of self-publishing. Thirty years ago, that wasn't much of an option. Neither were ebooks. Nor did a writer compete with millions of other writers for a contract. Self-publishing isn't a step down. I like to think of it as a step forward. :)