Contempt directed at writers by publishers and agents is the one fact I have seen over and over. And getting more and more angry at the contempt every time I see it in all its many forms, from tweets by stupid agents to editors sitting on panels and talking down to writers as if they know nothing of the business.
The clear and obvious showing of contempt by publishers and agents for writers is the real underlying focus of every one of my blog posts about waking up writers.
Writers must, and I repeat, must, stop allowing publishers and agents to show contempt for them. Writers must stop acting like stupid victims, learn business, and learn how to say NO! to anyone acting as if they are doing the writer a favor.
Today, going through contracts, the Passive Guy on his wonderful blog, The Passive Voice, talked about this complete contempt publishers have toward writers in contracts. As a former law student, I’ve always been upset about this and how it has gotten worse and worse over the last few decades.
His column is a MUST READ for any writers.
Folks, it’s not just me out here shouting this. Go read this, slowly, carefully, understanding what he is saying. It might be one of the most important blogs you read in a long time and save you more money and time than you can ever imagine.
http://www.thepassivevoice.com/09/2011/how-to-read-a-book-contract-contempt/
Nice post, Dean.
Isn’t there always contempt emanating from those without talent who make money off those with talent?
‘They’ can’t do it, (write, paint, compose music, cook; whatever the talent) so they have to make the ones who can, pay for being so uppity.
Martin, Paul, I don’t really think either is the reason. I don’t think it has much to do with talent and sure not cons all the time. I think the main reason is that writers are so damn stupid about business, and publishers and agents to a lesser degree, are in business and know the business to a degree. So when someone who is supposed to be a full partner (writers) are too stupid (most of the time) to deal with, it’s just natural to get contempt for them.
Writers walk into an international business without a lick of knowledge. Contempt from those who do know it is natural.
A con man always has contempt for his marks.
But ya know… When the mark eagerly volunteers to get fleeced, and defends the con man even after you show him the con, contempt becomes awfully tempting.
Dean, you’re not shouting in a vacuum. Your posts have been an education in the real world of publishing – thank you.
I’ve been in the business world for a long time, yet in learning about publishing, I bought into all those golden publishing myths. Hook, line and sinker. I’m over that now.
Unfortunately, we’re not in the age of handshake deals any more. (And probably shouldn’t have been, even then.)
Opinion seconded.
There are only a few blogs which I feel are absolutely mandatory reading right now for writers.
One is this one. One is Kris’s blog, minimally every Thursday (very nice how consistent she is!). The third is Passive Voice.
There are other rocking ones too; Konrath’s, Robin Sullivan’s, D. Gaughran’s, Mike Stackpoles, and a few others often have really solid and valuable stuff.
But if you’re going to cut it to the bone, Dean, Kris, and PG are the textbook of the modern writer.
Unfortunately, contempt isn’t exercised on a case-by-case basis. Once it sets in, a publisher or agent treats all writers with contempt–and is just irritated and exasperated by those who know the business and therefore -do- ask questions, negotiate their contractual clauses, expect to be treated as a partner in the endeavor and object when they are instead treated as an “employee” by the agent or like a hooker by the publisher.
Which is why ANY writer choosing not to know the business or exercise their rights is always, in the end, bad for ALL writers–including those of us who DO learn the business and exercise (or try to exercise) our reasonable rights as full partners in these business endeavors. Alas, the writer who signs contracts without reading them and lets his agent treat him like a stray cat is the precedent-setting writer, in terms of who writers will be treated by that agency or publisher, rather than the writer who exercises informed and intelligent business practices.
As a well-known, high-profile agent said to a departing client (a friend of mine), “I wish you didn’t know so much about the business.” Because that much-lauded agent DIDN’T WANT an intelligent, informed client participating fully in one’s own career; that agent wanted clients who just obey and accept.
Yup, what Laura said. And sadly, with the system breaking down, agents going to any way they can to maintain their made-up position of power, and publishers cutting everything to the bone and many are going to be gone in two years, many, many writers are going to just vanish. The survivors in this new world will have to be writers that know business. No other way. The days of writers being taken care of are almost gone.
I saw a couple of blog posts this morning that amused me. Since the subject matter strikes me as related to the theme of this discussion, I herein share them:
A literary agent speaking at a conference last weekend blogged the highlights of the speech, which was advice to writers. The 10th and final piece of advice the agent offered to writers was: “10. Do NOT drink the kool-aid on E-publishing. It’s too early to be making sweeping statements about any of it. We’re all learning this as we go and the right answer to almost everything is ‘we’ll see what happens.’”
