E-publishing vs. traditional publishing -- fiction

[Criseyde]

Spinoff of another thread. What's the advantage to e-publishing works of fiction, besides, of course, the fact that you can do it yourself? Do people read authors who only publish online?

I've read short pieces online, but sitting down to read an entire novel seems really tedious. I can't even read public domain books online, because the screen hurts my eyes. I guess if I had an e-reader, this wouldn't be a problem.

Then again, in theory, it's not really that different than the way that novels used to be serialized in magazines and newspapers. I can definitely see the appeal in a serialized novel appearing on a blog, for example.

But then there's also the fact that ANYONE can publish their novel online, and speaking as someone who used to deal with the slush pile at a literary magazine, separating the wheat from the chaff seems even more tedious than the reading process. Most people aren't good at writing fiction, and even the people who become good start off bad. Like anything else, really.

Thoughts?

[Aminka Ozmun]

First off, everyone interested in this subject should check out Novelr.com. No, it's not my site -- wish it was! -- but it's the closest to an one-stop-shop "content portal" for these kinds of ruminations that I know, with links to many an insightful blog by editors, agents, and so forth.

I'm new to Novelr myself and web fiction and e-publishing in general but from what I gather:

"Do people read authors who only publish online?"

Yes they do, and some (a precious few, as ever, though apparently much, much more than ever) are actually making thousands of dollars from putting things out there, completely free.

"I've read short pieces online, but sitting down to read an entire novel seems really tedious."

I'm not all that into eReaders myself, still, and unfortunately they seem mostly for genre fiction -- certainly all those making "real" money by only e-publishing are genre authors. If the worldwide web is for information, then I guess eReading is for relaxation!

"But then there's also the fact that ANYONE can publish their novel online...."

That's why social marketing is more important than ever. Which is just the ol' word-of-mouth, only raised exponentially! But I don't know of any purely e- and self-published writers of literary fiction, though; again, it's romance/mystery/horror/sci-fic, maybe western and war, too.

[newmark]

I'm not sure how much people read online in the sense of sitting at a computer, but there are increasing numbers of people reading electronic books via their readers (Kindle etc).

I'm writing a series of novels which I plan to self-publish online. I expect the first novel to be ready by the end of the year or beginning of next. I've thought about submitting my book to traditional publishers, but I know several writers who have done this.

First: publishers get very upset if you submit your novel to more than one publisher at a time (and I've been told will blacklist you if you are found out to be doing this). This is a problem because they are so slow to read and reply. Usually 3-4 months minimum.

Second: most editors don't accept work not coming via an agent. They seldom read beyond the first few sentences anyway. Those that do seldom read beyond the first page.....(or so I've read from many sources).

Third: publishers do not usually promote new works with any great enthusiasm.

So it could take you years to find a publisher. Only submitting a novel to six publishers may take two years of your time waiting for replies.

However, if you self-publish online you can control the process to a greater extent. Electronic readers, which I really like, are becoming more and more popular.

I think it's much more exciting to be doing it myself.

[Rebecca800]

Did you know that Amazon now sells more Kindle books than paperback and hardback books combined?

[Aminka Ozmun]

I totally agree, Newmark!

It's really an exciting time to be a writer. We're still at a great disadvantage compared to musicians and even visual artists, as reading takes time (Jorge Luis Borges has a famous quote about good readers being harder to find than good writers -- and he wasn't joking, either) -- but compared to what writers had to deal with before, we're better positioned than ever before!

[Criseyde]

Hmm.. thanks for your responses! I'll check that site out, Aminka.

And yes, I did know that Amazon is selling more electronic books than physical books, but Kindle books still have to go through a publisher so I don't consider it "e-publishing."

[cacheborn]

E publishing has become a force to reckon with. With Amanda Hocking becoming a millionaire and Rowling deciding to publish Harry Potter E books herself, the field is being taken seriously by professional authors as well.

It's a good way to get noticed for new authors but of course you have to be good enough to get noticed. A good website for newbies is Konrath's blog.

