The end of the "celebrity author"?

News, trends, and the future of publishing

The end of the "celebrity author"?

Postby Rachel Ventura » 27 Nov 2011, 22:55

...Say it ain't so! :(

This post from writer Justine Musk at her blog Tribal Writer makes me feel sad:

In the old days of publishing (which now seem as long-gone as the dinosaurs), publishers gave you the space and patience for that [steady growth through print publication] to happen. If they published you in hardcover, your first readers had a year to get the word out about you and jumpstart the second life your book experienced when it came out in paperback.

If you were published in original paperback, publishers would nurture you along for four or five books while you steadily accumulated a readerbase.

Not that any of this was guaranteed — or easy — but you had that fighting chance, and it enabled someone like Dean Koontz to survive as an obscure midlist writer (under various pseudonyms) for twenty years before breaking through to the bestselling lists (again under different pseudonyms, which indicates that maybe, just maybe, personal talent, skill and effort can mean as much if not more than luck).

Things are different now.

Writers are so focused on the Holy Grail of that first book contract, which (usually) takes ten or more years of serious writing practice to attain, that they often don’t realize that the second (and third and fourth) contracts can be as challenging. Publishers can’t afford — and are not willing — to carry you anymore. They want numbers. As in sales numbers. They want you to burst out of the gate like the sleekest of racehorses. If you don’t, they drop you, and you face the challenge of starting all over again, possibly under a different pen name so that the stink of poor sales won’t trail you and drag you down.


First thing that made me depressed:

that first book contract ... takes ten or more years of serious writing practice to attain


Ten years is an INCREDIBLY long time. I don't think I could stand 10 years of "practice" before "bursting out of the gate." In that case I'd be close to 30, and no offense, but man, seriously, by 21st-century standards, that is OOOOOLLLD. (The fact that I'm 19 and haven't done anything, in nano- and NaNo-years I'm "tech"nically a fossil already.) :(

But perhaps more so, this:

In the old days of publishing (which now seem as long-gone as the dinosaurs) ... publishers gave you the space and patience ... [for] your first readers ... to get the word out about you and jumpstart the second life your book experienced when it came out in paperback. If you were published in original paperback, publishers would nurture you along for four or five books while you steadily accumulated a readerbase. ... [Y]ou had that fighting chance, and it enabled someone like Dean Koontz to survive ... before breaking through to the bestselling lists...


What I take from this is because most beginner writers know very little about marketing, and aren't "business"-minded as, say, Seth Godin or Tim Ferriss, there's almost no chance for anyone anymore to become a household name like Koontz/King/Grisham/Grafton/Patterson et. al. Even J.K. Rowling made her name before the rise of "Web 2.0" and instant, albeit usually pointless, notoriety (and just-as-fast disappearance from the face of the earth). I'm extremely sad, and I seriously almost want to shove pencils up my nose like the old urban-myth of how exam-weary students closed out of their careers. It almost seems that while there might be a chance, albeit more and more remote as the Internet era goes on and gets worse, of cracking into the NYT lists, there's virtually none, at least not anymore, that you're going to be a household name with McDonald's sales numbers ("billions and billions sold").

The reason I think is because the Web 2.0 era has made the career writer -- someone who defines him/herself as a writer, and not a jack(a$$) of all trades and joker for all, is no longer "good enough" because the big-name publishers aren't going to waste their time on newbies when they've amassed a whole stockpile of big names "grandfathered" into the old system. The other thing is self-publishing, which (sorry Amanda) includes blogs, Facebook, and Twitter, and the ease of technical use has really diluted the market, making it almost impossible for a clumsy pony with potential to be Secretariat to cut through the bits and bytes of everyone and their other brother Darryl putting up a spam-blog or Lulu-ing their kitten newsletters. (They shoot "cheezburgers," don't they?)