In a rebuttal of this, Joe Konrath wrote on his blog, when pondering what that statement means: “I think it means, ‘If you do something without me, I don’t get my 15%.’”
Gee… y’THINK? (g)
(Konrath’s full blog:
http://jakonrath.blogspot.com/2011/09/drink-kool-aid.html )
When blogging on Ninc about agent-as-epublishers (or as (cough) e-publishing facilitators), one of the various concerns I expressed was that once an agent sets up such an operation, there will probably soon be pressure on clients to use the agency’s system, FOR THE COMMISSION INVOLVED, even in cases where the client would -rather- self-publish without involving (or paying) the agent.
After all, one of the things my fourth/final agent said to me during the week I decided to fire her (and this statement was indeed among the many reasons I decided to leave) was that I had to pay her a commission on everything I did, even if she wasn’t at all involved in the deal, and if I didn’t agree with that, then I couldn’t remain a client.
I replied, “Er, even on a project you DECLINED TO REPRESENT before I sold it myself?” The agent declined to answer. And since I decided within the week that I was leaving, I didn’t bother pressing for an answer.
The blog I wrote gives additional examples of this kind of behavior among agents. It’s prevalent and common enough that I think it’s naive to suppose it will NOT soon infect the agent-author relationship viz epublishing. In particular, I will not be at all surprised if it emerges before long that any agency operating an epublishing business soon pressures clients to participate in it even if they’re rather self-publish and keep their earnings to themselves…. and perhaps soon starts saying to its clients what my fourth/final agent said to me: “Even if I’m not at all involved in a deal, you have to pay me a commission on it, or you can’t be a client anymore.”
To see the blog I wrote on this:
http://www.ninc.com/blog/index.php/archives/literary-agents-self-publishing
I was astounded when I found out it is not uncommon for publishers to ask for non-compete clauses. After 20 years in sales I would not call publishing other works for other publishers or in other venues ‘competition’. I call that free advertising. It is interesting to watch publishers make common business mistakes of any industry that is in the mature phase of an industry life cycle. Most of the industry’s current problems are not as tied to the ascent of the ereader as they think it is and the mistakes they are making are predictable. Writers with good business chops are at a clear advantage today.
All their contempt comes from the fear of a changing publishing landscape. They’re losing their livelihood. A few years from now, those showing the contempt will either change and adapt or become obsolete.
When I read Mr. Konrath’s blog post, as well as this one, I was struck with the underlying reason for this contempt. It has to do with power. In a situation where there is a mismatched power relationship, the person possessing the power can lord it over the person without it. And the person without power can only eat it and smile.
As those who had been without power sense a decline in their oppressors’ fortunes, the boldest of them will feel free to speak out. Those accustomed to wielding their power will continue to act-as-if they still held all the cards, hoping the serfs won’t walk away.
The key question is whether power has indeed evaporated from the traditional publishers and their agents. (Note: I said “their” agents. An agent who advises against the interests of a writer isn’t really his agent, is s/he?)
Ahh, Steve, but that’s what you miss. The publishers and agents have ZERO power unless the writers give it to them. The writers only have been conned into thinking the agents and publishers have the power. They actually have no more power than the person who supplies the product gives to them. So yes, the power was mismatched in favor of the writers, but they haven’t known that for about thirty years. Now the writers, at least many of us, are learning that once again. And taking back the power. Thus we can stand back and shake our heads at the silliness of other writers giving away their power.
Writers create the product. You create quality product that readers want to read and you control. Period. They don’t function at all without you.
And how can an agent, who makes 15% of what you make, have any power? Like saying the receptionist for a company CEO is in control of the company. Nope.
I think writers will still be ‘taken care of’ – meaning have everything else done for them. It’s just going to cost them – (probably their careers in the long run). But no worries, there will be more lining up behind them, money in hand. Sigh.
I agree with Kevin, above — you, Kris, and PG are high-wattage lighthouses. Thanks for that. Shine on.
Passive Guy’s post is devastating. thanks for sharing the link, Dean.
I used to work as a scriptwriter, so I’m used to this contempt magnified MANY-fold.
