Well. Anyone with an
interest in writing will probably be fascinated, as I was, with the latest controversy
regarding self published authors. (Read the article, here.) The
uproar started when best selling author Sue Grafton referred to SPA's as lazy
and unwilling to do hard work. What's even more interesting is reading the comments section at
the end of these articles. It's given me
a chance to address my own feelings about the legitimacy of self publishing by
seeing how vigorously and articulately it was defended.
Obviously, Sue Grafton is entitled to her own opinion, but
that is not what people are reacting to.
"50 Shades of Grey is
overhyped" is an opinion. But this? "Don't self publish. That's as good as admitting you're too lazy
to do the hard work." Or,
" Self-publishing is a short cut and
I don’t believe in short cuts when it comes to the arts. I compare
self-publishing to a student managing to conquer Five Easy Pieces on the piano
and then wondering if s/he’s ready to be booked into Carnegie Hall" .
Those aren't opinions, they're judgements, and it's petty coming
from an author with the success that Sue Grafton has achieved.
I understand her point about the flood of bad books out
there; I said myself that anyone with access to a computer can now be published. Yes, when there are no barriers to entry, a
surge of unqualified people come into the market, and this dilutes/demeans/devalues
the craft. But this is true for any
endeavor. American Idol, America's Next
Top Model, America's Got Talent, to name just a few, are wildly successful
precisely because we see just how ordinary everyone else is. Especially during the auditions. But then, through hard work and
"coaching", we watch as a handful of people with genuine talent
emerge and are recognized---voted for---by the public. Not the experts, not the gate keepers. But the public. It's fair, it's fun; it works in entertainment, and apparently it
works in writing, too.
Now Sue Grafton has come along to tell us that we are
not only ordinary but delusional, to boot.
Why would she even care?
I mean, I don't think Jennifer Lopez sees people who take polite
applause at the Karaoke bar as evidence of their singing chops, an insult to her
"art". Does Simon Cowell consider the only road
worthy of a platinum album one that involves years of singing in nearly-empty
clubs? My guess is that they don't spend too much
time worrying about whether or not someone has paid their dues. They recognize that things are different now
and they use that difference to build new and more successful careers for
themselves.
I am aware of the thousands of poorly written, poorly edited
and aggressively marketed books out there because that is my competition. If I resent anything, it's that the presence
of these tens of thousands of bad books make it that much harder for other
people to take a chance on my book. But
so what? A quick preview, reader
ratings, book rank---these give more than enough information about whether to
proceed---for the reader AND the writer.
The market decides quickly, and the effect on me (if I've produced a
book that people want) is minimal in the long run.
Maybe I can be philosophical about this because I've already
gone through this weeding out process in the course of establishing my
blog. After two years of writing and
refining, I now have a small but solid following. In the meantime, I've seen a few blogs do
really well, but those blogs reflected the care and passion of their creators. Some of the blogs that started at the same time as I did, the ones whose creators manically flooded every blog hop in an attempt to raise their Goodle reader count, but then promptly unfollowed everyone who followed them: I've lasted long enough to see those blogs become abandoned. At best, they are limping along with a
post once or twice a month, their creators dreams of Internet riches through ad
revenue or sponsorships sinking fast. Again,
the quality of the product and the market decides.
I also understand the entrepreneurial impulse to create and build something with your own (figurative) hands. The economy is
in tatters, millions of people are unemployed, and many women with kids are
trying to find a way to earn an income while staying home. It's an admirable and natural instinct to try a variety of different things. I know I did, and I failed at a few of them
myself (online customer service rep, anyone?)
I'm just a little more determined when it comes to writing, I think,
because I've been doing it without pay for so long I've convinced myself
that this is something that makes me happy. Writing, that is. Not working without pay.
Anyway, when a successful, established author criticizes
"us" for being lazy, for taking shortcuts and worst of all, for being
poor writers (!!) then it's no wonder she triggers a strong reaction. Especially when most of the writers who are
serious about being independent authors HAVE had to take rejection. Years and years worth, actually. And oh yes, we HAVE spent years refining plot, structure, character development and all the myriad other things that result in good writing.
Worse, Grafton's is such an…ungenerous, uninformed and again,
judgemental position to take. Sure,
there are now thousands of "wannabe" writers, but thousands (millions?)
of new readers have been created as well, in the form of electronic readers,
tablets and even mobile phones. Perhaps
Sue should move beyond thinking of herself as a master craftsman, toiling in a
"salon" with a few apprentices at her feet, and into the 21st century where reading is neither as leisurely nor literary as it once was.
Books are no longer the discrete objects they once
were. Without the restrictions of space,
weight and cost, books have become goods.
Not too long ago, a person who owned thousands of books had to have both
space to store them and money to buy them.
Now, you can hold thousands of books in the clutch of your hand, and with
free books being offered every single day, those books could be acquired
without spending a penny. Today, people own titles, not books. They are acquired at a faster rate than ever before, and the explosion of sub genres like fanfic or steampunk means more people are reading because they have found something they can relate to.
Wouldn't it make more sense, then, to accept that whether people are
reading books or simply acquiring them, the old paradigms have shifted? And that perhaps, in this brave new world of online publishing, there is more than one way to be a legitimate author?
Here's the follow-up interview:
As well as a timely Forbes article about independent publishing:
No comments:
Post a Comment