Another is the phenomenon of the "niche," which I think used to be called "cult favorite," as in the Kardashians get the Cheers treatment of everybody knowing their names, but Darren Rowse and even Godin and Ferriss are well-known in their field. If your "field" is being a novelist, it seems nowadays even if you hit #1 you're never going to be a "rock star" like Rowling or (the most recent example I can think of) Stephenie Meyer. Even she was first published in 2005, when MySpace and IMing were all the rage, but again, even as little as six (going on seven? Wow) years ago, what we now know as "social media" was really still in "beta" stages. Facebook was still relegated to college students. Twitter wasn't anything more than an egg (and not even a chicken), and Yahoo! was still a viable competitor against the now-almighty Google. Except for Justin Bieber, it is possible to be "Internet famous" but that's pretty much it. The mainstream seems forever shut off, a relic of the past in which now, you're allotted to 15 nanoseconds and limited bandwidth of fame. (It could also be that the era of the Internet means that fewer and fewer people are actually reading books. I know they said the same thing about TV and movies, but this seems to be the final nail in the coffin. You're more likely to be a well-known something-else because the paperback writer is going the way of the lovely meter reader and Mr. Postman.)

It almost seems as though you won't hear about anyone "new," or they won't become a household name (except for something akin to Tidy Bowl, or the stuff it cleans), unless you're active online, and maybe I'm more sheltered than most people, but I've never heard of half the people that the "up and coming blogs" are all a-Twitter about. The publishers used to even handle the marketing for you. Now it's all about you, and frankly, that's why I think the fiction writer prefers fiction to memoir or "literary journalism," because s/he can't stand putting him/herself out there, naked and for all s/he is worth as a person, rather than the work itself. I'd never have heard of Tahareh Malfi (sp?) or Kirsten White (sp?) or even Amanda Hocking if there hadn't been an Internet. I wasn't born yet when King and Koontz were newbies in the game, like TM and KW and AH are now, but will these newbies ascend to the celebrity status of the "great ones," if that's their aspiration? Or (ahem) MINE? :cry:

In short, yeah, confession, for me writing the hoped-for bestseller does carry with it a degree of perhaps unrealistic narcissism, and the crushing blow that there will probably (God, did it hurt to click that strikeout button) never be a Rachel Ventura exposé on TMZ or Extra. I mean, I haven't written anything publishable yet, but this almost makes me want to give up and go make a sex video or something. (But of course, that'd be defeating the purpose of trying to be a paradoxical "celebrity recluse," because I just said I don't ever want to get naked.) ;)

Please, somebody reaffirm my faith in all that's shallow and plastic and Andy Warhol's favorite things. Help me believe it's still possible to be the Marilyn or Elvis of the book-writing world. Help me, Obi-Wan Branobis, you're my only hope. :cry: :cry: :cry: (I wish you could increase the size of the tearful emoticons, too.) :cry:
Rachel Ventura
 
Posts: 151
Joined: 29 Sep 2011, 21:29

Re: The end of the "celebrity author"?

Postby Mira » 28 Nov 2011, 20:07

Rachel, 30 is not old. Sheesh.

Yes, that's the primary thing I got out of all of that. :D

Just kidding.

Sort of.

I think what I have to say is this: Write an incredible book. That is the ONLY thing that can make you a bestseller. Marketing, agency support, press, promotion, knowing the right people, it may make you mid-list, but it aint' going to sell alot of books. The only thing that will sell alot of books is if you write a book that a lot of people want to read.

Once you write that book, people will find it, never fear.

The field right now is wide open. There are more opportunities for writers to stay in the game than ever before. Which is a good thing. Because sometimes it takes people alittle time to build their skills in order to write a masterpiece. Say, it might take until they are actually 30 years old, for example. I know. Sad to wait until you are ancient and all, but sacrifices must be made for art.

Also, I will add that predictions about the industry - well, they're abit iffy right now. There is so much that is changing. So, keep your hope alive! :D
User avatar
Mira
 
Posts: 1354
Joined: 07 Dec 2009, 07:59

Re: The end of the "celebrity author"?

Postby CharleeVale » 28 Nov 2011, 21:27

30 is old? When did that happen? Last time I checked celebrity culture 30 was the new 20! (on a completely different note, Justin and Britney are turning 30! wooo! :P)

Well, if it does take ten years, then I'm almost there. I've been writing for 9.

I have to say I disagree with this. There are plenty of household-name authors. Those that you mentioned, and also up-and-coming ones. (post Web 2.0)

But I'm honestly a little confused. Of course, most of the people who live on these forums want to be successful. However, I don't, nor do I think many writers, equate success with being on extra or TMZ. I can't imagine anyone, especially an author wanting that....

