[Radthorne]

...I like to think that writing has a value that isn't to do with its value as a commodity, and that that value is about a certain richness of experience (to put it very vaguely). I think all of us write in the hope that someone will not only read our work, but connect to it, and that can't actually be measured in numbers, or maybe measured at all...

Well said! I think that sums of the essence of what creative people do. Sure, we all like to be compensated for what we do; and most of us wouldn't shy away from a little recognition now and then. Yet even though we never actually hear directly from the vast majority of those who may read our works, I think we all hope that they've been touched by it, and that we've maybe left their lives a little fuller as a result. At the very least, we've shared our own imaginations with them, as well as allowed them to experience the imaginary lives of those characters we have created.

[Caitlin]

Yet even though we never actually hear directly from the vast majority of those who may read our works, I think we all hope that they've been touched by it, and that we've maybe left their lives a little fuller as a result.
Exactly. And I think you've hit on why I do get worried, when my publishing life isn't going smoothly. It's not because I worry that I won't be the next Dan Brown and sell millions of books for gagillions of dollars (I've never seen even one royalty cheque!) - it's that I care about maintaining a connection with the readers I do know are out there. It's exhilarating to know that people are reacting to our worlds, to the work we do alone. More than exhilarating: addictive.

Did anyone out there see the film Sideways? I thought its depiction of the desperate-to-be-published author was amusing and affectionate, and quite true. All he wants is The Big Time: a contract, money, recognition - and his zeal, in pursuing this desire, is both pathetic and understandable. In the end, though, it's the sensitive response of one reader that matters most.

When I was in highschool, the writers could be divided into two groups: the ones who shared their work and the ones who kept it to themselves. There was a certain degree of obsessiveness in each group. I was a compulsive sharer: I gave my stories and early novel drafts to teachers (English, history and Latin!), friends, even people I didn't know very well. I couldn't handle criticism at all; the praise made me giddy and even more eager to peck away at my Brother electric typewriter. This "hey everybody! I've written seven stories about Alexander the Great - come and get 'em!" enthusiasm should have been embarrassing, perhaps. It wasn't, though - and it marked the beginning of my addiction to connection.

What about the rest of you? Were you sharers or hiders?

[KatG]

Oh, I'm a hider, no question. Not because I don't want the connection, I just want to control what sort of connection is made. I will share early stuff with friends I trust, and I have utterly no fear of criticism at all, but I prefer the finished stuff to go out to the wider world. I suppose it's a rather weird style for me to have, as an editor who works continually with the unfinished, but there you go. I like to work, work, work on something and then say, here it is. Then I think about rewriting it. :)

[alison]

In a funny way, I think I'm neither. I think I just wrote stuff because I wanted to, and if anyone else wanted to read it, that was very good (especially if they liked it). I was of course a very shy child, and might have been more upfront if I had been less shy; but on the other hand, publication hasn't been a big deal for me in my writing life, and not only because I wrote poems - II'm notone of those people who send poems out religiously to magazines, in fact, I never do at all, and all my books have happened by serendipity or luck. In a funny way, poetry is very private for me, and I have the ol' letter in a bottle attitude towards it: if someone finds it, that's good, but that's not why I write it. Obviously I want people to read my fantasy books - it's the only time I've ever sat down and consciously decided to write something that I hoped lots of people would read. But again, it has to satisfy that other private desire. Actually, if it doesn't, I can't see the point of writing it, I might as well just have stayed a hack journalist.

But I am certainly big on connection - a lot of my writing life, if not the writing itself necessarily, has been about making and fostering connections. It's a big reason I devote so much time to my theatre blog, even though I'm half insane to do it - people tell me that it's changing how people are talking about theatre in this time, and making people aware of each other's work in a way that hasn't been possible before. And I like the world of theatre because, well, people talk to each other!

[Gary Wassner]

I'm neither as well. Funny, I never really thought about it before. I wrote my first book without showing it to anyone at all until it was done. I think I might have been a little afraid that i couldn't finish it too.

I know what you mean about the exhiliration. But the oppositie is true for me as well. I'd like to be able to say that I look forward to serious criticism and constructive analysis. But I don't. I use it. I benefit from it. But I never cease to hurt from it.

Now I share what I'm writing. I've learned from working with a very tough editor. I've learned that the manuscript improves exponentially by working with a good editor.

Careless criticism still hurts though.

When I write children's books, I have no qualms whatsoever of sharing the manuscripts for the purpose of critique. For some reason, I don't take those comments as personally.

Still, the most satisfying feelings come from strangers who read my books and take the time to email me or write down their comments somewhere. I can sail on one of those for a few days at least. When someone I don't know really gets what I'm trying to do, it's great. I feel so fulfilled.

[Writerman2255]

I just wanted to thank you for replying to my posts. Being that I write eight hours a day, most times more, I'm kinda in cyberland out here. I've been working on some big projects, so your comments about agents and statements helps a bit. I don't currently have an agent. On the net, I don't know what to believe about the pros and cons.

Thanks. Love and Light, TB Wright.

[Caitlin]

Gary, your description of how criticism affects you was sensitive and insightful. I liked your comments on the benefits of a tough editor, too.

I only ever showed people finished work, once-upon-a-time (back in highschool). I never wanted criticism, but I especially didn't want criticism that might cause me to question the course of the story/book. I continue to be cautious about showing in-progress stuff. My agent sees everything, at every stage, as did my editor. My sister and husband used to be in on early drafts, as well. That's it, though. I know many writers who have a very, very long list of beta readers - and while do understand this, I also wonder whether I'd be capable of sifting through all the myriad reactions and emerging with any clarity. Individual reactions can be so incredibly helpful and constructive, but I'm guessing that a whole slew of such reactions could really muddy the process, for me.

[alison]

Yes, I'm with you on that, Caitlin. I've never been one for workshops, as I find them quite confusing. I don't give my book to my editor until it's to first draft stage: I can only start thinking whether any structural changes need to be made if the whole thing is down. Though these days I try to write so no major structural changes need to be made - I had to rewrite the entire last quarter of The Gift, and I'd rather not have to do that kind of labour - it's better to get the big things right first time if possible! Otherwise I show my work to my husband, who is excellent on the micro-drama side of things. I always listen to his advice, on where I've missed a beat or something like that, and it's worth having. Few but trusted advisors is my motto...

[KatG]

Marketing and motives are much on my mind today (as, apparently, is alliteration). Just got my latest "royalty" statement from Penguin Canada. While these no longer send me reeling, they do continue to make me wince. Funny thing: I tend to insist that my publishing hopes have always been fairly modest, but when I'm confronted by these pieces of paper I realize that this assertion, too, is disingenuous...

It pays to remember that category sff is a paperback market. That means most books are only going to be on the shelves for 4-6 months after their release. Then booksellers will replace them, or keep a very limited inventory on hand until the next book by the author comes out. You've had two novels, Caitlin, but they went through their paperback printings a good bit ago, so of course sales are going to be mainly slim now. Even in general fiction, most books are not selling steadily. Publishers have stepped up the amount of serial publishing they've been doing in the last few years to get around this, I think, and to deal with impatient fans. They buy up a three book series and put the volumes out 4-7 months apart. For sff authors with busy day jobs, that's not always easy to do.

But you do have some options because your book also fits easily in the general literary fiction market, where works can have longer lives, and you have a general fiction publisher. You may need to work on your networking, promoting and recognition profile in general fiction and particularly in your region. Of course, again, not easy to do with the day job and kids. It would also help a great deal if on your next book, you could get a U.S. publisher. I think you've been building up the audience to do that.

[ABENOJA]

Yes you are right
good post