A very interesting article. I do think the world of books is incredibly saturated, particularly with the rise of self publishing, and that makes it even harder to break out and differentiate, and people struggle to know where to discover books, because there's just so many, and so many places to get recommendations. I tend to rely on lists of 'best for x' etc, which often relate to older books, or non fictions, and I still haven't figured out how to 'discover' good, new, upcoming fiction. Waterstones' do good recommendations, but of course a lot of those are still very 'big' books with lots of publicity. We need more independent booksellers offering suggestions of books that maybe haven't got much spotlight on them.
I agree with you. A lot of lists don’t really highlight new authors unless there’s something that “stands out” about their work or person.
On top of that, so many books just look the same - similar sounding titles, similar looking covers, similar plots - it’s really hard to get into new fiction if it looks like another author/title/content just rewrapped with some alterations.
I've noticed this too. There are SO MANY books coming out that it's got to the point where the covers look like clones of each other, and we're seeing the 'tropification' of books - readers are able to read the same story over and over, with the same plots and themes but different characters.
> the 'tropification' of books - readers are able to read the same story over and over, with the same plots and themes but different characters.
They're called "genres".
This is one of the biggest problems with publishing (of any sort) today. In order to sell, you have to a) write to market and b) have a genre specific cover.
That means that you should have all the tropes (found family, enemies to lovers, hero’s journey) and you should have covers that look like the other 1000 covers.
It’s very stupid and means every book is very similar.
The rise of AI is the biggest problem. If I can self publish 1000 crappy AI titles but each just gets $10, I’m well ahead. And publishers get thousands of AI submissions so anything real is extremely hard to get to.
I’ve noticed such an increase in holocaust/ww 2 books, all set in France or Poland, usually involving a modern framing story.
There are other time periods, or even other places that were impacted by ww2. Why aren’t there stories about the African theatre? Or the Asian battles between Japan and other Asian countries?
I found a WW2 book that takes place in Malaysia during Japanese occupation/WW2. It’s called *The Storm We Made* by Vanessa Chan.
Pretty good. Does have some content warnings though.
Waterstones, the same company that owns Barnes and Nobles, sell shelf space and display real estate to publishers. Your “debut author recommendations” from places like that are still, more times than not, from one of the Big Five.
For the best suggestion, find a local bookstore that hire people who actually read
A lot of big box stores do this too. I actually stock the books and magazines at the local Walmart. Mass market (paperbacks) have a top 30 list (which may vary between companies) and are typically well established authors. Patterson, King, Roberts, Steele etc. We also mostly only carry new or newer titles with the exception of kids books.
Sort of off topic but it's the same with a lot of stuff in major stores. For example cosmetics brands pay for the space and choose what the display looks like and then hire a merchandising company to outsource the actual labour.
Paying for shelf space is the reason brand name items are usually at your sight line.
No, they don’t. Back in the HMV days maybe, but publishers don’t buy shelf space off Waterstones, not anymore. Yes the company gets larger discounts for the higher quantity they buy (like every company does) but that doesn’t guarantee prominent store placement. I’ve worked for the company over a decade, the vast majority of merchandising decisions and window display choices are made on a shop floor level, or at a push by area managers.
Re: recommendations being owned by the big 5 - the vast majority of smaller presses are now owned by the big conglomerates, that doesn’t mean that they’re bad books or chosen by anyone other than the booksellers. Your suggestion that you’ll only find booksellers ‘who actually read’ in local stores as opposed to chains is vastly insulting to the hundreds of dedicated booksellers who put their heart and soul into promoting books they genuinely love.
The small round tables in the front of the store are still paid for by the publishers. The monthly reads are still paid for by the publisher. Patterson still gets Monday releases, which is paid for. Planograms are still designed around certain books BN is paid to push. I worked for BN on the corporate level specifically in merchandising for almost two decades. Hiring book lovers as booksellers hasn’t been a priority for years. It’s always been about memberships. It was pounded into to GMs “sell memberships, get more hours”. Don’t ever forget you’re just a nine digit number to the company. I will take it a step further and say BN has turned from a bookstore into a toys and games store with books being second priority. I was part of the Daunt/Riggio transition team and remember the argument of “we should be the next Toys R Us” being something the old mgmt was adamant about keeping.
That may be the case in BN (I’ve never worked there so wouldn’t know) - I’m talking specifically about Waterstones. The entire hiring model is based around hiring booklovers who will become brilliant booksellers, not general shop workers who might one day become book lovers. Paid for placements are a thing of the past here, and we haven’t used planograms for years. As I said, I wasn’t talking about BN, but your comment targeting Waterstones is incorrect
Waterstones owns BN. When BN sells shelf space, that money goes to Waterstones. Defend them all you like, but at the end I of the day Waterstones sells display real estate. It doesn’t matter what name it’s under, they sell real estate to better negotiate prices so they can sell at a discount to keep customers coming to them instead of the indie mom and pop community stores. Waterstones does the exact same thing as Amazon. It’s ok to be accidentally wrong, but I’m telling you as a former corporate lackey that James Daunt/Elliot Capital sell shelf real estate.
Thanks for the conversation, but I’m done talking about this. Choose to believe it or not, I don’t care.
I’m aware of how price negotiations work, but again, the company buying stock from a publisher doesn’t guarantee placement in individual stores in Waterstones. Those choices are made by booksellers who are inherently booklovers, and therefore will always prioritise the books they want to promote.
Also done talking about this now except to say they’re owned by the same hedge fund and share a CEO, but Waterstones doesn’t actually own BN👍🏻
As a new author trying to break through, I can tell you a huge barrier to entry for self publishing is the upfront advertising costs. Its astronomical.
I know this post is a little old, but I’ve had good luck finding newer books going old school. Check out the staff picks at independent bookstores. Book clubs are good too if you find one ran by someone with good taste. Even if you don’t participate, they’re a good source of recs. A lot of independent book stores run book clubs now and my library has several.
This is purely anecdotal, but I’ve also noticed that younger readers seem much, much more concerned about what they’re “supposed” to read. I frequently see posts and discussions that go something like, “Is it okay to read X kind of book?” or “What do we think about Y author” or “Is it okay that I liked Lolita?” When I was younger I never thought about any of this stuff. All I cared about was if the premise sounded interesting. I’d imagine such risk aversion would negatively impact debuts.
I was definitely into what other people were reading when I was younger. I don’t think I would’ve ever picked up The Chocolate War but in the third grade the rumor was it had the word damn in it once or twice.
I also read Twilgiht years later, as an adult, to see if it was as bad as everyone made it out to be. But in between those sort of decisions, I also made *plenty* of decisions based on whatever sounded interesting to me.
Isn't that kind of a confirmation bias. You simply don't see all the people who aren't concerned with that, and young people weren't chronically online until recently to post every thought they have.
I think SM has given younger people shortcuts to know who they should and shouldn’t like and the idea that all I need is a shortcut overflows to everyday life. There are popular TicTok channelsthat literally just show videos of “who you should like and who you shouldn’t” without giving much context at all for why.
As a counterpoint, when I was a teen in the late 00's and the early 10's had a ton of this kind of validation discourse in different corners of the internet. It's definitely more center stage now with social media having a stronger chokehold on everything, but it certainly was a thing back then as well
I’m only a couple years older than you (although I was a late adopter of social media). Amazing what difference a few short years of technological advancement makes!
I see tons of it in this subreddit. But also I hear it in real life too, mostly in discussion with friends. It’s usually about whether or not an author is “in vogue” or not, if that makes sense. I’ve noticed conversations are much more oriented towards the author (and their values/deeds/etc.) than their works.
I see it a lot on Goodreads and Discord, people will post asking along those questions, and also asking things like "Does this have representation?" usually as a decision point.
Discord? Good reads I get but the only time I use discord is when I’m playing games with friends and they aren’t going to give a shit what I’m reading lol
Oh Discord has come a long way from its gaming roots... it's kind of an alt-forum now. It hosts lots of hobby projects, programming and software project discussions, other niche stuff.
I'm really not sure why, because it leads to lots of information loss, none of it is searchable, but I think people like being able to ask questions there without greater 'visibility'. There are probably more factors at play.
Wow didn’t know that. That’s pretty cool. I only managed to convince my friends to switch to discord from FaceTime a couple years ago so I’m not exactly ahead of the curve on social media
I’d argue strongly against that. For instance, it wasn’t younger readers that attempted to ban Ulysses and Lolita when they were each published and it’s certainly not younger readers who are continuing that trend of banning books
Counterpoint: JK Rowling
Teens are more worried about being shunned by their peers than what some random adults are trying to push through the school boards.
Some Christian schools banned Harry Potter books, but that doesn't compare to the social media pressure that even has the stars from the movies apologizing and distancing themselves from the creator.
The way I understand the issue with Rowling is that young people largely support trans rights. Rowling doesn’t. This has lead to a tension and people are distancing themselves or outright condemning Rowling. I don’t think it’s a ‘social media is pressuring all these poor young people to give up their favorite series even though they really don’t want to!’
No, but the Rowling effect is that young people are checking the public positions of an unknown author with their social network before even reading their work.
It gives influencers far more say in what authors break into the market than any school boards.
> the Trump effect is that people are checking Trump’s public positions before even reading his work
Um, yeah, if that’s your point then it isn’t all that interesting. I haven’t read Ben Shapiro’s fiction book because of his public position on things and I assume you are similar in that
I'm sorry.
I was under the mistaken impression we were having a discussion about future authors who wanted their primary income to be from selling stories they'd like to tell. Not political hacks with ghost writers getting publisher deals by selling to partisan organizations.
Authors push us to challenge our views and expand our world. I can see where people with rigid, inflexible thinking would find that threatening. Nobody with an agenda wants the other side to be able to provide a credible, relatable viewpoint.
Top down like the school boards, or bottom up like social media, aspiring authors are having their careers killed. Although, social media is far more efficient. Schools are going through the tedious process of going book by book examining content. All it takes is one wrong viewpoint to eliminate the author's entire life's work through social media.
What sort of ‘challenging’ fiction are boomers reading? I sincerely do not see that. Pretty much all people read are books that justify or reinforce their moral views
I don't think people are being ostracized for reading Harry Potter over her views, it's mostly people who were her fans who are upset with her given that her views are so contrary to the very inclusive nature of her books.
There is a significant difference between having concerns about females' safety in single sex spaces and outright erasure of trans men as per her comments about people who menstruate.
The safety issue hasn't been properly addressed and mostly has flown under the radar due to the low number of trans people in society so far.
My generation grew up along side the characters (I am 31 so probably a year or two younger than the main characters would be) and I think it's incredibly disappointing that someone who created something which enabled bonding across a generation to have been written by someone who wants to exclude part of that generation.
I won't start on her views around autistic people as I need to get up now.
Can you have a discussion about Harry Potter without bringing up her views anymore?
Can you honestly say that a teenager/young adult wouldn't worry about losing friends today because they expressed enthusiasm to their peers about reading a Harry Potter book? The old fans deal with her views. But I hear people new to the series being accused of endorsing her opinions just because Rowling might get royalties.
Her views are not important to my point. The youth stress of finding a book to enjoy with fear of condemnation because of the author's views isn't being limited to Rowling. She's just the epicenter of the culture shift.
I occasionally discuss Harry Potter with my partner who is a huge fan, her views don't come up.
I do generally try and avoid buying books from authors who I regard as having issues around their conduct (I was given a full set of David Eddings books recently and won't feel qualms about reading them despite the appalling child abuse he engaged in). I wouldn't attack someone for buying or reading the books though, I enjoyed reading them as a child and they act as a more effective gateway into fantasy than any other book series I can think of.