That said, one of the reasons I’m giving this whole self-pub thing a go is the very freedom it allows to get away from the contempt-givers. Besides…
…I’ve got my family for that!
Todd
“THE TELLING OF MY MARCHING BAND STORY”
http://www.toddtrumpet.com
We are talking about writers here, but you will find this situation in all creative areas (that are known to me, at least).
I come from concept art and storyboarding (also photography and computer animation) and it is absolutely clear to me that I am a problem solver and content provider for people who seek my service. They do not come to me because they like to sit and have a coffee, they come to me because they think I am one of the people who could best solve their specific problem of the day.
Even if I have to do cold calls, like at the begining of my career right smack in the middle of the DOT-COM crisis, I know what my services are worth. So it never came to me to beg for a job, instead, what I was doing, was to actively look for people whom I could help – at least that is how I saw (and see) it. If someone was not willing to pay adequatedly, or did not see as a valued business partner, I moved on. There were a lot of potential clients I would not have wanted to work for. Sure I needed a job badly, VERY BADLY, and the agencies were firing (experienced) people and even going bankrupt – it did not look good. But I was always aware of my alternative to say “no” to an offer that was beyond my limits.
It is important to do the math and to know how far you are willing to strech and still feel ok about it. It has to be a conscious decision.
Regardless in which (creative) area you work, it is important to realize what your work is worth to others and which problems you are solving. It is so important to have self awareness and self esteem for your work and for yourself as a person.
It sounds crazy, but I think that a lack of self esteem is one of the worst problems creative preople tend to have.
Just last week I was trying to persuade a colleage of mine, a wonderful, amazing, crazy good and FAMOUS illustrator of infographic related storytelling, to offer his services to certain potential clients (consultants, and certain industy people I know). I am certain he would have done them a FAVOR by making them aware of his existence. But I did not manage to get through to him. I noticed in the eyes. Instant fear when I mentioned “consultants”. Inferiority complex. Not considering himself worthy to sit at the same table, looking for a middle man to do it for him, knowing that each middle man is a potential danger in this kind of creative process, where it is so utterly important to understand the message correctly. I tried the whole evening to eliminate the self esteem problem he seemd to have. To no avail. It just got worse and worse … Until I gave up. I did not want to give up, but I had used up all my good arguments. It was not about logic. Not at all. It was an emotional problem.
That same day an illustrator told me I should not be so harsh on the publishing companies (I had just declined two offers because I found them being a bad joke), the POOR publishers were earning so little money, that we illustrators should be helping them instead of letting them down!
I then told her how many billions of profit that publishing segment had made the year before, which she had not known (she apparently does not read the papers). Meanwhile she herself was NOT able to live from her profession …
Same, again with publishers (sorry, I am getting into a rage here), happened to me as a photographer – also a creative job, where many work for publishing companies.
I was one of 100 international photographers invited to LOOKbetween, a photgraphy festival in the US in 2010. We paid our own plane tickets from wherever in the world we were, and a bus collected us in NYC and drove us to Charlottesville, where we slept in tents (our own). Thankfully we did not have to pay for the food. Actually it was beautifully organized, I have to say! It had a Woodstock atmosphere which was envigorating … So it was, after all, a wonderful experience to be there and meet many colleages from other countries that one had not met before.
BUT — big but — what was the whole point of it? I would say that it was a pat on the back to make us work for free or almost for free for publishing companies. We were 100 photographers and 300 editors came to see us. Times, NatGeo … you name it, and they were there. They did not arrive in busses but in BMW, Mercedes, Porsche, SUVs … the parking lot was trully an amazing picture. They did not live in tents either and I am very sure most of them got their expenses paid.
When one of the photographers asked, who amongs all of the 400 there was able to live from “photography” (and editing/publishing photography), there were very few photographer’s hands up. But I did not see one editor/publisher who did not lift their arm. Fair enough, they were honest about it. But the truth of the picture was devastating.
And then … what was the constant message when I talked to publishers during the event? How great my photography projects were (=honey) and how difficult the times for publishing companies, and how they now (with the iPad out) have to invest so much into programming that they cannot pay for the content no more.
After hearing the same same about 8 times, I decided to go for a swim in the lake.
But I know of at least 20 photographers, mostly young ones, who told me later, all eager, that they thought that this would be a great way to get well paid future jobs and that they would be delivering content for free. They seemed happy about it, too.
