james_nicoll ([info]james_nicoll) wrote,
@ 2007-01-02 15:43:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
What readers are not owed by writers
Writers do not have to be readers' pals, even if the reader really really likes their books.

Readers are not owed anything by the writer that falls into the domain of someone else in the chain of production, from printing errors to cover art (And if you are unhappy with some aspect of the book that falls into this catagory, try to talk to the right person. Trying to return a defective copy of the book to its editor will be counter-productive).

Readers not owed the next book in the series. You get what you pay for and what you paid for is the book in your hands. Any number of things can prevent the next book from appearing so if you hate the idea that a series may not be finished, don't buy series (Do I need to add a special "and getting angry at an author for becoming terminally ill before finishing a long running series is really stupid"?)

Readers are not owed the book they thought they were buying (Take this up with marketing if the cover copy misled you) nor are they owed the book they wish the author had written instead of the one that they did.

Readers are not owed agreement, even if they own a lot of the author's books.

(Post a new comment)


[info]twoeleven
2007-01-02 07:53 pm UTC (link)
what brings this up?

(Reply to this)


[info]the_nita
2007-01-02 07:54 pm UTC (link)
I gather people are being nobs again, hmm?

(Reply to this)


[info]aries_jordan
2007-01-02 07:55 pm UTC (link)
What brought that on?

(Reply to this)


[info]jwgh
2007-01-02 07:58 pm UTC (link)
But if I need a kidney transplant I am entitled to hit up Lois McMaster Bujold, right?

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]jamesenge
2007-01-02 08:06 pm UTC (link)
She could at least forward your money to Jackson's Whole.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]machineplay
2007-01-02 08:04 pm UTC (link)
*eyeroll* The truth is that writers don't 'owe' readers anything. They can choose to provide things, but that's their choice. Their choice may even be motivated by wanting reader approval, but it's still not because the author 'owes' them. It shocks me how many people feel there's some arcane contract between reader/fan and writer/creator based simply upon the fact that reader/fan chooses to place some emotional investment in the work.

What on earth brings this on?

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]james_nicoll
2007-01-02 08:20 pm UTC (link)
A very gradual accumulation of events, followed by a cascade triggered by a high energy cosmic ray passing through my brain.

The "book buyer yells at (I think) pnh for not facilitating the return of his defective copy," happened in the mid-1990s, for example[1], and rasfw used to have period visits from a guy who wanted authors legally liable for not finishing series.


1: I am not even sure pnh was the editor of the book in question. I am sure that it was Tor because when I launched into a tirade about how when I went to NYC and Tor didn't send any editors out to park my car, it was pointed out to me that one reason might have been that I gave an address for Tor that was very out of date.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)
(no subject) - [info]julesjones, 2007-01-02 09:11 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]james_nicoll, 2007-01-02 09:17 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]julesjones, 2007-01-02 09:30 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]james_nicoll, 2007-01-02 09:38 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]james_nicoll, 2007-01-02 09:42 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]sclerotic_rings, 2007-01-02 10:52 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]le_trombone, 2007-01-03 12:24 am UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]james_nicoll, 2007-01-03 12:29 am UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]doug_palmer, 2007-01-03 02:17 am UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]le_trombone, 2007-01-03 05:31 am UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]zanzjan, 2007-01-03 02:49 pm UTC (Expand)

[info]lpetrazickis
2007-01-03 03:55 pm UTC (link)
Well, they don't legally in the contemporary West. Morals, ethics, and honour are a different question.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)
(no subject) - [info]machineplay, 2007-01-03 04:19 pm UTC (Expand)

[info]sclerotic_rings
2007-01-02 08:05 pm UTC (link)
Caught some entitlement brat's tirade about how readers are owed something by writers just because the EB wants it right now, eh?

(Reply to this)


[info]matgb
2007-01-02 08:07 pm UTC (link)
Laurell KH follow up, or something else?

(Reply to this)


[info]jonquil
2007-01-02 08:09 pm UTC (link)
Readers are not owed the happiness and/or survival of their favorite characters.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]james_nicoll
2007-01-02 09:08 pm UTC (link)
Or that their happiness be arrived at in the manner that the reader wanted.

[Reader are allowed not to like what happened. They just aren't entitled to have it happen some other way]

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)
(no subject) - [info]ross_teneyck, 2007-01-03 03:46 am UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2007-01-03 07:49 am UTC (Expand)

[info]matt_ruff
2007-01-03 01:42 pm UTC (link)
Curse you, Joss Whedon!