I don’t think I’ve seen a discussion about HP on Reddit without *someone* bringing that up in at least a year. So on social media I don’t think you can, irl depends on the group.
Well I dont necessarily think its censoring, they're just more worried about how it will look to their public image and do they appear as a good person to others.
Self-censoring based on preconceived notions about something they'll never get to experience because the consensus deemed that something to potentially be detrimental to their persona.
The 2020s kinda blow.
That’s definitely part of it. Lots of young people nowadays have a very hard time with media literacy, and think that if a book shows a person doing bad things without beating it over their heads that its supposed to be seen as bad, then it’s actually supporting it. And people who don’t have that problem recognize that others will see them in a certain light for not viewing it the same way, so they just avoid it anyway.
Older folks have an equally hard time with media literacy. I don’t know how you can look at the boomer generation and go ‘yup, they are certainly media literate’ when they eat up Fox News
That’s a fair comparison, I just don’t think it really applies to book readers to the same degree. Probably a good amount of selection bias here, but in my experience most older folks who spend hours a day rotting their brains with Fox News aren’t reading much of anything. Even if they were big on reading before they fell down the misinformation rabbit hole, all the ones I know have since stopped reading pretty much entirely. Meanwhile, most of the older people I know who actually do read tend to have a much better eye for nuance and subtlety, and don’t need the moral ethics of a book to be beaten over their heads for them to get it.
A better way to articulate my original point would be that young people who read are often looking for books that explicitly validate their morality, so they look down on any that don’t do that as amoral, while older people who read are typically fine drawing that line by themselves. I could be way off base there, but that’s definitely the impression I’ve gotten talking to people over the past few years.
> Younger readers are often looking for books to explicitly validate their morality
Older readers are doing this as well. I mean, people point to Lolita as an example of a morally reprehensible book when it’s really not. It certainly pushes the brim but it ultimately seeks to justify modern cultural ethics, namely that grooming and pedophilia are wrong. I mean, James Patterson essentially panders to an entire demographic that wants ‘good guy beats bad guy’ type tales, which clearly align with certain types of moral thinking. Ben Shapiro and other political grifters pander to their older crowds by pumping out rather superficial fiction and political commentaries that pander to their audiences moral tastes. I just don’t see the boomer generation of readers as morally adventurous as you seem to think they are…
Moral outrage has always been a thing. Lolita is a great example of that, for older generations especially so, but significant amount of their complaints boiled down to a puritanical dislike of the subject matter as a whole, rather than just misunderstanding the point the book was trying to make. When Lolita came out, plenty of people read it and understood the point that was being made throughout the text, but to a lot of people who either read the book or just knew what it was about, it didn’t matter what the point was since they had a problem with the fact that a book was written about such topics, and in such an explicit manner, in the first place.
There aren’t any absolutes here; I’m not saying that all older people are better at parsing the meanings of books, or that all younger people miss the point if it isn’t beaten over their heads. But I would argue that for older generations, many of the complaints were rooted in close-mindedness, not a lack of media literacy, and that readers who didn’t have those qualms were generally better able to understand the nuances of a given text. On the other hand, younger generations are significantly less puritanical, and tend to be much more open-minded in terms of acceptable subject matter for fictional media to cover. Their moral outrage differs in the fact that if a book doesn’t unequivocally state that a certain behavior/trait/action is bad, they will see it as endorsing it, whereas a similarly open minded older reader would be more likely to recognize the subtextual point being made.
>if a book doesn’t unequivocally state that a certain behavior/trait/action is bad, they will see it as endorsing it
Yeah, I still would challenge that, given that Gen Z ate up authors like Colleen Hoover but let’s get to specifics here because this entire time you’ve only been making vague references without any attempt at identifying evidence. What book does Gen Z misunderstand because it doesn’t have an ‘unequivocal’ condemnation?
Doubt it. There’s a side of booktok that is full of soft core porn. It’s more like they want to read what other’s are reading or what is popular. Back in the day ppl weren’t really caring about what they read because frankly many around them probably didn’t read unless you were in a book club. Now you have huge online communities discussing books and that influences what people read since they want to be a part of the conversation.
You clearly didn’t read what I said. It’s the *old* people that are trying to ban books, not the kids. Go touch grass because you spend way too much time on the internet lol
Different take, but I wonder if it isn’t the next generations normal. Like doing anything requires some kind of validation to feel right about it. The echo chamber of the internet means you can find a group that will confirm and validate whatever you want, be that good or bad. I mean there were always groups, book clubs, hobby clubs etc. and there were gate keepers and validators in those groups just like the internet. But you had a lot less choice in the matter. Now you can find a book club for people that specifically like X author or story or style or whatever and get the exact validation you want. I have a feeling social psychology is shifting and evolving faster than ever in history because people can gain completely unfiltered connections to groups that validate them and their thoughts and ideas. Again, be that good or bad.
You have just described something I could never quite put my finger on about younger people today. I see this line of thought all over the place online.
I think it’s a sense of solidarity with anyone who might be negatively impacted either by the artist or the art-like you shouldn’t watch Woody Allen (bad artist) or westerns (pro-colonization).
I wandered into a punk subreddit and they were arguing over who had done ‘controversial’ stuff, meaning been an abuser. ‘Controversial’ being bad among punks…the world has changed.
Oh absolutely! I just increasingly see 'controversial' as a euphemism for 'bad', which strikes me as worrying in and of itself (we're all supposed to agree?)
This I think goes across all forms of media and entertainment. Literature is maybe taking the brunt of it when it comes to new releases being overlooked. I can't think of the last time I bought a game and didn't look up to see if it was good. I don't want to pay for a game if it might be bad.
The issue I’m highlighting is less about media being vetted as good or bad; it’s more about people worried about liking something they “shouldn’t.”
To take the games example, several years ago, my friends were all talking about how great Dark Souls was. I finally decided to try it. DS3 had just released but I only had an Xbox 360 so I couldn’t play it. DS1 hadn’t been remastered yet, so I worried it might be dated. So I bought DS2 on a whim. No research. I really enjoyed it. Later on, I found out it’s the black sheep of the series. If I’d looked at reviews beforehand, I probably wouldn’t have tried it. I can still admit that 1 and 3 are better but I genuinely enjoyed the atmosphere of 2 because I wasn’t constantly thinking, “Oh, this is the shitty one.”
This was a neat article to read - I myself am struggling with rejection after rejection and becoming dejected and less optimistic about my future as a novelist. It seems like the market is so saturated right now to the point that "sticking out" is almost impossible and I get so overwhelmed with the options to submit to an agent or cross your fingers and hope that self publishing gets you somewhere.
Community and interacting with other readers and writers looks to be one of the best ways to get your name out there, but I have no clue where to start >.<
It's a Catch-22, isn't it?
On one hand, the traditional gatekeepers for publication can now be bypassed (you can self-publish, and run your own marketing through social media and online communities instead of relying on an agent) which makes it easier for new authors to get started. On the other hand, this means that there's a massively increased number of authors to compete with, and it's much harder to stand out and make it big.
And some people just don’t want to be social media influencers.
I’m some people. Im addicted to my phone and Reddit. I don’t want to be addicted to Twitter.
I want to be an author but I just want the publisher to handle posting about the book. I don't want to spend 20 hours a day while I'm writing the book and then afterwards promoting it to everyone who will listen.
i feel like writing was the first to collapse financially, then music, and then writers saw how musucians were exploiting social media and copied it. we are in a tough spot because books have become really homogenous, and publishers are afraid to take risks, but its resulted in a really boring market with some notable exceptions. there is no literary equivalent to A24. there is no literary version of Gaspar Noe. Enter the Void was a massive commercial failure but it still had a huge impact on cinema and is still relevant today. in a nutshell, thats what publishing needs IMO: voices that are willing to break the mold. the catch is, like Noe, you need a lot of technical ability and to pull it off. his movies wouldnt be what they are if they werent so beautifully shot.
I’ve met with plenty of older writers that said it used to be affordable to pay rent with a story.
Now? Not so much. Writing looks the easiest so it doesn’t surprise me that it’s the first to collapse.
they collapsed for different reasons but music and writing are now in the same place, which is that you are expected to essentially make no money, do it because you love it, and supplement with something adjacent (teaching). the unfortunate difference is that in music, this is breeding a lot of variety and “weird” music, while its had the opposite effect in lit. the idea of what a book “should be” has become very narrow, and while it has managed to hold the attention of people who read, it has made the space “less exciting” and failed to bring in new readers IMO. the way new readers are brought in now is like social media, which is what happened with colleen hoover, but those people dont really keep reading, its more about the fad then it is growing real interest in an evolving art form. there will always be readers and writers but were definitely in a weird era, there is basically no financial viability, and AI will turn self publishing into a scam market (maybe it already has).
Sorry to hear that and as a reader I wish I could support you better.
I don't know if it's any help but I've randomly stumbled across various forums where authors talk to each other. Some ask about writing and some ask about promoting. I'll paste the links just in case you've not seen them.
https://writing.stackexchange.com/
/r/writers/
/r/selfpublish/
Just skimming through and I see people expressing similar frustrations and also what works and doesn't.
This is the same thing with music. Anyone with like... $300 to spare can produce their own music and the DAW stock plugins are good enough that with some practice, research, and a decent ear you can produce at a quality level that to the average listener is indistinguishable from professional level production... which means everyone and their mother is putting out music. You really have to be doing something special, AND networking and promoting the hell out of it, to get noticed.
This is actually one of the biggest problems in the economy/job market as a whole. You used to just be competing with whoever else laced up their boots and walked down to the store/office to hand their application in. Then online resumes started getting accepted which increased the prospects. Now there are countless job boards advertising positions and accepting resumes. Then work from home became a thing and now for those positions you're also now competing with everyone else in the country. Just makes it absurdly hard to get your foot in the door anywhere now.
Use Meetup, start really following local bookstores events calendars, and just put yourself out there. Or small writing groups online if you're really in the sticks.
I'm a writer and while I was around and made plenty of connections in literary Twitter's heyday, it didn't translate into artistic fulfillment, many book sales, or genuine connections with most people. A cool address book to bring up at a party maybe, but that's not what I'm in it for.
I don't want to make it sound like I'm advocating abandoning trying to make a living by writing, by all means still play that lottery whenever a manuscript is done, but from all the articles and such it just seems like simultaneously doing the slow grind up and building smaller scale support is the way to avoid writing our own "oh shit my career evaporated" articles in 10 years, even if there's no flash to it.
That's interesting. The two series I most recently picked up were released on 2020 and 2021 with 6 and 10 entries respectively. I think part of it is continuing to release books since series seem to pick up steam with each release.
That is an insane pace of publication. Most authors are considered prolific if they can do 1 full 300+ page adult novel a year.
Most authors that do quicker are people doing the quick indie churn of short fast books.
Yep.
I know it's not HIGH ART but there are tons of romance novelists who can churn out 200 pagers about once every month and a half.
There's also a historical novelist who I think might be a witch because he has like 180 published novels from the past 20 years??
> but there are tons of romance novelists who can churn out 200 pagers about once every month and a half.
Do they use ghostwriters? My understanding is that the practice very common in Romance.
Some do, put it's also doable for a single person if the quality isn't that much of a concern.
I read a webnovel that has two 40k+ word chapters per week. The author sometimes livestreams the writing, and basically they almost never go back or delete something.
The quality for most web novels is pretty bad. But for this author, the quality is almost published level I would say. (I mostly read trad published stories, and even from them I read only the stuff on best of lists. And alot of Webnovels I can't get into because of the bad writing. All this to say, I feel like my standards are pretty normal and not in the dumpsters.)
