Not sure if others agree, but I think traditional publishing still offers the most opportunities in the real money maker: public speaking. If there are success stories about self published literary authors who also do well with speaking, I’d be curious.
This is important for new authors to understand before they chase agents and trad publishing. Amazon may have hurt read authors’ margins through discount buying…but they have exploded author margins at KDP. You have to be willing to market and PR yourself…which increasingly is necessary despite the publishing route. I urge folks to explore self-publishing more seriously. that’s why we’re here on Substack, right?
Thank you for this. I just read your lovely Guardian tribute to Wendy Mitchell – condolences on the loss of your friend and co-author. She sounds she was like a delightful person. I'm an academic, and the largest book advance I ever received was $1000, which seemed massive. A student asked last week, "Have you ever calculated your hourly wage for your writing?" I said "No, because it would provoke such deep depression I don't think I would ever find a way out of it." The former desire I had – to write so that I could say something, invite others (students) into analysis, thought, or even wonder – has been replaced by the desire to just protect my one precious evaporating life/energy from exploitation and drain.
Thanks for shedding light on this, Anna. I will apologize in advance for a multi-pronged response, but that is in fact the kind of conversation we hope to encourage at Inner Life!
What you describe in publishing reminds me of food systems. Very few small farmers get ahead; many are close to breaking even at farmers markets. One of my friends, who ran a flagship organic farm in Iowa for several years had smart ideas about how he could compete with big California operations by growing crops that had to be harvested by hand (bunches of kale, for instance) and therefore couldn't be mechanized easily. But eventually Trader Joe's and other supermarkets put him out of business. He concluded, sadly, that most people just don't care about who their food dollar supports. Or not enough did to keep him in business (and he was really smart and ambitious and had inherited a 100-acre family farm).
It can be hard to stomach the extra cash for locally sourced beef if the price at the supermarket is significantly lower. But we have to remember that federal subsidies make the conventional market price artificially lower. The same now goes for Amazon, which can absorb losses long enough to outlast competitors.
I am considering publishing my next book independently (trying to embrace that word instead of "self-publish"). But the default is once again, you guessed it, Amazon's KDP. I would dearly love to avoid feeding that beast. I like Samuél Lopez-Barrantes's idea of small batch printing with an artisanal printer, maintaining high standards for paper quality, and making a modest profit. But that's nowhere near a livelihood.
I'll close with an anecdote that I've shared elsewhere. Some years ago, when I directed a first-year seminar, my college chose "The Boy Who Harnessed the Wind" as the common reading. Bryan Mealer, who coauthored the book with William Kamkwamba, came to speak, and he confided in me before his talk that he had nearly despaired of continuing as a writer. I could scarcely believe it. The book was an enormous hit -- translated into several languages, advertised on billboards across Europe. But Bryan had to live in Malawi and conduct hundreds of hours of interviews before even beginning the drafting process. It was at least two years, maybe more, to finish the book. And of course production takes longer. He must have earned back his advance, but spread out over all that time, he wasn't making enough to support his family. I remember feeling deflated by that. It was almost as big a win as it could have been...and it still wasn't enough.
Amazon KDP is an easy option for publishing. When it comes to payment, unfortunately, it's a whole other story (in my experience). The writer ends up putting their creative energy into feeding that greedy Amazon beast...
"what I can never understand is how, in this whole chain of people involved in selling books, the creator of the material, the person who came up with the idea, who sat down and wrote it often through sweat and tears, is paid the least out of everyone."
PRECISELY!! I've often wondered about that. I've often asked myself and my husband (a poet!) why our creativity stops on the final page of a book (or the last line of a poem). There must be a creative way to earn a living with our writing, and it's not going to be via the book industry who is entirely built on our creativity.
I've been working as a literary translator before becoming a full time writer, working with several publishers in several genres (fiction and non-fiction) and I earned a fairly decent living. Now (some) publishers ask writers to pay them! With the prospects of earnings, why would we even want to offer our precious work to feed the publishing-industrial complex?
Thank you for sharing 💙🙏 and heartfelt condolences for your loss of Wendy
YES! We must discover ourselves (discovering each other on substack helps too). There must be another way!! We are the dreamers and worldbuilders. How can we build a world that sustains real writers? (leaving the celebrity ghostwritten variety to the sharks)
In a world where Mammons rule is increasingly not up for dispute, it's remarkable that so many people want to be writers. The good news is that as this reality dawns, perhaps the oversaturation will also subside. Those in it for the money can bow out. As for these celebrity authors, that's a different story. But increasingly, it seems that having written a book is something that functions more like a gold star than anything.
