The financial situation of writers always seems a bit mystical and magical to me.
How can they spend so much time writing?
Are they independently wealthy? Do they have a job we just don’t hear about, and they write in their own time? Do they not have families depending on them?
I’d love to have a life of leisure pursuing the highest quality of a thing I can build over a decade. But my family also needs to eat.
You sacrifice things - video games, TV, doomscrolling. There just isn't enough time to do all that and write. That's what most would-be writers are unwilling to give up.
If they're famous writers, they spend the money they made from their book rights, advances, and the luckier financially, movie and tv deals. I mean, Stephen King had enough money to spend 10 lifetimes to leisurly write a single word a day by 1990 already.
If they're not so famous, the have regular day jobs, or usually writing related side gigs, like writing articles for magazines (at least back when this made you a livable wage), teaching literature, and so on.
Others are independently wealthy, or have spouses who support them.
And some still live in poverty and make it day to day, with random gigs and the kindness of strangers.
I know it's not your main point, but writing for magazines is almost one of the only viable ways to "make it" as a writer/journalist nowadays. Far better than papers/online outlets most of the time.
Or doing writing-related day jobs like writing/editing company stuff and the like. With pretty rare exceptions, writing what you want to write for yourself isn't a sustainable job.
I had been assuming that at least one of Kornbluth or Pohl had been working as a copywriter to pay the bills and that The Space Merchants was a kind of revenge. (similar to how At the Bridge seems to have been inspired by Böll's stint in a statistics office and the Retief series by Laumer's work for Foggy Bottom)
(EDIT: "Cordwainer Smith" worked PSYOPs for Uncle Sam, and pointed out in a textbook that as psychological warfare operators make their career in being economical with the truth [he wrote several decades too early to have "spin doctor" in his vocabulary] one should not rely on their self-evaluations of their own effectiveness. I wonder if this were a dig at Bernays, who seems to have been willing to push his own brand at least as hard as he pushed those of his clients?
Finally, William Faulkner's resignation from his post office day job: As long as I live under the capitalistic system, I expect to have my life influenced by the demands of moneyed people. But I will be damned if I propose to be at the beck and call of every itinerant scoundrel who has two cents to invest in a postage stamp.)
> When I tried to get out of bed today I simply collapsed. There’s a very simple reason for it, I am completely overworked. Not by the office but by my other work. The office plays an innocent part in it only insofar as, if I didn’t have to go there, I could live in peace for my work and wouldn’t have to spend those 6 hours a day there, which have so tormented me that you cannot imagine it, especially on Friday and Saturday, because I was full of my concerns. In the end as I am well aware this is only chatter, it’s my fault and the office has the clearest and most justified claims on me. But for me it is a horrible double life from which insanity is probably the only way out.
So did Dean Koontz. I don't remember if they agreed upon one year or five years for him to make a living at it before he would give up and get a regular job if he didn't succeed. What ever the time period they agreed upon it worked out for him.
King was also a schoolteacher for years. Tolkien was a college professor (and famously wrote the opening lines of The Hobbit on the blank side of an exam paper).
For the vast majority of writers, writing is not their main household source of income. The average book is not profitable if you account for even minimum wage.
In the UK, the average full time writer earns less than they would at McDonalds, but their average household income is well above average. In other words: Most rely on a reasonably well earning partner.
And full time writers are rare even among fairly successful writers published by big publishers.
I have a few friends who have written NYTs best sellers. They made no money from them. One friend of mine is quite famous, writes regularly for the NYTs magazines… and again.. no money (not $0 but not enough to buy a new laptop). They give a lot of lectures and public speaking, most of which pay $0.
It’s hard to write for more than a few hours a day, when you do it every day. You spend the rest of your time researching, organizing, day job, raising children, divorcing, etc.