Rachel Ventura wrote:[ Now it's all about you, and frankly, that's why I think the fiction writer prefers fiction to memoir or "literary journalism," because s/he can't stand putting him/herself out there, naked and for all s/he is worth as a person, rather than the work itself.


I don't really see this...I don't see many authors having a problem with this.

I think you have to find out what you're writing for. If you're writing solely for the best-seller, you may want to re-evaluate. Publishing is a ridiculously hard business, and if you're not in it for the love of your words, it might break you. You need to love it. Love it more than life. Only that is going to carry you through.

Also, Tahereh is awesome. We're friends IRL (a little at least) and she's amazing. Also, her book is frickin' FANTASTIC.

CV
User avatar
CharleeVale
 
Posts: 553
Joined: 08 Dec 2009, 01:16

Re: The end of the "celebrity author"?

Postby Doug Pardee » 28 Nov 2011, 23:03

Plus ça change...

Changes or not, there's little chance of your becoming a world-famous author at 19. Or 20. Read the part about Dean Koontz: "an obscure midlist writer ... for twenty years before breaking through..." — and that was under the previous system. Or this part: "for four or five books while you steadily accumulated a readerbase." The number of authors who wrote a breakthrough novel before their mid-20s is very small indeed. Which doesn't mean that you can't write a good novel, and maybe even sell enough to make yourself justifiably proud. But it's extremely unlikely that your early works are going to sell the millions of copies that the star authors do.

As for changes, the big publishing houses have painted themselves into corners via consolidation and then selling out to international conglomerates. To make the ever-increasing profits that their overlords demand (although bookselling isn't a growth industry), they're having to focus more and more on the blockbuster series. Readers find series to be more addicting than crack. People will be anxiously awaiting book 15 of a series that they think has stunk since book 5. Readers don't care; they need their fix and they're willing to pay for it.

This doesn't mean there isn't room for new authors. No series goes on forever. Hachette has been hurting because Stephenie Meyer isn't writing any more Twilight books, and Hachette doesn't have a replacement. They need that replacement. Convince them that you've got a series that'll fill that hole, and you're in. On the other hand, Hachette's been unsuccessfully trying to fill that hole for a couple of years, and I'm sure they've seen more than a few manuscripts.

My personal prediction, worth every penny you paid for it, is that conventional publishing is riding for a fall. The consolidated conglomerates can't keep going; the blockbuster-series business model isn't sustainable. I think the big publishing houses will start breaking apart, and that other smaller conventional publishing houses will also take root. But this isn't going to happen next year. You might very well be 30 by the time it happens. I know, that's such a terrible thought; how will you be able to write with cataracts blocking your vision and your fingers all scrunched up with arthritis? :shock: But hey, it could be worse. At your age, Anne Perry was in prison... for murder. And she's sold a few books since then, although she was almost 40 before she had her first big-seller.

Becoming an overnight success doesn't happen overnight. You have to work for it and wait for it to happen, usually for many years. Write your novels, sell your novels, gain some experience, gain more experience. If you stick with it, success could happen. If you don't stick with it, success definitely won't happen.
Doug Pardee
 
Posts: 146
Joined: 18 Feb 2011, 16:56

Re: The end of the "celebrity author"?

Postby MattLarkin » 29 Nov 2011, 08:34

CharleeVale wrote:30 is old? When did that happen?


That was my reaction.

Also, even as is, very few authors become bestsellers before thirty anyway. Not only does it take time to practice the craft, it usually takes more than one book to get noticed (old system and new). Most are older than 30, possibly because it means they have more experiences to draw on in their writing.

At twenty I thought I was a decent writer, other people seemed to think so. But my work then seems amateurish to me now.

Don't stress it.
mattlarkin.net
larkinediting.com - freelance editing for fantasy and science fiction
ImageImageImage
User avatar
MattLarkin
 
Posts: 346
Joined: 31 Jul 2011, 06:37
Location: St Petersburg, Florida

Re: The end of the "celebrity author"?

Postby Margo » 29 Nov 2011, 11:30

What's the saying? Experience and treachery will overcome youth and something-or-other every time?