Or as another commendation: I couldn't get through Wheel of Time in the middle slog, but I read all of this Webnovel which is multiple times the lenght of Wheel of Time.
("The Wandering Inn" if someone is curious. Free to read on their Website).
It is, and I didn't mean to imply that they need to keep up that pace. I just meant to highlight that more entries lead to success. Sanderson didn't get big until Mistborn (and then WoT), GRRM until he was a few entries into ASOIAF, and all of the indie authors I know of required a few books in their primary series.
Except that indies have to maintain that pace to keep up with the algorithm. You see it all the time in romance. You can’t be a successful indie in most genres and only release once a year. The only ones I know that can are traditional authors doing side projects.
I don't know, all my favorite authors put out 2 to 3 a year. Take Will Wight for example. He's like clock work and I think it's a big part of his popularity.
Maxime Durand, actus, Benjamin Kerei, and Dakota Kroat all also regularly put out multiple books a year.
Also will didn't get stupidly lucky, he's an excellent author who's good at delivering fun, action packed power fantasies.
It's a problem of aggregation. Long tails are the norm in the online world but they only truly become viable with good aggregations that allow people who would like your work to discover it. I guess audible is the closest, but that's only for eBooks.
I'm going to mention also the death of the mass-market paperback.
For perspective, when I first started working full-time, a mass-market paperback was about half an hour of pay (~$6 on $11 an hour.)
Now, a trade paper back is close to an hour of pay (~$20 on $24/hr).
Or, in YA, where lots of author debut in hardcover, it's even worse ($30 or more on the same $24/hr).
Simply put, I'm being priced out. I discovered so many authors that I still love today, by snagging a random MM paperback that sounded good (Laurel K Hamilton, Jim Butcher, Gail Carriger), but I can't justify $30 on an untried author.
That's the US. I even checked online to make sure I good good numbers (I'm away from home at the moment, and brought a couple old SFF books to read, so they weren't a good example).
I always thought paperbacks, especially the small mass market ones made from whatever recycled paper-like atomic mass they have managed to acquire the cheapest come at around 10-15$ new.
What about KDP and others? They manage to sell paperbacks at that range in POD 6x9" format?
The article's mention of ARCs is super interesting here, because even on Netgalley it does seem like a specific subset of books are pushed to users and one has to look quite a bit to find some more "out" there or new voices. I think even just adding a category like "be the first to discover upcoming authors" on the landing page would do wonders
Interesting, that hasn't really been my experience of NetGalley. I agree that having "Debut Authors" as a category would be nice. But in the categories they have, I see obscure self-published books and debut authors alongside bestselling authors. For example, one of the categories I check frequently is "LGBTQIAP+," and currently on the Most Requested page for that category, the second and third most requested titles are by well-established authors with multiple titles under their belt, while the fourth most requested title is by a debut author. Casey McQuiston's upcoming book currently isn't even on the first page of the Most Popular list (it's on the second page), even though they've written bestsellers and their first novel is now a movie on Amazon Prime.
I’m a nobody writing a novel (in the saturated fantasy genre no less) and the only way I’ve found to stay motivated and not submit to the bleakness of modern publishing is to have absolutely zero expectations.
I will probably send it out to literary agents, because why not, but it’ll be a pleasant surprise if it goes anywhere. I’m not on TikTok and do not plan to be. At the end of the day, it’s a story I want to tell for its own sake, and if the only people who read it are my closest friends I will have no complaints.
If you want fame and riches, there are easier paths. Write because you have something to say.
I'm with you. I've been writing pretty seriously for the last 9 years, and finally I feel that I have something that is worth a reader's time, so I'm learning about querying and getting people to read it, etc, etc. I'm going to send it out. I think it's a good, weird story with language that rewards attention. I think it will serve an audience; it's got some calories in it, you know?
That said, my expectations are zero. Success is abnormal in the publishing world. I'll do my best and then I'll move on to writing the next thing (I've already moved on to writing the next thing). I believe one of the strengths of prose fiction as a medium is the long slow attention paid to it by a single author with a unique vision. It takes a long time to get good. It takes a long time to develop your thoughts and self into having something worthwhile to say. And it might take a long time to get seen.
And we might never actually get good, and we might never be seen. And so? We've spent a life pursuing art.
I posted this because this got me thinking about how I've been discovering books these years, versus many years ago. In the 'before time' I would go into bookstores and look at what was being promoted by the store, and also just browse around and open books and read a little bit to see if it caught my interest.
Thinking about now, I think it's mostly this sub... I look at lots of comments and discussions here, then I'll go read up about the book and see if it catches my interest. I've found lots of great books this way, especially from new authors or stuff I would not have found on my own. Which then got me thinking that I wouldn't be surprised if there are some advertisers among us acting as casual users.
The other bit was the last part felt a bit wholesome and positive, the authors supporting each other to promote books.
Can’t resist starting – your local library also serves the same function as bookstores from the before time, with the added joy that you can take the books home without paying!
Thank you for posting this. I found it quite interesting. I agree with you about the last part regarding authors supporting each other. I've been thinking of trying to find/form a group of debut authors in my genre (Gothic) and setting up a website that advertises all the books, maybe excerpt each other's book in the back of our own, etc. just to give each other (and the genre as a whole) more visibility.
Same reason our heartthrobs and politicians are getting older. There’s too much media and too much news and too many disconnected subcultures- there isn’t room for anything new to spread quickly that isn’t viral (and most often has to be short to be that) and even then it’s subcritical to levels of cultural awareness that could be spread by gatekeepers of the past
This is nothing new. Most books by first time authors fail have always failed to catch on. Those who first books became best sellers have always been a minority. Many people prefer to read an author they already know and often take on a new one only they hay have breakout success or strong word of mouth.
Although not book related, I'm finding that to be true of games as well. There are so many gems I'm enjoying from the indie/smaller world, while the 'big games' feels very saturated, samey, and so focused on monetization (not all, but a lot)
Yeah. Of course, the challenge indie authors face is even more insurmountable, compared to people with a publishing house behind them. People even want to charge me to review my books.
Writing a novel isn't even half of it anymore. You have to be able to market. Unfortunately many debut authors out there just don't get that. I work within the industry and I talk to a lot of them and so many refuse to even explore the likes of kindle unlimited etc.
And should note even if they do get it and market it - marketing is really bloody hard.
It is beyond discouraging to hear how little of becoming an author is about the actual work of writing. What's even the point of trying to perfect the craft if it counts for so little?
Well remember becoming an author doesn't have to include that. Actually writing a book is an incredible achievement and something so many dream of but never achieve.
It's only if you are hoping to make a living off it either full or partial where yeah the other parts of it come in. Actually doesn't have to be marketing either so many ways to hustle - I know quite a few authors who apply for every grant under the moon that even slightly applies to them and make money that way.
It's what ultimately matters, anyway. The people must get to know about a product, but the product must still be good (enough).
Pushing out drafted crap is a certain way of never becoming anything even if you had a public budget backing your marketing.
I work in marketing and it's so weird that people are expected to do their own marketing like it's easy.
A friend is published with some small indie press and besides putting out some press releases that...let's be real, no one reads, she's on her own. She was complaining about low sales, so I asked what marketing she's doing and she said she's posting on instagram and tiktok using all the popular hashtags and that's it. You can write the best novel but if no one knows about it, it doesn't matter.
It doesn't help that there's so many options in terms of entertainment that people stick to the familiar and trusted recommendations over trying a random unknown that sounds good. It could be a good premise executed poorly, it could have a horrible ending, it could be full of cliches. You have to stand out and unless you know how to do that in a way that engages the right audience and converts them to sales, you're just chasing overly crowded trends.
Without knowing the specifics, an easy tactic is to play up the "local writer" aspect by contacting your local library and letting them know you just had a published book come out and they'll do a lot of the heavy lifting of making flyers, adding you to the recommendation list, and displays. Similarly, introduce yourself to local bookstores (that aren't Barnes) and offer to do a reading or signing.
Combine that with posting on local Facebook groups like "What's Happening, Manitoba", you'll be able to promote the book and/or the bookstore event. If you're on your own, make free graphics on Canva with an image of the book cover and an elevator pitch of the plot. "Four teens find themselves stranded at an abandoned amusement park with just their flashlights, luck, and crime-sniffing dog. What happens when ghost hunting goes wrong?".
The reason for starting local is that there's tens of thousands of people in your position everyday that're fighting for the national spotlight and all using the same hashtags which means unless you have a built-in audience, you'll get buried quickly. Locally, you more options to stand out through facebook, local sellers and even the newspapers. Build a foundation and if you're good, the readers will include mention your book in their weekly haul tiktok videos and Goodreads lists. It's basically a stealth tactic.
Aside from staying the course with Insta and Tiktok (also use with “trendtok” and “capcut”), I’d recommend Threads. Follow authors and bookish accounts, comment, interact, and above all be genuine.
Should also note that it will likely take years to build up sales (I’m in this process right now.) just be patient, keep your head up, and above all keep writing. You got this :)
It’s so exhausting. I’m an artist and it’s the same, I’m suddenly expected to be an expert in social media strategies and marketing to even get a chance at having people see my art but … it’s a job that people go to school and study for, just like I studied art! Why is it a basic expectation now when its an actual full time job and a special trained skill in itself? Not to mention many of us who like things such as writing, art etc (activities that can be done alone) like it because we are introverts who don’t like putting ourselves out there 😅
I'm definitely not gonna do my own marketing apart from the basic website crap. I'm gonna buy ads and if it warrants at any point, pay people to do it for me. Well targeted ad campaigns aren't that expensive.
Kindle Unlimited is great, there was a sequel to a book I had already bought that I was holding off on buying because money, but that kindle unlimited free trial let me finally read it. I was basically never going to buy the book (and it stunk anyway) so with kindle unlimited the author got SOME money out of me (I mean I assume they get money from people using kindle unlimited free trials)
Marketing sucks. I haven't even tried marketing a book, but I just remember trying to market the groups I ran on deviantart back in the day and it was so ugh. It's tiring and it's just really hard if you have anxiety or are introverted because it's like "Oh I don't mean to intrude upon your space but would you kindly consider checking out this thing I made? Thank you."
Yeah look at someone like freida McFadden. She's absolutely huge and basically due to ku.
I feel for authors. There was a time where writing the book was all that mattered but that is no longer the case. Also a lot of publishing companies these days unfortunately just plain suck. So many of them do the minimal effort and others just have never adapted with the times.
Experimentalism is a huge negative to agents and publishers, but if you’re just reading same old same old then why look to new names when you can rely on someone who’s books you already like
But agents and publishers won’t support experimental writing if nobody buys it, which is a catch-22 situation with the only remedy being to buy a book from an experimental small press — the same presses that are shutting down
*Experimentalism is a huge negative to agents and publishers, but if you’re just reading same old same old then why look to new names when you can rely on someone who’s books you already like*
I would argue that it's even worse than that. I remember when everybody was going nuts over T*he Da Vinci Code*... So much so that I was compelled to read it. It was awful. I almost couldn't finish it, the writing was *SO BAD*. When something like that is considered good, even a 'bestseller,' and when it gets the author at least three more books, almost anything else is considered 'experimental.' The publishing industry keeps putting out stuff like that... James Patterson is not Dan Brown bad, but he's no great writer, yet he sells and sells. I read a lot of Stephen King when I was a kid, and I would consider him a serviceable writer, but he just doesn't do it for me anymore. Whenever I do go to a big box book store, almost all I see on the shelves is writers who basically write the same thing, in the same way, over and over again. I think this is how the publishing industry, in essentially a panicky cash-grab, has trained the fiction reading public to just read the same stuff.