On a related note, RIP Michael Hart - e book pioneer and founder of Project Gutenberg.

E-book pioneer Michael Hart dies | Deep Tech - CNET News

[newmark]

Originally Posted by Criseyde

Kindle books still have to go through a publisher so I don't consider it "e-publishing."

What is it then?

[Criseyde]

Originally Posted by newmark

What is it then?

Uh, I guess it's just another form of traditional publishing. E-publishing is usually self publishing, isn't it?

[WarrenG]

Originally Posted by Criseyde

Kindle books still have to go through a publisher so I don't consider it "e-publishing."

Anyone can put a book up on the Kindle store, it doesn't have to go through a publisher.

[Criseyde]

Originally Posted by WarrenG

Anyone can put a book up on the Kindle store, it doesn't have to go through a publisher.

Oh, I didn't know that! Interesting.

[Agota]

I haven't read fiction that is self-published online in a while.

I don't really know anything, but my first impression about the blog that publishes a novel is negative for some reason. Maybe it's because I associate it with sore eyes and getting tired from spending so much time on PC. That's a headache for me as a reader. I'm also not sure how blogs like that would generate traffic. That's a headache for me as a blogger. Again, it may be my ignorance, since I'm completely unaware of what's going in blogosphere when it comes to fiction.

Now, publising an e-book and selling it on Kindle store seems like a completely different story to me. You can give away the review copies in exchange for testimonials and get good reviews (that's assuming your book is good ). You can also send out the review copies to people who review fiction on their blogs. You can find many other ways to promote your e-book. Your e-book is accessible not only to people who read your blog should you have one, but also to people who browse through Amazon fiction listings, which is huge traffic. What's best, Amazon handles everything, you do promotion right, you get money rolling in. This sounds like a really legitimate business strategy for a starting author..

I think people who are starting out as fiction writers can write a popular e-book, market it like crazy and sell loads of copies on amazon store, then work on creating fan base on website like FB or maybe start a blog, etc., then leverage all this success to get the "real" book deal. I believe publishers will favor people who come in and say "Hey, I have a manuscript for a book.. This is my second book, I self-published my first one, it sold 250,000 copies on Amazon store...Oh, right, and I have my high traffic blog and 100k+ raving fans on facebook who are all ready to pre-order my second book.." over someone who simply sends them the manuscript of their first book..

[Andrew Brunelle]

Even if someone lands a publishing deal, there is no guarantee of success. And let's be honest here, most books sell modestly at best. Most writers don't even earn back their entire advance from the publisher. Especially if it is their first book. But at least a publisher can get you more exposure.

E-publishing a book yourself may be easier in the short run, but the marketing has to be done all yourself. Or if you can get others to do it for you. Self-publishing is a lot harder than it looks if you're trying to sell enough books to make a living off of. Writing a book is the easy part. Getting it sold is the hard part.

People are writing Kindle books and selling them for $1 now. Any serious aspiring author would be pretty mad right now, especially if they realize that anyone can be an author now and it will water down the quality pretty far. Anyone can write a book now and no matter the quality, it will be right besides your so-called masterpiece. It was a lot easier to write novels years ago when there was less competition.

That being said, if your book is of very high quality and exceeds people's expectations when they read it, word of mouth will get it sold a lot faster, but even then it is a small chance of success, but those who put the most into it will get the best result.

[Criseyde]

Originally Posted by Andrew Brunelle

Even if someone lands a publishing deal, there is no guarantee of success. And let's be honest here, most books sell modestly at best. Most writers don't even earn back their entire advance from the publisher. Especially if it is their first book. But at least a publisher can get you more exposure.

E-publishing a book yourself may be easier in the short run, but the marketing has to be done all yourself. Or if you can get others to do it for you. Self-publishing is a lot harder than it looks if you're trying to sell enough books to make a living off of. Writing a book is the easy part. Getting it sold is the hard part.