I came back home utterly frustrated with the world.
Reading things like this is depressing and frustrating. But then I have to remind myself that writers who still think that a trad deal and an agent is the only way to go are the only ones who will suffer.
Lassal, great post! Very intersting.
There’s a longtime hardcover NYT bestselling novelist I know who has always said that one power that every author has is the power to say “no.” And -exercising- that power is one of the ways this highly successful author has gotten where is:
Ex. She exercised it by saying “no” to her first publisher and walking away (without any deals waiting in the wings, and with very little money to live on) when they included an egregious contractual clause in their new offer to her and refused to remove or negotiate the clause. And she said it, when marketing a book whose commercial potential she strongly believed in, upon receiving weak offers from houses that wouldn’t have done much for the book. She held out until she found a house willing to offer major money and support; that book did well and, many years later, is still in print and earning; and most of the author’s subsequent books (all with that house) have been NYT bestsellers.
Sorry for the long rant last night. It was almost 2 am and I was working on my tax declaration – I guess it all added up.
Actually my point was a simple one:
you have the logical factors (people unaware of facts etc.) but one should never descard the emotional factors for people’s reactions.
So while there are a lot of prople (writers, or any other kind) who might know better, they are easily intimidated by position, rank, titles, or alpha behaviour … And being intimidated they are oh so easily manipulated – the focus in that moment seems to be to get out of the confrontation no matter what. And they give whatever kind of concessions without thinking – or with very little thinking.
I know quite a lot of people who cannot identify contempt as what it is. They think the other person is right in treating them this way. After all, the other person is … (fill in: rank, title, …). They will find excuses for why it is a right of the other person to treat them with contempt. And I am sure we all have seen this before. For some reason a lot of creatives behave this way. As if they owe something to society for being creatives in the first place.
It is relatively easy to fill in the information gap writers might have. Get the logic across, learn the math. But it is oh so difficult to deal with the psycological aspect …
I think Dean is doing a terrific job in both senses. Not just writers should be thankful for his blog and the time he invests here. There is a lot of stuff that is transferable.
Thanks, Dean.
(sorry if some of my sentences sound funny sometimes, my native language is German)
Oh, yes, and I am self-publishing, too.
)
And happy to be part of it!
Apart from the fact that I didn’t want to pay a 15 percent commission to some stranger, my main issue with the conventional wisdom (or myth, though I didn’t know it then) that you absolutely need an agent before submitting your work to publishing houses was that the most publicly visible agents, i.e. the one blogging and twittering all the time, always struck me as so damn unprofessional, when they posted snippets from bad queries and made fun of hopeful writers. Even if the queries were truly bad, posting snippets or all of it on the internet is not professional behaviour. And I didn’t want to enter a professional relationship with someone who didn’t even honour the basics of professional behaviour.
Now I’m happily indie publishing and glad to dispense with the agent. And should I ever venture into traditional publishing, I’ll gladly go with an IP-lawyer rather than an agent. Not only do lawyers actually recognize all possible legal problems, they also behave professionally.
Lassal said: “They will find excuses for why it is a right of the other person to treat them with contempt. And I am sure we all have seen this before. For some reason a lot of creatives behave this way. As if they owe something to society for being creatives in the first place.”
That was some intense stuff you posted, Lassal. Thank you for your honesty. I’ve had some of the same thoughts even though I’m just an infant in the world of publishing. That snippet of yours I quoted made me think of a recent post of Kris Rusch’s http://bit.ly/pgVdF9 about the uphill battle writers (and other creatives) face in just getting validation and recognition for their work.
She talks about how parents and teachers often discourage kids from pursuing a career in the arts. I wonder if this early programming is behind a lot of the self-esteem issues you mention. It’s hard to believe in your worth when you’ve been labeled a dreamer, or even lazy or foolish, because you want to write stories/take pictures/sculpt/dance/whatever. When I was a teen, my mother destroyed most of the stories I’d written up to that point, so I know how bad it can feel.
BTW, your written English, while not perfect, is pretty darn good. A lot better than my fumbling attempts at German. You should be proud of your skill!
Tori
Laura,
yes, so right. Most people do not realize that there always is an alternative. “No” is an alternative, and sometimes it is the best.
