Originally Posted by BearMountainBooks
Work for hire has never gotten any residuals. It's one of the reasons that I often point out that if there is no threat of making money or a continued revenue stream, writers would stop writing or not put their heart and soul into it. Writing for hire for publishers (despite their best efforts) has never taken off. There have been a few publishers who have tried it (and essentially ghost writing is the only area where it has any kind of success) but writers don't want to do it long term. Some do it to get a foot in the door, but ultimately, there's no reason to put your heart and soul into something that is a one-time payment, walk away, watch the publisher make the money. Generally work for hire is also very much spelled out as to exactly what you must write. Shoot, Harlequin, which isn't work for hire, spells out pretty clearly what they want to happen by page 4. Their various lines dictate how much foul language there can be, how graphic the descriptions, HEA, etc.
But most writers want to create and innovate and put their heart and soul into things--and even have the threat of making some money, gathering a following and if luck strikes, maybe having something picked up by a larger following. Work for hire is just another job. Almost all of us writers pick up some work freelance, whether it's resume writing, editing, etc and believe me, there is a vast difference to it versus writing a novel.
Every writer I know who writes with her heart and soul is hoping to strike that special note with an audience. To do that and keep doing that, you have to have a lot of belief in yourself, a money stream of some sort, the ego to take a lot of hits, but still know when to take advice, sheer stubbornness, a will of iron and a modicum of talent.
There are few who can sit back for a long period of time and dedicate themselves to work for hire. It's not the same thing as other writing and requires a different mentality. One is survival, the other is a nurtured creativity. If an artist is to ever find genius, it is generally in the mix if heart, soul and survival, not just survival.
That is why I support patents and copyright. It is not a perfect answer, but it lends credibility to the idea that the art is WORTH something and that price should be set and controlled by the rights' holder. The copyright period should, at the very least, cover the life of the author and IMO, probably the first generation (Because if a writer dies with young children, the writer probably hoped that the income from writing was going to allow those children to have food and shelter.)
|