People are writing Kindle books and selling them for $1 now. Any serious aspiring author would be pretty mad right now, especially if they realize that anyone can be an author now and it will water down the quality pretty far. Anyone can write a book now and no matter the quality, it will be right besides your so-called masterpiece. It was a lot easier to write novels years ago when there was less competition.

That being said, if your book is of very high quality and exceeds people's expectations when they read it, word of mouth will get it sold a lot faster, but even then it is a small chance of success, but those who put the most into it will get the best result.

I don't think it will really "water down the quality" of literature or anything like that. There's always been pulp fiction. The internet has given many people a voice but that doesn't mean anyone is listening...

I see upsides and downsides to it, like any other medium. I was just wondering how seriously people take it.

[Rebecca800]

Personally I feel that if you think your finished novel can seriously compete with the big names in your genre, then I would seek a publisher - via an agent of course. You'll have to be patient until you get signed, but they'll give you more exposure than you could ever dream of on your own. I don't know this from personal experience. I only know it from my own research and talking to other writers.

If you have a semi-decent work but you sense it doesn't have the strength to sell 100,000+ copies (either it's not that original or polished or just too niche to appeal to the masses) but you still feel the need to get it out there - then perhaps self-publishing is for you. You can do this through Amazon Kindle for free and it takes about 24 hours to see your book go on sale. You earn 70% per sale and Amazon acts as the platform to direct your own online marketing efforts.

That's not to say there are no groundbreaking self-published works out there... Some self-published Kindle authors have gained popularity by selling dirt cheap ($1) e-books, writing series which draws people in to multiple reads, and gaining publicity through word of mouth if their fiction is really compelling. Kindle even saw its first self-published $1 million author this year - so it is possible.

My conclusion is it's an interesting choice but in either field, you have to be exceptional if you want to make a living out of it.

[newmark]

Originally Posted by Andrew Brunelle

But at least a publisher can get you more exposure.

People are writing Kindle books and selling them for $1 now. Any serious aspiring author would be pretty mad right now, especially if they realize that anyone can be an author now and it will water down the quality pretty far.

It's not sure that a publisher will get you more exposure. If you are a big name, then yes - perhaps. Often the publishers don't put in very much effort, especially for new writers.

Am I mad to consider selling my novels when other people are selling theirs for less? Should I be scared of competition? Perhaps madness is part of it. If I was completely rational I guess wouldn't be spending a lot of hours writing novels with no guarantee of success - but you never know unless you try.

[newmark]

Originally Posted by Rebecca800

You'll have to be patient until you get signed, but they'll give you more exposure than you could ever dream of on your own.

You can do this through Amazon Kindle for free and it takes about 24 hours to see your book go on sale. You earn 70% per sale and Amazon acts as the platform to direct your own online marketing efforts.

The patience required to find an agent, then submit manuscripts to one publisher at a time, to publishers who take 3-4 months to reply (usually negatively - even to good books), then keep repeating for years... well, it's a lot of patience

On Amazon kindle, how much you earn per sale depends on how you price your book. If you sell your book for $2.99 - $9.99, then you get 70%. If you sell your book for under $2.99, or over $9.99, then you get 30%, which is still a lot more than a publisher will give you.

[Agota]

I hope that still on topic:

I've read this interview with Jack Canfield this morning, it certainly gave me some new perspective on what makes a book bestseller.

I think that the main reason why most books sell only few copies is that writers think that once their book is published, they can sit back and relax, when the truth is that even if you have a decent book, you have to market it like crazy. There are some people who are lucky and their books just suddenly become popular without much efforts or because someone famous stumble upon them, but these are exceptions. Everyone else who's serious about their book has to put massive efforts into marketing.

Actually, I believe it's the same thing with other forms of writing as well, not only paper books: bloggers write and wait for visitors to come, people write e-books and expect sales, etc. They forget the DELIVER part of create and deliver value formula.

Just my two cents

[Criseyde]

I've been reading Amanda Hocking's blog. I think it's pretty nifty. I also thought this was nifty: Amanda Hocking's Blog: The Secret

[cacheborn]

Originally Posted by Criseyde

I've been reading Amanda Hocking's blog. I think it's pretty nifty. I also thought this was nifty: Amanda Hocking's Blog: The Secret

Cool. I subscribe to her blog but I had missed that post.

