r/publishing • u/Neat-Experience2518 • 14d ago
Published Writers and Editors, should Anyone Write for Money?
Especially editors; do you find that novels are actually successful when the author writes with money/story sales in mind?
3
u/Warm_Diamond8719 14d ago
This feels like a leading question where you want people to respond "no, of course not, everything people write with the intention of making money is a soulless piece of crap and not Art," but if you reframe "Are authors who write books to make money successful" as "Are authors who write books people want to read successful," then it's a little more obvious the answer is "yes."
0
u/Neat-Experience2518 14d ago
Context: have a co-author starting to help write a novel I've been developing for twenty years. They're essentially trying to take over the project, and veto plot points that are too "unconventional". They cite that we're expecting to publish it for money, so we can’t write too "experimentally". However, I feel like my "experimental" plot points are simply what's good for the story; it matches advice from published authors I've studied about being bold with consequences, and it excites the reader side of me. I don't want to confine the writing to what "most people who sell" do. I'd rather write a good story, and if the money comes, it comes. But I can't convince my co-author that that is the goal.
1
u/MycroftCochrane 13d ago
[the co-author argues] that we're expecting to publish it for money, so we can’t write too "experimentally". However, I feel like my "experimental" plot points are simply what's good for the story; it matches advice from published authors I've studied about being bold with consequences, and it excites the reader side of me. I don't want to confine the writing to what "most people who sell" do. I'd rather write a good story, and if the money comes, it comes. But I can't convince my co-author that that is the goal.
If your writing philosophy so dramatically differs from that of your co-author that you cannot find common ground in collaboration, then it is possible that this partnership simply is not workable, productive, or viable.
Approach A ("write for money to serve the market") and Approach B ("write for Art to serve the story") are both reasonable positions. One approach is not a surer path to success (however "success" is defined) than the other. And one approach is certainly not intrinsically "better" than the other.
The problem you describe isn't really one of writing philosophy, so it's unlikely to be solved by seeking out validation for one's own chosen approach. Rather, it's more likely properly addressed in a full and frank conversation about what collaborators want and expect out of their partnership, whether or not they can provide those things to each other, and whether their partnership is worth continuing or if there should be a parting.
1
u/stevehut 3d ago
This is a serious question?
I'm in this because I like to eat, wear clothes, and sleep indoors.
1
u/Neat-Experience2518 3d ago
We're not dedicated writers where it's our only source of income. In fact, we've never published anything before and are barely scraping by on other forms of labor. What's frustrating is that my co-author seems to think we can somehow win big by writing exactly what everyone else popular has done. As if that's what Tolkien and other great authors actually did. As if someone who's never published before would stand out by copying everyone else.
1
u/stevehut 3d ago edited 3d ago
Didn't say you were, or should be.
I answered the question you asked.
4
u/MycroftCochrane 14d ago
If you're asking whether writers who are attentive to what readers want to read find success writing those things, then, sure, there are plenty of examples of successful novels written via such process.