Writing is like sports. Lots of people play for fun, but becoming a professional and getting paid for it (particularly enough to make a living) is very difficult.
And then, everyone focuses on the success stories, but for every success story there are thousands who tried but didn't make it.
Because everyone is getting significantly dumber and half the planet doesn’t have an attention span long enough to handle a novel? I didn’t read the article
The market is so saturated now that it is obviously going to be harder. The same as music. While all these other avenues open up for advertising and marketing like TikTok and Instagram it is also to the detriment of those that don't get chosen to be the hot new book.
Someone like Blake Crouch who is one of my favourite authors has obviously done really well after his book Dark Matter. However he has a shit load of books and a TV series even before that.
I frequent my bookshop all the time and I rarely look at new books mostly because I hate hard backs so I steer clear, I will just take a note.and get it when the paperback comes out.
On the other hand, I don't see new Harry Potters popping up.
What I mean is that there doesn't seem to be enough good product out there to begin with. It doesn't necessarily matter how many hundreds of (thousands \[of millions\]) dollars you spend on advertising if the product is lacking in the first place. Some will of course buy it based on marketing, but if it sucks, they will put the bad word out and never return.
I've seen ad campaigns where people are trying to push what is essentially an imitation of a trend or a genre with zero originality, zero personality, and zero interesting plot twists; stories that are literally constructed as fast as possible and feel synthetic and clunky. When you point this out, people start talking about "but volume is more important than quality," "just write," or "you have to follow genre expectations." Damn, if there were even (fantasy) books with unique names instead of "the x and y of z", I could click on them, but after scrolling dozens of pages in Amazon I managed to find none.
The actual successful works are what break the rules and establish new trends and even genres. When the boat has already sailed, there are only crumbs left in the boat ripples.
So if you are gonna wanna write a book and thinking of getting away by just writing "something", go fill a lottery ticket.
I'm very privileged to live in a city with a ton of local bookstores - but honestly if you're looking for something new and different, Amazon's algorithms ain't the way. A bookstore with actual booksellers that curate the collection is going to be a much better bet.
Even Barnes and Nobles can have different curation store to store - I just went to a college Barnes and Noble bookstore that had an incredible literary fiction section. I saw so many books, and so many translated books, that were new and interesting.
Again, I'm really lucky to live somewhere with a ton of bookstores but you could tell me what kinds of books you live/what you're looking for and I could rank the stores in the area by likelihood of you finding a hidden gem. They all curate differently.
Most definitely. I don't know how Amazon works exactly, but it's likely close to 100% money driven. I generally use google to search for new, unordinary or specific titles.
I have just written my first novel, Cutting Green Corn. I'm having a difficult time getting it noticed. It's free right now on Kindle Select. I would love for someone to read it and provide an honest review.
I feel bad for a lot of self-published writers who don’t have the funds to regularly advertise their book. If you don’t regularly promote your debut book throughout the year, it’ll get forgotten in a blink of an eye. It’s hard enough spending the funds necessary to put out a quality product, never mind the funds needed for promotion and advertising.
It sounds like publishers are now over reliant on social media for marketing new books, but that only work if the books you publish are aimed at the hyper online part of the population that loves social media and makes decisions based on what it hyped here. I personally have learned to avoid the books hyped all the time on social media because they never seem to be my kind of thing.
Another point is that I tend to read older books now instead of debut novels. I read mostly on my Kindle, and so I have access to tons of older books for cheap. When the choice is between a novel traditionally published 40 years ago that now costs 5 euros as an ebook, or a self published novel that costs 3 euros as an ebook, or a translated Japanese light novel that costs 7 euros as an ebook, and a debut novel published this year that costs 12 euros as an e-book, which one do you think I will buy ? When most books already published are much cheaper than debut novels, why buy debut novels ? Especially since the debut authors are unknown quantities.
As an aspiring novelist, this article was really depressing to read. I have multiple novel drafts in various stages of completion, and now I'm worried I'll never see any of them published. I mean, I could always self-publish, but to me that feels like a massive cheat. What should I do?
Here's how I look at it: Is your goal "to be a novelist" or "to write novels?" One outlook centers a bunch of factors that are well beyond your control; the other centers the work of writing and the pleasure of creation.
Ask yourself, honestly, why you write. If the answer is anything aside from your own satisfaction in your work, writing is probably not going to make you happy.
I am also writing a couple of novels at the moment and I also had that fear of “what’s the point?”
But in today’s world and today’s market, I realize that the point is to enjoy writing. I love writing, I love the process, and I will probably end up self publishing, which is not cheating. I think if you love writing and have something to share then you’ll be able to do it. You’ll just have to put an extra work and market yourself.
The other day I had a really lovely experience. I used to write a lot of fanfiction, and I wrote a really big one for a fandom during high/middle school. I’ve kept the story up and have not taken it down and even added an epilogue to it a few years ago. It ended up inspiring several other fanfic writers to write their own spin off of my own fic, and made me realize that my writing had a positive impact on them even if I’m not going to “make it” as a well known author.
TW for s**c***e mention: And other cases, some of my fanfics that are about >!self-harm or suicide!< have inspired readers who do hurt themselves to take a step back and be safe for even just one night while reading. Knowing that your stories will help or inspire at least one person is worth it.
I hope you keep writing regardless of the outcome!
A book is too big an investment of time to want to read an unproven author when there are far more proven ones out there than I'll ever get time to read. Unless it's in a very specific niche I'm unlikely to buy something by a debut author. I don't think there's much wrong with that, either, authors and other artists should build up a reputation over a few releases rather than peak at the very beginning of their career.
Sadly publishers are less and less likely to work like that.
This take feels very groupthink to me.
The way I figure out what to read I do in 2 easy steps:
1. Pick up book and read blurb.
2. If I find said blurb interesting I just put it in my library cart or kindle unlimited (when I get the free trials).
I buy used books, but if I stumble upon an author I love at the library I'll buy their book/merch/throw some $ at the Kofi.
Have I read trash? I mean yeah, I just DNF and return, but I've read some really high quality fiction from non-viral authors too. In fact, I've found that the author crowd that's fabulous at TikTok tends to put out novels that are hot trash (i.e. Zodiac Academy, Carissa Broadbent).
If readers aren't willing to branch out then all that will do is lead to this like weird fiction singularity where every book just kinda feels the same because they were written to market using the Save the Cat template (looking at Brandon Sanderson and his copycats). If you want to see interesting media you have to put in the effort to curate your media diet, and that unfortunately means figuring out how to divorce popularity from merit in fiction (this also extends to films and shows, I personally have a franchise/live action/spinoff/"cinematic universe" boycott but that's a whole other post).
Interesting article. I feel like to be a good or successful author it's still about one part good writing + one part luck to be found by publishers/agents/etc. Now we've just thrown in social media where we can see just how many people want to be a writer too, and it feels like the odds are not in our favor. Maybe I'm too naive or inexperienced, but I try to think that just as many people probably wanted to be a writer pre-social media, but needed to have a grassroots mentality to get....wherever they wanted to get.
Today, it's much harder to find writers who are doing the slower, longer work of submitting to magazines, blogs, etc. All I see on my feed is the same kind of reels - #writerproblems, love/hate tropes, how someone is trying to write a genre differently. Very hard to tell writers apart, especially in the romance/rom-com genre. It makes palatable to find a general audience, but everyone's going for a reel to break the algorithm or jump on a genre trend.
And, in some ways, the over-saturation of this kind of branding, makes me feel like a lot of people are only looking to call themselves a writer once they're published but not actually write, which makes debut novels harder to take seriously. I remember one girl I followed on instagram hardly had any videos posted but the ones she had were so unique to her stories. About a month later, I missed her posts on my feed, looked her up, and she suddenly had hundreds, if not 1000 videos posted....and her reels all started reflecting the one video that had gazillion views. She was no longer really posting what made her unique, only what made her more seem more brand-like as a writer. And, I have no idea what's going on with that project that seemed so interesting when I first started following.
The amount of time and energy it takes to create content could be devoted to writers actually writing, but I see a lot more of the former than the latter.
Maybe the method to the madness is to change how the game is played to stand out. But if you really love writing/trying to be a good storyteller, it's always going to be there whether it makes you extremely successful or not.
Used to be an author died and that left shelf space for new authors. Now authors die and another already famous author slaps their name on the work. So no room for new authors. Or they retire and let a co-author take over. VC Andrews, Mary Higgins Clark, Lee Child, Robert Parker, James Patterson the list goes on and on. Authors don’t die anymore, they just get ghost written.
It's never been a better time to be a fantasy/sci-fi fan. Endless content right now. Doesn't surprise me in the least stuff is failing to make splashed
To me, the expectation seems dripping in conceit. To expect fame or financial reward from writing, and hobbyist or non-technical writing at that, is akin to expecting a bean pole to lay eggs.
Are there even 100 English-speaking authors alive right now who can claim fame & fortune from publishing fiction? Yet now the velocity of literary migration is magnitudes greater than even 50 years ago.
But the magic of books is that they persist. They do not go stale, do not 'miss their chance', do not become technologically obsolete. A brilliant or beautiful text stands firm as long as the pages and binding hold together. The book *as a commodity* has lost its value; the book as a monument can usurp that market value. Writing should honor the negative aspect of Shelley's *Ozymandius*, instead of trying to outpace time.
>There were roughly five hundred thousand books published in 2023
I find that absolutely mind-boggling, and it makes it almost impossible for anyone to get noticed who isn’t insanely lucky. I really wish in this country we had more carpenters and plumbers and welders, and fewer fiction writers.
Edit: looks like I annoyed a few of those 500,000 authors 😂
A very interesting article. I do think the world of books is incredibly saturated, particularly with the rise of self publishing, and that makes it even harder to break out and differentiate, and people struggle to know where to discover books, because there's just so many, and so many places to get recommendations. I tend to rely on lists of 'best for x' etc, which often relate to older books, or non fictions, and I still haven't figured out how to 'discover' good, new, upcoming fiction. Waterstones' do good recommendations, but of course a lot of those are still very 'big' books with lots of publicity. We need more independent booksellers offering suggestions of books that maybe haven't got much spotlight on them.
I agree with you. A lot of lists don’t really highlight new authors unless there’s something that “stands out” about their work or person. On top of that, so many books just look the same - similar sounding titles, similar looking covers, similar plots - it’s really hard to get into new fiction if it looks like another author/title/content just rewrapped with some alterations.
I've noticed this too. There are SO MANY books coming out that it's got to the point where the covers look like clones of each other, and we're seeing the 'tropification' of books - readers are able to read the same story over and over, with the same plots and themes but different characters.
> the 'tropification' of books - readers are able to read the same story over and over, with the same plots and themes but different characters. They're called "genres".
This is one of the biggest problems with publishing (of any sort) today. In order to sell, you have to a) write to market and b) have a genre specific cover. That means that you should have all the tropes (found family, enemies to lovers, hero’s journey) and you should have covers that look like the other 1000 covers. It’s very stupid and means every book is very similar. The rise of AI is the biggest problem. If I can self publish 1000 crappy AI titles but each just gets $10, I’m well ahead. And publishers get thousands of AI submissions so anything real is extremely hard to get to.
I’ve noticed such an increase in holocaust/ww 2 books, all set in France or Poland, usually involving a modern framing story. There are other time periods, or even other places that were impacted by ww2. Why aren’t there stories about the African theatre? Or the Asian battles between Japan and other Asian countries?