[Aminka Ozmun]

I don't think web fiction can be the same as traditional fiction. The very nature of the medium encourages physical interaction, not physical passivity.

A book is simply more intimate. A screen, a lot less so. E-readers like the Kindle have been a hit probably because they manage to keep the intimacy of the book, such as a small screen, with the interactivity of a computer.

But using a computer, online, I think web fiction needs to really engage its readers -- directly. Such as those early experiments in hyperfiction (hypertext fiction) from the '90s. I'm not sure why they never took off, as their antecedents, the text-based adventure games of the 1908s, were a big hit, but perhaps it's time to revisit the idea....

[Aminka Ozmun]

Originally Posted by Andrew Brunelle

Even if someone lands a publishing deal, there is no guarantee of success. And let's be honest here, most books sell modestly at best. Most writers don't even earn back their entire advance from the publisher. Especially if it is their first book. But at least a publisher can get you more exposure.

E-publishing a book yourself may be easier in the short run, but the marketing has to be done all yourself. Or if you can get others to do it for you. Self-publishing is a lot harder than it looks if you're trying to sell enough books to make a living off of. Writing a book is the easy part. Getting it sold is the hard part.

I understand from reading traditionally published writers' comments on the business that unless you're something of a hit, publishers tend to ignore you anyway (i.e., stuck in mid-list author hell). I believe Margaret Atwood (or some other Canadian female author) even wrote a short story about tugging along her own books to a bookstore signing where no one showed up, not even her publisher.

That's why I believe self-publishing via eBooks is the only way to go. If you've got to promote yourself anyway, as J.A. Konrath notes, what exactly do you need the middleman for??

Originally Posted by Andrew Brunelle

People are writing Kindle books and selling them for $1 now. Any serious aspiring author would be pretty mad right now, especially if they realize that anyone can be an author now and it will water down the quality pretty far. Anyone can write a book now and no matter the quality, it will be right besides your so-called masterpiece. It was a lot easier to write novels years ago when there was less competition.

I was "mad" at first, but I quickly realized that if someone with bad grammar, cliché plots and stock characters, not to mention downright misspelled words every other page, can make a hundred thousand dollars a month, then I can make at least...twenty bucks!!

I mean, writers need really good coffee....

Seriously, I could just churn out genre fiction, too, so why not, I thought. I hope to have a fully functioning downloadable eBook site come February!

Originally Posted by Andrew Brunelle

That being said, if your book is of very high quality and exceeds people's expectations when they read it, word of mouth will get it sold a lot faster, but even then it is a small chance of success, but those who put the most into it will get the best result.

That's always been the case. It's just that now, with eReaders being so popular, the path to success has become that much wider!

[Aminka Ozmun]

Originally Posted by Rebecca800

My conclusion is it's an interesting choice but in either field, you have to be exceptional if you want to make a living out of it.

I hear this a lot, this notion that "if you're any good," "if you're exceptional" -- and I would like to address it, with all due respect!

I fully expect to make at least a few hundred dollars a month within two years selling genre fiction.

Yet I'd never consider it "good," never mind "exceptional."

It would simply be what people want.

Sometimes, they don't need nicely grilled prime steak. Sometimes, they just want a sloppy ol' hamburger.

Even Amanda Hocking, while not disparaging her own work, says on her blog that writers she admires -- that in her own opinion write better than her in the genre -- have not been successful, and it puzzles her.

So I guess I just don't want anyone, any writer, to feel that his or her work isn't "good" simply because it isn't selling, or selling as well as they'd hoped. I think it's all about finding one's own way in the world...online and off.

Anyway, what the success of purely e-published genre writers has really demonstrated to me is that it's all about marketing. With proper marketing, you can sell snowballs to Eskimos!

