Dude, could you add a little more information to this. Just posting a link is considered spam in most message boards.
Posted by skadder (Member # 6757) on :
All the information is pretty much in the first sentence of the article. Besides I think I am known well enough on Hatrack not to be considered a spammer.
But for those to fearful to click on it without an abstract, it is about the myth that only a few can earn enough to write full time.
[This message has been edited by skadder (edited December 20, 2009).]
Posted by Foste (Member # 8892) on :
Interesting one. Thanks Skadder!
Posted by Owasm (Member # 8501) on :
Dude,
Thanks for the link. I enjoyed reading that. Makes me want to write...
Posted by BenM (Member # 8329) on :
Thanks for the clarification, and the link.
Posted by KayTi (Member # 5137) on :
Even though I know you, skadder, I'm one of those who won't click without having some idea of what I'm clicking on. (Partly because there are many things I don't want to waste my time on, partly because an uncommented link can and often is some sort of spammy phishing something that I don't need in my life.)
Thanks for the clarification, and the link. I do dig DWS's blog, great stuff.
Posted by Pyre Dynasty (Member # 1947) on :
quote:Besides I think I am known well enough on Hatrack not to be considered a spammer.
Well it wouldn't be the first time a doppleganger attacked. I don't know how many of you were around for the extra Survivor incident, man that was a ride.
But it doesn't really have to do with whether I trust a link from you or not, I'm just sick of the mystery link thing. It was a nice link once i knew what it was, thanks for that.
Posted by LlessurNire (Member # 8781) on :
Thanks Skadder for the link, very encouraging to read!
now if only I could write a short story in a day....
Posted by skadder (Member # 6757) on :
No problem. I will endeavor to provide at least a cursory description next time.
Posted by rich (Member # 8140) on :
Very nice link.
However...
The comments section is where the "meat" is.
DWS says: "If you write two short stories per year and one novel per year, you will never get there, at least not in a generation or two. But if you write three novels per year and a dozen short stories per year, it won’t take you long at all to pick up real speed and practice enough to learn your craft."
Sounds like there's going to be some quantity v quality issues, but, if you can achieve that output, and actually sell it, then more power to you.
Posted by Foste (Member # 8892) on :
Actually I think that he talks about covering both, quality and quantity.
Posted by BenM (Member # 8329) on :
Yeah rich, the comments about reselling were an eye opener for me. Now I just need to work at building my inventory...
Posted by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (Member # 59) on :
I'd appreciate it if people would preface links with some kind of indication of what they link to.
Posted by Crank (Member # 7354) on :
DWS's recommended output led me to a curious observation about my own writer's mindset. I often wondered what kind of pace I would like to write at, given everything else I like to do in life. After some thought, I decided that, at my current skill level (ADD and dyslexia factor into this, BTW), I would be comfortable with a two novel and two to three short story output per year. It's not like I don't have enough ideas to draw from, so I figured this pace was doable.
Except, I reminded myself that I have a full time job. Two, if you include raising my kids.
I immediately concluded that such a pace would be attainable only if I did not have to work for a living.
Disturbing as it was, I realized I was abstaining from even making an attempt at the pace I wanted.
Obviously, that mindset is on its way out of my thought process. Now, I still might not match that desired output level, but I see no sense in denying myself the opportunity to strive for it.
Actually...after reading DWS's passage, I'm thinking that a three novel per year output sounds pretty damned cool.
S! S!
Posted by skadder (Member # 6757) on :
quote:I'd appreciate it if people would preface links with some kind of indication of what they link to.
Apologies.
Posted by Pyre Dynasty (Member # 1947) on :
Jk Rowling did pretty good with one novel a year, she's richer than the queen. (Of course any mention of her should include one of those "Results not typical" thingies they put on weight loss commercials.)
Personally I think the increased output thing is about increasing your experience writing, this is the same thing as you need to write a million (actual numbers may vary) words of pure crap before you start get good. So it's a quantity makes quality thing. (Well, we should hope that your hundredth story is better than your third.)
