Business choices in writing
May. 2nd, 2008 10:56 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
msagaraEveryone on LJ has probably seen the Richard Morgan post. It's here.
I have minor doubts about the over-all collegiality of any large group of writers, because, well, writers. But I really like his overall point, which is that we don't need to piss in the pool that we're swimming in in an attempt to hit the Other Guys. Because, well, we're all swimming in the same water, and it's icky.
I occasionally talk about the business of writing, which is not entirely like the business of publishing, and one of his points struck me enough that I wanted to talk a bit about it, because there is one quibble I have with his article.
I know that he is trying to make his larger point. I agree with the larger point: the market is what the market is, and you will probably do better if you write with an eye to the market.
But.
Writing a three-brick fantasy trilogy is not an option for a lot of writers, in part because they don't like reading them. If you don't like reading something, it shows in the writing. You may consider the type of book so anti-intellectual that you feel it can be tossed off with little effort, research or thought. I think this is wishful thinking (at best) and contempt for readers (at worst). There are an awful lot of 3 book fantasies that simply do not sell. Assuming that all you have to do is write one to make money? Wrong.
(And this leaves aside the point that for the most part, no one wants fantasy trilogy bricks anymore.)
If we all wanted to make money, the fiction we should be writing? Romance. Because romance outsells everything else. Bad romance numbers? Are our high midlist numbers. Seriously. They can drop a romance writer for numbers that would keep most of our genre's editors cautiously optimistic about your future career.
But we're not all writing romances. Why? Well, in my case, it's because I can't. Whatever it is that speaks most strongly to readers in a romance novel is not something that I understand well enough to work with. If it doesn't speak to me at all, how the heck am I supposed to be able to work with it in a way that will make it true for readers?
Same with the fantasy that Morgan is off the cuff about. I honestly don't think that you can write blazing bestsellers when your intent is a knock-off of something you simply don't respect.
However...
There are stories which will probably be more commercial, and stories which will probably be less so. If you're a writer who has -- as many of us do -- a wide range of stories that you could start writing right now, then an eye to the business of writing (as opposed to the art), is in my opinion a practical, even a good, thing.
But we don't all have the same range of stories. If, for instance, hard sf was the darling of the market at the moment, I would heave a small sigh, and keep writing; if horror were the Next Big Thing, I would be quietly writing in my corner of Old Small Thing, because stories that would fit the horror genre are not the stories I have to tell.
Even if I felt any regret about this, it wouldn't matter. Those are not my stories. And I think it's absolutely essential, no matter what you're writing, that you write your stories. My concept of writing-as-business-move is more about the intersection of two sets: Hard-headed career decisions and Stories I want to tell. If you want to wander outside of this intersection, it's my humble opinion that you'll do better in the end in the Stories I want to tell set.
I write two different types of books at the moment: The West novels and the Sagara novels (sometimes I call them the DAW and Luna novels). The West novels are the books that I want to read, and if I could only choose one type of novel to read on the desert island, it would be books like those. People have asked me if I'm tired of them; I'm not. I'll probably be tired of them when the story is finished, if then.
The Sagara novels are books I like to read. (Actually, they're the novel version of what I would write if I were writing manga, because in some ways, they have the emotional immediacy and the internal visualization of manga or anime to me; I see them in the color palettes of anime, but whole conversations and pauses are manga pauses. And Bishounen. I digress.) They're my attempt to write a story that is both mine and more accessible.
Because no one writes fantasy to be inaccessible, but in my case, it happens anyway =/.
I thought, of all the stories that I could write, the Cast books had the potential for the broadest appeal (there are two other worlds, one still percolating in the background, but with an entirely different tone and texture). It would probably have made more sense to try a contemporary/urban series, given this market. But... I didn't have one of those until much, much later, and I didn't have the emotional kernel of something that could become one of those, either.
Of course, the theory of accessible and the fact of it isn't decided by me. It's decided by readers. I chose the story that I thought would have the broadest appeal, I wrote it -- but you know? I could have been entirely wrong. It's something that the reading market determines and judges. But the decision to write the Cast novels was based entirely on what I thought would have the best chance at reaching the widest audience. I looked over the possible things I would enjoy writing (for a value of enjoy that includes the inevitable middle-of-the-book), and I chose the one that I thought would work best in that context.
But I remember reading a Neal Stephenson interview a while ago (maybe in Locus) in which he said he had decided to write his co-authored thrillers because they would be the money-makers, and the money-making writing would free him up to write the books he really, really wanted to write.
He did both -- but the books that sold were, of course, the books that he really, really wanted to write.
