Should writers give up on getting paid for their writing?

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by spindlegirl

If I ever write a book, (and while I like writing, I don't see myself realistically writing). I plan to promote my book thusly: I'll create an epub, sign up on a place like the pirate bay or something, upload my book to it, then scream my head off that my book has been pirated

It's been done too many times now for that to work.

[latepaul]

This article from 2006 estimates between 50-100 authors of SF&F earn enough from writing to support themselves.

I agree with those who say it's always been tough to support yourself purely off writing. Certainly off writing fiction and selling books.

Writing, like acting and making music, is one of those things that there are more people wanting to do than there's an audience for. So from a crude economic point of view over-supply drives down prices, fragments the market and makes it very hard to make a lot of money. With ebooks and self-publishing this is exacerbated. There are those who simply jumped on the band-wagon and when they realised that they will only ever make a few sales here and there will leave. But equally there are those who are just happy to be being read and for whom the extra money is a bonus.

[Justin Nemo]

To quote Samuel Johnston "No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money."

[rhadin]

Originally Posted by ProfCrash

I pay for the quality of the writing as well as the story. There are a ton of Indie authors out there that I do not read because I don't trust the quality of the writing.

I, too, pay for the quality of the writing plus the storytelling ability of the author and the story's ability to interest me. But when it comes to ebooks, I prefer to spend $2.99 or less on an indie author than to pay $15 for an established author.

My experience with indie authors is that 1 out of 10 can weave a good story but only 1 out of 15-20 can both weave a good story and write well. Yet, because nearly all of the indie titles I have "bought" I "bought" for free, I am willing to wade through a dozen or so pages of a book before deciding whether to continue to read or to delete.

When I do find an indie author who can both weave a good story and write well, I am as well-rewarded as if I had bought the newest novel by a well-known, established trade author. It makes the search worthwhile.

I have found that I am unwilling to spend $15 on an established author for an ebook for several reasons. First, is the fact that the ebook is licensed. Second, is the problem of DRM. Third, and perhaps most important, there are too many James Patterson-type bookmills. Is the book I am paying $15 for really written by Patterson or has he just lent his name to the narrative for a bigger cut of the pie?

I think it is a mistake not to keep searching for high-aulity indie authors. It was through such searching that I found indie authors like Shayne Parkingson, LJ Seller, Michael Hicks, Richard Tuttle, Vicki Tyley, and Tracey Falbe, among others. And once I found them, I found the reading experience to equal that of the well-known trade authors but at a significantly more reasonable price. Consequently, I have been willing to pay for their new books (e.g., in Tuttle's case I bought 28 of his books).

[abookreader]

Originally Posted by Phogg

There are millions of people who never wanted a gatekeeper and who are resolute in their intent that there not be one. Many of us post on these forums.

I'm not sure what you mean when you say "Intent there not be one."

By all means those who prefer to purchase by skimming the lists of books published by all methods, sampling, and choosing for themselves should have that right.

But those who prefer to read blogs, rankings, and recommendations from 3rd party sources and buy based on those are also entitled. Many of those types also post on these forums.

It seems to be a little like saying "I like to book my own vacation so I don't think there should be any Travel Agents."

[Ninjalawyer]

Originally Posted by abookreader

I'm not sure what you mean when you say "Intent there not be one."

By all means those who prefer to purchase by skimming the lists of books published by all methods, sampling, and choosing for themselves should have that right.

But those who prefer to read blogs, rankings, and recommendations from 3rd party sources and buy based on those are also entitled. Many of those types also post on these forums.

It seems to be a little like saying "I like to book my own vacation so I don't think there should be any Travel Agents."

I don't see how bloggers, ranking websites or recommendation engines are gatekeepers. A better example of a gatekeeper would be not being able to go on a vacation unless you went through a travel agent and took one of the vacations they offered.

