Would you rather be an artist or a whore?

[K Sawyer Paul]

I've got a small problem with this article I just came across:

Clearly, literary fiction sells less than mass market popular fiction.

Now, I love books of all kinds. I have a lot of literary fiction, stacks of non fiction and many popular fiction novels (although those often get recycled through second-hand bookshops!)

I go to Writers Festivals, I have taken writing courses. I write journals and poetry and have 3 non-fiction books to my name. I have always wanted to win the Booker Prize because of the prestige!

But I have decided that I want to be a best-selling author, NOT a best-writing author lauded by lit fic critics! I want to write well, but not be classed as literature. I want to be popular, not literary.

Joanna Penn's argument is sound. Stephanie Meyer and Dan Brown and their ilk may be plagiarists and hacks, but they sell paper by the truckload, so they must be better, right?

It's not a bad thing to want your writing to be successful. It's not a bad thing to want to make lots and lots of your countries' preferred currency because of your writing. And it's not a bad thing if you succeed at this while being a hack. If you can convince a head editor at a major publisher to promote and print your wild ramblings and you make a ludicrous amount of money from it, then more power to you. It's one of the side effects of living in a capitalistic society: mediocrity sells. This isn't a good or bad thing. It just is.

These major publishing-house editors, they know how to make the hacks sell. They have marketing kits, they have re-writters, and they have spin. They are very, very good at turning your manuscript into something that people can swallow. This process includes carving it up and turning it into what they want, which makes it their book, not yours, and makes you a name they can sell. You are their product to pimp.

And I'm not criticizing Joanna Penn for wanting to be a whore rather than an artist. God knows it's easier.

What I'm criticizing is that perhaps this isn't the best message to tell the kids. You know, the people who have stars in their eyes. The people who want to be an artist, someone who wants to write a great book and have it read by great readers, who wins great acclaim for being a great artist. Maybe we shouldn't be advertising how much better it is to sell out and just write what the guys in charge say you should.

Yes, literary whores exist. They are the writers who put out 3 books a year, who live and die by the formula for science fiction or romance or "1001 ways to do" whatever. These people make a living, and some of them thrive, and some of them are genuinely nice people who have just found a niche and god knows they'd rather put out endless reams of bad fiction than go work a real job. But this is not what we should be saying is preferred.

You want to be a literary whore? Great. But don't tell people it's better. It isn't.

Writing is hard. Writing well is harder, and writing well enough to win awards and be considered one of the best on top of appealing to the mass market and making lots of money is nearly impossible. It can't be taught, and it can't be choreographed, and it can't be predicted.

What can be done is that when you open that "new document," you set out to write the very best book you've got in you. What can be done is that you use every arrow in your quiver. What can be done is that you take the advice of people who want you to produce great art as opposed to people who just want to sell you advice books.

That way, when you get the publishing deal, and when you make lots of your countries' preferred currency, you can credit the fact that you wrote a good book, not that you beat the system.

[Alissa]

I'd rather be an artist that makes lots of money! that wasn't an option but I'm just putting it out there. I hear it's all about putting out the positive energy. :D