That's why some of us (probably most) go to work every day...some in desk jobs (like me, still working on a novel I started almost two decades ago), some who are housewives with husbands who work (and vice versa), some teachers, some bus drivers. What you do to put food on the table often has nothing to do with your writing, which can be fit into your life on the weekends, in the evenings, on lunchbreaks, on the bus...
you can sign a book deal to write a book and get paid an advance against your royalties. for a major publisher and a "normal" author this would typically be five figures.
those are hard to get, especially your first one, and also it's not quite enough money, but it's not completely ridiculous that it could fund some full-time writing.
No, it doesn’t fund full time because the advance isn’t paid all in advance! It’s often paid in thirds or even fourths at the this point, with the final payment not occurring until well after the book is published. So like one third on acceptance, one third on editing being done, one third once the book hit shelves. Or one fourth on acceptance, one fourth on editing, one fourth on hard copies being out, one fourth on a soft copy being out. Even with a six figure advance, you are not getting 100k that year, maybe 33-66k depending on how slow your editor is, and of course your agent takes a bite out of that, and you pay a high tax on it too.
After almost a dozen years spent writing almost as many technical books (some second editions), I wouldn't recommend taking forever with a technical book. It will be out of date by the time it comes out.
Every author has to figure out why they write. For me it was a business decision, and finally this year I'm making more from books than I was doing software.
Your publisher will likely send out an email when the book comes out. Don't expect much more from them. My advice, promote the book and use it to build up a mailing list. (I should have been building my list much earlier.)
I'm not sure about the intersection between technical books and traditional novelists. The only person I've known who tried it ended up going the self published route for the novel.
I am curious myself about writing a book for the general business audience through a traditional publisher.
Happy to answer more questions, I have details in my bio for contacting me.
I'm still waiting for Rohinton Mistry's next book. He published three amazing novels (notably A Fine Balance, which is a masterpiece) between 1991 and 2002. Then nothing except a short story in 2006. It's possible he has retired from writing, but there's been no news at all from him or his publisher.
This is a strange article. There are slow writers, there are fast writers. It seems that each writer is in a way different like… like any person! So..?
But are they prolific due to speed or consistency? I think consistency plays the bigger role.
Stephen King writes about 1,000 words per day, consistently. Some other writers may do much more in a single day, but are more sporadic, “when inspiration strikes.”
Eminem has been prolific and is well known for his writing. I read an account from Akon working with Eminem in the stupid where he said Eminem treats music like a job. He shows up in the morning, works, takes his lunch break, works, and is done at 5pm. He’s showing up consistently, and he’s writing constantly, most of which will never been seen.
Jerry Seinfeld also famously wrote a joke every single day, not breaking the streak.
With this much practice, it would make sense that they’d get faster of time, but someone who is slow and consist will be much more prolific throughout the course of a lifetime, than someone who is fast, but inconsistent.
> …someone who is slow and consist will be much more prolific throughout the course of a lifetime, than someone who is fast, but inconsistent.
In this parable¹, the teacher divided a ceramics class into two groups. One was graded solely on the quantity of work they produced, and the other solely on its quality. The result was that the "quantity" group also created higher-quality work.
King is a "quantity" guy, which means that the quality of his work is inconsistent, but he releases a lot of high-quality work.
GRRM is a "quality" guy, which means he may not finish the A Song of Ice and Fire series before he dies.
George Lucas hates writing. He only got the screenplay to Star Wars: A New Hope written by locking himself in an office with a pad of paper and pencils for eight hours every day, through several drafts. Whether he actually wrote anything varied day by day.
I think the value in this case is for the slow writer (or slow creator of anything) who perceives it to be a race (gotta go work for Big Corp and crank out PRs faster than the next guy).
When a person is stuck in that belief, which they often don’t explicitly realize, to have the realization that slow-but-high-quality is a viable path is a big unlock, and potentially a huge weight off their shoulders.
A great boon for people who enjoy a writing voice trained by Quora answers, corporate press releases and bone-dry academic journal articles. The bookshelves at Kindle Self Publish have never been fuller.
Don't do this on HN. Anyone here who wants to know what an LLM has to say can check for themselves; you are just cluttering up the discussion with spam. Post your own opinions.