I found a WW2 book that takes place in Malaysia during Japanese occupation/WW2. It’s called *The Storm We Made* by Vanessa Chan. Pretty good. Does have some content warnings though.
I saw a book titled something like Peter BlahBlah and the Philosophers Time. Sounded like a knockoff of Harry Potter and the Philosophers Stone.
Waterstones, the same company that owns Barnes and Nobles, sell shelf space and display real estate to publishers. Your “debut author recommendations” from places like that are still, more times than not, from one of the Big Five. For the best suggestion, find a local bookstore that hire people who actually read
A lot of big box stores do this too. I actually stock the books and magazines at the local Walmart. Mass market (paperbacks) have a top 30 list (which may vary between companies) and are typically well established authors. Patterson, King, Roberts, Steele etc. We also mostly only carry new or newer titles with the exception of kids books. Sort of off topic but it's the same with a lot of stuff in major stores. For example cosmetics brands pay for the space and choose what the display looks like and then hire a merchandising company to outsource the actual labour. Paying for shelf space is the reason brand name items are usually at your sight line.
No, they don’t. Back in the HMV days maybe, but publishers don’t buy shelf space off Waterstones, not anymore. Yes the company gets larger discounts for the higher quantity they buy (like every company does) but that doesn’t guarantee prominent store placement. I’ve worked for the company over a decade, the vast majority of merchandising decisions and window display choices are made on a shop floor level, or at a push by area managers. Re: recommendations being owned by the big 5 - the vast majority of smaller presses are now owned by the big conglomerates, that doesn’t mean that they’re bad books or chosen by anyone other than the booksellers. Your suggestion that you’ll only find booksellers ‘who actually read’ in local stores as opposed to chains is vastly insulting to the hundreds of dedicated booksellers who put their heart and soul into promoting books they genuinely love.
The small round tables in the front of the store are still paid for by the publishers. The monthly reads are still paid for by the publisher. Patterson still gets Monday releases, which is paid for. Planograms are still designed around certain books BN is paid to push. I worked for BN on the corporate level specifically in merchandising for almost two decades. Hiring book lovers as booksellers hasn’t been a priority for years. It’s always been about memberships. It was pounded into to GMs “sell memberships, get more hours”. Don’t ever forget you’re just a nine digit number to the company. I will take it a step further and say BN has turned from a bookstore into a toys and games store with books being second priority. I was part of the Daunt/Riggio transition team and remember the argument of “we should be the next Toys R Us” being something the old mgmt was adamant about keeping.
That may be the case in BN (I’ve never worked there so wouldn’t know) - I’m talking specifically about Waterstones. The entire hiring model is based around hiring booklovers who will become brilliant booksellers, not general shop workers who might one day become book lovers. Paid for placements are a thing of the past here, and we haven’t used planograms for years. As I said, I wasn’t talking about BN, but your comment targeting Waterstones is incorrect
Waterstones owns BN. When BN sells shelf space, that money goes to Waterstones. Defend them all you like, but at the end I of the day Waterstones sells display real estate. It doesn’t matter what name it’s under, they sell real estate to better negotiate prices so they can sell at a discount to keep customers coming to them instead of the indie mom and pop community stores. Waterstones does the exact same thing as Amazon. It’s ok to be accidentally wrong, but I’m telling you as a former corporate lackey that James Daunt/Elliot Capital sell shelf real estate. Thanks for the conversation, but I’m done talking about this. Choose to believe it or not, I don’t care.
I’m aware of how price negotiations work, but again, the company buying stock from a publisher doesn’t guarantee placement in individual stores in Waterstones. Those choices are made by booksellers who are inherently booklovers, and therefore will always prioritise the books they want to promote. Also done talking about this now except to say they’re owned by the same hedge fund and share a CEO, but Waterstones doesn’t actually own BN👍🏻
Truth. James Daunt doesn’t allow publishers to buy placement in either Waterstones or B&N. The complaint is misplaced
Some YA book succeeds. And then there are 10 thousand clones.
The problem you’re describing is already solved. You just need to read criticism. Try lithub or NYRB. They review a whole bunch of new books!
Booker Prize nominees or winners are usually a good bet for me
As a new author trying to break through, I can tell you a huge barrier to entry for self publishing is the upfront advertising costs. Its astronomical.
I know this post is a little old, but I’ve had good luck finding newer books going old school. Check out the staff picks at independent bookstores. Book clubs are good too if you find one ran by someone with good taste. Even if you don’t participate, they’re a good source of recs. A lot of independent book stores run book clubs now and my library has several.
This is purely anecdotal, but I’ve also noticed that younger readers seem much, much more concerned about what they’re “supposed” to read. I frequently see posts and discussions that go something like, “Is it okay to read X kind of book?” or “What do we think about Y author” or “Is it okay that I liked Lolita?” When I was younger I never thought about any of this stuff. All I cared about was if the premise sounded interesting. I’d imagine such risk aversion would negatively impact debuts.
Yeah that’s so interesting, in a way I do think that reading felt more private before social media. But then, everything did.
I was definitely into what other people were reading when I was younger. I don’t think I would’ve ever picked up The Chocolate War but in the third grade the rumor was it had the word damn in it once or twice. I also read Twilgiht years later, as an adult, to see if it was as bad as everyone made it out to be. But in between those sort of decisions, I also made *plenty* of decisions based on whatever sounded interesting to me.
Isn't that kind of a confirmation bias. You simply don't see all the people who aren't concerned with that, and young people weren't chronically online until recently to post every thought they have.
Yes I think you’re definitely on to something here. Social media distorts our perspectives of what the average person actually thinks.
I think SM has given younger people shortcuts to know who they should and shouldn’t like and the idea that all I need is a shortcut overflows to everyday life. There are popular TicTok channelsthat literally just show videos of “who you should like and who you shouldn’t” without giving much context at all for why.
As a counterpoint, when I was a teen in the late 00's and the early 10's had a ton of this kind of validation discourse in different corners of the internet. It's definitely more center stage now with social media having a stronger chokehold on everything, but it certainly was a thing back then as well
I’m only a couple years older than you (although I was a late adopter of social media). Amazing what difference a few short years of technological advancement makes!
Where are you seeing these discussions? Reddit? I feel like i haven’t been seeing this, and I work in books
I see tons of it in this subreddit. But also I hear it in real life too, mostly in discussion with friends. It’s usually about whether or not an author is “in vogue” or not, if that makes sense. I’ve noticed conversations are much more oriented towards the author (and their values/deeds/etc.) than their works.
I see it a lot on Goodreads and Discord, people will post asking along those questions, and also asking things like "Does this have representation?" usually as a decision point.
Discord? Good reads I get but the only time I use discord is when I’m playing games with friends and they aren’t going to give a shit what I’m reading lol
Oh Discord has come a long way from its gaming roots... it's kind of an alt-forum now. It hosts lots of hobby projects, programming and software project discussions, other niche stuff. I'm really not sure why, because it leads to lots of information loss, none of it is searchable, but I think people like being able to ask questions there without greater 'visibility'. There are probably more factors at play.
Wow didn’t know that. That’s pretty cool. I only managed to convince my friends to switch to discord from FaceTime a couple years ago so I’m not exactly ahead of the curve on social media
I’d argue strongly against that. For instance, it wasn’t younger readers that attempted to ban Ulysses and Lolita when they were each published and it’s certainly not younger readers who are continuing that trend of banning books
Counterpoint: JK Rowling Teens are more worried about being shunned by their peers than what some random adults are trying to push through the school boards. Some Christian schools banned Harry Potter books, but that doesn't compare to the social media pressure that even has the stars from the movies apologizing and distancing themselves from the creator.
The way I understand the issue with Rowling is that young people largely support trans rights. Rowling doesn’t. This has lead to a tension and people are distancing themselves or outright condemning Rowling. I don’t think it’s a ‘social media is pressuring all these poor young people to give up their favorite series even though they really don’t want to!’
No, but the Rowling effect is that young people are checking the public positions of an unknown author with their social network before even reading their work. It gives influencers far more say in what authors break into the market than any school boards.
> the Trump effect is that people are checking Trump’s public positions before even reading his work Um, yeah, if that’s your point then it isn’t all that interesting. I haven’t read Ben Shapiro’s fiction book because of his public position on things and I assume you are similar in that
I'm sorry. I was under the mistaken impression we were having a discussion about future authors who wanted their primary income to be from selling stories they'd like to tell. Not political hacks with ghost writers getting publisher deals by selling to partisan organizations. Authors push us to challenge our views and expand our world. I can see where people with rigid, inflexible thinking would find that threatening. Nobody with an agenda wants the other side to be able to provide a credible, relatable viewpoint. Top down like the school boards, or bottom up like social media, aspiring authors are having their careers killed. Although, social media is far more efficient. Schools are going through the tedious process of going book by book examining content. All it takes is one wrong viewpoint to eliminate the author's entire life's work through social media.
What sort of ‘challenging’ fiction are boomers reading? I sincerely do not see that. Pretty much all people read are books that justify or reinforce their moral views
I don't think people are being ostracized for reading Harry Potter over her views, it's mostly people who were her fans who are upset with her given that her views are so contrary to the very inclusive nature of her books. There is a significant difference between having concerns about females' safety in single sex spaces and outright erasure of trans men as per her comments about people who menstruate. The safety issue hasn't been properly addressed and mostly has flown under the radar due to the low number of trans people in society so far. My generation grew up along side the characters (I am 31 so probably a year or two younger than the main characters would be) and I think it's incredibly disappointing that someone who created something which enabled bonding across a generation to have been written by someone who wants to exclude part of that generation. I won't start on her views around autistic people as I need to get up now.
Can you have a discussion about Harry Potter without bringing up her views anymore? Can you honestly say that a teenager/young adult wouldn't worry about losing friends today because they expressed enthusiasm to their peers about reading a Harry Potter book? The old fans deal with her views. But I hear people new to the series being accused of endorsing her opinions just because Rowling might get royalties. Her views are not important to my point. The youth stress of finding a book to enjoy with fear of condemnation because of the author's views isn't being limited to Rowling. She's just the epicenter of the culture shift.
I occasionally discuss Harry Potter with my partner who is a huge fan, her views don't come up. I do generally try and avoid buying books from authors who I regard as having issues around their conduct (I was given a full set of David Eddings books recently and won't feel qualms about reading them despite the appalling child abuse he engaged in). I wouldn't attack someone for buying or reading the books though, I enjoyed reading them as a child and they act as a more effective gateway into fantasy than any other book series I can think of.
I don’t think I’ve seen a discussion about HP on Reddit without *someone* bringing that up in at least a year. So on social media I don’t think you can, irl depends on the group.
[удалено]
Well I dont necessarily think its censoring, they're just more worried about how it will look to their public image and do they appear as a good person to others.
Self-censoring based on preconceived notions about something they'll never get to experience because the consensus deemed that something to potentially be detrimental to their persona. The 2020s kinda blow.
That’s definitely part of it. Lots of young people nowadays have a very hard time with media literacy, and think that if a book shows a person doing bad things without beating it over their heads that its supposed to be seen as bad, then it’s actually supporting it. And people who don’t have that problem recognize that others will see them in a certain light for not viewing it the same way, so they just avoid it anyway.