I can carry my head up high with an honest job at McDonalds, even if that might not be what I want to do in the long run. So something like that could always be a plan C/D/E … whatever. Less shame in that than in wasting your rights (my personal oppinion for myself)
There is a price you pay for every alternative in the game and the point is that everybody has to find the one that suits her best (without forgetting the long-run concequences).
Also just politely saying no, while pointing out where my issues are, being prepared to leave the negotiation and sometimes actually LEAVING the negotiation, has already worked magic for me. Very often they came running after me with the changes I had wanted. It is a negotioation, after all, and you are often tested how far you are willing to strech. I found out recently, that my clients have databases on us and on our negotiations. So what is happening now is, that there are certain things that I am not willing to do. As I am a bulldog in these things, they decided they can save themselves the time trying to convince me to sing something I would never sign. On the other hand side, they would never come to me with a project that would require these concessions – which saves MY time.
Regardless of if you are a writer or whatever else, if you go into a negotiation, you better know what the minimum is, that you will need, in order to accept the deal. And be prepared to leave, if this goal is not reached. This is nothing bad. It just meant that you did not find a mutual basis to agree on.
After I realized this, I actually started to have FUN negotiating!! I felt much more confident and free.
Also your clients (publishers) are not by nature your enemies who want to smash you during negotiation – they merely have different interests. If you know THEIR math and YOUR math, you might even work out a win-win situation.
But even if you UNDERSTAND their situation, it does not mean that you need to accept it.
Albeit, with what I read in this blog and some others, it might be very hard to achieve a win-win situation with publishers for most of us. My point here is, that you do not have to wait for your negotiation partner to come up with a good deal. You can come up with the deal yourself – but of course this will only work if the result is interesting enough for the other party, too. (I think John Locke did exactly that).
I hope this does not sound like preaching … Gee, it is always difficult to reach the right frequency in a foreign language.
Sorry if I come across like a bulldog.
Lassal, you are coming across great. And clear explanations of business.
When I look back at my decades in this business, my biggest mistakes always came from NOT SAYING “NO.” If I had just said no to something at certain points, I would be so much better off. So I agree completely. No is not only an alternative, but should be your most powerful weapon in your business plan.
Thanks for the great posts.
Tori,
thanks for linking to Kris’ blog. I bought her “Freelancer’s Survival Guide” straight away. What a great guide to write! I have been a freelancer since the begining, but there is always something to learn …
I was lucky. I have always been encouraged by my parents and teachers to be an artist. Maybe that did make a difference?! I never thought of it this way.
I spend a year in the US as an exchange student in highschool and I was fascinated by how much support I got! I did not find anything comparable in my school in Germany. Unfortunately. I had the impression that they tried to level everybody out (here), compared to having your “talents” or “interests” nurtured, as I found it the case in my Highschool in the US. It is a totally different system, with ups and downs on both sides.
Thanks also for your nice comment on my language skills. I guess I am just good enough to notice how far from good enough I am.
Writers should be treating their agents more like salesmen and less like supervisors. The job of agents should begin and end with selling their clients work. When they are successful, they get their commission. When they aren’t, they enter a new line of work. Salesmen don’t refuse to sell product and still get a cut of the product they refused to sell. Salesmen also don’t get a cut of their clients income. They get what they earn.
I know that’s not how the world works today, but if more writers approached their relationship with agents like that, it would be.
Rob, I don’t agree. In fact, agents can’t sell anything. They only have contacts with about six editors and if it doesn’t fit those editors, they are lost. Agents never used to be sales people. They were go-fers, glorified secretaries in the old sense of the world. They were there to do the dirty stuff the writer didn’t want to do and to protect the writer from unwanted or unneeded distractions. And to be a buffer with the publisher and to chase the money. Bill collectors.
Nothing more. It’s only during the last two decades the agents have tried to elevate their job description and started to believe they knew more about writing than writers. And beginning writers let them, and thus started the problem.
If you want an agent, fine, but sell your own work and treat the agent like helper that you are paying way too much too. Nothing more. And if the helper won’t jump when you want them to jump, you fire them. But they are not salesman. That’s part of the myth.
I stand corrected. Although I don’t think there is a whole lot of daylight between us on the broader point that agents are employees and should be treated as such. The writers I’ve known who get all worked up about getting an agent always seemed to approach it as if they were looking for a boss.
I still suspect that even though it’s not the case now or in the past, if agents want to keep being agents, sales will need to be part of their skillset.