I think I disagree, Felix, for several reasons. First, I'd distinguish between the gold star and achievement. The conventional notion of convincing a discerning publisher to produce your work was a meritorious one: you'd reached a certain standard. Not unlike being discovered as a musician. Sure, there have been artists who only received that recognition posthumously, but I don't think there was anything wrong with the older model when craft drove it. And when enough people believed in craft, it created its own demand.
The problem with traditional publishing now is that craft doesn't matter. Predictable sales do. It is disheartening to see that the same ills that bedevil higher ed are present in publishing. And I find myself still searching for a model to believe in.
It does seem like reclaiming the means of production is an option for writers. However, I'm not sure how achievement is measured. Assuredly, one can satisfy one's own sensibility, but is that enough? I've never been motivated by satisfying myself solely. And I think the desire to teach someone, to be of service as a writer, is also distinct from Zina's idea of validation. It's hard to feel that sense of purpose if all you're doing is satisfying your own creative appetites.
fully agree with you here, Josh. I write because for me it's a calling. I believe in delivering valuable content (which is of service to readers) + honing our craft (so our writing becomes enjoyable to read). Traditional publishing did at some time in history serve its purpose and commitment towards writers. That's no longer the case. Therefore we have to find a new way, which needs to be collaborative. We can't do it all alone.
I also think it's a good idea to look at models in other creative industries (e.g. farming you mentioned above). Some farmer–local-customer cooperatives in Switzerland and France work very well. These are models were producers and private buyers get together on a regular basis. For us that would mean writer-reader cooperatives (with the benefit of being able to gather online as well)
Interesting comment, Felix. I think it’s human instinct that makes us want to be seen and valued. That’s what being offered: validation. And that’s what publishing (or being on television,,etc.) does for people. I am not saying that’s bad, but I wonder about the business end of writing and needing to create. By being paid a lot of money—yes, it’s validating and people should be paid for work—but I’m thinking to Josef Pieper’s distinction between the servile arts and the free arts (liberal arts) and that writing is a liberal art, and this it is for most of us an act of leisure—and leisure is the basis of culture. Therefore, payment can’t be the only source of validation. It’s too important for culture. Yet, we all need to eat. It could be that we are best served if all work like Dana Gioia did until we have financial security and then try full time artistic creation. It is otherwise very difficult to sustain oneself.
Not sure if others agree, but I think traditional publishing still offers the most opportunities in the real money maker: public speaking. If there are success stories about self published literary authors who also do well with speaking, I’d be curious.
This is important for new authors to understand before they chase agents and trad publishing. Amazon may have hurt read authors’ margins through discount buying…but they have exploded author margins at KDP. You have to be willing to market and PR yourself…which increasingly is necessary despite the publishing route. I urge folks to explore self-publishing more seriously. that’s why we’re here on Substack, right?
Thank you for this. I just read your lovely Guardian tribute to Wendy Mitchell – condolences on the loss of your friend and co-author. She sounds she was like a delightful person. I'm an academic, and the largest book advance I ever received was $1000, which seemed massive. A student asked last week, "Have you ever calculated your hourly wage for your writing?" I said "No, because it would provoke such deep depression I don't think I would ever find a way out of it." The former desire I had – to write so that I could say something, invite others (students) into analysis, thought, or even wonder – has been replaced by the desire to just protect my one precious evaporating life/energy from exploitation and drain.
Thanks for shedding light on this, Anna. I will apologize in advance for a multi-pronged response, but that is in fact the kind of conversation we hope to encourage at Inner Life!
What you describe in publishing reminds me of food systems. Very few small farmers get ahead; many are close to breaking even at farmers markets. One of my friends, who ran a flagship organic farm in Iowa for several years had smart ideas about how he could compete with big California operations by growing crops that had to be harvested by hand (bunches of kale, for instance) and therefore couldn't be mechanized easily. But eventually Trader Joe's and other supermarkets put him out of business. He concluded, sadly, that most people just don't care about who their food dollar supports. Or not enough did to keep him in business (and he was really smart and ambitious and had inherited a 100-acre family farm).
It can be hard to stomach the extra cash for locally sourced beef if the price at the supermarket is significantly lower. But we have to remember that federal subsidies make the conventional market price artificially lower. The same now goes for Amazon, which can absorb losses long enough to outlast competitors.
I am considering publishing my next book independently (trying to embrace that word instead of "self-publish"). But the default is once again, you guessed it, Amazon's KDP. I would dearly love to avoid feeding that beast. I like Samuél Lopez-Barrantes's idea of small batch printing with an artisanal printer, maintaining high standards for paper quality, and making a modest profit. But that's nowhere near a livelihood.
