March 20, 2006
Joe Konrath has 12 things writers think that they don't want to admit and they're pretty bitchy--Joe may be having a day. Nonetheless, after responding on his blog, they've been on my mind, so I'm re-posting them here with my responses in a bit more detail.


1. Answering fan mail is a drag. Sure, when we first got started we loved to hear from fans. But after the thousandth letter of someone proclaiming their love, we begin to cut and paste our responses (Thanks so much for writing!) Yes, I know this sounds sucky and ungrateful. But at least I still answer all of my fan mail---lots of big shots have a website moderator do it for them.

Wouldn't know, having not gotten to that point, but I'm sure it's time consuming once it gets big. Frankly, I'm ever-so-slightly uncomfortable with praise (I should see a shrink), so my responses tend to be: "I'm glad you liked it," which is true enough.

2. We hate being edited. Writers will say that they love a good editor, but none of us actually believes the editor knows better. We listen, because we have to, but we think we got it right the first time and that we don't require any rewrites or tweaking. That's why, when we become bestsellers, we refuse to be edited.

Yes, probably. I almost always feel a moment's "burn" upon receiving editorial comments, but generally speaking they improve the work. I think there are plenty of bestsellers who would be vastly improved by accepting some editing, and some who should be forced to pay for copy editing.

3. We think our last book is better than the one that won that award. Even if we weren't on the final ballot. Even if we weren't nominated. Even if we write in an entirely different genre.

Not having won an award, I can't say, but I suspect most writers always think the current or next book is the best. And I can't quite get away from my gut feeling that an awful lot of awards in the mystery genre gravitate toward name-brand authors, whether they're better or not. As my agent commented once, "Awards are like husbands. If you hang around long enough, you'll probably get one."

4. We don't read every book we blurb. Some writers don't even write the blurbs--they let the author who asked for the blurb write the blurb.

No shit.

5. We think #1 NYT Bestsellers are crap, and that our own books aren't on the NYT List because we refused to sell out, because our publishing house didn't do enough, or because the readers are stupid. We also resent Oprah, but in public talk about how much she does for the publishing world.

Uh, I think that depends. JK Rowling gets my thumbs-up. I thought Patterson was pretty good back when he was writing his own books. Since all he's doing is pasting his name on the cover, it's hard for me to praise that bit of bullshit in any way, shape or form. As for Oprah, gimme a break. 80% of the people who buy the books Oprah recommends probably don't read them, and very few stick with the authors after their turn in the Oprah Machine.

6. We say snide things behind each other's backs. There's gossip, rumor mongering, and pettiness, and we badmouth people that we call our friends. Especially if they are award winners or #1 NYT bestsellers.

Probably, but honest to god, I try not to do this. It's a small world and although I would like to slam some authors, I honestly, honestly wish them all the best. I used to be a big gossip at my workplace, bitching about people, but now I just prefer to keep things to myself. Different mindset, different place in my life.

7. We envy each other. If an author gets a movie deal, a huge advance, a big tour, a magazine spread, we're incredibly jealous because we feel we deserved it, not them. Then we hide our feelings behind well wishes, and say snide things behind their backs.

Yeah, except the snide things. I want these things, too.

8. We all have a martyr complex, believing that writing is an heroic, impossible profession, and that our tremendous intestinal fortitude is the reason we're professionals. That, and our natural talent. Oh yeah, we're also all egomaniacs.

Yes, a little bit. Less so than I used to believe this. As for "natural talent," well, I have a hard time identifying it in writing. I can see it in some types of music and art, but not all kinds of music and art. I can recognize excellence in writing, and that seems like a byproduct of talent, but otherwise, it's hard for me to say how some writer might improve given time and good feedback.

9. We all have a sense of entitlement. We expect to be treated better than the average Joe, to be catered to, to be fawned over. The higher we climb, the more prima donna we become.

Maybe. I'm probably more of a loner than this statement implies, and again, I can be uncomfortable being praised or being at the center of attention.

10. We're all constantly afraid that the world will realize we're frauds, and it will all be taken away from us. Our careers are precarious, fragile things, and we know this all too well, but we hide that fear behind bluster and bravado and say things like, "That book flopped because the author didn't try hard enough" when we all know that but for the grace of God go I.

Probably, though to a less extent than Joe's admitting to here. I do think in fiction, particularly, luck plays a huge part in success. Joe was lucky. He even told me that. I'm not sure he believed it when he said it, but it's probably true. And Stephen King was lucky and Janet Evanovich and David Morrell and John Grisham... right place, right time, right publisher, right audience, right etc.

11. We blame our publishers, our editors, and our agents, when our careers aren't going well, but take all of the credit when they are going well.

Except on the acknowledgements pages, where we suck up to our editors and agents like the biggest brownnosers in the world, hoping that we'll stay on their good sides.

12. We secretly think that 99% of all newbie writers aren't good enough to make it. But we also think that 99% of all professional writers aren't good enough either.

I responded specifically to this one on Joe's blog. Yes, I'm afraid so. I've said it before and I'll say it again: None of us are as good as we think we are. And when I reviewed books for ForeWord Magazine, which focuses on self-published and small-press books, I can honestly claim that a huge, huge percentage of these books just plain would not be published by major houses because they're not good enough.

But, "not good enough" doesn't necessarily mean "untalented." We have to remember, in the year 2006, the typical person--even kids, but anyone--has been exposed to literally thousands and thousands of stories. From TV and movies and books. It wasn't like this 400 years ago. Going to a play was rare. Today, the average person watches 5 or 6 or 10 30-minute "plays" a day on television. We know story structure backwards and forwards. Our expectations for quality, both in terms of story and in terms of technical expertise, is phenomenally high. And that's because we're exposed to it thousands and thousands of times. And say what you will about TV writing, they do a pretty good job considering the structural and time demands.


Best,
Mark Terry