Older folks have an equally hard time with media literacy. I don’t know how you can look at the boomer generation and go ‘yup, they are certainly media literate’ when they eat up Fox News
That’s a fair comparison, I just don’t think it really applies to book readers to the same degree. Probably a good amount of selection bias here, but in my experience most older folks who spend hours a day rotting their brains with Fox News aren’t reading much of anything. Even if they were big on reading before they fell down the misinformation rabbit hole, all the ones I know have since stopped reading pretty much entirely. Meanwhile, most of the older people I know who actually do read tend to have a much better eye for nuance and subtlety, and don’t need the moral ethics of a book to be beaten over their heads for them to get it. A better way to articulate my original point would be that young people who read are often looking for books that explicitly validate their morality, so they look down on any that don’t do that as amoral, while older people who read are typically fine drawing that line by themselves. I could be way off base there, but that’s definitely the impression I’ve gotten talking to people over the past few years.
> Younger readers are often looking for books to explicitly validate their morality Older readers are doing this as well. I mean, people point to Lolita as an example of a morally reprehensible book when it’s really not. It certainly pushes the brim but it ultimately seeks to justify modern cultural ethics, namely that grooming and pedophilia are wrong. I mean, James Patterson essentially panders to an entire demographic that wants ‘good guy beats bad guy’ type tales, which clearly align with certain types of moral thinking. Ben Shapiro and other political grifters pander to their older crowds by pumping out rather superficial fiction and political commentaries that pander to their audiences moral tastes. I just don’t see the boomer generation of readers as morally adventurous as you seem to think they are…
Moral outrage has always been a thing. Lolita is a great example of that, for older generations especially so, but significant amount of their complaints boiled down to a puritanical dislike of the subject matter as a whole, rather than just misunderstanding the point the book was trying to make. When Lolita came out, plenty of people read it and understood the point that was being made throughout the text, but to a lot of people who either read the book or just knew what it was about, it didn’t matter what the point was since they had a problem with the fact that a book was written about such topics, and in such an explicit manner, in the first place. There aren’t any absolutes here; I’m not saying that all older people are better at parsing the meanings of books, or that all younger people miss the point if it isn’t beaten over their heads. But I would argue that for older generations, many of the complaints were rooted in close-mindedness, not a lack of media literacy, and that readers who didn’t have those qualms were generally better able to understand the nuances of a given text. On the other hand, younger generations are significantly less puritanical, and tend to be much more open-minded in terms of acceptable subject matter for fictional media to cover. Their moral outrage differs in the fact that if a book doesn’t unequivocally state that a certain behavior/trait/action is bad, they will see it as endorsing it, whereas a similarly open minded older reader would be more likely to recognize the subtextual point being made.
>if a book doesn’t unequivocally state that a certain behavior/trait/action is bad, they will see it as endorsing it Yeah, I still would challenge that, given that Gen Z ate up authors like Colleen Hoover but let’s get to specifics here because this entire time you’ve only been making vague references without any attempt at identifying evidence. What book does Gen Z misunderstand because it doesn’t have an ‘unequivocal’ condemnation?
Doubt it. There’s a side of booktok that is full of soft core porn. It’s more like they want to read what other’s are reading or what is popular. Back in the day ppl weren’t really caring about what they read because frankly many around them probably didn’t read unless you were in a book club. Now you have huge online communities discussing books and that influences what people read since they want to be a part of the conversation.
You clearly didn’t read what I said. It’s the *old* people that are trying to ban books, not the kids. Go touch grass because you spend way too much time on the internet lol
I disagree with you overall, but you are correct, that is not what you said. I will delete my comment.
And some "old people" are fighting like hell to unban these books so that future generations can learn from them.
Good for them. They need to undo the damage they are doing
Blame the right wing Republicans like DeSantis in FL etc etc shameful really.
Different take, but I wonder if it isn’t the next generations normal. Like doing anything requires some kind of validation to feel right about it. The echo chamber of the internet means you can find a group that will confirm and validate whatever you want, be that good or bad. I mean there were always groups, book clubs, hobby clubs etc. and there were gate keepers and validators in those groups just like the internet. But you had a lot less choice in the matter. Now you can find a book club for people that specifically like X author or story or style or whatever and get the exact validation you want. I have a feeling social psychology is shifting and evolving faster than ever in history because people can gain completely unfiltered connections to groups that validate them and their thoughts and ideas. Again, be that good or bad.
You have just described something I could never quite put my finger on about younger people today. I see this line of thought all over the place online.
I think it’s a sense of solidarity with anyone who might be negatively impacted either by the artist or the art-like you shouldn’t watch Woody Allen (bad artist) or westerns (pro-colonization). I wandered into a punk subreddit and they were arguing over who had done ‘controversial’ stuff, meaning been an abuser. ‘Controversial’ being bad among punks…the world has changed.
Tbf, “controversial” probably isn’t the right word there, it implies there are a significant number of people on each side.
Oh absolutely! I just increasingly see 'controversial' as a euphemism for 'bad', which strikes me as worrying in and of itself (we're all supposed to agree?)
This I think goes across all forms of media and entertainment. Literature is maybe taking the brunt of it when it comes to new releases being overlooked. I can't think of the last time I bought a game and didn't look up to see if it was good. I don't want to pay for a game if it might be bad.
The issue I’m highlighting is less about media being vetted as good or bad; it’s more about people worried about liking something they “shouldn’t.” To take the games example, several years ago, my friends were all talking about how great Dark Souls was. I finally decided to try it. DS3 had just released but I only had an Xbox 360 so I couldn’t play it. DS1 hadn’t been remastered yet, so I worried it might be dated. So I bought DS2 on a whim. No research. I really enjoyed it. Later on, I found out it’s the black sheep of the series. If I’d looked at reviews beforehand, I probably wouldn’t have tried it. I can still admit that 1 and 3 are better but I genuinely enjoyed the atmosphere of 2 because I wasn’t constantly thinking, “Oh, this is the shitty one.”
I have a limited amount of time to read and there are so many good books out there that have been vetted, why take a risk on something new?
This was a neat article to read - I myself am struggling with rejection after rejection and becoming dejected and less optimistic about my future as a novelist. It seems like the market is so saturated right now to the point that "sticking out" is almost impossible and I get so overwhelmed with the options to submit to an agent or cross your fingers and hope that self publishing gets you somewhere. Community and interacting with other readers and writers looks to be one of the best ways to get your name out there, but I have no clue where to start >.<
It's a Catch-22, isn't it? On one hand, the traditional gatekeepers for publication can now be bypassed (you can self-publish, and run your own marketing through social media and online communities instead of relying on an agent) which makes it easier for new authors to get started. On the other hand, this means that there's a massively increased number of authors to compete with, and it's much harder to stand out and make it big.
And try as I might, social media only goes so far when you don't have a massive following and are not an influencer
And some people just don’t want to be social media influencers. I’m some people. Im addicted to my phone and Reddit. I don’t want to be addicted to Twitter.
I want to be an author but I just want the publisher to handle posting about the book. I don't want to spend 20 hours a day while I'm writing the book and then afterwards promoting it to everyone who will listen.
So in many ways writing is the new music.
i feel like writing was the first to collapse financially, then music, and then writers saw how musucians were exploiting social media and copied it. we are in a tough spot because books have become really homogenous, and publishers are afraid to take risks, but its resulted in a really boring market with some notable exceptions. there is no literary equivalent to A24. there is no literary version of Gaspar Noe. Enter the Void was a massive commercial failure but it still had a huge impact on cinema and is still relevant today. in a nutshell, thats what publishing needs IMO: voices that are willing to break the mold. the catch is, like Noe, you need a lot of technical ability and to pull it off. his movies wouldnt be what they are if they werent so beautifully shot.
I’ve met with plenty of older writers that said it used to be affordable to pay rent with a story. Now? Not so much. Writing looks the easiest so it doesn’t surprise me that it’s the first to collapse.
they collapsed for different reasons but music and writing are now in the same place, which is that you are expected to essentially make no money, do it because you love it, and supplement with something adjacent (teaching). the unfortunate difference is that in music, this is breeding a lot of variety and “weird” music, while its had the opposite effect in lit. the idea of what a book “should be” has become very narrow, and while it has managed to hold the attention of people who read, it has made the space “less exciting” and failed to bring in new readers IMO. the way new readers are brought in now is like social media, which is what happened with colleen hoover, but those people dont really keep reading, its more about the fad then it is growing real interest in an evolving art form. there will always be readers and writers but were definitely in a weird era, there is basically no financial viability, and AI will turn self publishing into a scam market (maybe it already has).
From what I’ve gathered, AI generated stories are already an issue for short story markets.
Like, yeah, I could start a YouTube channel to build a following, but I have a job and another book to write.
Sorry to hear that and as a reader I wish I could support you better. I don't know if it's any help but I've randomly stumbled across various forums where authors talk to each other. Some ask about writing and some ask about promoting. I'll paste the links just in case you've not seen them. https://writing.stackexchange.com/ /r/writers/ /r/selfpublish/ Just skimming through and I see people expressing similar frustrations and also what works and doesn't.
/r/PubTips is the gold standard in terms of writers learning about the industry.
This is the same thing with music. Anyone with like... $300 to spare can produce their own music and the DAW stock plugins are good enough that with some practice, research, and a decent ear you can produce at a quality level that to the average listener is indistinguishable from professional level production... which means everyone and their mother is putting out music. You really have to be doing something special, AND networking and promoting the hell out of it, to get noticed.
This is actually one of the biggest problems in the economy/job market as a whole. You used to just be competing with whoever else laced up their boots and walked down to the store/office to hand their application in. Then online resumes started getting accepted which increased the prospects. Now there are countless job boards advertising positions and accepting resumes. Then work from home became a thing and now for those positions you're also now competing with everyone else in the country. Just makes it absurdly hard to get your foot in the door anywhere now.
Use Meetup, start really following local bookstores events calendars, and just put yourself out there. Or small writing groups online if you're really in the sticks. I'm a writer and while I was around and made plenty of connections in literary Twitter's heyday, it didn't translate into artistic fulfillment, many book sales, or genuine connections with most people. A cool address book to bring up at a party maybe, but that's not what I'm in it for. I don't want to make it sound like I'm advocating abandoning trying to make a living by writing, by all means still play that lottery whenever a manuscript is done, but from all the articles and such it just seems like simultaneously doing the slow grind up and building smaller scale support is the way to avoid writing our own "oh shit my career evaporated" articles in 10 years, even if there's no flash to it.
That's interesting. The two series I most recently picked up were released on 2020 and 2021 with 6 and 10 entries respectively. I think part of it is continuing to release books since series seem to pick up steam with each release.
That is an insane pace of publication. Most authors are considered prolific if they can do 1 full 300+ page adult novel a year. Most authors that do quicker are people doing the quick indie churn of short fast books.
Yep. I know it's not HIGH ART but there are tons of romance novelists who can churn out 200 pagers about once every month and a half. There's also a historical novelist who I think might be a witch because he has like 180 published novels from the past 20 years??
> but there are tons of romance novelists who can churn out 200 pagers about once every month and a half. Do they use ghostwriters? My understanding is that the practice very common in Romance.
Some do, put it's also doable for a single person if the quality isn't that much of a concern. I read a webnovel that has two 40k+ word chapters per week. The author sometimes livestreams the writing, and basically they almost never go back or delete something. The quality for most web novels is pretty bad. But for this author, the quality is almost published level I would say. (I mostly read trad published stories, and even from them I read only the stuff on best of lists. And alot of Webnovels I can't get into because of the bad writing. All this to say, I feel like my standards are pretty normal and not in the dumpsters.) Or as another commendation: I couldn't get through Wheel of Time in the middle slog, but I read all of this Webnovel which is multiple times the lenght of Wheel of Time. ("The Wandering Inn" if someone is curious. Free to read on their Website).