Yeah, another person unimpressed with the "30 is so old" comment. No offense.

As someone who had the agent at 17 and almost signed a contract with Penguin at 18, I'm really glad it didn't work out. Just like Matt, I found the years have added to the quality of my writing. It's also given me time to learn about the industry firsthand and make many handy connections/mentors/friends among writers, agents, and editors.

As someone who has put in my 10,000 hours and million-word apprenticeship, I'd just say...stop worrying about the state of an industry you don't control and just write.

Horse, then cart.
Urban fantasy, epic fantasy, and hot Norse elves. http://margolerwill.blogspot.com/
Margo
 
Posts: 1712
Joined: 05 Apr 2010, 08:21

Re: The end of the "celebrity author"?

Postby CharleeVale » 29 Nov 2011, 21:41



I saw this episode and this clip reminded me of the post. :)

CV
User avatar
CharleeVale
 
Posts: 553
Joined: 08 Dec 2009, 01:16

Re: The end of the "celebrity author"?

Postby Cookie » 01 Dec 2011, 18:56

Patience young master. Would you expect to become a black belt after only a few lessons? those authors listed are successful because they wrote prolifically and for many years. Although, when I was your age, I was just as impatient. I was like Veruca Salt "I want to be published, and I want to be published now!" Seven years later, and I'm still not published, but my writing is exponentially better. And I'm ok with that. Also, how is 30 old in this day and age, when the average life span is 85? Your only a 1/3 of the way through your life. Mathematically, you're still young.

I have to disagree with that article. I think with the internet and all the social media, it has become easier for authors to be well known. I think a lot of young adult and debut authors are getting more attention then they were before social media. there are many authors (and books) I never would have heard of if it weren't for the internet. In fact, I think BECAUSE of the internet, it's a lot easier for debut authors to get noticed.

I'm with Charlee, who wants to be on tmz? If that's your goal, then perhaps you should consider becoming an actress, or marrying a Kardashian.
User avatar
Cookie
 
Posts: 540
Joined: 20 Sep 2010, 08:18
Location: Berkshires

Re: The end of the "celebrity author"?

Postby CharleeVale » 01 Dec 2011, 19:33

Cookie wrote: I'm with Charlee, who wants to be on tmz? If that's your goal, then perhaps you should consider becoming an actress, or marrying a Kardashian.


Acting is my other career (just as stable as writing I know) And I STILL don't want to be on TMZ! lol

CV
User avatar
CharleeVale
 
Posts: 553
Joined: 08 Dec 2009, 01:16

Re: The end of the "celebrity author"?

Postby Cookie » 01 Dec 2011, 19:42

CharleeVale wrote:
Cookie wrote: I'm with Charlee, who wants to be on tmz? If that's your goal, then perhaps you should consider becoming an actress, or marrying a Kardashian.


Acting is my other career (just as stable as writing I know) And I STILL don't want to be on TMZ! lol

CV


I'm sure you don't want to marry a Kardashian either.
User avatar
Cookie
 
Posts: 540
Joined: 20 Sep 2010, 08:18
Location: Berkshires

Re: The end of the "celebrity author"?

Postby Sommer Leigh » 02 Dec 2011, 07:25

Hahahahaha, 30 is not old.

There's a reason very few published, successful authors are younger than 25, and if you pull up the bestsellers in YA you'll see most of them are around the 30-32 age bracket.

Part of it is skill - it takes time to learn how to write really well. Publishable well. Half is the writing practice and the other half is reading. You need to read a lot of really good books and write a lot of really terrible novels before you find your voice and your talent. This is a pretty universal truth.

There are exceptions, of course. Kody Keplinger comes to mind. She published The DUFF when she was still in her teens. That being said, while I loved The DUFF, the writing in her second book that came out this year is far superior.

The other part of that ten year waiting period is experience. While you're practicing your craft, you're going out there and doing things. You live your life. You meet fantastic, weird people. You learn about history and you do cool things. You have to discover about yourself the things you really love, are really passionate about, and the things you absolutely will never do. You have to live your life so that you can take what you learn and what you see and weave it into your novels.