[abookreader]

I don't see how bloggers, ranking websites or recommendation engines are gatekeepers. A better example of a gatekeeper would be not being able to go on a vacation unless you went through a travel agent and took one of the vacations they offered.

But they are. If they take a broad selection of submissions, filter them, and then offer a selection up as their recommendations then they are acting as literary gatekeepers.

[JD Gumby]

Originally Posted by GA Russell

Just a couple of weeks ago I came across a Larry King USA Today column from twenty years ago in which he said that Kurt Vonnegut told him that there were only 300 full time authors in America supporting themselves writing.

Authors of *fiction* (and maybe biography - which is, frankly, close to fiction anyways, in most cases :P), because obviously there are and were many thousands supporting themselves by writing. Journalists, technical writers, and so on.

[Ninjalawyer]

Originally Posted by abookreader

But they are. If they take a broad selection of submissions, filter them, and then offer a selection up as their recommendations then they are acting as literary gatekeepers.

That's not what a gatekeeper is.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

I have my plan in the works to get paid for my writing.

Attachment 84836

Originally Posted by Justin Nemo

To quote Samuel Johnston "No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money."

Did he say that in "Shaft"?

[taosaur]

Originally Posted by abookreader

But they are. If they take a broad selection of submissions, filter them, and then offer a selection up as their recommendations then they are acting as literary gatekeepers.

That's curation, not gatekeeping. Everything that comes into their hands has already passed the gatekeepers and is 'in the yard,' to stretch the metaphor. Of course, these days a lot of work never encounters a gatekeeper at all, hence some writers' despair over the glut of work on the market. All it takes to enter the market now is to cobble together an ebook and hit "upload," whereas not so long ago self-publishing and even small-press publishing were a joke, and inherently limited your audience to the number of DTBs you could afford to print. Now, setting up a PayPal checkout and hosting your own work is trivial, and bribing booksellers and going on morning shows are arguably less effective than amassing followers on Twitter.

[sbroome]

Originally Posted by hidari

Writing for a living is a privilege not a right. Plenty of writers have historically made little or no money for their work. Competition? So the musicians do not have competition? Painters?... I think writers have is easy compared to other artists. Also, as some have mentioned before....99 percent of writers already have jobs to "make a living" ...if you are one of the lucky ones to be able to write full time as an author good on you...but that is a rarity.

Fewer writers may actually help the market considering most of the drivel that is out there....

No job/career is a privelege. All jobs require effort and/or training. I have no idea why people act like writing is not something done after years and years of practice. I'm assuming you don't have any actual talent.

[RHWright]

I think fiction authors who make their living doing just*that are relatively rare. Vonnegut's estimate may not be far off.

*By that I mean: they don't blog and/or drive revenue through advertising on their website; they don't sidelight as a screenwriter, editor, journalist, etc; they don't teach; they don't do writer's workshops, conferences, lectures; basically, anything other than the primary stream of being paid to write their fiction.

Most working writers have to be fairly diversified in their writing unless/until they can find a strong following in a niche that will let them pick & choose their projects.

I think very few authors are at the "pick & choose" level.

[carld]

Originally Posted by taosaur

The folks who bring it up are rarely "anti-copyright." The position that authors and publishers should be pursuing new business models has nothing to do with one's stance on copyright. Copyright only comes into it when media companies try to aggressively expand copyright as a shield against progress.

Oh, I very much disagree. The anti-copyright folks bring up the idea that writers can find other way to make money from their writing, other than getting paid for it, ALL THE TIME!

They never have any realistic suggestion of how this is supposed to happen in absence of copyright, of course, just either a sort of "well, it'll work out somehow" attitude, or "writers can dig ditches can't they?" solution.

As to your solutions, that's just going back to the old system where the wealthy controlled the flow of ideas and information to the masses. I prefer not to retreat to intellectual serfdom.

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by Steven Lyle Jordan

I have my plan in the works to get paid for my writing.

Attachment 84836

I'm surprised your dentist didn't want to advertise there too since he obviously did such a good job.