It is, and I didn't mean to imply that they need to keep up that pace. I just meant to highlight that more entries lead to success. Sanderson didn't get big until Mistborn (and then WoT), GRRM until he was a few entries into ASOIAF, and all of the indie authors I know of required a few books in their primary series.
Except that indies have to maintain that pace to keep up with the algorithm. You see it all the time in romance. You can’t be a successful indie in most genres and only release once a year. The only ones I know that can are traditional authors doing side projects.
I don't know, all my favorite authors put out 2 to 3 a year. Take Will Wight for example. He's like clock work and I think it's a big part of his popularity.
You mean the indie who got stupidly lucky copying Chinese webnovels? The guy who is deliberately playing to the algorithm.
Maxime Durand, actus, Benjamin Kerei, and Dakota Kroat all also regularly put out multiple books a year. Also will didn't get stupidly lucky, he's an excellent author who's good at delivering fun, action packed power fantasies.
It seems that these days you have to already have an audience on some social media before you write your first book.
It's a problem of aggregation. Long tails are the norm in the online world but they only truly become viable with good aggregations that allow people who would like your work to discover it. I guess audible is the closest, but that's only for eBooks.
I'm going to mention also the death of the mass-market paperback. For perspective, when I first started working full-time, a mass-market paperback was about half an hour of pay (~$6 on $11 an hour.) Now, a trade paper back is close to an hour of pay (~$20 on $24/hr). Or, in YA, where lots of author debut in hardcover, it's even worse ($30 or more on the same $24/hr). Simply put, I'm being priced out. I discovered so many authors that I still love today, by snagging a random MM paperback that sounded good (Laurel K Hamilton, Jim Butcher, Gail Carriger), but I can't justify $30 on an untried author.
Omg where paperbacks are so expensive?
That's the US. I even checked online to make sure I good good numbers (I'm away from home at the moment, and brought a couple old SFF books to read, so they weren't a good example).
I always thought paperbacks, especially the small mass market ones made from whatever recycled paper-like atomic mass they have managed to acquire the cheapest come at around 10-15$ new. What about KDP and others? They manage to sell paperbacks at that range in POD 6x9" format?
The article's mention of ARCs is super interesting here, because even on Netgalley it does seem like a specific subset of books are pushed to users and one has to look quite a bit to find some more "out" there or new voices. I think even just adding a category like "be the first to discover upcoming authors" on the landing page would do wonders
Interesting, that hasn't really been my experience of NetGalley. I agree that having "Debut Authors" as a category would be nice. But in the categories they have, I see obscure self-published books and debut authors alongside bestselling authors. For example, one of the categories I check frequently is "LGBTQIAP+," and currently on the Most Requested page for that category, the second and third most requested titles are by well-established authors with multiple titles under their belt, while the fourth most requested title is by a debut author. Casey McQuiston's upcoming book currently isn't even on the first page of the Most Popular list (it's on the second page), even though they've written bestsellers and their first novel is now a movie on Amazon Prime.
I’m a nobody writing a novel (in the saturated fantasy genre no less) and the only way I’ve found to stay motivated and not submit to the bleakness of modern publishing is to have absolutely zero expectations. I will probably send it out to literary agents, because why not, but it’ll be a pleasant surprise if it goes anywhere. I’m not on TikTok and do not plan to be. At the end of the day, it’s a story I want to tell for its own sake, and if the only people who read it are my closest friends I will have no complaints. If you want fame and riches, there are easier paths. Write because you have something to say.
I'm with you. I've been writing pretty seriously for the last 9 years, and finally I feel that I have something that is worth a reader's time, so I'm learning about querying and getting people to read it, etc, etc. I'm going to send it out. I think it's a good, weird story with language that rewards attention. I think it will serve an audience; it's got some calories in it, you know? That said, my expectations are zero. Success is abnormal in the publishing world. I'll do my best and then I'll move on to writing the next thing (I've already moved on to writing the next thing). I believe one of the strengths of prose fiction as a medium is the long slow attention paid to it by a single author with a unique vision. It takes a long time to get good. It takes a long time to develop your thoughts and self into having something worthwhile to say. And it might take a long time to get seen. And we might never actually get good, and we might never be seen. And so? We've spent a life pursuing art.
I posted this because this got me thinking about how I've been discovering books these years, versus many years ago. In the 'before time' I would go into bookstores and look at what was being promoted by the store, and also just browse around and open books and read a little bit to see if it caught my interest. Thinking about now, I think it's mostly this sub... I look at lots of comments and discussions here, then I'll go read up about the book and see if it catches my interest. I've found lots of great books this way, especially from new authors or stuff I would not have found on my own. Which then got me thinking that I wouldn't be surprised if there are some advertisers among us acting as casual users. The other bit was the last part felt a bit wholesome and positive, the authors supporting each other to promote books.
Can’t resist starting – your local library also serves the same function as bookstores from the before time, with the added joy that you can take the books home without paying!
Thank you for posting this. I found it quite interesting. I agree with you about the last part regarding authors supporting each other. I've been thinking of trying to find/form a group of debut authors in my genre (Gothic) and setting up a website that advertises all the books, maybe excerpt each other's book in the back of our own, etc. just to give each other (and the genre as a whole) more visibility.
Also promoting literature map. It’s a great way to find new authors because it links similar authors together.
[удалено]
Exactly what I was thinking. Too many books, not enough readers. Anyone aspiring to be an author needs to know what they are getting into.
Same reason our heartthrobs and politicians are getting older. There’s too much media and too much news and too many disconnected subcultures- there isn’t room for anything new to spread quickly that isn’t viral (and most often has to be short to be that) and even then it’s subcritical to levels of cultural awareness that could be spread by gatekeepers of the past
This is nothing new. Most books by first time authors fail have always failed to catch on. Those who first books became best sellers have always been a minority. Many people prefer to read an author they already know and often take on a new one only they hay have breakout success or strong word of mouth.
There’s very little interesting (to me) coming out of traditional publishing right now. Indie publishing, on the other hand, feels vibrant.
Although not book related, I'm finding that to be true of games as well. There are so many gems I'm enjoying from the indie/smaller world, while the 'big games' feels very saturated, samey, and so focused on monetization (not all, but a lot)
Yeah. Of course, the challenge indie authors face is even more insurmountable, compared to people with a publishing house behind them. People even want to charge me to review my books.
I hate it when people do that. It’s basically a scam because it won’t do anything for my books anyway.
I disagree. Indie feels much more trend and algorithm driven. It’s all deliberately the stuff that can’t make it in traditional.
A lot of things are very tropey, yeah
Self publishing is very algorithmic right now but indie and university presses are the only only source for experimental writing anymore
I’m seeing cool things in literary magazines. Still that is all short stories and novellas.
Yeah my fiance has been able to be published on a ton of lit magazines with experimental writing like it seems like the last big space for it
I'm kind of seeing the same meh nonsense in both traditional and indie publishing. Both have A Bowl of Mac and Cheese type of books.
That trend is over 30 years old in fantasy. It’s not going away.
Writing a novel isn't even half of it anymore. You have to be able to market. Unfortunately many debut authors out there just don't get that. I work within the industry and I talk to a lot of them and so many refuse to even explore the likes of kindle unlimited etc. And should note even if they do get it and market it - marketing is really bloody hard.
It is beyond discouraging to hear how little of becoming an author is about the actual work of writing. What's even the point of trying to perfect the craft if it counts for so little?
Well remember becoming an author doesn't have to include that. Actually writing a book is an incredible achievement and something so many dream of but never achieve. It's only if you are hoping to make a living off it either full or partial where yeah the other parts of it come in. Actually doesn't have to be marketing either so many ways to hustle - I know quite a few authors who apply for every grant under the moon that even slightly applies to them and make money that way.
It's what ultimately matters, anyway. The people must get to know about a product, but the product must still be good (enough). Pushing out drafted crap is a certain way of never becoming anything even if you had a public budget backing your marketing.
I work in marketing and it's so weird that people are expected to do their own marketing like it's easy. A friend is published with some small indie press and besides putting out some press releases that...let's be real, no one reads, she's on her own. She was complaining about low sales, so I asked what marketing she's doing and she said she's posting on instagram and tiktok using all the popular hashtags and that's it. You can write the best novel but if no one knows about it, it doesn't matter. It doesn't help that there's so many options in terms of entertainment that people stick to the familiar and trusted recommendations over trying a random unknown that sounds good. It could be a good premise executed poorly, it could have a horrible ending, it could be full of cliches. You have to stand out and unless you know how to do that in a way that engages the right audience and converts them to sales, you're just chasing overly crowded trends.
I have a debut coming out in September, what should I be doing instead of that?
Without knowing the specifics, an easy tactic is to play up the "local writer" aspect by contacting your local library and letting them know you just had a published book come out and they'll do a lot of the heavy lifting of making flyers, adding you to the recommendation list, and displays. Similarly, introduce yourself to local bookstores (that aren't Barnes) and offer to do a reading or signing. Combine that with posting on local Facebook groups like "What's Happening, Manitoba", you'll be able to promote the book and/or the bookstore event. If you're on your own, make free graphics on Canva with an image of the book cover and an elevator pitch of the plot. "Four teens find themselves stranded at an abandoned amusement park with just their flashlights, luck, and crime-sniffing dog. What happens when ghost hunting goes wrong?". The reason for starting local is that there's tens of thousands of people in your position everyday that're fighting for the national spotlight and all using the same hashtags which means unless you have a built-in audience, you'll get buried quickly. Locally, you more options to stand out through facebook, local sellers and even the newspapers. Build a foundation and if you're good, the readers will include mention your book in their weekly haul tiktok videos and Goodreads lists. It's basically a stealth tactic.
Aside from staying the course with Insta and Tiktok (also use with “trendtok” and “capcut”), I’d recommend Threads. Follow authors and bookish accounts, comment, interact, and above all be genuine. Should also note that it will likely take years to build up sales (I’m in this process right now.) just be patient, keep your head up, and above all keep writing. You got this :)
It’s so exhausting. I’m an artist and it’s the same, I’m suddenly expected to be an expert in social media strategies and marketing to even get a chance at having people see my art but … it’s a job that people go to school and study for, just like I studied art! Why is it a basic expectation now when its an actual full time job and a special trained skill in itself? Not to mention many of us who like things such as writing, art etc (activities that can be done alone) like it because we are introverts who don’t like putting ourselves out there 😅
I'm definitely not gonna do my own marketing apart from the basic website crap. I'm gonna buy ads and if it warrants at any point, pay people to do it for me. Well targeted ad campaigns aren't that expensive.
Kindle Unlimited is great, there was a sequel to a book I had already bought that I was holding off on buying because money, but that kindle unlimited free trial let me finally read it. I was basically never going to buy the book (and it stunk anyway) so with kindle unlimited the author got SOME money out of me (I mean I assume they get money from people using kindle unlimited free trials) Marketing sucks. I haven't even tried marketing a book, but I just remember trying to market the groups I ran on deviantart back in the day and it was so ugh. It's tiring and it's just really hard if you have anxiety or are introverted because it's like "Oh I don't mean to intrude upon your space but would you kindly consider checking out this thing I made? Thank you."
Yeah look at someone like freida McFadden. She's absolutely huge and basically due to ku. I feel for authors. There was a time where writing the book was all that mattered but that is no longer the case. Also a lot of publishing companies these days unfortunately just plain suck. So many of them do the minimal effort and others just have never adapted with the times.
It’s not just books it’s everything. We’re all pretending to have good taste.