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]dd_b
2007-01-02 08:16 pm UTC (link)
Readers are owed a competent and workmanlike job of writing (including characterization, plotting, worldbuilding, etc.), in particular a job in line with the author's previous work when there is any, unless the departure is signaled. This obligation falls primarily on the author, but also on the editor to some degree. Since these things are entirely subjective, there will frequently be disagreement.

Readers are owed not grossly deceptive marketing (cover and cover copy bears some relationship to the content, sharp left turns in a series are signaled somehow, etc.). This obligation falls nearly entirely on the publisher, though if the author *has* any influence and uses it badly, blame accrues.

Editors, art directors, and others are also owed various things by various parties, and they often don't get them either.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]doug_palmer
2007-01-03 02:06 am UTC (link)
... in particular a job in line with the author's previous work when there is any, unless the departure is signaled.


Er, why?

Unless it's an explicit series, I can't see why an author shouldn't go wherever their muse is dragging them. Even with a series, I'd at least be interested in the concept of a one where the author tries to range around without violating the structure of the series; degree of difficulty 9.5.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)
(no subject) - [info]serenya_loreden, 2007-01-03 03:23 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]xiphias, 2007-01-03 04:30 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]dd_b, 2007-01-03 11:12 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]doug_palmer, 2007-01-04 12:05 am UTC (Expand)

[info]alexx_kay
2007-01-02 08:21 pm UTC (link)
I don't know why everyone else is so curious about what brought this on. Rules exist because people break them. Every rule you list gets broken quite regularly. There's no lack of inspiration for such a thing.

(Reply to this)


[info]commodorified
2007-01-02 08:41 pm UTC (link)
(Do I need to add a special "and getting angry at an author for becoming terminally ill before finishing a long running series is really stupid"?)

Targeted railing at the fates is still permitted, I trust?

Not especially because of the books, though that too.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]james_nicoll
2007-01-02 09:06 pm UTC (link)
Oh, sure. Just not at the author. I would imagine that given a choice, a terminally ill author would prefer to be healthy.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)
(no subject) - [info]commodorified, 2007-01-02 09:18 pm UTC (Expand)

[info]erastes
2007-01-02 09:11 pm UTC (link)
Oh WORD!

i can only speak from a fanfic perspective, but omg the number of times i've been begged for sequels and had grumpy readers because i politely declined.

The clincher will be when I write a sequel to Standish, it's on the cards, as they may not like what I do with the characters.

If I were JKRowling, I would DEFINITELY kill Harry off. Just to shut the fans up.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]wizwom
2007-01-03 04:15 am UTC (link)
I like your style :-)

Ungratefulness should always be met with actions intended to make the person even less happy.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]snarkel
2007-01-02 09:19 pm UTC (link)
I must admit, I'm curious as to the other side of the coin: what do you feel writers are not owed by readers?

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]james_nicoll
2007-01-02 09:21 pm UTC (link)
Can't I save that for another post?

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)
readers don't owe writers... - [info]the_blue_fenix, 2007-01-02 10:27 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]snarkel, 2007-01-03 03:02 am UTC (Expand)

[info]cultureulterior
2007-01-02 09:47 pm UTC (link)
Things writers can do, which are entirely within their rights but in my opinion are ungentlemanly.

o Saying they don't believe in their fictional universe anymore(Stross, I'm looking at you).
o Ghostwriting badly for other, dead, writers.(Benford, I'm looking at you)
o Putting political positions in the mouths of dead writers which they wouldn't have held(Spider Robinson, I'm looking at you)
o Start harping on their politics/religion in the _later_ books of a series(Too many to look at, I'd go crosseyed).

(Reply to this) (Thread)(Expand)

[info]james_nicoll
2007-01-02 09:52 pm UTC (link)
Saying they don't believe in their fictional universe anymore(Stross, I'm looking at you).

Um, are writers supposed to be denied the right to change their minds?

Ghostwriting badly for other, dead, writers.(Benford, I'm looking at you)

Which dead writer do you have in mind here?