[Criseyde]

Originally Posted by Aminka Ozmun

I hear this a lot, this notion that "if you're any good," "if you're exceptional" -- and I would like to address it, with all due respect!

I fully expect to make at least a few hundred dollars a month within two years selling genre fiction.

Yet I'd never consider it "good," never mind "exceptional."

It would simply be what people want.

Sometimes, they don't need nicely grilled prime steak. Sometimes, they just want a sloppy ol' hamburger.

Even Amanda Hocking, while not disparaging her own work, says on her blog that writers she admires -- that in her own opinion write better than her in the genre -- have not been successful, and it puzzles her.

So I guess I just don't want anyone, any writer, to feel that his or her work isn't "good" simply because it isn't selling, or selling as well as they'd hoped. I think it's all about finding one's own way in the world...online and off.

Anyway, what the success of purely e-published genre writers has really demonstrated to me is that it's all about marketing. With proper marketing, you can sell snowballs to Eskimos!

Ah wow... I disagree with this so much. This is pretty much the reason I was skeptical of e-publishing in the first place.

Yes, it's true that "not selling" =! "not good." But literature has a purpose. Even the literature that I find abysmal -- like Twilight -- is obviously speaking to something within the culture. (I could go on at some length about what that something is, but I'll refrain for now.)

Of course not everyone wants to read the canon all the time. Even I don't want to read The Faerie Queene every day, you know? But the writing has to resonate somehow. Fiction isn't about making money, it's about telling stories. And it's about saying what you have to say.

It's not about marketing. It's so not about marketing that I'm kind of inarticulate right now.

[Aminka Ozmun]

Thanks for the link, Rebecca800! It's a very good article.

[Aminka Ozmun]

Originally Posted by Criseyde

Ah wow... I disagree with this so much. This is pretty much the reason I was skeptical of e-publishing in the first place.

Yes, it's true that "not selling" =! "not good." But literature has a purpose. Even the literature that I find abysmal -- like Twilight -- is obviously speaking to something within the culture. (I could go on at some length about what that something is, but I'll refrain for now.)

Not sure what you mean; I happen to agree that "it takes all kinds" -- or, "all God's creatures, great and small," so I don't know that we disagree here. But please go on about that cultural "something" you have in mind; it's useful for all artists to know!

Originally Posted by Criseyde

Of course not everyone wants to read the canon all the time. Even I don't want to read The Faerie Queene every day, you know? But the writing has to resonate somehow. Fiction isn't about making money, it's about telling stories. And it's about saying what you have to say.

Believe me, I used to think the way you do. However, I realized something very basic one day: fiction can be about both making money and telling stories, stories that "resonate somehow," so much so that the reader's willing to fork over money for it. Of course, you know that, too, so I'm not sure where we have a disagreement here, either.

As for "saying what you have to say," I think John Gardner said it best in his Art of Fiction primer: the writer inevitably winds up expressing him or herself. His or her purpose, however, is to entertain the reader.

Originally Posted by Criseyde

It's not about marketing. It's so not about marketing that I'm kind of inarticulate right now.

I only wish that were true, Criseyde. But if a tree falls in the forest and no one's around to hear it....

The former CEO of Pepsi during the '80s, John Sculley (a close friend of Steve Jobs' and head of Apple during the '90s) was able to pull ahead of rival Coke through marketing alone, as everyone -- even him -- knew that cola is cola. Since I'm talking about genre fiction, which is generally derivative (okay, all literature is if you want to get down to it, the same way we're all related in an ultimate sense, but you know what I mean here), the analogy applies.

Or don't take my word for it. Amanda Hocking said about as much herself on her blog!

[Criseyde]

Originally Posted by Aminka Ozmun

Not sure what you mean; I happen to agree that "it takes all kinds" -- or, "all God's creatures, great and small," so I don't know that we disagree here. But please go on about that cultural "something" you have in mind; it's useful for all artists to know!