I had this wonderful lit professor in college who told us one evening that being an English major means you've got to be very good at everyone else's major in order to be good at your own. I remember we were reading Kubla Kahn by Samuel Taylor Coleridge and we were all trying to wrap our head around what was happening in the poem. This professor drew a picture of the scene in the poem on the board and dove into explanations of complicated mathematical theories in order to help us understand what Coleridge was writing about. That's when he told us that to really be able to read and understand and enjoy literature, you have to have a good understanding of history, foreign languages, art, geography, philosophy, psychology, communication, religion, the various sciences, economics, and politics. That's just to read and enjoy it, nevermind being able to write it.

I believe this whole heartedly.
May the word counts be ever in your favor. http://www.sommerleigh.com
Be nice, or I get out the Tesla cannon.
Sommer Leigh
Moderator
 
Posts: 1624
Joined: 02 Apr 2010, 20:07
Location: Omaha, NE

Re: The end of the "celebrity author"?

Postby Ryan » 02 Dec 2011, 08:41

19! You are ahead of the game if you start now.

We live in the era of the Overnight Sensation but there really isn't such a thing unless you are talking about someone earning the Darwin Award.

As someone who has put in my 10,000 hours and million-word apprenticeship, I'd just say...stop worrying about the state of an industry you don't control and just write.


Listen to Margo here.

Go to the book store or library and ask for the book Outliers by Malcomb Gladwell. Read the chapter on 10,000 hours.

You'll never know where you'll be in ten years if you don't keep doing writing.
My love of fly fishing and surfing connects me to rivers and the ocean. Time with water reminds me to pursue those silly little streams of thought that run rampant in my head.
http://www.withoutrain.com/
User avatar
Ryan
 
Posts: 205
Joined: 07 Dec 2009, 12:25

Re: The end of the "celebrity author"?

Postby Rachel Ventura » 05 Dec 2011, 17:39

Thanks for everyone's replies :) Sorry I haven't been able to reply right away. I have to say I was a little surprised at how many people latched onto the "30 is old" statement... ;) I did say, "no offense," but that's still how I perceive the big dreaded 3-0. (It's even unluckier of a number than the big XIII.)

CharleeVale wrote:But I'm honestly a little confused. Of course, most of the people who live on these forums want to be successful. However, I don't, nor do I think many writers, equate success with being on extra or TMZ. I can't imagine anyone, especially an author wanting that....

Imagine me :) And I will say it's kind of ironic how shy I am, fear and self-loathing and yet I want to be a showgirl in Vegas. ;) But I'm sort of gathering, not necessarily from these posts, but just from what I'm observing about the marketplace in general, that there's still sort of an insular elitism regarding the book world in general. Maybe that's not true (anymore), but well, Salinger hated movies and Hollywood (and would probably despise the phoniness of reality TV), and there's the old adage, "the book is always better than the film." As I've said before, I hate literary fiction, but I think that there's still a "literary" image involved in the descriptor of a writer/author/"words person." For some reason books carry more of an "intelligence" factor than movies, TV or, heck, the Internet. The latter three are considered more of a PWOT than reading a book is, when IMHO they're just alternate media formats for telling a story.

Rachel Ventura wrote:Now it's all about you, and frankly, that's why I think the fiction writer prefers fiction to memoir or "literary journalism," because s/he can't stand putting him/herself out there, naked and for all s/he is worth as a person, rather than the work itself.
CharleeVale wrote:I don't really see this...I don't see many authors having a problem with this.

Well, there are "literary journalism" authors and nonfiction authors to beat the band. What I kind of meant was that fiction writers might have more of a tendency towards creative inventiveness, like actors/actresses with their stage/screen roles, or even musicians who craft a persona, a "brand," if you will, like Lady Gaga, Madonna, or Michael Jackson, because a lot of them are uncomfortable with their "true selves." The whole issue of identity comes into play, I think, and there's less of an expectation that a writer (in general) would invent a creative identity/persona for him/herself and be over-the-top the same way a rock star would. I think "reality TV" has almost flipped the dynamic so much that "the real world" (or The Real World) is indeed stranger, and thus more engrossing, than even the most outlandish works of fiction.