Sometimes it happens that way. That's probably the very best thing that can happen to a writer, imho. Sometimes, it doesn't, which is probably the hardest thing to accept as a writer.
The fact that it doesn't, more often than not, can lead to all kinds of Unfortunate Author Behaviour and insecurities, some of which causes people to -- yes! -- spit on other authors and their readers. And given that you want those readers, spitting on the books they do like does not seem a reasonable way to reach them, imho.
I have minor doubts about the over-all collegiality of any large group of writers, because, well, writers. But I really like his overall point, which is that we don't need to piss in the pool that we're swimming in in an attempt to hit the Other Guys. Because, well, we're all swimming in the same water, and it's icky.
I occasionally talk about the business of writing, which is not entirely like the business of publishing, and one of his points struck me enough that I wanted to talk a bit about it, because there is one quibble I have with his article.
"Want to make a shit-load of money? Want to make the bestseller lists? Then get on and write a three brick fantasy trilogy about a good hearted farm-boy who becomes a wizard or a warrior (or a space pilot) and defeats an evil empire."
I know that he is trying to make his larger point. I agree with the larger point: the market is what the market is, and you will probably do better if you write with an eye to the market.
But.
Writing a three-brick fantasy trilogy is not an option for a lot of writers, in part because they don't like reading them. If you don't like reading something, it shows in the writing. You may consider the type of book so anti-intellectual that you feel it can be tossed off with little effort, research or thought. I think this is wishful thinking (at best) and contempt for readers (at worst). There are an awful lot of 3 book fantasies that simply do not sell. Assuming that all you have to do is write one to make money? Wrong.
(And this leaves aside the point that for the most part, no one wants fantasy trilogy bricks anymore.)
If we all wanted to make money, the fiction we should be writing? Romance. Because romance outsells everything else. Bad romance numbers? Are our high midlist numbers. Seriously. They can drop a romance writer for numbers that would keep most of our genre's editors cautiously optimistic about your future career.
But we're not all writing romances. Why? Well, in my case, it's because I can't. Whatever it is that speaks most strongly to readers in a romance novel is not something that I understand well enough to work with. If it doesn't speak to me at all, how the heck am I supposed to be able to work with it in a way that will make it true for readers?
Same with the fantasy that Morgan is off the cuff about. I honestly don't think that you can write blazing bestsellers when your intent is a knock-off of something you simply don't respect.
However...
There are stories which will probably be more commercial, and stories which will probably be less so. If you're a writer who has -- as many of us do -- a wide range of stories that you could start writing right now, then an eye to the business of writing (as opposed to the art), is in my opinion a practical, even a good, thing.
But we don't all have the same range of stories. If, for instance, hard sf was the darling of the market at the moment, I would heave a small sigh, and keep writing; if horror were the Next Big Thing, I would be quietly writing in my corner of Old Small Thing, because stories that would fit the horror genre are not the stories I have to tell.
Even if I felt any regret about this, it wouldn't matter. Those are not my stories. And I think it's absolutely essential, no matter what you're writing, that you write your stories. My concept of writing-as-business-move is more about the intersection of two sets: Hard-headed career decisions and Stories I want to tell. If you want to wander outside of this intersection, it's my humble opinion that you'll do better in the end in the Stories I want to tell set.
I write two different types of books at the moment: The West novels and the Sagara novels (sometimes I call them the DAW and Luna novels). The West novels are the books that I want to read, and if I could only choose one type of novel to read on the desert island, it would be books like those. People have asked me if I'm tired of them; I'm not. I'll probably be tired of them when the story is finished, if then.
The Sagara novels are books I like to read. (Actually, they're the novel version of what I would write if I were writing manga, because in some ways, they have the emotional immediacy and the internal visualization of manga or anime to me; I see them in the color palettes of anime, but whole conversations and pauses are manga pauses. And Bishounen. I digress.) They're my attempt to write a story that is both mine and more accessible.
Because no one writes fantasy to be inaccessible, but in my case, it happens anyway =/.
I thought, of all the stories that I could write, the Cast books had the potential for the broadest appeal (there are two other worlds, one still percolating in the background, but with an entirely different tone and texture). It would probably have made more sense to try a contemporary/urban series, given this market. But... I didn't have one of those until much, much later, and I didn't have the emotional kernel of something that could become one of those, either.
Of course, the theory of accessible and the fact of it isn't decided by me. It's decided by readers. I chose the story that I thought would have the broadest appeal, I wrote it -- but you know? I could have been entirely wrong. It's something that the reading market determines and judges. But the decision to write the Cast novels was based entirely on what I thought would have the best chance at reaching the widest audience. I looked over the possible things I would enjoy writing (for a value of enjoy that includes the inevitable middle-of-the-book), and I chose the one that I thought would work best in that context.