I'll close with an anecdote that I've shared elsewhere. Some years ago, when I directed a first-year seminar, my college chose "The Boy Who Harnessed the Wind" as the common reading. Bryan Mealer, who coauthored the book with William Kamkwamba, came to speak, and he confided in me before his talk that he had nearly despaired of continuing as a writer. I could scarcely believe it. The book was an enormous hit -- translated into several languages, advertised on billboards across Europe. But Bryan had to live in Malawi and conduct hundreds of hours of interviews before even beginning the drafting process. It was at least two years, maybe more, to finish the book. And of course production takes longer. He must have earned back his advance, but spread out over all that time, he wasn't making enough to support his family. I remember feeling deflated by that. It was almost as big a win as it could have been...and it still wasn't enough.
There really does have to be a better way.
Amazon KDP is an easy option for publishing. When it comes to payment, unfortunately, it's a whole other story (in my experience). The writer ends up putting their creative energy into feeding that greedy Amazon beast...
"There really does have to be a better way."!!!
"what I can never understand is how, in this whole chain of people involved in selling books, the creator of the material, the person who came up with the idea, who sat down and wrote it often through sweat and tears, is paid the least out of everyone."
PRECISELY!! I've often wondered about that. I've often asked myself and my husband (a poet!) why our creativity stops on the final page of a book (or the last line of a poem). There must be a creative way to earn a living with our writing, and it's not going to be via the book industry who is entirely built on our creativity.
I've been working as a literary translator before becoming a full time writer, working with several publishers in several genres (fiction and non-fiction) and I earned a fairly decent living. Now (some) publishers ask writers to pay them! With the prospects of earnings, why would we even want to offer our precious work to feed the publishing-industrial complex?
Thank you for sharing 💙🙏 and heartfelt condolences for your loss of Wendy
Increasingly I feel like writers need to give up the dream of being discovered and take back the means of production.
YES! We must discover ourselves (discovering each other on substack helps too). There must be another way!! We are the dreamers and worldbuilders. How can we build a world that sustains real writers? (leaving the celebrity ghostwritten variety to the sharks)
Couldn't agree more. I published a magazine for 20 years and did okay. Now as a full-time author I'd starve if it wasn't for my wife.
In a world where Mammons rule is increasingly not up for dispute, it's remarkable that so many people want to be writers. The good news is that as this reality dawns, perhaps the oversaturation will also subside. Those in it for the money can bow out. As for these celebrity authors, that's a different story. But increasingly, it seems that having written a book is something that functions more like a gold star than anything.
I think I disagree, Felix, for several reasons. First, I'd distinguish between the gold star and achievement. The conventional notion of convincing a discerning publisher to produce your work was a meritorious one: you'd reached a certain standard. Not unlike being discovered as a musician. Sure, there have been artists who only received that recognition posthumously, but I don't think there was anything wrong with the older model when craft drove it. And when enough people believed in craft, it created its own demand.
The problem with traditional publishing now is that craft doesn't matter. Predictable sales do. It is disheartening to see that the same ills that bedevil higher ed are present in publishing. And I find myself still searching for a model to believe in.
It does seem like reclaiming the means of production is an option for writers. However, I'm not sure how achievement is measured. Assuredly, one can satisfy one's own sensibility, but is that enough? I've never been motivated by satisfying myself solely. And I think the desire to teach someone, to be of service as a writer, is also distinct from Zina's idea of validation. It's hard to feel that sense of purpose if all you're doing is satisfying your own creative appetites.
fully agree with you here, Josh. I write because for me it's a calling. I believe in delivering valuable content (which is of service to readers) + honing our craft (so our writing becomes enjoyable to read). Traditional publishing did at some time in history serve its purpose and commitment towards writers. That's no longer the case. Therefore we have to find a new way, which needs to be collaborative. We can't do it all alone.
I also think it's a good idea to look at models in other creative industries (e.g. farming you mentioned above). Some farmer–local-customer cooperatives in Switzerland and France work very well. These are models were producers and private buyers get together on a regular basis. For us that would mean writer-reader cooperatives (with the benefit of being able to gather online as well)
Interesting comment, Felix. I think it’s human instinct that makes us want to be seen and valued. That’s what being offered: validation. And that’s what publishing (or being on television,,etc.) does for people. I am not saying that’s bad, but I wonder about the business end of writing and needing to create. By being paid a lot of money—yes, it’s validating and people should be paid for work—but I’m thinking to Josef Pieper’s distinction between the servile arts and the free arts (liberal arts) and that writing is a liberal art, and this it is for most of us an act of leisure—and leisure is the basis of culture. Therefore, payment can’t be the only source of validation. It’s too important for culture. Yet, we all need to eat. It could be that we are best served if all work like Dana Gioia did until we have financial security and then try full time artistic creation. It is otherwise very difficult to sustain oneself.