I mean that even though Twilight is giving readers what they want, it's not because the author did a bunch of market research and then tailored her product to suit the desires of the consumer. It's because she had a story to tell and she told it, and that story struck a chord with teenage girls. It touches on feelings of not fitting in, struggles with parents, the desire for love, etc. along with a good dose of urban fantasy (or "paranormal romance" as it's being called now).

Believe me, I used to think the way you do. However, I realized something very basic one day: fiction can be about both making money and telling stories, stories that "resonate somehow," so much so that the reader's willing to fork over money for it. Of course, you know that, too, so I'm not sure where we have a disagreement here, either.

Yes, I do know that. What I'm saying is that if the money comes before the story, it probably won't be an awesome story -- because the author would be too concerned with trying to be everything to everyone and not concerned enough with bringing a compelling vision to the page.

As for "saying what you have to say," I think John Gardner said it best in his Art of Fiction primer: the writer inevitably winds up expressing him or herself. His or her purpose, however, is to entertain the reader.

The eternal question: art pour l'art ou art pour les gens?

I only wish that were true, Criseyde. But if a tree falls in the forest and no one's around to hear it....

The former CEO of Pepsi during the '80s, John Sculley (a close friend of Steve Jobs' and head of Apple during the '90s) was able to pull ahead of rival Coke through marketing alone, as everyone -- even him -- knew that cola is cola. Since I'm talking about genre fiction, which is generally derivative (okay, all literature is if you want to get down to it, the same way we're all related in an ultimate sense, but you know what I mean here), the analogy applies.

I don't think the analogy applies at all. Pepsi and Coke are nearly the same product. The differences in taste are pretty negligible. Only hardcore fans can tell them apart in a blind taste test. Pepsi was dealing with class perceptions -- Coke was considered a more "sophisticated" product. Marketing is well and good for changing perceptions like that.

But would you really go so far as to say "a story is a story"? A Song of Ice and Fire is the same as Harry Potter? I certainly think it's true that there are no new stories, and that all stories can be reduced to a few simple outlines, but it's all in the execution. One of my favorite stories is Shakespeare's Troilus and Cressida, and that tells the audience something very different than, oh, Braveheart, despite the fact that both are essentially war stories.

Or don't take my word for it. Amanda Hocking said about as much herself on her blog!

We must be reading different blogs. What I've read is that she loves to write and has been doing so for the past 20 years, that she'd write even if nobody read it (and did for a long time), that her success is largely due to reviews and word of mouth, that the goals of e-publishing and traditional publishing -- producing good books -- should be the same, and that content/delivering a high-quality product is of paramount importance. I never saw her say anything like "it's all about marketing and with good marketing you could sell a snowball to an Eskimo," nor did I read anything along the lines of "cola is cola and that analogy applies to genre fiction" (although she did say that people compare her books to Twilight and she can't understand why, because besides being the same genre, they're not alike at all).

[Agota]

Originally Posted by Criseyde

I mean that even though Twilight is giving readers what they want, it's not because the author did a bunch of market research and then tailored her product to suit the desires of the consumer. It's because she had a story to tell and she told it, and that story struck a chord with teenage girls. It touches on feelings of not fitting in, struggles with parents, the desire for love, etc. along with a good dose of urban fantasy (or "paranormal romance" as it's being called now).

Yes, I do know that. What I'm saying is that if the money comes before the story, it probably won't be an awesome story -- because the author would be too concerned with trying to be everything to everyone and not concerned enough with bringing a compelling vision to the page.

When you think about it, you can apply the general business principles, like defining target audience, understanding your customer, effective marketing, etc. when writing a fiction book and create a book that really has compelling vision: mainly because it targets a particular audience very well. This would allow the writer to express himself or herself, but it also would increase his or her chances to making a living from selling that book, online or offline. It might seem wrong when you put literature on the pedestal, but what exactly is wrong about combining writing skills and business skills, really? It doesn't necessarily decrease the quality of writing, it might as well increase it a lot and it certainly increases the chances of getting paid

I also don't see much wrong in creating genre fiction that is simply created as a product that fills a certain need in the market in order to make money without any higher purposes, the same way I don't really see what's so wrong about people creating popular music and getting paid. People often blame them that they're selling out, but hey, in these cases, it's just a job, so everyone who is not doing what they're really passionate about and works in a job only for money is selling out..Okay, well, they're selling out on a bigger picture, but let's talk about a small "make money to pay your bills" picture. Nothing wrong with creating something that someone else finds valuable and is willing to pay money for, even if you won't get the Nobel Literature Prize for it.