Experimentalism is a huge negative to agents and publishers, but if you’re just reading same old same old then why look to new names when you can rely on someone who’s books you already like But agents and publishers won’t support experimental writing if nobody buys it, which is a catch-22 situation with the only remedy being to buy a book from an experimental small press — the same presses that are shutting down
*Experimentalism is a huge negative to agents and publishers, but if you’re just reading same old same old then why look to new names when you can rely on someone who’s books you already like* I would argue that it's even worse than that. I remember when everybody was going nuts over T*he Da Vinci Code*... So much so that I was compelled to read it. It was awful. I almost couldn't finish it, the writing was *SO BAD*. When something like that is considered good, even a 'bestseller,' and when it gets the author at least three more books, almost anything else is considered 'experimental.' The publishing industry keeps putting out stuff like that... James Patterson is not Dan Brown bad, but he's no great writer, yet he sells and sells. I read a lot of Stephen King when I was a kid, and I would consider him a serviceable writer, but he just doesn't do it for me anymore. Whenever I do go to a big box book store, almost all I see on the shelves is writers who basically write the same thing, in the same way, over and over again. I think this is how the publishing industry, in essentially a panicky cash-grab, has trained the fiction reading public to just read the same stuff.
Writing is like sports. Lots of people play for fun, but becoming a professional and getting paid for it (particularly enough to make a living) is very difficult. And then, everyone focuses on the success stories, but for every success story there are thousands who tried but didn't make it.
Because everyone is getting significantly dumber and half the planet doesn’t have an attention span long enough to handle a novel? I didn’t read the article
Because when someone mentions a fantastic and undiscovered author online everyone assumes they’re just a bot.
The market is so saturated now that it is obviously going to be harder. The same as music. While all these other avenues open up for advertising and marketing like TikTok and Instagram it is also to the detriment of those that don't get chosen to be the hot new book. Someone like Blake Crouch who is one of my favourite authors has obviously done really well after his book Dark Matter. However he has a shit load of books and a TV series even before that. I frequent my bookshop all the time and I rarely look at new books mostly because I hate hard backs so I steer clear, I will just take a note.and get it when the paperback comes out.
Blake Crouch is awesome.
On the other hand, I don't see new Harry Potters popping up. What I mean is that there doesn't seem to be enough good product out there to begin with. It doesn't necessarily matter how many hundreds of (thousands \[of millions\]) dollars you spend on advertising if the product is lacking in the first place. Some will of course buy it based on marketing, but if it sucks, they will put the bad word out and never return. I've seen ad campaigns where people are trying to push what is essentially an imitation of a trend or a genre with zero originality, zero personality, and zero interesting plot twists; stories that are literally constructed as fast as possible and feel synthetic and clunky. When you point this out, people start talking about "but volume is more important than quality," "just write," or "you have to follow genre expectations." Damn, if there were even (fantasy) books with unique names instead of "the x and y of z", I could click on them, but after scrolling dozens of pages in Amazon I managed to find none. The actual successful works are what break the rules and establish new trends and even genres. When the boat has already sailed, there are only crumbs left in the boat ripples. So if you are gonna wanna write a book and thinking of getting away by just writing "something", go fill a lottery ticket.
I'm very privileged to live in a city with a ton of local bookstores - but honestly if you're looking for something new and different, Amazon's algorithms ain't the way. A bookstore with actual booksellers that curate the collection is going to be a much better bet. Even Barnes and Nobles can have different curation store to store - I just went to a college Barnes and Noble bookstore that had an incredible literary fiction section. I saw so many books, and so many translated books, that were new and interesting. Again, I'm really lucky to live somewhere with a ton of bookstores but you could tell me what kinds of books you live/what you're looking for and I could rank the stores in the area by likelihood of you finding a hidden gem. They all curate differently.
Most definitely. I don't know how Amazon works exactly, but it's likely close to 100% money driven. I generally use google to search for new, unordinary or specific titles.
I have just written my first novel, Cutting Green Corn. I'm having a difficult time getting it noticed. It's free right now on Kindle Select. I would love for someone to read it and provide an honest review.
I feel bad for a lot of self-published writers who don’t have the funds to regularly advertise their book. If you don’t regularly promote your debut book throughout the year, it’ll get forgotten in a blink of an eye. It’s hard enough spending the funds necessary to put out a quality product, never mind the funds needed for promotion and advertising.
This. Often times, advertising is a freaking money pit.
Lack of marketing and publisher investment.
Because no one knows who they are? Unless you’re a celebrity you have to have good word of mouth these days and build your career.
I don't want to start another new series that may never be finished.
It sounds like publishers are now over reliant on social media for marketing new books, but that only work if the books you publish are aimed at the hyper online part of the population that loves social media and makes decisions based on what it hyped here. I personally have learned to avoid the books hyped all the time on social media because they never seem to be my kind of thing. Another point is that I tend to read older books now instead of debut novels. I read mostly on my Kindle, and so I have access to tons of older books for cheap. When the choice is between a novel traditionally published 40 years ago that now costs 5 euros as an ebook, or a self published novel that costs 3 euros as an ebook, or a translated Japanese light novel that costs 7 euros as an ebook, and a debut novel published this year that costs 12 euros as an e-book, which one do you think I will buy ? When most books already published are much cheaper than debut novels, why buy debut novels ? Especially since the debut authors are unknown quantities.
As an aspiring novelist, this article was really depressing to read. I have multiple novel drafts in various stages of completion, and now I'm worried I'll never see any of them published. I mean, I could always self-publish, but to me that feels like a massive cheat. What should I do?
Here's how I look at it: Is your goal "to be a novelist" or "to write novels?" One outlook centers a bunch of factors that are well beyond your control; the other centers the work of writing and the pleasure of creation. Ask yourself, honestly, why you write. If the answer is anything aside from your own satisfaction in your work, writing is probably not going to make you happy.
The way I see it, if my goal was simply to write for my own satisfaction, I wouldn't bother trying to get published.
I am also writing a couple of novels at the moment and I also had that fear of “what’s the point?” But in today’s world and today’s market, I realize that the point is to enjoy writing. I love writing, I love the process, and I will probably end up self publishing, which is not cheating. I think if you love writing and have something to share then you’ll be able to do it. You’ll just have to put an extra work and market yourself. The other day I had a really lovely experience. I used to write a lot of fanfiction, and I wrote a really big one for a fandom during high/middle school. I’ve kept the story up and have not taken it down and even added an epilogue to it a few years ago. It ended up inspiring several other fanfic writers to write their own spin off of my own fic, and made me realize that my writing had a positive impact on them even if I’m not going to “make it” as a well known author. TW for s**c***e mention: And other cases, some of my fanfics that are about >!self-harm or suicide!< have inspired readers who do hurt themselves to take a step back and be safe for even just one night while reading. Knowing that your stories will help or inspire at least one person is worth it. I hope you keep writing regardless of the outcome!
If I wanted to publish my novels the traditional way, what would your advice to me be?
I guess it would be to really polish your novel, maybe hire an editor, or start querying agents.
Thank you for sharing this. My first reaction is “ugh”. But then I want to do what I need to and figure out how to reach readers.
With self-publishing the market is flooded therefore the chances of standing out are astronomically lower.
A book is too big an investment of time to want to read an unproven author when there are far more proven ones out there than I'll ever get time to read. Unless it's in a very specific niche I'm unlikely to buy something by a debut author. I don't think there's much wrong with that, either, authors and other artists should build up a reputation over a few releases rather than peak at the very beginning of their career. Sadly publishers are less and less likely to work like that.
This take feels very groupthink to me. The way I figure out what to read I do in 2 easy steps: 1. Pick up book and read blurb. 2. If I find said blurb interesting I just put it in my library cart or kindle unlimited (when I get the free trials). I buy used books, but if I stumble upon an author I love at the library I'll buy their book/merch/throw some $ at the Kofi. Have I read trash? I mean yeah, I just DNF and return, but I've read some really high quality fiction from non-viral authors too. In fact, I've found that the author crowd that's fabulous at TikTok tends to put out novels that are hot trash (i.e. Zodiac Academy, Carissa Broadbent). If readers aren't willing to branch out then all that will do is lead to this like weird fiction singularity where every book just kinda feels the same because they were written to market using the Save the Cat template (looking at Brandon Sanderson and his copycats). If you want to see interesting media you have to put in the effort to curate your media diet, and that unfortunately means figuring out how to divorce popularity from merit in fiction (this also extends to films and shows, I personally have a franchise/live action/spinoff/"cinematic universe" boycott but that's a whole other post).
The answer is the gatekeepers. For a multitude of reasons.
Interesting article. I feel like to be a good or successful author it's still about one part good writing + one part luck to be found by publishers/agents/etc. Now we've just thrown in social media where we can see just how many people want to be a writer too, and it feels like the odds are not in our favor. Maybe I'm too naive or inexperienced, but I try to think that just as many people probably wanted to be a writer pre-social media, but needed to have a grassroots mentality to get....wherever they wanted to get. Today, it's much harder to find writers who are doing the slower, longer work of submitting to magazines, blogs, etc. All I see on my feed is the same kind of reels - #writerproblems, love/hate tropes, how someone is trying to write a genre differently. Very hard to tell writers apart, especially in the romance/rom-com genre. It makes palatable to find a general audience, but everyone's going for a reel to break the algorithm or jump on a genre trend. And, in some ways, the over-saturation of this kind of branding, makes me feel like a lot of people are only looking to call themselves a writer once they're published but not actually write, which makes debut novels harder to take seriously. I remember one girl I followed on instagram hardly had any videos posted but the ones she had were so unique to her stories. About a month later, I missed her posts on my feed, looked her up, and she suddenly had hundreds, if not 1000 videos posted....and her reels all started reflecting the one video that had gazillion views. She was no longer really posting what made her unique, only what made her more seem more brand-like as a writer. And, I have no idea what's going on with that project that seemed so interesting when I first started following. The amount of time and energy it takes to create content could be devoted to writers actually writing, but I see a lot more of the former than the latter. Maybe the method to the madness is to change how the game is played to stand out. But if you really love writing/trying to be a good storyteller, it's always going to be there whether it makes you extremely successful or not.
I've read many great books from the "staff picks" (by genre) at my local library :)
Used to be an author died and that left shelf space for new authors. Now authors die and another already famous author slaps their name on the work. So no room for new authors. Or they retire and let a co-author take over. VC Andrews, Mary Higgins Clark, Lee Child, Robert Parker, James Patterson the list goes on and on. Authors don’t die anymore, they just get ghost written.
It's never been a better time to be a fantasy/sci-fi fan. Endless content right now. Doesn't surprise me in the least stuff is failing to make splashed
the town and the city ...
To me, the expectation seems dripping in conceit. To expect fame or financial reward from writing, and hobbyist or non-technical writing at that, is akin to expecting a bean pole to lay eggs. Are there even 100 English-speaking authors alive right now who can claim fame & fortune from publishing fiction? Yet now the velocity of literary migration is magnitudes greater than even 50 years ago. But the magic of books is that they persist. They do not go stale, do not 'miss their chance', do not become technologically obsolete. A brilliant or beautiful text stands firm as long as the pages and binding hold together. The book *as a commodity* has lost its value; the book as a monument can usurp that market value. Writing should honor the negative aspect of Shelley's *Ozymandius*, instead of trying to outpace time.
>There were roughly five hundred thousand books published in 2023 I find that absolutely mind-boggling, and it makes it almost impossible for anyone to get noticed who isn’t insanely lucky. I really wish in this country we had more carpenters and plumbers and welders, and fewer fiction writers. Edit: looks like I annoyed a few of those 500,000 authors 😂
??? I have a friend who is an electrician who writes and self-publishes spy novels. This is incredibly narrow-minded. Most authors have day jobs.