Personally I think there is a logical fallacy hidden somewhere in the mindset that writing fast has less quality and writing slow has more quality. There are much more variables that go into it. When I write fast I usually produce a more cohesive story, when I go slow I tend to go off on irrelevant things that I end up cutting later. I lose focus when I write slow.
Three novels a year means you take four months on each, plus a short for each month. That doesn't seem too terrible, particularly if you do the research for the next novel while your doing the last one. Of course this is writing a few hours a day I think. That's not too terribly possible for most of us. But if I did sell a novel chances are pretty good I'd make more on a lousy advance than I can make a year in my current job. (Which is 20 hrs a week a toothpick over minimum wage.)
Posted by Robert Nowall (Member # 2764) on :
quote:Jk Rowling did pretty good with one novel a year, she's richer than the queen.
Ah, but what will she do for a followup act?
Posted by MartinV (Member # 5512) on :
Personally, I don't want to be rich. If you are, your life is all about money. Yes, I know, most of any person's life is about money.
All I want is live from writing. Nothing more.
Posted by skadder (Member # 6757) on :
quote:Ah, but what will she do for a followup act?
Become the queen? Spend the money? Laugh in a 'Maw-hah-hah' stylie?
The fact is two hundred million gives you a few options...
Posted by Robert Nowall (Member # 2764) on :
I had in mind what's she going to write next. Harry Potter Eight? Sequels or prequels? Or maybe that rumored mystery novel?
Posted by dougsguitar on :
There is a tremendous amount of truth in the idea (supposedly proven) that to be an expert at something one must put in at least ten thousand hours of practice. see; (This is Your Brain on Music, the Science of a Human Obsession; Daniel J. Levitin, pg. 197,) which is 3 hours a day or 20 hours per week for over 10 years. Is 20 hours of writing a week too much for most of us? Probably... due to the current state of the 'Union'. Right Pyre Dynasty... Our collective 'bosses' are not standing in line to open the money faucet over our heads, so to speak. Just thoughts on the matter.
Posted by Brad R Torgersen (Member # 8211) on :
Skadder, you miserable spambot, you! (wink)
Great link, if nobody has read it yet.
Kris and Dean covered this in their June workshop. Really an eye-opening moment for me. I think most of us are so focused on break-in and those first sales/advances, we don't stop to consider that a well-managed portfolio of books and stories can yield decades of dividends.
Like I mentioned at this particular post, writer Williams Sanders -- now retired -- got a tidy little three-digit check a month or two ago. For something he wrote YEARS in the past, and had all but forgotten about. PING! A check shows up in his mailbox one day, and it was because of something in his contracting for that very story; and he'd forgotten all about it.
My dream is to manage my "pie" such that it's providing me with my entire income by the time I am in my 50's. Get some books going, keep current in the short story market, pick up some options from Hollyweird, maybe gaming rights... There is way, way more money to be made, beyond the advance or the check from the digest.
Posted by andersonmcdonald (Member # 8641) on :
skadder, Great link! Thanks for sharing this with your fellow Hatrackers. Much appreciated.
Posted by andersonmcdonald (Member # 8641) on :
As for JK Rowling, I think pretty much anything with her name on it will be a guaranteed bestseller.
Posted by skadder (Member # 6757) on :
[robot voice a la Cher] Spambot? I don't know what you are talking about, Brad. [/robot voice a la Cher]
[This message has been edited by skadder (edited January 08, 2010).]
Posted by Robert Nowall (Member # 2764) on :
I like the idea of my work making money as time went by...never thought to apply it to writing SF, though. I thought I'd have to get into the songwriting racket, or something like that...
Posted by posulliv (Member # 8147) on :
Would a writer able to crank out four or more novels publishable in a year _have_ to publish under pseudonyms?
It seems like mass-market and genre authors put out a book a year or so. I'm predisposed to think that anyone who published four novels a year would be writing dross. Now that I think about it, though, the only reason I believe that one novel a year is the average rate of a quality author is how often the books hit the market.
Posted by Dark Warrior (Member # 8822) on :
Before Piers Anthony lost his daughter he was putting out a novel every three months, most under his name.