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)
(no subject) - [info]mjlayman, 2007-01-03 12:53 am UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]armb, 2007-01-03 10:55 am UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]autopope, 2007-01-02 09:56 pm UTC (Expand)
That's known - (Anonymous), 2007-01-02 10:35 pm UTC (Expand)
Re: That's known - [info]autopope, 2007-01-03 01:06 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]sraun, 2007-01-02 10:35 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2007-01-02 10:57 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]sraun, 2007-01-03 01:06 am UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]dd_b, 2007-01-02 10:35 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]debgeisler, 2007-01-02 11:12 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]dd_b, 2007-01-03 11:16 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]cultureulterior, 2007-01-02 10:46 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]cultureulterior, 2007-01-02 10:51 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]katfeete, 2007-01-03 01:41 pm UTC (Expand)
Um... - [info]seawasp, 2007-01-03 12:18 am UTC (Expand)
Re: Um... - [info]cultureulterior, 2007-01-03 12:41 am UTC (Expand)
Re: Um... - [info]seawasp, 2007-01-03 01:08 am UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]serenya_loreden, 2007-01-03 03:14 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]james_nicoll, 2007-01-03 03:34 pm UTC (Expand)
Exceptions to every rule
[info]dragon3
2007-01-02 11:15 pm UTC (link)
Readers are not owed the book they thought they were buying (Take this up with marketing if the cover copy misled you)

Some years ago I read a piece in the Globe by a writer whose work I had enjoyed, lamenting, among other things, how hard it was to keep making money at SF. Around the same time I noticed what I thought was a new book of his, since I didn't recognize the title. I did the [recognized name] and [new title] thing and bought it without further inspection. It turned out to be a repackaging of old stuff under a new name and I was pissed off. Not pissed off enough to raise a stink, but pissed off enough with *all* involved that it left a bad taste in my mouth.

I think loyal readers are owed enough consideration from the entire publishing chain that they won't be *tricked* into rebuying material that is already on their shelves.

(Reply to this) (Thread)
Re: Exceptions to every rule
[info]jwgh
2007-01-03 01:29 am UTC (link)
Are you talking about an anthology, or something republished under a different name? I'm aware of examples of the latter but I thought it was less common than it used to be.

I admit to being annoyed by sequels that are released after (supposedly all-inclusive) omnibus editions of the earlier stories have already been released, but I suppose I should just be grateful that there's more material to read. (Assuming, of course, that the new books are worth reading. Although even if they aren't it doesn't necessarily stop me.) Of course this is the opposite of the problem of the unfinished series that is discussed elsewhere in this thread.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)
Re: Exceptions to every rule - (Anonymous), 2007-01-04 01:25 am UTC (Expand)

[info]fredcritter
2007-01-03 01:58 am UTC (link)

Readers not owed the next book in the series.

No doubt you are familiar with the rumor that Philip José Farmer is . . . unwilling? . . . unable? . . . to finish a series because he fears doing so will bring about his untimely death.

(Reply to this) (Thread)(Expand)

[info]wizwom
2007-01-03 04:18 am UTC (link)
I wonder if a crazed fan could arrange for it to be even more dangerous to NOT write the book?

(Reply to this) (Parent)
(no subject) - [info]matt_ruff, 2007-01-03 01:50 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]fredcritter, 2007-01-03 02:14 pm UTC (Expand)

[info]katfeete
2007-01-03 01:53 pm UTC (link)
As a subset: readers are not owed books that don't kick the reader right in the prejudices.

Brought on by reading not one, but two bits of mail Laurie King (a mystery writer) posted on her blog this year, wherein readers who had enjoyed her Mary Russell novels bought a Kate Martinelli books and OMG! The protagonist! Was a lesbian! Laurie, how could you?

The letters appeared to commonly believe that a) the books should have had warning labels of some kind on them, b) no one but gay people would be interested in reading about a gay protagonist, and c) it was a betrayal for an author who had previously written about a straight woman to then go on and write about a gay woman.

And then there was the fan who wrote Scott Lynch nasty letters about putting a female pirate in his next book.

If you don't like the author's politics or character habits, don't read their books. There are a few authors I don't read for these reasons. If you really like the author, tough titties: either give up a good read or suck it up and read something that makes you uncomfortable. But the author isn't required to pander to your prejudices, no matter what they've written before or what they will write again.

(Reply to this)


[info]zodiacal_light
2007-01-04 09:10 am UTC (link)
Interesting. Hope you don't mind a drive-by comment.

I think all this can be boiled down to one thing: readers are not owed the fulfillment of their expectations. That is, readers can expect whatever they want, but if those expectations are not fulfilled, they cannot place the blame on the writer.

Then again, I'm the kind of person who honestly believes that the only two things a reader is entitled to are books free of glaring spelling and grammar problems (such as having the main character's name spelled differently every two pages ... sigh) and book covers that clearly state the relationship of a particular book to the rest of a series (if applicable) and the contents of a book (if a reprint or anthology).

(Reply to this)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…