6 ms·
> Many writers like writing books, and would do so even if it didn't put a single cent in their pockets. Unless you are independently rich, you need an income
by goto11 6y ago
> Many writers like writing books, and would do so even if it didn't put a single cent in their pockets.
Unless you are independently rich, you need an income to survive.
- the_af 6y agoThat's not the only option. Some writers get by without being rich. Others have other jobs, and write because it's their passion. The falsehood here is "no writer will be insane enough to write without a business model".
- goto11 6y agoSure some cushy jobs makes it possible to write on the side. It is no accident that historically a lot of authors and scientists were clergymen. But you need an income to be able to write.
- the_af 6y ago"Cushy jobs" is overstating it. People find the means to write with poor jobs too. Yes, you need to be able to have a means of living in order to write. Selling your books is one such way, but not the only one. Lots of writers would still write without a business model. That was my only point, really. It's false that one would have to be "insane" in order to write. We can argue about ifs and buts all day long, but that bit which I was replying to was hyperbolic and false.
- goto11 6y agoCan you mention some examples of novels by working-class authors from before the introduction of copyright and commercial publishing?
- the_af 6y agoI can do one better: I can mention a hugely popular and commercially successful writer -- whom you know of, at least by name-- who used to live from paycheck to paycheck, really struggling when he started (before succeeding enormously, of course) and who wrote in the introduction to one of his books: "Painting. Sculpture. Composing. Singing. Acting. The playing of a musical instrument. Writing. Enough books have been written on these seven subjects alone to sink a fleet of luxury liners. And the only thing we seem to be able to agree upon about them is this: that those who practise these arts honestly would continue to practise them even if they were not paid for their efforts; even if their efforts were criticized or even reviled; even on pain of imprisonment or death." He struck gold, of course, but note the sentiment he expressed. By his own admission, had he never been paid for it, he would have kept writing anyway, because that's what he does. And when he was starting he had other jobs -- and a family to support -- and really struggled with money, but kept going anyway.
- goto11 6y agoAll the greatest writers, painters, composers, sculptors etc. dedicated themselves full time to their art. You just can't reach a comparable level of mastery by dabbling in your spare time.
- the_af 6y agoFirst, this is a secondary discussion. Mastery? That wasn't the argument. The argument was about whether writing books can exist separate from monetary compensation. Second, as has been mentioned to you in another comment, mastery is not directly related to having been paid for your art. There are acknowledged poets whose work was published posthumously. They didn't live off it. (The quote was by Stephen King, by the way. Regardless of what you think about his literary skill, the man sure can speak about writing).
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- goto11 6y ago
- dageshi 6y agoThe business model has existed for centuries at this point. People write books, books are sold. Even those who are simply writing for the sake of writing KNOW that there is the potential to have their book picked up by a publisher and sold, take that away, take the hope of actually being able to support yourself by writing and no... even the most obsessive of obsessive writers will likely give up, from starvation if nothing else.
- the_af 6y agoI disagree. Plenty of people take up writing because it's in their blood. They write because writing is their passion and because they have something to tell. Maybe it's artistic, maybe it's political, maybe it's religious -- or a combination. Getting paid by publishers for writing books is a powerful motivator, but not the only one. In a world without a way to sell books, writers would still write.
- goto11 6y ago> Plenty of people take up writing because it's in their blood. They write because writing is their passion and because they have something to tell. I can agree with that. We have stuff like fan fiction which people write and share for free. I guess 50 Shades of Grey is the preeminent example of writing as a passion and as a calling rather than a professional skill.
- the_af 6y ago"Fanfiction" comes with a certain baggage and implications of quality. I don't agree that unless you're getting paid, your literary work is fanfiction or unprofessional. There are authors whose main body of work was only published after their deaths and who are considered literary masters nonetheless, and not fanfiction writers. All in all, I agree with a sibling comment: we must divorce the business of writing with the art of writing. They are related, of course, but the latter doesn't require the former. Once one understands this, one is less inclined to claim things such as "if writers don't get paid, books won't get written".