But I remember reading a Neal Stephenson interview a while ago (maybe in Locus) in which he said he had decided to write his co-authored thrillers because they would be the money-makers, and the money-making writing would free him up to write the books he really, really wanted to write.
He did both -- but the books that sold were, of course, the books that he really, really wanted to write.
Sometimes it happens that way. That's probably the very best thing that can happen to a writer, imho. Sometimes, it doesn't, which is probably the hardest thing to accept as a writer.
The fact that it doesn't, more often than not, can lead to all kinds of Unfortunate Author Behaviour and insecurities, some of which causes people to -- yes! -- spit on other authors and their readers. And given that you want those readers, spitting on the books they do like does not seem a reasonable way to reach them, imho.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-05-13 11:02 pm (UTC)So you come at it from a completely different point of view than I do. For me, my writing isn't complete until it's read by someone else, and they bring their own experiences to it. I don't have to know what they bring to it, just that they're reading it and bring something.
When you say "If I could figure out a way to get my words out there and read", it leads to the question by who? This is a serious question, and I ask it of myself as well.
Honestly? At this stage, I just want anyone to read it. When I first got to the beta reader stage, it was like a miracle that anyone was reading what I'd written. But that's not enough anymore. I want to touch strangers' lives, even if for just a few hours. That's all.
Sounds corny. And preachy. But the books themselves aren't. Honest.
no subject
Date: 2008-05-13 11:42 pm (UTC)For me, the writing is complete when it's a book because at that point, it is literally out of my hands. I can respond to people who've read it, and I'm happy when they do, and I admit I'm nervous because their reaction defines success or failure, since in the end, writing is communication. But the book is out of my hands because I can't take it back or revise it or argue about covers or copy or anything else. I can't bring their perception to the story, or somehow make it mine, and reading is very individual.
Anything I can do has already been done. Anything anyone else does, I have no control over.
Honestly? At this stage, I just want anyone to read it. When I first got to the beta reader stage, it was like a miracle that anyone was reading what I'd written. But that's not enough anymore. I want to touch strangers' lives, even if for just a few hours. That's all.
I think, at base, this is part of what motivates any of us. It's the hope of affecting readers in the same ways that we were affected by books that moved us.
But... having said that, what we write in some ways defines who might read us. I write fantasy. That means that I'm already not going to be read by a large, large number of readers who simply don't care about fantasy. My novels are sometimes too dense, and the density will also pare down audience, even among readers of fantasy. I'm sometimes considered a bit grim, which is also a choice that will affect readers.
But I write about the things that move me, first. I try different things, in different novels, but there are some stories that, while I can read, I can't write.
So I have control over the text to a certain point.
I think there's an arrogance involved in writing, that balances the edge of the insecurity involved -- and the insecurities are legion. At some level, I have to believe that the stories I'm telling are stories that will move people. It's possible that I'm not yet at the stage where my story is clear enough, or accessible enough -- but to write, I need to find the place in which the belief is strong.
And then... I have to let it go out into the world, to find ways in which I can fix mistakes and make it stronger, until the point where it's a book, and there's nothing at all that I can do.
At that point, I'm working on something else in my little corner of the office.
no subject
Date: 2008-05-14 02:19 am (UTC)Yes, exactly. I want it out of my hands, and in the hands of others. It's sort of the difference between hitting in a batting cage, and hitting on the field. Once the ball is gone, the ball is gone, but the first is just practice. The second is a real game.
Or, as a character playing an out-of-work actor in one of my favorite movies once said, "I'm tired of practicing my expressions in front of the mirror."
I have to believe that the stories I'm telling are stories that will move people.
What I want is the chance to get mine out there so I can see if they are.
I want to let them go. But I can't get anyone to catch them.
no subject
Date: 2008-05-14 02:26 am (UTC)I think, because I also write poetry which I never submit anywhere, the idea of writing something that has to be written, shorn of audience, doesn't seem as pointless, if that makes sense. It's something I already do.
I want to let them go. But I can't get anyone to catch them.
This is always hard, and it's something almost every writer goes through =/. And I know it is hard, but also, that it's not permanent. Someone - I can't offhand remember which author, said he wrote something like 16 novels before the first one was published, and is doing quite well now.
no subject
Date: 2008-05-14 03:02 am (UTC)Isn't that how most of us get started in the first place? I know I did.
that it's not permanent
I wish I could hold you to that... [wry g]