It reminds me business a little bit. You know how there are people who strive to build business on something they're passionate about and can make a great contribution to the world and there are people who simply find a need, fill it and cash out, without the need to be passionate about the business itself? I belong to the first group of people, but I don't think that the second group of people is wrong. Maybe they'll decide to combine their passions with their business, maybe not, but currently they're making an honest living, nothing wrong with that, right? It's the same way with creating a genre fiction which is tailored to appeal to a certain group of people: you find a need, you fill it, you cash out. That's definitely better than flipping burger in McDonalds or working 9-5 in a boring office job, right?

[Criseyde]

Originally Posted by Agota

When you think about it, you can apply the general business principles, like defining target audience, understanding your customer, effective marketing, etc. when writing a fiction book and create a book that really has compelling vision: mainly because it targets a particular audience very well. This would allow the writer to express himself or herself, but it also would increase his or her chances to making a living from selling that book, online or offline. It might seem wrong when you put literature on the pedestal, but what exactly is wrong about combining writing skills and business skills, really? It doesn't necessarily decrease the quality of writing, it might as well increase it a lot and it certainly increases the chances of getting paid

I'm not trying to say that you shouldn't combine writing skills and business skills. I'm saying that writing something you don't like or care about in order to make money isn't going to result in something that a lot of people will read, nor is it going to fulfill you. There's nothing wrong with wanting to sell what you've worked hard to create, and I never meant to imply that there is. It's more like this:

It's the same way with creating a genre fiction which is tailored to appeal to a certain group of people: you find a need, you fill it, you cash out. That's definitely better than flipping burger in McDonalds or working 9-5 in a boring office job, right?

It's no better because it's no different.

I also don't see much wrong in creating genre fiction that is simply created as a product that fills a certain need in the market in order to make money without any higher purposes, the same way I don't really see what's so wrong about people creating popular music and getting paid. People often blame them that they're selling out, but hey, in these cases, it's just a job, so everyone who is not doing what they're really passionate about and works in a job only for money is selling out..Okay, well, they're selling out on a bigger picture, but let's talk about a small "make money to pay your bills" picture. Nothing wrong with creating something that someone else finds valuable and is willing to pay money for, even if you won't get the Nobel Literature Prize for it.

I've never accused a music artist of selling out. I don't know of any huge stars who don't love what they do and do it because they believe their work is important. I've never heard a successful artist say "I'm in it for the cash." Being popular doesn't mean selling out, just like the fact that I don't like something doesn't mean it's not good.

It reminds me business a little bit. You know how there are people who strive to build business on something they're passionate about and can make a great contribution to the world and there are people who simply find a need, fill it and cash out, without the need to be passionate about the business itself? I belong to the first group of people, but I don't think that the second group of people is wrong. Maybe they'll decide to combine their passions with their business, maybe not, but currently they're making an honest living, nothing wrong with that, right?

That might work with non-creative enterprises. I don't really see it happening with creative work. A good book grips you. You identify, you believe. If I care about the Saga of Mary and James, I'm going to do a better job of writing it than someone who doesn't (assuming that we possess equivalent grammar and composition skills).

Then again, dentistry is the profession with the highest suicide rate. And dentists make pretty good money.

[Criseyde]

Maybe this will clear something up: I'm not saying that people shouldn't write genre fiction because they think it will sell. And I don't think it's morally wrong to try to make money, nor do I think it's morally wrong to make money doing something you don't have a passion for.

What I AM saying is that 1. good fiction is about MUCH more than marketing, and 2. writing a book that you have no passion for probably isn't going to result in good fiction.