Who is in charge?

We recently discuss marginalized authors complaint that they have to compete against entitled authors of specific demographic.

Now we speak of authors complaining about readers who feel entitled.

Entitlement and Marginalized two buzz words. And I think that we are seeing what is two sides to the same mad coin.

This is why 'god' created publishers to be arbitrators between readers and authors.
 
Authors have responsibility for the path their career takes. Delegating certain tasks to a publisher does not absolve you of this responsibility; you have chosen to allow someone else to make certain marketing and artistic choices in your name, but you are still ultimately responsible for the development of your personal brand.

You are not, however, responsible for how your work is received. We do not create art. We create the opportunity for art. Meaning and content is supplied in the reading and consumption of your work; the reader brings their own expectations with them, and has a positive or negative experience based on what they do with the material you provide them. It's only through the fusion of the words you've written and the context they find in the mind of the reader that literature takes shape.

A lazy writer will use this truth to absolve themselves of responsibility. A good writer will try to shape a reader's expectations before they even read page one through the choice of title, cover art, and other marketing considerations. If you have allowed yourself to be removed from marketing considerations by way of submitting to a publisher's will (depending on contract), then you have agreed to relinquish the right to shape the way readers come to your books.

Ultimately, though, unless you are literally writing for-hire, you have the responsibility, you answer to yourself, and there's no one else to blame or praise.
 
Good agents and good publishers guide the authors and if they have a problem with either then they certainly should be looking for better representation. And yes it is their responsibility; but historically speaking the author can usually be insulated by those two when it comes to rabid readers. The ones with a presence on twitter and other social media are taking their chance with the rabid readers; but it seems some of those enjoy that.

The thing is that with a publisher and agent an author does make some compromises, and that does help keep the insane at bay. Without those; the self publisher has all the control and the headaches; while any author has responsibility. Also you have to keep in mind that the most insane elements out there that dispute the loudest and the most look first to self publishers because they have that soft underbelly they like to chew at.

There is a greater sense of freedom for the self publisher; but there is a trade off of becoming an easier target.

But back to the OP: an author can write for the reader or not; and the success of that author still depends on how many people read the book and tell someone else they should read it. So whether an author wants to admit it or not the reader does have a say in the sale of their book. Listening to the customer won't hurt. Ignoring them or alienating them will.
 
Historically, perhaps, but from what I've been hearing from my writer friends going the traditional route is that publishers and agents are increasingly expecting authors to have their own brand platforms and to handle their own social media marketing.
 

Similar threads


Back
Top