So when you say "least of all an author would want his/her name in the tabloids" well, I don't think other kinds of celebrities do either, but pop culture seems almost an unspoken (and unspeakable) taboo when it comes to the book/publishing world. For some reason it'd be more acceptable for, say, Meg Cabot to write about teenage starlets on the red carpet than to actually interact with them, or if she were younger, to be one of them. (Lauren Conrad was one of those teenage starlets before she wrote her book. I don't think it would've been possible to cross over the other way.)

Doug Pardee wrote:Read the part about Dean Koontz: "an obscure midlist writer ... for twenty years before breaking through..." — and that was under the previous system. Or this part: "for four or five books while you steadily accumulated a readerbase."

But in the pre-platform era he didn't have as much of the promotional onus shifted onto him as a writer. Meaning he'd have to be promoting those six or seven books himself, with blog/Tweetbook/EveryoneSpace, booking his own tours and appearances, and so on. Most authors aren't publicists or PR specialists, and with my memoir comment above, I think for a lot of them/us it's unnatural to think in a business-oriented mindset. Maybe this is just me, I don't know; but it seems more and more like the business end of publishing is almost like being a struggling actor or musician, except you by and large "hit the pavement" on the Information Superhighway, so why shouldn't a writer who finally hits it big get the same attention as given to movie stars and rock 'n' rollers? Used to be the publishing company would handle the bulk (not saying all, but the bulk) of the support system, for a limited time at least, much longer of a time anyway than they do today. It's all you, and like I said, a lot of writers don't like having to put on a show when they could be writing. There are, after all, only so many hours in the day, even in the city that never sleeps.

In other words, you won't be a Koontz or a King unless you work your own patoot off, because there's no one willing to take you on as a protege and pick up the promotional slack for you while you're hard at work. Obviously not everyone in the pre-Web 2.0 era became a Koontz or a King, but a textbook introvert like King would never be at his level, not ever, were he starting out in the game today.

Cookie wrote:Also, how is 30 old in this day and age, when the average life span is 85? Your only a 1/3 of the way through your life. Mathematically, you're still young.

I don't want to live to be 85. I was kind of hoping to be the writing world's entry into the 27 Club. ;)

Cookie wrote:I'm with Charlee, who wants to be on tmz? If that's your goal, then perhaps you should consider becoming an actress, or marrying a Kardashian.
CharleeVale wrote:Acting is my other career (just as stable as writing I know) And I STILL don't want to be on TMZ! lol
Cookie wrote:I'm sure you don't want to marry a Kardashian either.

Well, it's a lot more fun than C-SPAN's Book TV. A Friars' Club Roast is tons more laughs than say, Charlie Rose or 60 Minutes. That stuff is what I call the Z-list, for obvious reasons (zzzzz...) I guess I prefer sophomoric to soporific :)

And I don't want to marry a Kardashian either. The brother is kind of cute, Robert (I think he's a Junior?), but I actually don't want to be married. :)

Sommer Leigh wrote:I had this wonderful lit professor in college who told us one evening that being an English major means you've got to be very good at everyone else's major in order to be good at your own. I remember we were reading Kubla Kahn by Samuel Taylor Coleridge and we were all trying to wrap our head around what was happening in the poem. This professor drew a picture of the scene in the poem on the board and dove into explanations of complicated mathematical theories in order to help us understand what Coleridge was writing about. That's when he told us that to really be able to read and understand and enjoy literature, you have to have a good understanding of history, foreign languages, art, geography, philosophy, psychology, communication, religion, the various sciences, economics, and politics. That's just to read and enjoy it, nevermind being able to write it.

Lol, exactly why I have no interest in ever going to college :D I never heard of Kubla Kahn, is she a long-lost Kardashian? :lol:

That's exactly what I'm getting at, though: that other stuff is BORING, and I have no idea who that guy is you mentioned. He sounds British or something, and anything British that doesn't involve the names Fry, Cowell, Rowling, Adams (as in Douglas) or Monty (as in Python and Full) isn't for me. (The only thing I find remotely entertaining is all the cross-dressers in tights.) :lol: But pop culture and celebrity are fun. Charlie Sheen > Charlie Rose. (But Charlie Vale > Charlie Sheen. Duh, winning :mrgreen:). Yeah, I might read it, but I know I'd never enjoy it. I'm 19, am I really expected to ditch Cosmo for, I dunno, Cosmos? :lol:

What I kind of want is to have a nice equillibrium of creativity and pub-co hand-holding like they did in the pre-Web 2.0 era. I'm plenty creative "and all," but I get the feeling that wanting to be too much of an attention grabber would be a knock against me, because the legitimate pub-cos (and maybe the readers/fans) would think me to be a "phony." It's just so much work, and you almost have to put in 20K hours (or divide the 10K between promotion and actual writing), because the pub-cos aren't running their Babysitters' Club model anymore. :( Self-pubbing, in comparison to the movies, is the equivalent of direct-to-video (sorry Amanda), and not anywhere near Sundance, or an underground bootleg compared to American Idol. Publishing -- of which writing is a critical, if not the most critical, component, but still only one component of the whole deal -- is today like double-majoring, no, triple-majoring, in marketing, I.T., and English (and all those other things Sommer mentioned above). Even college is becoming less and less of a guarantee you'll even find a job anymore. Only the aforementioned "outliers" ever become Buffett and Trump -- or Koontz and King. There's no screaming fans at a book signing unless Edward and Jacob are flanking Steffie Meyer at a Twilight event. (I said "flanking," folks. ;)) There's no... energy, I guess, not even in a modest fashion. No real... fun. Celebrity is fun. Critical acclaim, without fans and followers, is, well, stuffy and boring. The lack of both is a fate worse than 10,000 Gladwell hours of marathon-viewing C-SPAN. :shock: (Insert creepy Clockwork Orange analogy here.)

And it doesn't seem that either will happen for the up-and-comers anymore unless they burn themselves out with promotional activities and trying to write the best they can. The era of the writer as just writer if s/he wants any sort of wide-ranging acclaim is over. I guess this is sort of a complaint that pub-cos shift too much responsibility on the writer for achieving his/her dreams, and the "literary" culture in general for poo-poohing anything commercial as the unworthy commoners' disrespect for highbrow "art." It's a one-percenter mentality, fer sure, but at least the economically one-percent in 90210-ville know how to have fun. :D

EDIT: Btw, I am really considering doing a nudie shoot to get a "leg up" on the whole promotional deal. :twisted: I know I said I'd rather wear a scarlet letter than go naked (pun on the PETA slogan, "I'd rather go naked than wear fur"), but then there's that other catch phrase, immortalized on so many bumper stickers nationwide and the world over, "Good girls go to heaven; bad girls go...everywhere." :twisted:
Rachel Ventura
 
Posts: 151
Joined: 29 Sep 2011, 21:29

Re: The end of the "celebrity author"?

Postby Mira » 09 Dec 2011, 15:05

Rachel - I highly recommend college. Not just because it improves your chances in the job market (it does. Someone with a B.A. in anything is always a step ahead of someone without it), but because it's a wonderful thing for your mind. College helps people broaden their viewpoint. It introduces them to a broader way of thinking about things, as well as exposing them to new viewpoints.

Besides, you're so intelligent, you'd love college. You'd have a blast there - especially if you went to a decent one with other bright students. Try to go.

Also, the age thing. Imho, one of the saddest things about this youth oriented culture is it makes people scared to grow older. Which is tragic - partly because it's an inevitability, and it's sad to be afraid of something that is inevitable - but also because growing older brings many gifts. There is a loss, of course, but getting older can be a wonderful thing. It brings deeper understanding, greater centeredness, lessons learned from the resolution of challenges, comfort with yourself and others, and wisdom.
Of course, being older has it's difficulties, too, like the loss of a young body, but there are definitely compensations.

Besides, science does back this up. Research has definitely shown that the more birthdays you have, the longer you live. ;)

Just my opinions about some themes in your post. ;)
User avatar
Mira
 
Posts: 1354
Joined: 07 Dec 2009, 07:59

Re: The end of the "celebrity author"?

Postby Cookie » 09 Dec 2011, 17:29

Can I just say that you have a frightening obsession with the 27 club?
User avatar
Cookie
 
Posts: 540
Joined: 20 Sep 2010, 08:18
Location: Berkshires

Next

Return to All Things Publishing and Self-Publishing

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest