# Writing skills v Marketing skills



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson (Aug 25, 2010)

At one time publishers relied heavily on book tours as a marketing tool. Authors, whose personality and public speaking skills allowed it, were taken on world tours. (Some publishers admitted that they wouldn't let certain authors anywhere near their readers! )

Among the numerous book launches/tours I attended were those of Wilbur Smith, Jeffrey Archer, Terry Pratchett, Bryce Courtney and Mandy Rice-Davies (to those who remember her - yes, she did write a novel!) Most of the audience bought copies of the book and lined up to have it autographed.

I always maintained that mediocre to good books would shoot up the bestseller list thanks to this marketing tool, leaving behind excellent books that missed out on the same opportunity.

Indies can now at least _publish_ their own books, but I wonder if their success relies as much on modern marketing skills as it does on their writing skills. 
I have writers asking me to help them upload their books as ebooks, but have to advise them that without learning some computer marketing skills it will be down to sheer luck that they have any success. With all the scams, shady manipulation of ranking and reviews and new methods of marketing it's hard to keep up, and I'm certainly not qualified to give advice in this area (AMS ads are as much a mystery as algebra ).

Are we in danger of marketing skills trumping writing skills in the race to the bestseller list, or does it really matter?

Should creative writing courses now be split between writing and marketing - assuming that the writers wish to sell their work?


----------



## Anarchist (Apr 22, 2015)

In my opinion, marketing skills are just as important as writing skills. They'll become even _more_ important as the barriers to entry disappear.

Great products often fail due to lack of visibility. This risk increases with competition.


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

Nope.

Writing skills are important and they are important to master before mastering marketing skills. A lot of writers don't want to sell a book. And there are many examples where a lot of marketing still couldn't prevent a relative flop. Writing skills (and plotting skills) are everything. You can't compensate for them with marketing skills, even if marketing is also important. It's just important at a different part of a writer's career.


----------



## Deke (May 18, 2013)

There are parts of writing that can be learned, but all of marketing has to be learned. I’ve developed a solid discipline as a writer, but have none as a marketer. Thus I have books that have never sold and have no reviews…and I have no idea how to convince people to buy them or even read them for free. My inability to market may be why I ultimately stop writing fiction and turn to non-fiction.


----------



## CassieL (Aug 29, 2013)

As someone who actually started to see steady book sales after learning some marketing, I can say that being able to market your books is essential.

But as others above have said, I've also seen that the more a book I wrote was what others might want to buy, the better that book did naturally and the better it did when I applied advertising to it.

The best combination is a well-written book on a topic readers actually want that's then marketed well. But after that? I think it's evenly split between a well-written book on a topic readers want that can sell itself and an adequate book on a topic readers want that's well-marketed.


----------



## bruno.carlos.santos84 (Apr 30, 2018)

Well said.


Cassie Leigh said:


> As someone who actually started to see steady book sales after learning some marketing, I can say that being able to market your books is essential.
> 
> But as others above have said, I've also seen that the more a book I wrote was what others might want to buy, the better that book did naturally and the better it did when I applied advertising to it.
> 
> The best combination is a well-written book on a topic readers actually want that's then marketed well. But after that? I think it's evenly split between a well-written book on a topic readers want that can sell itself and an adequate book on a topic readers want that's well-marketed.


Enviado de meu Moto G (5S) usando o Tapatalk


----------



## Talbot (Jul 14, 2015)

Cassie Leigh said:


> As someone who actually started to see steady book sales after learning some marketing, I can say that being able to market your books is essential.
> 
> But as others above have said, I've also seen that the more a book I wrote was what others might want to buy, the better that book did naturally and the better it did when I applied advertising to it.


Hear hear.


----------



## Lu Kudzoza (Nov 1, 2015)

You can sell average to above average books with great marketing. You can even earn a living with barely above average books and great marketing.

However, a great book will sell with average marketing skills. The better the book the better your marketing pays off due to word of mouth. 

To answer the OP question of "Should creative writing courses now be split between writing and marketing - assuming that the writers wish to sell their work?". The answer is no. An author who wants to sell their work should take some marketing classes or buy some books on book marketing or search the internet (or kboards) for relevant information. You should keep the skills separate and know the difference between the two.

The biggest mistakes I see authors make in marketing is they are trying to write instead of market in their ad copy and blurb.


----------



## RBC (Feb 24, 2013)

Good question but it is definitely not a danger for marketing skills to overtake writing skills. I don't think that can ever actually happen!

The product comes first and Marketing is a multiplier. And marketing can't multiply a 0. Even if you have marketing skills 10 out of 10, 0x10=0 (you'd get initial readers with good marketing but then the bad reviews and word of mouth would sink the efforts and the book down still). Really bad books don't make it to worldwide tops. So it's impossible to overtake writing skills in importance.

I think there are more things to ask and think about when it comes to marketing vs writing skills here too:

*1. There will always be outliers*

As in average books making it to the super hights and superb books languishing at the bottom. Sometimes through Serendipity more than just writing. It's something you pretty much have to accept and move on from. Not something to drive yourself nuts about. Only worry about yourself here.

*2. Serendipity*

It is a big part of marketing too because it's not enough to do the right things in marketing you need to do:

Right Things at the Right Time in the Right Order

And those are constantly changing and evolving with marketing not to mention reader tastes change too. So even if you 100% know the right things to do in marketing, it might still not work to 100% result. It's just gonna be that way and we have to accept it. While still trying to do as close to 100% as possible.

*3. What writers want and what Readers want in Writing Skills*

The way Authors judge writing is very much different than how Readers judge them. That's why books who authors consider lame make it to great sales numbers and movies etc. In an ideal world, writing skills would be be-all-end-all but they are not. Readers buy stories, not writing skills. They can't judge good technical writing skills at all. We can tell if the book is good by some terms (like, 'great twists', great action, great character development but average reader doesn't know more - and doesn't need to). Readers will never judge the books the same way writers do and in reality, that's probably good thing because it allows some forgiveness on imperfect writing (more chance for all authors).

So sometimes books that are in the tops get unfair criticism from fellow writers. If market feedback on the book is good and it outsells others, means it's good book because ''that many people'' voted (and if book was bad reviews would kill it but they don't).

The same is happening in Music industry (musicians criticise 'pop music'). The value of a song is not just technical stuff but how many people relate to it (and I'd say the 'relate' part is most important thing). People don't care if song has most clever lyrics, or most intricate melody, the final result is more important than parts of it. If music makes use relate and we like it, we like. Without analyzing it much. Thus 'pop music' is not bad, but popular for a reason.

So, maybe writing skills should be judged from both sides of equation, not just technical. Because staying subjective might lead to jealousy of other more successful authors. Instead of learning.

*4. People don't always want super quality work*

Sometimes we just feel like watching a simple action movie flick to relax and not have to think about who did what and solve the mystery. Same for books. Sometimes readers don't want the book with deep message interwoven into the story and clever things in it. Sometimes they just want simple and easy to consume. It's no one place to criticise people for that tho. So, when those books win, they aren't bad or low-quality. They fit what people want and relate to.

*5. Marketing skills are very broad and each person needs to find their own mix of those.*

A great example here is a Marketing DNA test which helps you determine your strengths and weaknesses in marketing which then help you decide what techniques to use.

https://marketingdnatest.com/

Some author is great 'on the spot' and witty and public speaking can be done on the fly. But other person is not good on the fly so public speaking for him should be done after a careful preparation. And the end result will look amazing (speaker gets the ovation) but it was done in completely different style. 'On the spot' person will be drained by doing a preparation session. And if you throw 'preparation person' into the fire they will stumble. So both people need to put themselves in position to win.

Or, some authors should blog about 'evergreen' topics and others just do more 'what's trendy now' kind of posts. That's where personal preferences/tendencies come into marketing - if you prefer one or the other, stick to it make it your thing in marketing. Own it. Maybe it means making short 2 minute videos instead of 25 minute deep thinking video podcast (or articles). Some are more visual so should use Gifs in the articles. Some aren't. Even that detail can be worked in.

Or, some are more analytical and some are more emotional. So the marketing content should reflect that and lean on whichever is right for you.

This can play a huge part on your Social Media use and what kind of posts to post (own your strength and post those, the readers who resonate with that will resonate).

*6. Using Introversion as an excuse to no learn/do marketing*

Huge.

We live in the age where most marketing can be done with computers and using Introversion as an excuse to not do it is ridiculous. Internet and computers were created by Introverts for Introverts. THE Perfect tool. All marketing (even talking to people) is done at home on your laptop!!! You can meet 100 people on Twitter a day in your pyjamas. Without leaving anywhere. Meeting readers has been made easy for you. No need to go outside. Talk to them online. Easy peasy.

Another big part of marketing books is book promo site. And nothing can be easier than that. Buy it and get some results. Pure laziness. Not hard to do. Hopefully, we can get more options here in future.

No longer authors need to go do book tours in real life too. Instagram and web is full of reviewers. How about spending a month researching all book reviewers there an start engaging with them (comment on books, what could be easier? And more fun?). No need to get in contact with some newspaper critic/reviewer.

*7. Time spent on Marketing vs Writing skills*

Where should more time be spent? On writing skills. But what proportion, that is where there are more nuances.

At least 1 hr a day is minimum to work on marketing skills. Maybe it's 4 writing hrs to 1 marketing hour. Or 1 to 5. Depends on where each author is at but 1hr a day is minimum, esp. for a complete newbie in marketing. That's enough daily to do basic maintenance stuff and study one topic at a time (like spending a month on researching all things about Instagram, or Blogging). And a full-time author has more time to do marketing.

Some might be better off doing cycles - writing cycle then marketing cycle then book launch cycle. But then marketing cycle has to be full-time job. Learning AND testing. Still, some things must be done daily in marketing so even in writing cycle it can't be completely ignored. But really deep-level learning can occur in marketing cycle.

Yeah, so that's a brain dump. Hell of a lot more to add but no time for it. In the end, we live in great times. All authors have a chance and tools to succeed with. Not everyone will but everyone can go for it and make their own luck.


----------



## Guest (Apr 30, 2018)

Writing and publishing are two different things.

Writing is a CRAFT. Publishing is a BUSINESS. Writing AS CRAFT doesn't become more or less important just because you want the book to be a bestseller. Writing AS CRAFT is about telling the best story you can tell. Whether or not a book becomes a bestseller is solely a BUSINESS concern, not a CRAFT concern.

In business, marketing will ALWAYS be more important than craft insofar as _creating initial visibility_. But craft is much more important for _longevity_ of product. Yes, a savvy marketer can make a mediocre writer a bestseller...once. Maybe twice. But to build a career, the writer needs to have the craft down.


----------



## A. Pepper (Apr 19, 2018)

The brilliant marketers who take calculated risks and invest not just time but money will win every time. But there is hope. I've found that most people who are clever enough to write a good book are also clever enough to figure out the marketing basics, if given time. It is not brain surgery to run a few AMS ads and see how that affects ranks and sell-through.

ETA: I mean no disrespect to people who are currently struggling and do find AMS ads to be like brain surgery. I'm just saying that it does take time to learn, and the people who seem to be good at marketing right out of the gate might have had experience in the field from other industries. Also, there are a lot of "debut" pen names that are experienced authors who just look like lucky newbies.


----------



## wilsonharp (Jun 5, 2012)

My current life situations have slowed my writing considerably. I don't write well in small windows of time (30 minutes or less), but I can do some marketing. So, since I have 9 books out, and they sell well when there are paid promos, I have decided to devour books and training on copy writing to improve my abilities in the marketing field.

As my schedule starts to provide more time for writing, the things I am learning about copy writing and marketing will continue to help build my business.


----------



## Lu Kudzoza (Nov 1, 2015)

RBC said:


> *5. Marketing skills are very broad and each person needs to find their own mix of those.*
> 
> A great example here is a Marketing DNA test which helps you determine your strengths and weaknesses in marketing which then help you decide what techniques to use.
> 
> ...


This is a very important point. You have to focus on marketing strategies you're comfortable with or you won't do it. Some authors aren't interested in lead generation marketing (freebie for mailing list sign up - then push the subscribers to other books), but they love to write about their characters, their books, new ideas, etc. A true fan mailing list would be better for that person (for the simple reason that it will get done).

Another important point is you can hire out the stuff you don't want to do (or aren't good at). If you hate the way ad copy sounds you should hire it out rather than writing poor ad copy.


----------



## Sakonchai (Apr 28, 2018)

The Great Marketing make people buy then the Great product(Book) 
make reader to be your potential customer for the next books.

Imagine this, You have the good product but it's lack of visibility.
Nobody know it so it's no sell. So What's happen.
You lost your time to write. 

It no need the best writing skill but just good is enough.
People don't want super quality work.
The most important is marketing. I advice you to learn it.


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson (Aug 25, 2010)

Not Lu said:


> The biggest mistakes I see authors make in marketing is they are trying to write instead of market in their ad copy and blurb.


That's an important observation. A good book needs writing skills. A good blurb needs marketing skills .


----------



## Dpock (Oct 31, 2016)

Jan Hurst-Nicholson said:


> Are we in danger of marketing skills trumping writing skills in the race to the bestseller list, or does it really matter?
> 
> Should creative writing courses now be split between writing and marketing - assuming that the writers wish to sell their work?


Marketing seems to trump writing talent in several (but not all) genre subcategories. The balance seems to shift in mainstream contemporary fiction where writing talent appears paramount. But no writer, no matter how talented, will have much success without gaining visibility via some basic marketing (I think basic has come to mean AMS for most indies). As indie marketing is an ever-changing beast I doubt it'll ever make creative writing curriculums. AMS will probably look much different in six months.

Anyway, if a writer using basic marketing isn't gaining momentum over time, I'm not sure more marketing will be the cure. Some of our efforts will simply never find an audience. That's the hardest knock of all.


----------



## Crystal_ (Aug 13, 2014)

Not Lu said:


> You can sell average to above average books with great marketing. You can even earn a living with barely above average books and great marketing.
> 
> However, a great book will sell with average marketing skills. The better the book the better your marketing pays off due to word of mouth.
> 
> ...


All other things being equal, you are better off with great marketing and an average book rather than the other way around. At least in crowded categories. It's really hard to get visibility without excellent marketing. It doesn't matter how great your book is if no one reads it.

However, I don't really see these things as seperate, per se. Packing should reflect your book. Marketing should reflect packaging. Marketing and writing are a web, not two separate things. Your concept becomes your tagline. Your tagline becomes your blurb. Your blurb reflects the tone of your cover, which reflects the tone of your book. Your ads reflect that. And so on and so forth.


----------



## jb1111 (Apr 6, 2018)

Should creative writing courses be split between writing and marketing?

Yes.

You don't really learn to write in a creative writing course. You learn the basics, but most of the skill comes by actually doing it, and learning through trial and error. I took creative writing, and then took editorial journalism. Then I worked for several years on college newspapers (writing and editing), and even though I was very good at writing I learned most of what proficiency I've acquired as an author by actually _doing_ it and learning it the hard way.

When I took creative writing it was all trad pubbing, and they taught us zero about marketing. With ecommerce and epublishing it's obviously an entirely new game.

Marketing is necessary if you want to sell books. And face it, people become authors because they want to sell books, even if it's just a few copies to say they've done it. It's hard to sell a large number of books without at least _some_ sense of marketing. And although some of it might be intuitive (look at what others do -- their style of covers, style of blurbs, advertising methods, etc.), having it taught in courses would at least give beginning writers a head start.

So, I think it should be taught in creative writing courses, so the budding writers at least have a clue as to what lies ahead of them if they intend to make any money at it.


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## Deke (May 18, 2013)

I struggle with marketing because it is so unpredictable. Thanks to Amazon and other outlets, I can write a story, format it, and make it available to the masses. There are no gate keepers standing in my way. But when I think about marketing, I think about various paid promotion site like Bookbub or ENT and it’s no slam-dunk to be approved for those services. What can we do to market that is reliable and predictable?


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

> What can we do to market that is reliable and predictable?


Write books people want to read.

Package them in a format where those people are looking for books.

Own your audience.

Use that audience.

Many people here think "marketing" and go into hypes of Bookbub, ENT, Facebook. Those are marketing TACTICS. Marketing strategies are much more simple:

Mine is:

Give out as many book 1's to as many people as possible. Then make the rest of the series available in all the possible places where people will want to buy it. Get as many of those people as possible on my mailing list so I can let them know about the book in a timeframe that suits me, as often as I like, or whenever I need to.

That's all.

Bookbub, ENT, Facebook, Google Adwords, Instafreebie etc. are mere tools I use for doing these things.


----------



## Digiterium (Feb 28, 2016)

Before I wrote one word of my first ever book I watched a tonne of podcasts on YouTube, and that got me up to speed pretty quickly on what you have to do as an indie author to succeed, i.e. figure out ways to market your work.

There is an irony to all of this though. Undoubtedly it's tough out there, with thousands of books flowing into the charts, and if you don't promote then your book can just sink without a trace. But, a big part of the reason it took me until I was 44 before I started writing was because I thought there wasn't any point, because to me getting a book 'out there' meant being traditionally published and that meant having an agent, none of which I saw happening for someone just starting out. So each time I had a story idea I wrote it down and filed it away for the 'time I write that first book'

But now look at the situation. You don't need to be trad published, and you don't need an agent to get your imagination to the readers. And I kinda love that. That freedom. The flip side is that you can't JUST be an author. But it is what it is.


----------



## Jack Krenneck (Feb 9, 2014)

Jan Hurst-Nicholson said:


> Are we in danger of marketing skills trumping writing skills in the race to the bestseller list, or does it really matter?
> 
> Should creative writing courses now be split between writing and marketing - assuming that the writers wish to sell their work?


In my view, that ship has already sailed. Over half the bestseller lists are owned by savvy marketers and the beneficiaries of marketing tools such as Bookbub.

It's still possible for a new author to break into the lists without good marketing, but it's getting harder. Marketing skills are becoming mandatory.

Good marketing can lever pretty ordinary books right to the top. But the better the product, the better the marketing works. The poorer the book, the quicker it sinks into oblivion after its high-visibility spike.

I don't think creative writing courses will ever give equal weight to marketing though, if any weight at all. Those who run creative writing courses tend to despise marketing. Authors who want to sell are better off taking the responsibility themselves and learning what needs to be learned. And at the end of the day, good commercial writing and good marketing are closely aligned skill sets.


----------



## GeneDoucette (Oct 14, 2014)

Marketing is a lot easier if you've written a really good book that lots of people want to read.


----------



## Anarchist (Apr 22, 2015)

GeneDoucette said:


> Marketing is a lot easier if you've written a really good book that lots of people want to read.


Exactly.

Marketing a bad product is like persuading someone to pay to see the Fiji mermaid.

Marketing a good product is like telling someone who loves mob films to see _Goodfellas_.


----------



## jb1111 (Apr 6, 2018)

GeneDoucette said:


> Marketing is a lot easier if you've written a really good book that lots of people want to read.


Very true.

Although we all know that what constitutes "a really good book that lots of people want to read" is subjective. It's something that the writer and the rest of the marketplace usually finds out after the fact (50 Shades is probably an obvious example).

Marketing at least helps the writer get that book out there more visibly to see if that "really good book" sells.


----------



## MissingAlaska (Apr 28, 2014)

jb1111 said:


> Although we all know that what constitutes "a really good book that lots of people want to read" is subjective. It's something that the writer and the rest of the marketplace usually finds out after the fact (50 Shades is probably an obvious example).


I write this with the caveat that I'm a prawn...

I believe there's an audience for most every book (provided it is written with an attempt to be professional) though that audience can often be quite small. Marketing is about connecting a book to the correct pool of readers. Finding that connection and leveraging it via ads (or whatever) is the toughest part, IMHO. When ads are poorly targeted, some authors blame the medium (Facebook, etc) rather than their targeting.

Getting a neutral set of eyes on the novel can help. Many times an author (myself included) can become too close to a book to realize the correct audience/genre mix. What an author believes a book to be is sometimes not what it really is. That's why agents, editors, and similar professionals exist in commercial publishing; their job is to spot that market and figure out the angle that sells.

Before doing any ads, ask "Who is my precise audience?" and "Where am I best able to reach them?"

I love using AMS ads to help with this. I broadly target authors who I believe have similar audiences (readers of self-published XYZ-micro-genre novels) and then see which authors get the click-throughs. The results usually surprise me. I also look at the Goodreads readers who leave 5-stars and ask myself what they have in common. This helps drive Facebook advertising. There is a lot of data out there; use it to make your ads as effective as possible.


----------



## mojomikey (Apr 9, 2014)

Patty Jansen said:


> Write books people want to read.
> 
> Package them in a format where those people are looking for books.
> 
> ...


This times five. And read Patty's books on marketing, mailing lists, etc. They're excellent.


----------



## Deke (May 18, 2013)

"Marketing is a lot easier if you've written a really good book that lots of people want to read."


Not really.  Marketing is the process of letting lots of people know you've written a book they want to read. And that takes a lot of work.


----------



## GeneDoucette (Oct 14, 2014)

Deke said:


> "Marketing is a lot easier if you've written a really good book that lots of people want to read."
> 
> Not really. Marketing is the process of letting lots of people know you've written a book they want to read. And that takes a lot of work.


Nothing you said invalidates what I said. It takes work, but that doesn't mean it isn't a lot easier.


----------



## Steve Voelker (Feb 27, 2014)

Creative writing courses should teach creative writing. 
Marketing courses should teach marketing. 

They are two very different skills. I can't imagine any instance where you would want to have them taught in the same class. Maybe if it were a comprehensive writing program, that took you from idea to published work. But even then, they would most likely be taught at different times, by different instructors. It is rare to find someone who is good enough at both to even consider teaching them. And more rare to find someone who has both of those skills AND skill as a teacher. 

As far as marketing over quality, you can definitely benefit from great marketing with a less than great book. But there is a certain level of quality that really has to be there, or all the marketing in the world isn't going to help. 

I see it all the time in the Mark Dawson and Nick Stephenson groups, which are geared toward marketing and not craft. I even see it here. An author follows all the instructions and advice. They get a good cover, write a blurb, run ads, set up the newsletter, etc. Then they can't figure out why their book isn't selling. You read the first page of their look inside, and the book is just terrible. Since we are all being nice, no one ever tells them that, and they continue to spend time and money on a product that no one would ever want to buy. 

Even with marketing, craft matters.


----------



## 10105 (Feb 16, 2010)

Much is said here about marketing a book. Think, instead, about marketing yourself. If you can get your name and face in front of those who would read your books, they'll find the books.

For example, James Comey's first book was a #1 NYT best seller its first day out.

Of course, if you are famous (or infamous), your marketing has already been done. If, like most would-be best-selling authors, you are neither, you must get yourself established in the public eye. That's called "public relations," and it's the hard part.

Avenues for PR, which for indies are mostly social media, are heavily traveled, making it difficult to rise to the top.

For non-fiction, you want to establish prominence in the community of potential readers of your subject. Magazine articles, lectures, interviews, any way to get your name out front. For fiction, your targeted readership is much bigger, and it might take drastic measures to gain the fame (even notoriety) you pursue.

Your name is the enduring facet of your brand. Sell that as enthusiastically if not more so as you sell that next book.


----------



## S.R. (May 19, 2016)

[My posts have been deleted in response to the unannounced KBoards TOS change that was made by the new forum owner (VerticalScope) -- I do not agree to the new terms and have requested that my account be deleted as well]


----------



## Anarchist (Apr 22, 2015)

kw3000 said:


> So, does that render all talk of craft moot?


I don't mean to nitpick, but it should be "render all talk of craft _moo_."


----------



## Dpock (Oct 31, 2016)

kw3000 said:


> I'm left to question... just what is craft?


For some markets, the only craft or skill required is good typing.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri (Oct 31, 2011)

I think they are plenty of marketers making bank on Amazon right now who are either so-so writers, or not even writers at all.  We've already discussed this in other threads, people buying up cheap ghost written works, packaging them up for giant mailing lists, throwing a ton of money into them etc etc. 

The thing is, that's a short term strategy at best ... because it requires you to constantly feed the beast.  Books like this are the reason people fear the 30 day cliff, because they have no longevity.  So it's a case of you need to keep churning out more and more to keep it going.  You can make a TON of $$ this way, but the well will run dry really quick if you're not constantly on the go.  

They serve the purpose of feeding a voracious market, but ultimately have very few true fans. 

Personally, I think those who will thrive in the long term will have to write good stories that stick, but also be at least competent marketers.  You need good stories, and true fans ... but you need to find that audience and let them know you're out there.


----------



## NedMarcus (Dec 29, 2017)

Al Stevens said:


> For fiction, your targeted readership is much bigger, and it might take drastic measures to gain the fame (even notoriety) you pursue.


Drastic measures?  Do you have any examples?


----------



## Roman (Jun 16, 2015)

Deke said:


> There are parts of writing that can be learned, but all of marketing has to be learned. I've developed a solid discipline as a writer, but have none as a marketer. Thus I have books that have never sold and have no reviews&#8230;and I have no idea how to convince people to buy them or even read them for free. My inability to market may be why I ultimately stop writing fiction and turn to non-fiction.


I understand where you are coming from. Some of my worst books are my best selling books and I think that it is out of sheer luck. Some of my amazing books sell nothing at all.

I tried AMS but I just don't get the strategy behind it. Should I keep it running at a loss for months? If I disable it because the AMS sales are less than my investments then the sales in general trickle down after one or two months but it's very difficult to track since there are many factors. Or should I blow 200$ into it for each new book no matter how much money I loose?

Two months ago I stopped my AMS campaigns because the ACOS showed me that I was losing a bit of money (it was around 30%). Now I want to try it again but my ACOS is 100 to 60% for pretty much all of my books.


----------



## Elizabeth Barone (May 6, 2013)

LilyBLily said:


> . . .
> 
> Product is the first part of marketing. If you don't have a product people want, no amount of brilliant marketing will make people continue to purchase it after the initial fool-me-once.
> 
> . . .


This is why it's important to have a handle on both. If you don't understand that you need to create a product people actually want, you're not going to understand much more about marketing. And if you don't understand what makes a good book -- even if only on an instinctual level -- you're not going to grasp anything else about craft. Author-as-entrepreneur is the best position to be in. Understanding the market and what makes people buy will help you write better books, and so will learning craft. They go hand in hand.


----------



## jb1111 (Apr 6, 2018)

Which all returns us to the original question: should creative writing classes have a marketing angle also?

I still say yes. It's part of the reason one takes a Creative Writing class to begin with -- to learn to not only write, but also sell, a book or story.


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## Elizabeth Barone (May 6, 2013)

P.J. Post said:


> This isn't really true. Writing books to satisfy preexisting consumer expectations provides familiar books, but not better books. Sales and 'quality' are separate, and often, unrelated metrics. The best books are almost always genre defining or redefining, those that challenge, subvert and reinvent reader expectations.


Quality can be subjective, though. I'm talking about understanding your market -- which is a major part of marketing. If you don't understand your audience and what they like, how will you ever write a book they want to buy? Marketing and writing go hand in hand.



jb1111 said:


> Which all returns us to the original question: should creative writing classes have a marketing angle also?
> 
> I still say yes. It's part of the reason one takes a Creative Writing class to begin with -- to learn to not only write, but also sell, a book or story.


Absolutely. Some writers take creative writing classes without ever planning on selling their work. For some, writing is a hobby -- not that there's anything wrong with that! But I do wish creative writing courses at least taught the bare bones of genre and audience. It would benefit all types of writers, regardless of their publishing plans.

Maybe now they do, though. We live in a more entrepreneurial world now; things have changed a lot since I took a college-level creative writing course (well over a decade ago, eesh). It's possible that the content has changed. I think creative writing is still viewed as an art, though, rather than a business. It's too bad marketing courses aren't required for art majors.


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## writerlygal (Jul 23, 2017)

I spent a long time writing a book & getting it critiqued from lots of author friends, including one who works as an editor & a couple who have been traditionally published. I took all their advice & spent a lot of time editing my book & getting it to where I truly believed it was a great book & the best it could be. The book flopped big time & barely sold.

Then I learned about marketing & redid the book so that its tropes were more timely & it attracted the right people based on its new cover & description & advertising, & published it under a new pen name. The book took off & sold very well. So I hurried to write some more books & my first drafts did better than that very first book I'd poured my heart & soul into. All b/c I'd learned how to write to market & how to market the book well.

I think & have been told since I was young that I'm a good writer, but, I'm certainly not the best that there is. What makes my books sell is that they are marketable. I publish my first drafts & they still do well b/c I know how to write what people want & how to market it. The faster I write, the more money I make. Therefore in my opinion & experience, marketing skills, as well as fast writing skills & knowing how to write in the tone & style & tropes that people are looking for & knowing how to tell a good story that your audience wants, are the key to financial success in this business.

Marketing skills have been for me 100X more important than writing skills, although it does help to have good writing skills.    But I don't think they do much w/out superb marketing knowledge & practice. Amazon is like a big sea of books & it is very hard for your book to be discovered in that sea unless you help it out w/ good marketing.


----------



## Elizabeth Barone (May 6, 2013)

P.J. Post said:


> By taking risks and learning craft, independently of reader expectations. By writing amazing stories, like Gone Girl, The Handmaid's Tale, The Martian, Twilight, The Godfather, Ender's Game, Outlander, etc. Readers only know what we've enjoyed in the past, it's like comfort food, but none of us have any idea what we might like in the future because it hasn't been written yet.


You're describing market research. 

Please don't confuse writing to market and writing what's popular. Writing to market just means understanding your audience and genre.


----------



## Rick Gualtieri (Oct 31, 2011)

Elizabeth Barone said:


> Absolutely. Some writers take creative writing classes without ever planning on selling their work. For some, writing is a hobby -- not that there's anything wrong with that! But I do wish creative writing courses at least taught the bare bones of genre and audience. It would benefit all types of writers, regardless of their publishing plans.


I'm fine with the concept so long as there's disclosure upfront. Paying for a class and then unexpectedly getting a few lessons on something else might be gold for one person, but it could easily tick off the next.

That's the key for a lot of things with me: tell me what I'm getting and let me decide if the "bonus" stuff is worthwhile or not.


----------



## Rob Martin (Nov 15, 2017)

Rick Gualtieri said:


> I'm fine with the concept so long as there's disclosure upfront. Paying for a class and then unexpectedly getting a few lessons on something else might be gold for one person, but it could easily tick off the next.
> 
> That's the key for a lot of things with me: tell me what I'm getting and let me decide if the "bonus" stuff is worthwhile or not.


^^^ This. I signed up for a class that was supposed to be on plotting for a series and the instructor spent the entire time rehashing his book on writing methods. Total waste of time and money.


----------



## Steve Voelker (Feb 27, 2014)

jb1111 said:


> Which all returns us to the original question: should creative writing classes have a marketing angle also?
> 
> I still say yes. It's part of the reason one takes a Creative Writing class to begin with -- to learn to not only write, but also sell, a book or story.


I disagree.

You wouldn't go to a cooking class and expect the chef to tell you how to sell your food or open a restaurant . 
You wouldn't take a gardening class and expect advice on starting a landscaping business.

I would never take a writing class and expect marketing advice. In fact, I'd be pretty disappointed if I signed up to work on my craft, and the instructor made more that a cursory mention of marketing. (There might be some discussion in the very beginning about why you are choosing to write in that genre or that style. But that's about it.)

Conversely, I'd be just as disappointed to have a marketing teacher spend any time talking to me about my writing.

I my mind, they are two VERY different things. They might serve the same end, if your goal is to publish your work, but they are not the the same thing. Or even remotely similar, from where I stand.

The farmer and the chef both play a key role in getting your meal on the table, but I wouldn't expect their skillsets to overlap much. And I certainly wouldn't expect to learn much about farming in a cooking class.


----------



## Dpock (Oct 31, 2016)

jb1111 said:


> It's part of the reason one takes a Creative Writing class to begin with -- to learn to not only write, but also sell, a book or story.


Lord no. If I take a writing enhancement course, I don't want to learn about using spreadsheets to analyze AMS campaigns. I'll look elsewhere for that sort of instruction.


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## Crystal_ (Aug 13, 2014)

P.J. Post said:


> By taking risks and learning craft, independently of reader expectations. By writing amazing stories, like Gone Girl, The Handmaid's Tale, The Martian, Twilight, The Godfather, Ender's Game, Outlander, etc. Readers only know what we've enjoyed in the past, it's like comfort food, but none of us have any idea what we might like in the future because it hasn't been written yet.


Most of these are clearly within genre, though. Gone Girl is a classic psychological thriller. The Handmaid's Tale is classic dystopian fiction. Etc.

For the most part, hit books are hitting all the tropes people like. They sometimes do it differently or combine two genres or start a subgenre, but they tend to hit all the checkmarks.



Rick Gualtieri said:


> I'm fine with the concept so long as there's disclosure upfront. Paying for a class and then unexpectedly getting a few lessons on something else might be gold for one person, but it could easily tick off the next.
> 
> That's the key for a lot of things with me: tell me what I'm getting and let me decide if the "bonus" stuff is worthwhile or not.


Yeah, I quit taking acting classes in part because we'd spend time every class talking about business stuff. I had no interest in being an actor. I was there to improve my writing skills. I didn't want to hear about head shots or auditions or agents. I wanted to do scene study and improv.

I wouldn't mind occasionally touching on those topics, but it became too much.


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## Crystal_ (Aug 13, 2014)

P.J. Post said:


> For marketing purposes, sure, they fall within some general guideline of the broader genre classification, but the market didn't influence the stories of these books or how they were written, which was my point. Handmaid was instrumental in redefining the dystopia genre, which is why it's considered classic. The Martian was a web site project that became a book pretty much by accident. And while it is squarely SF, it was written as a non-sub-genre specific idea, that is, without consideration for market feedback. It was written to genre (where almost anything is acceptable), but not to market (where the path is narrowly defined).
> 
> They hit the tropes people like - retroactively. No one knew these tropes were going to be so widely accepted initially, some of them didn't even exist prior to publishing. I'm sorry, but no one knew beforehand that a first-person present swearing, snarky, sciencing-the-[crap]-out-of-this kind of guy was going to be a thing. Handmaid's reception was mixed at best - certainly not an instant classic. Gone Girl subverted the [expletive] out of expectations - a huge risk. A family epic about the Mafia? A child sociopath for a main character? Outlander, at the minimum, greatly popularized Highlander romance, but the number of risks this book took....I can't even. I don't think it is fair to judge authorial intent by how popular a book becomes later on, especially way way down the road. These were all groundbreaking, genre defining books, even Twilight, written with no regard for checkboxes, tropes or market expectations.


Isn't the story about Stephanie Meyer that she talked to someone (Dan Brown?) and asked them to teach her how to write a best seller?

You can't really say if books were written with tropes in mind. You don't know what the author was thinking and most authors are not going to come out and say "I tried to hit all the tropes" even if they did. I've seen a lot of authors put out super tropey books and profess them as from the heart. Maybe they are, but they're still really on market. Those people just happened to love what the market does.


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## jb1111 (Apr 6, 2018)

Dpock said:


> Lord no. If I take a writing enhancement course, I don't want to learn about using spreadsheets to analyze AMS campaigns. I'll look elsewhere for that sort of instruction.


I'm referring to the concept in general. And as we all know here, there are marketing techniques unique to publishing that you may not easily find at a college level unless you major in business.

They wouldn't have to go into the minutiae of AMS. How about the idea of a cover that actually reaches out to the genre you are seeking? How about the idea of writing a blurb that actually catches people's attention? Things that new writers that come here seem to have to learn -- and I've only been active here for a month and a half and I've seen several of them that needed to learn such things. They obviously didn't get any of it in Creative Writing.

They wouldn't need to learn about spreadsheets -- how about teaching the notion that while you may have a great idea for a literary style novel, or a Christian family saga, it probably _won't sell_? How about teaching students that although poetry is really cool, books of poetry don't sell unless they are collections of classic works hundreds of years old?

How about teaching the concept that if you want to make ANY money in fiction, you write in a genre that actually sells, and if you don't read one frequently, you find one that fits your writing style and make a go of it?

These are things that seem rather simple to those of us who have published, but they were concepts that weren't even breached when I took creative writing. And from the input here and at another forum I frequent, a lot of new writers clearly don't understand these concepts. Sure, they can get them here. Great. But why not also get some of them in a Creative Writing course?

I think these concepts could be taught at a certain level in a creative writing course without being overbearing. The writer is going to learn a lot more by doing, anyway. Just as I did. I took Writing 101, several courses in journalism, and Creative Writing -- but most of what I learned was from one 80 page book and just doing it.


----------



## Diamond Eyes (Feb 11, 2017)

jb1111 said:


> I'm referring to the concept in general. And as we all know here, there are marketing techniques unique to publishing that you may not easily find at a college level unless you major in business.
> 
> ...
> 
> I think these concepts could be taught at a certain level in a creative writing course without being overbearing. The writer is going to learn a lot more by doing, anyway. Just as I did. I took Writing 101, several courses in journalism, and Creative Writing -- but most of what I learned was from one 80 page book and just doing it.


Great post, totally agree. I think it should be taught if only for a couple of lectures a semester or whatever. Brandon Sanderson teaches a writing class at BYU and he devotes 2 or 3 lectures each course to the business side of things. He's mostly speaking from the trad pub angle of things, but I think teaching self-pub business and marketing stuff also would benefit any writing course.

Here's a couple of his full writing playlist from different years. Great stuff in there for any writer if they do not want to go to a college to take a class.

Brandon Sanderson BYU 2012
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AKHlanlzaIY&list=PLSTzdBlo5WBCsSpT-dN56bwbo5ig03cgR

Brandon Sanderson BYU 2016
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apIhBQxV3Xg&list=PLSTzdBlo5WBB6ggp85NFzl7KNQa0ZdK_i


----------



## Dpock (Oct 31, 2016)

jb1111 said:


> I'm referring to the concept in general. And as we all know here, there are marketing techniques unique to publishing that you may not easily find at a college level unless you major in business.


I would speculate that college-level publishing courses ignore indie publishing, though book publishing courses (which cover marketing) are abundant. A Google search for "college courses publishing" returned 48 million results ("How To Market You Book" shows 80 million results).

Part of the OP's original query asked:

"Are we in danger of marketing skills trumping writing skills in the race to the bestseller list, or does it really matter?"

If she's referring to bestseller lists in several of the genres, the answer is an all-caps YES. Marketers seem to hold top positions, and frequently it's the same marketers (or cabals, syndicates, whatever). Writing talent seems to be the least of their worries. If you want to beat them, you'd better be a top-notch marketer, as the books in those susceptible genres tend to be the writing equivalents of paint-by-numbers. There really is no way to stand out without an immense ad budget and talent for exploiting it.

Except for the black hat crowd, I don't think those mega-marketers employ any techniques that are not available to the rest of us. They just employ them at a much higher velocity. There are successful writers in this forum who think nothing of dropping a grand a day on AMS or FB ads regardless of their genre. I feel a bit queasy when I sink $20 a day down the AMS drain.

I don't write in the genres and don't feel much pressure on the marketing side. As others have said, being your own genre may be the best long-term strategy.


----------



## dirtiestdevil (Aug 20, 2014)

Marketing is 1,000x more important! With marketing alone, you can makes thousands of dollars fairly easily. The problem there is, if your book sucks... then you won't have return readers, many positive reviews, or much help for future releases. But having said that, you can certainly make a good living from pumping out crap with quality marketing behind it. No question about it!

In fact, the luck in publishing comes from having a great book that gets put in front of the right pair of eyes (authors, bloggers, celebrity endorsement, wild-fire social media spreading, etc.). I'm sure there are tons of terrific books that will never be read by anyone other than the author, and perhaps their mother. 

If you want to make $$, then it's marketing > story every time! Ideally, you have at least a decent book along with great marketing. That model would be vastly superior to having a fabulous book, but piss poor marketing.


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

I live a block from my state's largest university. It is my home town. I have a bestselling series (top rank: #8 on Amazon overall) set in that town. I offered to come in and talk to their creative writing classes or MFA program about the business side of publishing. I explained that I'd made mid-six figures writing fiction for over five years, and that I had traditionally published books as well as indie ones. Got slapped down hard. I've heard many similar stories. This idea will not happen, because English professors still turn up their noses at that filthy money, at considering the business side or the *shudder* market, not to mention the idea of writing genre fiction because you can live on it (because people want to read it). Horrors.

And yes, absent a few exceptional cases, if you want to make live-on-it money in fiction, you are, let's say, best served to write in a genre that sells. That's sort of the meaning of the word "sells." There is a big Australian writers' conference going on right now. The theme of many of the talks (this is, of course, a conference for "legitimate," i.e., trade pubbed literary fiction, authors) has been that most books sell less than a thousand copies, you won't make any money publishing, etc., etc. Still the party line.

I love what I write. I write what I like. It's pretty firmly within genre, although I put my own particular spin on it and add some elements of other things. It still follows the rules, though,  because I like that genre and am good at writing it. The rules are the ones I want to follow myself. I wrote my first book knowing it would be a good subject for a novel in my genre, and it was. I knew that because I read it. I'd never heard of a "trope," and I still don't plan anything that way, but I am a natural consumer in my market, so the stories that appeal to me appeal to many other people, too. Fortunately.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

Will repeat what others have said: writing to *a* market is not the same thing at all as writing to trend. Books written to a solid market (books that are widely appealing in their genre) do not have a two-week shelf life. 

Everyone I know who makes excellent money publishing, year over year, writing their own books, writes differentiated books that continue to sell over time. The book is what matters most, and that includes a hooky premise and, generally, a strong voice, both of which work for your audience. The most important marketing happens before you publish your book. (I said that one.) 

That's not the only way to do this business, of course. There is another group of paths that centers around putting out the trendy stuff fast, whether by yourself or with the aid of ghostwriters, and marketing the heck out of it. Everybody gets to choose the path that works for them. 

4 P's of marketing:
Place (platform, in our case--where you sell it)
Product 
Promotion
Price

Only one of those things is about what most people think of as "marketing"--promotion. Get the other three right, and promoting the book is relatively easy. Get them wrong, and you're pushing a boulder up a hill.


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## jb1111 (Apr 6, 2018)

P.J. Post said:


> Um...because it's not true. It's another one of those Indie memes that refuses to die, like never using adverbs or writing in present tense.


So, if you want to make money as a fiction writer it's best to choose a genre that has low sales and low demand.

OK. I'll take your word on that.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

P.J. Post said:


> Can you please give me a reasonably detailed explanation of what you consider 'writing to *a* market' to be?


Fulfilling the expectations of your genre/subgenre. Giving your readers the experience they came for, emotional and otherwise. (Logical, for example, in the case of mystery). Creating believable characters whose feelings and experiences in the book resonate with readers. Truly bestselling books aren't "about" whatever the trend-thing is. They're about that deeper resonance, about plucking the right strings. The better you do that, the better positioned you are for success, and the easier marketing becomes, if you've got your signals right. (Title, for example, is really overlooked IMHO, especially the power of title + cover.)

I don't know how to explain it better than that, but that's what I've observed. I know it for my genre/audience and the ones I read a lot of.


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

P.J. Post said:


> Can you please give me a reasonably detailed explanation of what you consider 'writing to *a* market' to be?


If you wanted to write to an urban fantasy market, you'd sit down and read a lot of successful urban fantasy to see how it's put together. Should you use first-person or third? Past or present? Short chapters or long? Sentence length and vocabulary level? 50K words or 150K? One POV? Male MC or female? Her/his flaw(s)? Age? Romantic subplot? How prominent? Mystery plot? Pacing and action? Graphic violence? Sex? Swearing? Happy ending? What tropes do you see cropping up repeatedly across multiple books (weird pet, snarky voice, mysterious magical talisman, guns and blades, financial stress, secret parentage, scary power, friendly yet deadly guiding figure, unusual first name, oppressive authority figure ... UF has tons of tropes)? Etc.

The answers to the above questions don't tell you the "trends" in the genre. They allow you to identify stable features of it, including what differentiates its different subgenres. A "trend" would be, I don't know, _Would you look at that? Six of the top ten books have angels! Angels are hot right now!_

What you see successful examples of a genre doing is _what that segment of the reading market wants_. The market finds what it wants and rewards it by buying it in large amounts, and that is how success happens. If you want to please that segment of the market, you produce a book that does many of those things. For writers who are steeped in their genres, it can happen automatically, but it can also be a conscious approach to writing.


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## jb1111 (Apr 6, 2018)

P.J. Post said:


> If you want to make money in business you must first create and then communicate a positive value proposition to your core demographic. The history of that market segment, meaning other businesses, need not have any bearing on the success of your new product.
> 
> Don't take my word, do the research, google it. Just look at how many times Apple nearly went under. Look at Toys R Us, what, kids don't like toys anymore? Gibson Guitars filed for bankruptcy and Guitar Center appears to be in trouble too. Guitars have been an amazingly profitable market, right up until they weren't.
> 
> Markets change, they become saturated, consumers get bored, expectations change, winners fail and losers triumph. The only one in this whole equation we can count on is ourselves. Write for your own fans, no one else's matter.


You're talking to the choir here. This whole thread is about whether marketing should be included in Creative Writing courses (among other things). The things you have just said could be included. Spotting trends is part of marketing. And then figuring out if you can personally deliver to that marketplace once you spot it.

All I know is a new writer now will do better financially if they can write the genre in which _you_ write, as opposed to any of a number of other genres that presently just don't sell.

Maybe those non-selling genres will sell in a couple years. But right now they don't. New writers should know that, or know how to find that out, unless they just want to write for family and themselves. Or if they want to wait until their favorite writing genre comes into vogue again. Which could be next year, the next decade -- or could be never.

And there's nothing wrong with that if that is their intention. However, I haven't met many, if any, budding writers that want that. They dream a little higher than that level. And being taught the notions of marketing their work, and targeting their work towards something that may pay back -- as you have just illustrated -- should be taught in some writing courses, at least partially.

Also, I don't think most budding writers are so unidimensional that they can only write in one genre. Some of the pulp sex writers of the 60's and 70's wrote excellent science fiction on the side. Writing was their trade. They adapted and changed with the times. They wrote what sold in the genres that sold, until their favorite genres became profitable again, because otherwise they would be just writing for family and friends. Or not writing at all.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

P.J. Post said:


> I don't see that as writing to market at all, I just see it as writing. It's how I write everything, because most genres share the same literary needs, the only differences being the things that make each genre unique. In Romance, it's the happily ever after love story, in science fiction it's the story dependent future science, in mystery it's the...well, the mystery.


That's the stuff that makes a book fit into a genre in the most global sense. But there are good* romances and not so good ones, good mysteries and not so good ones. Conscious writing to market is the effort to study examples of your targeted genre that the market has singled out as "good" so that you can see how they tick, then instilling those features into your own work. It might also guide your choice of genres to target.

*For the purposes of the above, "good" = "notably popular with readers."


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## GeneDoucette (Oct 14, 2014)

I didn't know there was a sub-genre of science fiction called 'first contact' when I wrote The Spaceship Next Door. I hadn't read a book that could be qualified as a 'first contact' book since I was a teen in the 1980's. I wrote the book and published it and added metadata tags to it when the reviews started to come in. A lot of those reviews said it 'wasn't like any first contact story i've ever read before', which makes some sense given I hadn't read any of the books the readers were familiar with.

It is entirely possible to write without concern for the genre you're writing for, and to succeed. It's tiresome to see it argued otherwise over and over here; it isn't true.

Writing courses should teach writing, marketing courses should teach marketing, if for no other reason than that _when you are learning to write_ you should focus on learning to write. If _how to sell what you write_ is a part of your creative process, fine, but that should come after you've already worked on the part where you learn how to write.


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

GeneDoucette said:


> I didn't know there was a sub-genre of science fiction called 'first contact' when I wrote The Spaceship Next Door. I hadn't read a book that could be qualified as a 'first contact' book since I was a teen in the 1980's. I wrote the book and published it and added metadata tags to it when the reviews started to come in. A lot of those reviews said it 'wasn't like any first contact story i've ever read before', which makes some sense given I hadn't read any of the books the readers were familiar with.
> 
> It is entirely possible to write without concern for the genre you're writing for, and to succeed. It's tiresome to see it argued otherwise over and over here; it isn't true.
> 
> Writing courses should teach writing, marketing courses should teach marketing, if for no other reason than that _when you are learning to write_ you should focus on learning to write. If _how to sell what you write_ is a part of your creative process, fine, but that should come after you've already worked on the part where you learn how to write.


All of this is so true that I join the chorus in wondering where the like button is on this forum.


----------



## Anarchist (Apr 22, 2015)

GeneDoucette said:


> It is entirely possible to write without concern for the genre you're writing for, and to succeed. It's tiresome to see it argued otherwise over and over here; it isn't true.


In my opinion, no one is making that argument.

Rather, the argument I've seen is that an author will _improve his chances_ of commercial success by studying and catering to a market.

To me, that point seems unassailable.



GeneDoucette said:


> Writing courses should teach writing, marketing courses should teach marketing, if for no other reason than that when you are learning to write you should focus on learning to write.


Agree 100%.


----------



## Wisescarab (Oct 12, 2017)

I've found most marketing courses out there to be bunk, and mostly repeat what you can find for free on the internet. Honestly, it just seems to be a lot of trial and error. Marketing surely takes up more time for me than writing ever did.


----------



## jb1111 (Apr 6, 2018)

GeneDoucette said:


> It is entirely possible to write without concern for the genre you're writing for, and to succeed. It's tiresome to see it argued otherwise over and over here; it isn't true.


No one seems to be saying that, or insisting that colleges put the cart before the horse. And although it's great that you had success without doing genre research or any of that, a lot of new writers taking courses could benefit greatly from a marketing sequence placed in the creative writing curriculum somewhere. That is, if the college wants it to be comprehensive. If they don't, then just leave it out.


----------



## GeneDoucette (Oct 14, 2014)

I hate it when I post something on one of these threads, say something that seems to (in my mind) adequately summarize a perspective being presented, and get back "well, nobody's saying THAT." It puts me in the position of having to call out posters specifically in order to back up my post, and I don't want to call anybody out specifically.

So, there was this:



> Marketing is 1,000x more important! With marketing alone, you can makes thousands of dollars fairly easily. The problem there is, if your book sucks... then you won't have return readers, many positive reviews, or much help for future releases. But having said that, you can certainly make a good living from pumping out crap with quality marketing behind it. No question about it!
> 
> In fact, the luck in publishing comes from having a great book that gets put in front of the right pair of eyes (authors, bloggers, celebrity endorsement, wild-fire social media spreading, etc.). I'm sure there are tons of terrific books that will never be read by anyone other than the author, and perhaps their mother.
> 
> If you want to make $$, then it's marketing > story every time! Ideally, you have at least a decent book along with great marketing. That model would be vastly superior to having a fabulous book, but p*ss poor marketing.


And there's this:



> How about teaching the concept that if you want to make ANY money in fiction, you write in a genre that actually sells, and if you don't read one frequently, you find one that fits your writing style and make a go of it?


I'm sure I could find more. I stand by the point i was making, which is this:



> It is entirely possible to write without concern for the genre you're writing for, and to succeed. It's tiresome to see it argued otherwise over and over here; it isn't true.


----------



## Elizabeth Barone (May 6, 2013)

P.J. Post said:


> I don't see it that way. I think good books are written by good writers, those who push the boundaries of genre and challenge their readers. If the market has singled out a trope as 'good' - I want no part of it, beyond subverting it. I want to be in front of the curve, not behind it. I'd rather fail at trying something new, because that will make me a better writer - and that's my goal.


You still need to understand the pieces that make up a genre in order to write it. "Trope" is just a word for those pieces. You could also just call it basic rules of your genre. If I write a book, call it romance, but there's no happy ending, I'm not writing romance. If I call my book a post-apocalyptic novel but everyone is relaxing on the beach the whole time, I'm not writing to market, either. I'm writing something else entirely, and that won't resonate with readers. At best they'll be confused, at worst they'll never touch my work again because I clearly don't know what I'm doing.

That's why we're trying to explain that writing to "curve" and "trend" are not writing to a market. Trends change; just look at the shelves every couple months. What makes a genre, though, is everlasting. Part of writing is understanding who you're writing for and the genre you're writing in. You can still try new things and be your own writer, but there are certain notes you have to hit.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

I did not know what trope meant when I published. I did not know what HEA meant. It has been pointed out to me however that I knew the conventions and tropes of my genre and used them. The fact that an author does not consciously name those things does not mean that he or she is not using them. 

The most important marketing happens before you publish the book. It starts with genre, hook, and characters (in other words, story). Title, cover, and blurb are not separate from that. They should all be working together. If you want to write to please yourself that is fine. If you become a copywriter, however, you learn how to do that and what kind of copy sells. The same is true for fiction. You have to figure out how to write something that resonates. Writing is communication. Even if all you want is to be READ (which was my biggest motivator), you need to write something enough people will enjoy reading, so you get some visibility.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

P.J. Post said:


> I don't see it that way. I think good books are written by good writers, those who push the boundaries of genre and challenge their readers. If the market has singled out a trope as 'good' - I want no part of it, beyond subverting it. I want to be in front of the curve, not behind it. I'd rather fail at trying something new, because that will make me a better writer - and that's my goal.


Well that's very cool, for sure. It's probably a higher-risk, higher-potential-pay-off approach. (Well, *even* higher risk; it's all high risk.) There are readers out there who want to see tropes and genres challenged, definitely. Being an academic type, I run with those horses. There are fewer of them, so they're harder to find, that's all.

That said, I love that the writing to market approach is out there for people who want or really need to convert their mad writing skilz into income. And genre-typical work is "good" too. I mean, *I* like it, and I am a person of exceeding fine taste. 

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk


----------



## Crystal_ (Aug 13, 2014)

P.J. Post said:


> I don't see it that way. I think good books are written by good writers, those who push the boundaries of genre and challenge their readers. If the market has singled out a trope as 'good' - I want no part of it, beyond subverting it. I want to be in front of the curve, not behind it. I'd rather fail at trying something new, because that will make me a better writer - and that's my goal.


It's not a black and white thing. You can challenge readers in some ways while comforting them in others. I deal with a lot of mental health stuff in my books that people don't expect to see in a sexy romance. I also deal with a lot of stuff about gender roles and do what I can to push the boundaries of how my heroes can differ from the idea of an "alpha male" all the time. But I do so knowing what readers expect. So this point, I do have a thing I'm doing, and people who enjoy one of my books will probably enjoy all the rest (though not necessarily. Some people are really specific about what they want).

You can write genre fiction and challenge people and many money. You just have to balance all the elements. Not that it's easy to do that.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

kw3000 said:


> The last thing you should do is worry about what an audience wants. Write a great story that interests you, market it well, hope it catches on, repeat.


Everybody I know who pays their bills with this biz cares about what their audience wants.


----------



## Anarchist (Apr 22, 2015)

GeneDoucette said:


> I hate it when I post something on one of these threads, say something that seems to (in my mind) adequately summarize a perspective being presented, and get back "well, nobody's saying THAT." It puts me in the position of having to call out posters specifically in order to back up my post, and I don't want to call anybody out specifically.
> 
> . . .
> 
> ...


I stand corrected.


----------



## Jack Krenneck (Feb 9, 2014)

I'm going with Usedtoposthere on this.

If an author wants commercial success, having a finely-tuned appreciation of what readers want is the _least _a writer can do. To do less, but expect readers to dip into their wallet and part with hard-earned cash, is a recipe for failure. A chef who only serves offal because that's what they like themselves isn't going to have a full restaurant. Disclaimer -- in some communities that might work -- but once again it comes down to knowing what your diners (or readers) want.

I'd also have to say it's not difficult to presuppose what readers want. Most people, most of the time, keep reading the same types of books. Epic fantasy, thrillers, romance etc. all have their conventions (and the conventions of their sub-genres and sub, sub-genres) for a reason. Bestseller after bestseller after bestseller will showcase those conventions _because they're satisfying the needs readers have for very specific things. 
_
All of the above still leaves enormous room for the artistic spirit to express itself, for the author to draw deeply of their unique voice and make the conventions their own.


----------



## jb1111 (Apr 6, 2018)

GeneDoucette said:


> I hate it when I post something on one of these threads, say something that seems to (in my mind) adequately summarize a perspective being presented, and get back "well, nobody's saying THAT."
> 
> .....
> 
> ...


Here is the original question as posed by the OP:
"Should creative writing courses now be split between writing and marketing - _assuming that the writers wish to sell their work?"
_ (Emphasis added)

A writing student pays $500 or so to take a 5 credit Creative Writing course, and will pay more than that if they take several courses in a curriculum. If I am paying big money for a series of college creative writing courses I would prefer they don't teach me to rely on raw luck as one of the tools for success, although I suppose it could be included.

The point of this thread is the question of whether Creative Writing courses, in order to be effective for the students who are paying big money to take them, should have marketing included, especially if such students want to sell their work.

You apparently say no -- if they want to learn to market their writing, let them go to separate marketing courses which will teach them general marketing principles that may not be specific to writing or publishing.

I say yes -- let the courses include a sequence on marketing your book or writing. The students are paying well for the instruction. It should be at least that comprehensive.

Obviously, you and I disagree on these points. I respect your opinion. Your methods and ideas have obviously worked for you, and you have had great success with them. And you are correct: anything is possible. EL James probably shouldn't have had a 150 million seller, but did so by writing fan fiction. Good things can indeed happen if you write well, and a certain amount of luck is involved.

But I frequently see posts here and on the Amazon Community boards with new writers wondering what to do with their first book, asking why they don't have any sales, etc. -- and I'm certain that at least some of them have taken creative writing courses.

And in my view, that's what the courses are for -- to teach aspiring writers _all_ the tools they can hone further to become successful at writing and publishing, if they so choose. Many courses have a day they spend on related techniques. When I took legal courses in college they had several days specific to legal software -- something that had nothing to do with law whatsoever, but was vital to succeeding in the field. I don't see a reason that Creative Writing curricula should be any different in scope. Writing may not be a career field, but why should students be taught only enough to get out there and potentially fail?


----------



## GeneDoucette (Oct 14, 2014)

jb1111 said:


> Here is the original question as posed by the OP:
> "Should creative writing courses now be split between writing and marketing - _assuming that the writers wish to sell their work?"
> _ (Emphasis added)
> 
> ...


I get what you're saying. The comparison to legal software doesn't really work for me, because that's a matter of "do this and it will work and this is now a tool you can use" is different from "do this and you will sell more books" because in the latter case, there's no 'this' which is definitely true. The real comparison would be spending a day or two in a writing class learning how to use Word, Scrivener and Vellum.

My ultimate issue is that I don't think the question "how do I market this?" should come at the same time as "how do I write a thing?" If you don't learn how to enjoy what you're doing first--and discovering what you can write _well_ is a joy--because you're focusing on writing what you think will sell, IMO you aren't going to become the best writer you can be. These boards are also full of stories from people who have been writing for X years and _don't enjoy what they're doing._ I hate reading things like that. I feel like the impulse to tell people to learn what they want to write before they learn how to write creates that outcome.


----------



## Dpock (Oct 31, 2016)

kw3000 said:


> The last thing you should do is worry about what an audience wants. Write a great story that interests you, market it well, hope it catches on, repeat.


There are people who land on this board with a strong impulse to write the next Great American Novel, others who simply look at writing books as an income opportunity. The latter group needs to cater to their perceived audience. The former group needs to pray they have the talent to draw one.

Plenty of talented and well-known authors have explored an interim or in some cases sustaining middle ground to make ends meet--writing pulp under various pens. Some even enjoy it. John Banville writes mysteries as Benjamin Black.

In the end, you gotta do what you gotta do. It doesn't necessarily mean forsaking your dreams. Sometimes you have to bend them a little to make them come true.


----------



## 10105 (Feb 16, 2010)

jb1111 said:


> I say yes -- let the courses include a sequence on marketing your book or writing. The students are paying well for the instruction. It should be at least that comprehensive.


There's a problem with that. By the time the instructor develops the curriculum, gets it reviewed and approved, and the students receive the instruction, the approaches being taught are old hat, obsolete, beaten to a frazzle, and don't work anymore.

The target is a shifting one. When we can't even agree here on what works, and what works for some does not work for others, and when today's hot marketing ploy is tomorrow's fizzle, how can a formal course hope to keep up with all that change?

But the art and craft of writing endure, and everyone seems to agree that the first step in selling a book is to write a good one. Tell your students to do an amazon search for the latest books on marketing books and go from there. (Anything more than 6 months old is ancient history.) In the meantime, teach them to write.


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson (Aug 25, 2010)

kw3000 said:


> In my opinion, the best way to express one's self through writing is to write for you, not for the audience. I think that's how you engage your unique voice and I also think in-so-doing you wind up making the inevitable conventions that pop up into your own thing anyway. Of course, everyone's mileage may vary yada yada yada.


This is true to an extent. When I wrote my Headmaster book is was for _me_; the type of story that _I _enjoy reading and writing. However, the problem then arose of which genre to market it in. It had an HEA and a strong romance element. A beta reader who reads Romances felt it was a Romance. Another beta reader who doesn't read Romance loved the story and felt it wasn't a Romance at all. I also don't read Romance, and therefore I didn't know that in a Romance story the romance itself is the MC. I made the mistake of marketing the book as a Romance, but soon learned my error when the reviews came in. Readers who enjoy contemporary fiction liked the story, but Romance readers felt a bit cheated.

What we can take from this is that you should write the book YOU want to read - but make sure that when you come to market it you put it in a genre that fits the expectations of readers of that genre - especially Romance readers! (Although readers of other genres might not feel as strongly)
I feel this basic marketing info would be useful in a writing course.


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

kw3000 said:


> And power to them, of course. I think a lot of the time however, people don't know what they want 'til they read it and likewise I can't presuppose I know what that is on their behalf. Instead, I'm just going to keep writing whatever tickles my fancy, eventually jump into the whole marketing dance and we'll see how it goes.


Examples might help. I write various genres and tones of romance including suspense. Whatever I write, I know what romance readers in general are looking for in a romance, and I know what kind of book within that genre is my book. Some of my series are darker than others. Some are suspense. One is very different, a trendier thing written differently. I experiment a lot. I break some people"s rules a lot-about how central the romance plot is, about whether there is an antagonist, about how much conflict there is between the main characters. In that sense I write only what I like, but I know there is a market for it. At the beginning I did not, but when I gave my first books to others to read and then published them, there was a market.

Whatever I write, I write to MY market. There is always humor. There is always an extra helping of family and other generations. The heroes are always sweet. The characters have a full life and friendships outside the romance. There is always some other interesting thing to learn about-about a profession, an industry, a country. The books have a strong sense of place and are long. I deliver the kind of read my readers want, though the tone and depth can vary.

But I do start with a hooky idea for a romance. I know what a hooky idea is. Job One. And I look to the market in everything else by making my book as attractive as possible for that market. Title, cover, blurb, opening. I am trying to deliver a fun, intelligent, easy-breezy escape read that offers some deeper feelings and thoughts and leaves a reader with a happy glow. THAT is the way in which I write and present the book to my market.


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

P.J. Post said:


> Usedtoposthere said:
> 
> 
> > Whatever I write, I write to MY market.
> ...


Usedtoposthere's market is turned out to be pretty large because a lot of readers share her tastes (including me ... love her books). But that's not always the case. SM Reine posted something to this effect years ago, and I always thought it was well said: there are no _bad _books. Books just have different market sizes, from millions right on down to one. If you have highly idiosyncratic tastes, then writing whatever you want may be fundamentally incompatible with selling many books because your market size will be naturally small. Doesn't mean you can't do it, but if you're relying on your writing to support yourself, idiosyncrasy may be a luxury you can't afford. But for those who can afford it, why not indulge? Every so often, something magical will happen. A mature literary marketplace should offer a wide array of choices, IMO, from the mainstream to the truly new and weird, so that everyone can find their thing.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

Becca Mills said:


> A million times this.
> 
> Usedtoposthere's market is turned out to be pretty large because a lot of readers share her tastes (including me ... love her books). But that's not always the case. SM Reine posted something to this effect years ago, and I always thought it was well said: there are no _bad _books. Books just have different market sizes, from millions right on down to one. If you have highly idiosyncratic tastes, then writing whatever you want may be fundamentally incompatible with selling many books because your market size will be naturally small. Doesn't mean you can't do it, but if you're relying on your writing to support yourself, idiosyncrasy may be a luxury you can't afford. But for those who can afford it, why not indulge? Every so often, something magical will happen. A mature literary marketplace should offer a wide array of choices, IMO, from the mainstream to the truly new and weird, so that everyone can find their thing.


True. I am an intelligent person with fairly lowbrow taste. I find that a lot of novelists who do well fit that profile. They enjoy what they do because most likely, when they were working stressful day jobs, many of them pretty high-status, they relaxed with genre fiction. Not stupid books. Fun, entertaining books, thrillers or romance or mystery or chicklit or fantasy. And then they wrote them, maybe for an escape there as well. They approach publishing as a business, but they did not originally write to get rich.

There are people who solely write (or use ghostwriters) to make money also. They do tend to write the trendy stuff. And then there are people in between. But unless you are SOLELY writing for yourself and do not care if anybody even reads your book much less pays for it, you do have to consider the market. You cannot write some way off-target idea for the genre (and I have seen some doozies), and then complain that your book did not sell. Or you can, but it looks kinda stupid.


----------



## Jack Krenneck (Feb 9, 2014)

kw3000 said:


> I do this for my enjoyment, I write what I want, and if I can entertain others in the course of that, that makes me happy. Of course, I care about sales, but I think if what you write is written well, you can find an audience for just about anything if you know what you're doing with packaging, ads/promos and pricing.


I think this highlights the key difference in our processes.

You write for enjoyment, and then believe marketing skills can sell the books later. I write so that I can eat, and therefore make sure I'm going to sell books right from the beginning of my outlining process.

I also _love _what I do for a living. And I'm very fortunate that what I love to read (traditional epic fantasy) is what I love to write and that there's a huge market for it. Many authors aren't so lucky. Their tastes are different from the market. When that happens, they can either ignore the market completely and hope to establish their own genre (extreme high risk) or they can suppress their instincts and write for money alone (extreme low personal satisfaction). Or they can find a balancing point somewhere between the two extremes that works for them.

In terms of finding "...an audience for just about anything if you know what you're doing with packaging, ads/promos and pricing." I think that you're overestimating the power of marketing. Marketing is a big part of the business, but it's not an all-powerful tool. It's a lever, and the more your book resonates with a large audience the better it works and the cheaper it is. The less your book resonates with an audience...the less effective it is and the more expensive.

Pushing a book that doesn't resonate is possible. But the costs of marketing exceed the profits and sales flat-line when the marketing juice dries up.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

Usedtoposthere said:


> True. I am an intelligent person with fairly lowbrow taste. I find that a lot of novelists who do well fit that profile. They enjoy what they do because most likely, when they were working stressful day jobs, many of them pretty high-status, they relaxed with genre fiction. Not stupid books. Fun, entertaining books, thrillers or romance or mystery or chicklit or fantasy. And then they wrote them, maybe for an escape there as well. They approach publishing as a business, but they did not originally write to get rich.


Yeah, I've noticed that pattern in high-profile indie authors (lots of escapees or retirees from pressure-cooker careers). Personally, I totally get it. This is an extreme example, but I heard a teacher from Columbine interviewed on the radio not too long ago, and she talked about how, after the shooting, she took a few years off teaching to write romance, and how healing it had been for her. She was able to make stories where the structure of the universe was orderly (governed by a plot arc), and endings were happy, which stood very much in contrast to the experience she was trying to recover from. That's why I've never understood the disparaging attitudes toward genre fiction: wanting to spend some time in a world that's more orderly, more predictable, and happier seems so understandable to me. Reality, with its myriad unpleasantnesses, reasserts itself soon enough.


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## AmpersandBookInteriors (Feb 10, 2012)

P.J. Post said:


> Presenting one extreme or the other isn't really helpful...a market of one vs eating? Really? Those are my only choices? Very few writers are going to earn a living right out of the gate, and planning for it is [bullcrap] fantasy advice and really detrimental because it's setting up false expectations. Almost everyone fails to earn a living in the Arts. It's a fact, regardless of strategy. Furthermore, there is ZERO evidence that following the market will in any way improve one's earnings. As for anecdotes, we have just as many writers here that are doing well that don't follow the market as those that profess to "write to it".
> 
> But, if a new writer writes for the fans they want and builds an audience, not of someone else's fans with expectations based on another writer' books, but of their own, then expectations become clear and easy to manage; and they'll trust you to take them to new places. They'll stick with you - for a long long time and for many many books.
> 
> ...


I'm quoting this in its entirety because I think it deserves to be read twice.


----------



## Dpock (Oct 31, 2016)

kw3000 said:


> Yeah, man, you do you...and especially if it works. I know I couldn't do the whole "I write so that I can eat" thing because it'd compromise the heck out of what I was writing. I'd be a simpering mess and my stories would suffer.


I take it you don't want to sacrifice the integrity of your writing to make a buck. It would destroy your passion to write and lower the quality of your work. In my case, if market forces took control of my pen, I'd put it down and do something else with my time.

Still, I can't escape the need for marketing once my manuscript is complete. But it's a separate process. It follows the creative work. It doesn't shape it.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

Dpock said:


> I take it you don't want to sacrifice the integrity of your writing to make a buck. It would destroy your passion to write and lower the quality of your work. In my case, if market forces took control of my pen, I'd put it down and do something else with my time.
> 
> Still, I can't escape the need for marketing once my manuscript is complete. But it's a separate process. It follows the creative work. It doesn't shape it.


I do not sacrifice the integrity of my writing. Most everyone I know writes what they love and/or loves what they write. I just love to write romance. Best and easiest job I have ever had but it is also the most satisfying thing I have ever done.


----------



## Scarlett_R (Sep 30, 2011)

My 2c from watching and working with authors over the years, and being a business owner and small biz coach:

Authors who choose to self-publish are becoming small business owners, whether they know it or not. They are offering a product to a specific market.

But from my experience there are two camps here: *Authors who write for pleasure* and *authors who write for sales. *

The quality of the writing is definitely important, obviously. But authors who WFP (write for pleasure) put it out there and hope there are others who will enjoy the work as much as they do. So many small business owners in _all_ industries take this route and it has a hugely high fail rate. The difference here being that with self-publishing, you can try and try and try again and minimise the fail rate, but you still may not get to your target. You can continue to release books and hope that it meets a market and that it gets to the top.

Authors who WFS (write for sales) recognize what the readers want in writing to market. This is when small biz owners really take a hold of their industry and jump right to the top. Why? Because they're treating their work *like a business* and that means: identifying the gap and supplying the product to fill the need.

So when it comes to marketing, authors who WFS have already done half of the hard work, because they have a product that the audience already craves. Authors who WFP have to battle and _convince_ readers to pick up their book.

From my observation of my clients marketing this is the break down:

*Authors who WFP:*

Don't have a long term plan in mind
Try a scattershot effect when marketing- rather than targeting specific buyers and niches
Keep writing in the hopes that the tide will change

*Authors who WFS:*

Work from a plan- just like a business plan- and know exactly where they want to go
Have monetary and sales targets
Have marketing strategies and processes in place before the book even hits the shelves
*Know exactly who they are selling to*<< the most important part

I am an author who WFP. But business is my passion, so I have that knowledge of how to make sales and market well. However, I keep those two loves completely separate, I keep writing as a _pleasure_ activity and don't really care if my stuff sells or not because I know why I did it. I get a few bucks here and there, sure, but I'm not looking for it to be my main source of income. I direct my passion for business through my design and consulting work.

I think a lot of authors come into the industry like this: *They start off as writers who have to run a business, and transform into business owners who write books.* It's a natural progression for so many authors, which is why the first couple of books really can just be testing the waters until they know whether they want to commit to this as a business owner or not. You'll probably be a blend of both, but normally you'll lean towards one side more than another.

I think for writing skills- these match authors who WFP. And marketing skills match authors who WFS. If you can get the two to meet at equal quality, hello bestseller!


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

I write for pleasure. But I love to write in a genre that sells. There are not two camps. It is a continuum. I did not have a plan. I have never had targets. I am not unusual in that.


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## Scarlett_R (Sep 30, 2011)

P.J. Post said:


> I know you're writing a forum post and not a book, but your analysis, while I generally agree with it, is leaving out a huge chunk of writers - those that are planning a long term career as opposed to obsessing over short term sales. It's still a business, but not a commodity business, which is a mindset many small business get caught up in. Some of us are developing a brand. It doesn't matter if any one book or series fails to earn amazingly well, especially not the early stuff, because it's about the oeuvre. (Sorry, such a pretentious word.)


If you are planning a long term career, then you definitely fall into the WFS. Especially if you're moving into the world of branding- that's a hugely marketable aspect of publishing and I'd say about 60% of the authors I work with don't consider that when coming to me. Successful small businesses aren't about short term turn arounds, I think that's where some authors who WFP get caught up and that's their hope. Write something, get it out and it'll sell heaps. Authors who make those plans to sell books over long term and have that vision definitely have the business mentality that will get them to success.


----------



## Jack Krenneck (Feb 9, 2014)

Jan Hurst-Nicholson said:


> Should creative writing courses now be split between writing and marketing - assuming that the writers wish to sell their work?


Going back to one of the original questions, I think the last bit there is central to the issue. Many, many authors (probably the majority) are writing for pleasure alone and while sales might be nice it's not really their aim. They likely have little interest in marketing and want writing courses to focus on the creative side.

But for those who do want sales, who want commercial success, then marketing knowledge (via a course or some other means) is pretty much mandatory. Trying to compete without it is like going into business without a business plan. Or playing golf with a tennis racket.

It's certainly possible though to love what you write and write what you love -- and still run a writing business.

Given that writing courses are themselves a product that a business is selling, the business owners cater to their largest target audience. That is, people who write for pleasure alone. So I don't see them introducing much in the way of marketing know-how.

Others, such as Mark Dawson, have spotted a perfect niche market in this situation. So the courses are there, but I don't think it's ever likely that they'll be provided in the one spot.


----------



## Elizabeth Barone (May 6, 2013)

I look at it this way: if I open a burger joint, people in town are going to expect at least the basics of a burger. I can spice up my menu and experiment, which could turn out both tasty and lucrative. But if I've never even eaten a burger before and never bothered to at least look at pictures or recipes, my customers are going to be surprised when they get their plate and find out they got an overcooked piece of meat without any of the fixings.

Readers have the same expectations when it comes to genre.


----------



## Crystal_ (Aug 13, 2014)

My understanding is that Jaws the book is more about the town and the interpersonal drama that the shark, which would make it classic "melodrama." The movie invented the summer Blockbuster but it's also a classic creature feature. It's not innovation or banality. There's a spectrum.

None of the groundbreaking books/movies of the last hundred years true invented anything. They're all riffing off successful formulas. That isn't too take away from the creativity of the authors, but rather to point out that the books are all following through same story dynamics that have been working for hundreds of years. There's a reason why The Hero's Journey is such a classic.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

The Martian. Cast Away (film). Robinson Crusoe. Baby Island (I know, obscure now. Carol Ryrie Brink, Author of Caddie Woodlawn. From my small home town by the way.) Etc. Same idea. Still works.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

LilyBLily said:


> The 4 Ps of marketing probably will help some indie writers, but not those of us who write from the inside out and who do not intend to turn this writing thing into a schedule-driven, mass-production business. The fact is, we're all at different life stages, with different personal goals, and those play a major role in how we approach what we write. The business of art is not the same as the art of business.


If you are self publishing you are in business. You can choose to be in an Etsy sort of hobby business if you like, if as I say you are mainly writing for yourself and do not care that much about whether you are read unless it is a sort of happy accident.

It is honestly not a dichotomy, and I am not sure where people get the idea that people write either for money or for pleasure. It is so contrary to the author world as I have seen it (allowing for the people who ARE simply marketers/entrepreneurs, of whom we have had another sterling example this week.) Marketing is mostly common sense. Plenty of people pay attention to marketing principles as one would in any small business. That does not mean you are in some mass production business. You can understand the basics of producing something your market wants, and Pricing and placing and presenting it appropriately, while writing a book or three a year. (Like me right now, alas.) If anybody is interested, I recommend seeking out Annie B's post on the subject of how she stopped Listening to bad marketing advice and started paying attention to how people worked who were getting read and making a living, and started getting read and making a living with her talent, while writing what she loved.

I do write for a living, but mainly because I like working hard at writing so much more than I liked my prior careers. It is still a job, but a much more enjoyable one.


----------



## Dpock (Oct 31, 2016)

Elizabeth Barone said:


> I look at it this way: if I open a burger joint, people in town are going to expect at least the basics of a burger. I can spice up my menu and experiment, which could turn out both tasty and lucrative. But if I've never even eaten a burger before and never bothered to at least look at pictures or recipes, my customers are going to be surprised when they get their plate and find out they got an overcooked piece of meat without any of the fixings.
> 
> Readers have the same expectations when it comes to genre.


Good analogy.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

P.J. Post said:


> Presenting one extreme or the other isn't really helpful...a market of one vs eating? Really? Those are my only choices? Very few writers are going to earn a living right out of the gate, and planning for it is [bullcrap] fantasy advice and really detrimental because it's setting up false expectations. Almost everyone fails to earn a living in the Arts. It's a fact, regardless of strategy. Furthermore, there is ZERO evidence that following the market will in any way improve one's earnings. As for anecdotes, we have just as many writers here that are doing well that don't follow the market as those that profess to "write to it".
> 
> But, if a new writer writes for the fans they want and builds an audience, not of someone else's fans with expectations based on another writer' books, but of their own, then expectations become clear and easy to manage; and they'll trust you to take them to new places. They'll stick with you - for a long long time and for many many books.
> 
> ...


Yeah, I don't think so. If Usedtoposthere applied her writing talents to producing artsy, obscure literary fiction, she'd almost certainly have a much lower readership than she does because far fewer people want to read that kind of material. Instead, she writes in a genre where there's a large and eager readership. Writing for a large readership by no means guarantees you'll sell a lot, but it raises the ceiling on how well you can do, should you happen to do well.

Where did I say your choices were "a market of one vs. eating"? I said there was a continuum of market sizes, from millions down to one. Meaning, you know ... 10,000,000 ... 9,999,999 .... 9,999,998 ... etc. There's plenty of room for different market sizes in that spectrum, and many of them would permit eating, even eating+. I could live off my readership if I were capable of publishing at anywhere near a reasonable speed, and my readership is far closer to the "one" end of the continuum than the "millions." Like, waaaay closer to the one end.

I agree that the vast majority won't earn a living from their fiction, and that _planning _on that level of success would be incautious. But while I wouldn't _plan on it_, I do think it's totally cool to _try for it_, especially if you've gotten some unbiased feedback that you have strong potential as a writer. If that's what you want to do. Some folks love their day jobs (which aren't really day jobs, in that case), and more power to them.

I think you're right to set a goal of getting better with each book; I do that too. But "better" means different things to different writers. For some, it means "even closer to the center of the genre target," and that's fine. Betterness has no single definition.


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

Ha that is way, way too big a reach to think that I could (or can) write award-winning fiction! I just wrote a simple,
linear Cinderella story with a cool hero, with no pretensions to anything except trying to be emotionally authentic. It had a good and unusual setting and situation hook, which was a deliberate marketing choice, in the sense that I thought it would be a great romance novel. I wrote a romantic daydream I had, and it turned out to be an enticing one that helped people excuse some first-novel weaknesses. 

Since then I have become a bit more ambitious, but I do best when I do not make my readers or myself work too hard. I am trying to write an easy escape read, with some deeper undertones if people care to look at them. If not that is OK too. But the main thing for my genre and niche is to write and present a book that looks like a fun but not stupid read. I am not the most mass market however. I have heard people say that you need to ... I am not sure. Not dumb down exactly; there is some term for making your work extremely accessible. It is the reason my first three books are still the favorites. I want to write what I want however, and that is my own trade off. 

What you choose to write is your first marketing decision, in the sense that marketing means writing for somebody else to read. Whether or not you want to make a dime on it or care. 

Sure The Martian is Cast Away, whatever the author was going for and whatever else it is. That is the appeal for many folks. That is that underlying resonance that gets to what people are reading for. It is why a non sci-fi reader like myself read and loved it. It let you empathize with a guy in a desperate situation and follow his thought process. It was a fabulous and desperate adventure. The author did that so well. Both the details, which he kept fascinating to puzzle out with the hero, and the emotional connection. He did both. That is rare.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

P.J. Post said:


> How can you be sure of that? She's a pretty good writer. Maybe her obscure literary novel would win a Pulitzer and the movie deal would make her a billionaire. But now we're back to comparing extremes, there's a pretty wide commercial gulf between mainstream-ish Romance and artsy, obscure literary fiction.


Yeah, maybe. There are breakout commercial hits in literary fiction, that's for sure. All of the advice you hear on this front is about increasing or decreasing odds, and it is the nature odds never to be zero.



P.J. Post said:


> I was combining posts, not just yours.


Oops, sorry ... didn't realize.



P.J. Post said:


> I agree, but there's still no One Way, which is what keeps coming up. _"WTM is for the business-minded, serious writer - anything else is a hobby"_ - and that's just horsehockey, plain and simple. There's lots of ways to operate a business, lots of financial goals and methods to hit them; I just happen to think that chasing markets is the single worst way to go, for both business reasons and Art reasons; and because this view isn't widely held around these parts, I think it is important to talk about it when the subject comes up, especially for new writers.


Hmm. Well, I think one attraction of the WTM approach is that it offers a specific, concrete series of steps to take to build your writing career, and it has more than a handful of people saying, "I did this, and it worked." (Anecdotal, yes, but it's going to strike people as better than nothing.) You're saying your approach is also business-oriented, but you're not really laying out specific advice on how to build a career on genre-bending work. Your advice seems to be just keep writing, with a focus on aesthetic quality and uniqueness, but that's pretty vague. Something that suggests a clear forward path is always going to be attractive to people.



P.J. Post said:


> For me, better means deeper feelz, edgier edge of the seat excitement, a more immersive reading experience for each and every one of them, more memorable, more challenging, more thinking, more entertaining - just more betterer.


I like that stuff too.


----------



## Scarlett_R (Sep 30, 2011)

Elizabeth Barone said:


> I look at it this way: if I open a burger joint, people in town are going to expect at least the basics of a burger. I can spice up my menu and experiment, which could turn out both tasty and lucrative. But if I've never even eaten a burger before and never bothered to at least look at pictures or recipes, my customers are going to be surprised when they get their plate and find out they got an overcooked piece of meat without any of the fixings.
> 
> Readers have the same expectations when it comes to genre.


----------



## jb1111 (Apr 6, 2018)

Al Stevens said:


> There's a problem with that. By the time the instructor develops the curriculum, gets it reviewed and approved, and the students receive the instruction, the approaches being taught are old hat, obsolete, beaten to a frazzle, and don't work anymore.
> 
> The target is a shifting one. When we can't even agree here on what works, and what works for some does not work for others, and when today's hot marketing ploy is tomorrow's fizzle, how can a formal course hope to keep up with all that change?
> 
> But the art and craft of writing endure, and everyone seems to agree that the first step in selling a book is to write a good one. Tell your students to do an amazon search for the latest books on marketing books and go from there. (Anything more than 6 months old is ancient history.) In the meantime, teach them to write.


I'd agree with you on your first point except I know some instructors at the community college level (law and journalism) and they stay very current on things in their fields and teach them that way, because they _have_ to if they want to help the students succeed when they get out in the world.

Perhaps the level of curriculum micromanagement on the level you're describing is different from college to college.

Otherwise, points well taken, teaching yesterday's trends would obviously be pointless. And I don't think the cart should be put before the horse.

As Mr. Doucette mentioned, one should learn to write well first -- learn marketing _after_ they actually can write something that is legible and coherent, and possibly 'sellable'.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

Talking about marketing basics to aspiring writers has absolutely nothing to do with trends. It has to do with talking to students about how to observe the market, and teaching them what "marketing" is. Promotion is only one tiny piece of it. First and foremost, it's producing a marketable product, and knowing how to determine that. It is about skills, not specifics. It's a guest lecture or an optional brown-bag lunch with a successful author (I'll bet most college towns boast a few).

I speak as both an author and a former marketing and publishing professional (and MBA, although most of what I know about marketing is from looking at sales numbers, talking to customers, analyzing the competition, looking at the landscape, and crunching all that--exactly what indie authors tend to do). I am also a graduate of the University of Denver Publishing Institute back when the earth cooled and the dinosaurs came, and we had a marketing segment whose lessons I still remember. I'm also speaking as somebody who's absolutely crappy at promotion, by the way. Lots of facets to marketing, and promotion is only one of them.


----------



## jb1111 (Apr 6, 2018)

P.J. Post said:


> Furthermore, there is ZERO evidence that following the market will in any way improve one's earnings.


You know, I really want to agree with all you've said, because you make very good points, but the above quoted statement just doesn't exactly ring true.

All I have to do is look at all the successful books that followed the 50 Shades meme -- various authors made a killing off of the same thing right after it came out. And they still do today. I can look over the women's fiction section of Amazon today and see high selling books, still 'following' that market 7 years after 50 Shades hit the bookshelves. And how many young-woman-with-a-vampire-lover books are there? And many of them sell greatly. Thank you, Twilight.

Then you have the bad boy genre. I don't know who invented that, or popularised that one, being that I really don't follow it myself. But it's apparent it has been out there for at least 4-5 years, and there are numerous authors of various bents making a killing off of it, following the trend and pounding it to death -- in many cases all the way to the bank. And you can read the LookInsides and see they are well written, but seem to lack the soul that some other writers have. But they make money.

This isn't to say that such writing tactics are for everybody. And that isn't to say that someone should be instructed or told to do such things (try to capitalize on a hot market), or that it is preferable, or that it guarantees results. I think your point is that it does _not_ guarantee results, and I agree with you. But there have been a decent number of authors that have made a lot of money doing such. One can't deny that.

I think the best authors are ones who follow their own soul. You can call it 'being ahead of the curve' if you like. To me, it's just writing your own voice, but trying to write it in a way that entertains others. And one can sell books that way. Obviously, many here do.

But at the same time, once you publish a book, you are marketing it, whether you want to or not. If you just put it out in a plain black and white cover with just the title and author's name (as a friend of mine did once), that is marketing -- even if you don't think so. My own book covers are not well done. I do the best I can within my budget; they get the job done, but they are anything but slick. That still is marketing. If I had slicker covers, even though they would cost me more, perhaps they would sell more. It's a choice I have made. A marketing one.

As for writing to market, I think all authors have to deal with it, whether we like it or not. The issue is what defines the word 'market'.

In my own genre I have found, through trial and error, that my readers prefer some themes, memes and subgenres over others. Now, I could just decide that my readers can go take a hike, and write whatever I want -- and that would be great for me, but my books wouldn't sell as much. I learned that already by trial and error. I have left the books out there, where I made a left turn, and they sell a little, but nowhere near as well as the ones that stick to the most popular memes.

So I come up with creative ways to stick with the theme that keeps my readers. They obviously know what they want. I try to deliver it to them, and at the same time stay true to my own self by writing something in that subgenre that interests me. So far, it is working... And the decision I made is a form of marketing.

I look at your offerings. The covers and presentation of your books are all very impressive and well put together. They're awesome. I know they aren't everything -- certainly your writing and stories are what sells, but you didn't put your books out with plain black and white covers, and that was for a reason. You may call it an extension of your personal style. I see a form of marketing.

So, should budding writers be instructed at all in these things you and I both use, which are forms of marketing? It's apparent to me that not all new writers are aware of some of them.

After reading this thread, the answer is all over the place, and maybe there is no answer. Maybe they just have to learn it on their own. Maybe it would just waste class time. Obviously, if it happens, it should be after they learn how to write. And probably after they learn how to write well -- for their own sakes, at least.


----------



## Anarchist (Apr 22, 2015)

Usedtoposthere said:


> Lots of facets to marketing, and promotion is only one of them.


This truth should be displayed in a banner at the top of this forum.


----------



## 10105 (Feb 16, 2010)

jb1111 said:


> Perhaps the level of curriculum micromanagement on the level you're describing is different from college to college.


When I was lecturing at college classes on computer programming in the 80s, the coursework was always out of date because the instructors did not have time to both teach and practice and thus learn themselves the skills they needed to teach. And those disciplines changed only every year or two. Today with selling books, things change so fast nobody knows what works. As soon as a working strategy is discovered and revealed, it stops working because everyone piles into the fray.


----------



## 10105 (Feb 16, 2010)

"Write for pleasure?" I wish. Like most creative arts, writing is a mind-busting, soul-rending, painful endeavor, offering little or no pleasure while it's in progress. If it was pleasurable, they'd either outlaw it or regulate and tax it.


----------



## Elizabeth Barone (May 6, 2013)

P.J. Post said:


> Not really. I mean, I get the gist, but...
> 
> This analogy presumes the writer has never read a book before. However, if we take one step back, shows like Iron Chef have chefs cooking crazy special things for the first time, having only the most basic knowledge of ingredients or preparation, but they have a wealth of knowledge about cooking in general. It's common for Chefs to win challenges when cooking things for the very first time, often cuisine from other cultures, because, first and foremost, they know how to cook.
> 
> So, a really good writer could do their take on cozy mystery or urban fantasy or science fiction based on the genre definition alone, and it would probably be pretty good - because they know how to write.


Okay, it's just an analogy. I'm not presuming anything. I'm saying readers have certain expectations, and it'd serve writers to know what those expectations are. If your example writer is writing based on the definition of a genre, then they have an idea of what those expectations are. Writers should probably read some books from that genre, though, to get a really good grasp.



Usedtoposthere said:


> Talking about marketing basics to aspiring writers has absolutely nothing to do with trends. It has to do with talking to students about how to observe the market, and teaching them what "marketing" is. Promotion is only one tiny piece of it. First and foremost, it's producing a marketable product, and knowing how to determine that. It is about skills, not specifics. It's a guest lecture or an optional brown-bag lunch with a successful author (I'll bet most college towns boast a few).
> 
> I speak as both an author and a former marketing professional (and MBA, although most of what I know about marketing is from looking at sales numbers, talking to customers, analyzing the competition, looking at the landscape, and crunching all that--exactly what indie authors tend to do). I'm also speaking as somebody who's absolutely crappy at promotion, by the way. Lots of facets to marketing, and promotion is only one of them.


Yep.


----------



## Dpock (Oct 31, 2016)

Al Stevens said:


> "Write for pleasure?" I wish. Like most creative arts, writing is a mind-busting, soul-rending, painful endeavor, offering little or no pleasure while it's in progress. If it was pleasurable, they'd either outlaw it or regulate and tax it.


I think anyone who feels that way should get as far away from a keyboard as possible. I've heard writers say they "bleed" when they write, but they're referring to something very deep in their process, going somewhere that metaphorically opens their chest and reveals their perceived universal truths. Something like that. It's a blissful process. Eckhart Tolle describes it well in his "The Power of Now". What he misses, Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi covers in "Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience".

To each his own, of course.

If someone told me their writing experience involved pain and great effort (was not joyful and effortless), I would suggest writing wasn't for them.


----------



## wilsonharp (Jun 5, 2012)

Writing is different from other arts. Sculptors love sculpting. Painters love painting. Writers love having written.


----------



## C. Gockel (Jan 28, 2014)

wilsonharp said:


> Writing is different from other arts. Sculptors love sculpting. Painters love painting. Writers love having written.


Errr ... I like writing. If I don't like what I'm writing, I figure something is wrong with it that needs to be fixed.


----------



## Crystal_ (Aug 13, 2014)

Hey, some of us actually love bad boys. But there are a lot of people writing them because they seem to think it's a path to instant cash. Not the best move IMO because it's so saturated, but it can work.

PJ, I'm not dismissing Jaws at all. I've never read the book, but I loved the movie. I saw it way too young and I'm still afraid of sharks. It has creature feature in its DNA. It's about a mysterious creature terrorizing a small town. It's got more too, but it's a mistake to believe that genre fiction can't have more.

IMO, the novelty of in how the story is told, not what the story is. There are only a few basic story concepts when you break it down far enough. But those are only part of success. Harry Potter is a classic chosen one narrative but it's popular ans special because of the characters and the excellent world building.


----------



## CathleenT (Mar 14, 2018)

Hey, I just wanted to poke my nose in. I don't feel I can speak much to the topic, OP, although I agree with everyone else that you should learn to write before you research promotion, and I really appreciate Usedtoposthere's distinction between marketing and promotion.

I appreciate all of it, actually. To some of you, this may be very old hat, but to me, I'm still wrestling with many of these issues, and the courteous, articulate, back-and-forth clarification of ideas has been extremely valuable. I've been worried that my path is really no path at all, and I should just accept the hobby moniker, even though writing far outstrips anything I've done before in terms of dedication, even painting, which I take very seriously.

So thank you, everyone.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

C. Gockel said:


> Errr ... I like writing. If I don't like what I'm writing, I figure something is wrong with it that needs to be fixed.


Raises hand. I quit my job while writing my first book because writing was the most pleasurable thing I
had ever done outside of bed. I felt like I was on painkillers the whole time, it was such a pleasure. It can be very angst producing sometimes nowadays due to the intrusion of making a living and pleasing readers and all that, but when it is going well or even when it is not quite, it is still usually pretty darn cool.


----------



## 10105 (Feb 16, 2010)

Dpock said:


> I think anyone who feels that way should get as far away from a keyboard as possible.


I made my living with keyboards (QWERTY and piano) for fifty years or thereabouts. Your advice is a little late.  It also suggests a departure from the true artist's creative process. I'm pleased to hear about all these happy writers. Maybe it's because they don't have to use typewriters anymore.


----------



## Dpock (Oct 31, 2016)

Al Stevens said:


> It also suggests a departure from the true artist's creative process.


Well, I don't know about that. What is a _true_ artist's creative process anyway? If I'm doing something wrong I need to know!

Lol. I suspect a "What's A True Artist's Creative Process?" thread would be locked in no time.


----------



## JWright (Apr 10, 2018)

If the creative writing class is described as being one that teaches a writer how to make a living from their writing then I think it should include marketing, if it is purely a writing class then I don't think it needs to have it.

Personally, I think everyone who wants to publish their books should devote a certain amount of time to learning about marketing and applying it, including beginning writers.  If you want to self-publish, then you at least want an audience for your books even if you aren't trying to make a living.

If you are going to self-publish there is the writing side and the marketing side and the two are going to have to be juggled at some point.  If your time is extremely limited you might want to wait until you have something finished to market, but also taking the marketing part in small chunks as you go along seems like a good option to me as well.


----------



## 10105 (Feb 16, 2010)

Dpock said:


> I suspect a "What's A True Artist's Creative Process?" thread would be locked in no time.


Only if the moderators didn't like the answer.


----------



## JWright (Apr 10, 2018)

I think if you already genuinely love (or at least like) the genre you write in and have read lots of books that you don't necessarily have to consciously think about things like writing to market, tropes, etc.  You will have absorbed it through all of your reading and can focus on writing good books that your audience will love and put your own twist and stamp on it.

If you decide to enter a genre without really understanding it or having read much, and just have a checklist of tropes or try to take a narrow view of what "write to market" means then you might not get too far.  

Having an HEA in romance isn't just something to check off the list.  You have to know why readers want that and understand how to tell an emotionally satisfying story and realize that the journey is just as important - if not more so - than the destination.  The same is true for any other trope or genre. 

Unless you have a lot of money to outsource and pay for tons of advertising, I do think it is key to really focus on craft and understand your genre and audience.  You still have to learn marketing also to succeed, but I think it's getting so competitive now that you really have to understand your genre and audience to be successful over the long-term.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

JulesWright said:


> I think if you already genuinely love (or at least like) the genre you write in and have read lots of books that you don't necessarily have to consciously think about things like writing to market, tropes, etc. You will have absorbed it through all of your reading and can focus on writing good books that your audience will love and put your own twist and stamp on it.
> 
> If you decide to enter a genre without really understanding it or having read much, and just have a checklist of tropes or try to take a narrow view of what "write to market" means then you might not get too far.
> 
> ...


Yep. Exactly. And understanding what resonates with readers is the most important piece of marketing. Choosing what to write is marketing if you mean to share it. That does not mean you consciously analyze anything. I do not. I am lousy at it. But I write romance and I am always trying to come up with a hooky concept that will make a good story and be entertaining. That is marketing. Cover blurb and title are too-how I present my concept to the world. The rest flows from there, but you need a story that resonates to start with.

Except that I do not practice the true artist's creative process, so obviously don't listen to me.


----------



## JWright (Apr 10, 2018)

Usedtoposthere, yes exactly! 
  
I don't write romance but I find your posts here and those on your website enormously helpful, so I do listen to you!


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

JulesWright said:


> Usedtoposthere, yes exactly!
> 
> I don't write romance but I find your posts here and those on your website enormously helpful, so I do listen to you!


Aw thanks!


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

kw3000 said:


> I don't know, it's hard for me to be definitive with such an intangible subject area. I've tried and failed.
> 
> In my limited understanding, visibility seems to be key, and packaging is too. Everything else? I have no idea. There are many bestsellers in my favorite genres that I've read that nail the visibility aspect and the packaging too while the writing inside is just abysmal.
> 
> ...


The "creative process" reference was a joke re something on the previous page--basically saying that folks who enjoy writing aren't real writers, or words to that effect.

As far as the rest of your comment--I understand your point. The problem with that outlook, which I see a fair amount of, is that it's not a good path forward. If you think, "it's all luck," "talent doesn't matter," "nobody cares about writing ability," etc.--well, first, it's not what I observe. Everybody I know who makes great money from this puts out books that are loved by their market, and keeps on doing it (that can be the hard part. It's a lot easier to write one hit book than to keep following it up, especially given the pressure!) Daniel Arenson, Jana DeLeon, Penny Reid, just to name a few people in different genres whose work ethics, writing voices, and consistent quality I admire--they take risks, they write different things, they move forward like sharks (except much nicer), and they've gained their enormous audiences by doing something unique and doing it very, very well.

Second and perhaps more importantly, it's not actionable. If skill doesn't matter, where does that leave you? I heard a great nugget of advice once (in the Indies Who Sell podcast, which was short-lived but really helpful (disclosure: I am one of the interviews, so possible bias)), that said: If you think, "Crap books sell. Look at 50 Shades. Look at the Da Vinci code. Look at Lee Child's books. Pure crap," etc.--you're missing your chance to learn. WHY do they sell? Except for the botted/circle-borrowed books, there's a reason. Those books resonated with a big audience for a REASON. It's a lot more actionable to tease out the reason. What did people love? The characters and their connections? The pace and the author's deft use of cliffhangers at the ends of chapters, even down to paragraph level, to pull you through the story? The puzzle? The sex? That's useful information, even if you thought the book was stupid, and it's actionable. Even if you hated the book, you can find a takeaway for your work.

My advice and observation only, but that kind of honesty is useful to me even in looking at my own stuff. Which books resonate most? Where I fell down with some readers--why? Easy to say, "They weren't ready for a flawed character" or whatever--but it's probably more like, "I didn't explain the character's flaws well enough to make him sympathetic." That's actionable, and it helps me next time. (Which is why I do read my reviews. Not to say I act on all of them, but they sure have been helpful going forward. Learning all the time, I hope.)


----------



## Dpock (Oct 31, 2016)

kw3000 said:


> Mind you, readers of those series I deem to be poorly written... Something's clearly resonating with these folks and it's invisible to me. But then again, resonating is such a relative term, how can anyone nail such a thing down?


There's a huge mass market out there that isn't very demanding. In books, it used to be covered by commercial mass paperbacks. Someone earlier compared it to selling burgers. Just make them look juicy. Their palates aren't refined enough to know any better. It hits the spot whether it's delicious or not.



> ...I have no idea what that means. What's a "true artist"?


I doubt any two people will agree on the answer.

Still, there is consensus from learned quarters that I can only summarize here from memory: A true artist doesn't pander to an audience and isn't sentimental. They see and state things as they truly are and not as we wish them to be. When their art works for you, you experience aesthetic arrest. The artist has given you a new perception of reality that literally stops you in your tracks. It others cases, the artist's perceptions may connect with your formerly unexpressed intuitions or subconscious. They've somehow drilled into your core. It has the same effect as aesthetic arrest. In both cases, there's a feeling of universality, which some summarize as "oneness".

In other words, you have an "aha" moment that is free from sentiment or predisposition and connects you to something larger than yourself.

That's pretty hardcore but in my opinion, true. For me, it's aspirational. I make no claim to being a true artist of any kind. It's not really my call anyway, and anyone earnestly claiming to be a true artist most probably is not.


----------



## 10105 (Feb 16, 2010)

kw3000 said:


> What's a "true artist"?


Any artist who isn't a fake artist.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

Al Stevens said:


> Any artist who isn't a fake artist.


*Checks self.* Yep, clearly a rub-on. Fake. But then, I've never claimed to be an artist. Good thing, if it means I can continue to enjoy writing!


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

Al Stevens said:


> Dpock said:
> 
> 
> > I suspect a "What's A True Artist's Creative Process?" thread would be locked in no time.
> ...


----------



## Jack Krenneck (Feb 9, 2014)

kw3000 said:


> Talking about 'writing to market' and nailing tropes and meeting reader expectations, etc, reminds me of that scene in 'Dead Poets Society' where Robin Williams' character makes fun of an introduction to poetry essay that encourages students to view great poetry as being the result of something you can quantify through a formula, when, as he rightfully points out, that idea is laughable.


I'm not so sure about this. For instance, a story can have a happy ending or a sad ending. You can mathematically demonstrate that happy endings are more common. Via survey or focus group you can mathematically determine what percentage of a particular target audience expects a happy ending for a specific genre. For some genres, that's going to be 100%. If an author writes in that genre and disregards the convention, you can mathematically predict their chances of producing a satisfying story.

Can a story be good art if it's not satisfying to those who read it?

I'm not smart enough to answer that question, so I won't. But I will say that if an author wants to improve their chances of selling books, then there's an element of science/marketing/business savvy/behavioral insights/trope awareness etc. that should be embedded into their creative process.

I used happy endings as an example, but you can empirically analyze other elements of storytelling as well. For instance, use of hooks in opening sentences, teasers at the end of chapters, heightening of stakes coinciding with "act" points, the likability of a character, the usefulness of character flaws etc.

Is an author who uses this knowledge less of an artist? Is their story less worthy as a result? Personally, I don't think so. Nor do I mean to suggest that all of the storytelling art can be analyzed this way. But a lot of it can. I think, however, that many people absorb these "formulae" unconsciously while they read. Others just study them consciously.


kw3000 said:


> But, I do believe there is a hard concrete wall that separates creation from visibility. I don't think either aspect has anything to do with the other at all. I think you can break down methods of gaining visibility for your art into formulas and algorithms and math and methods that can be replicated. To me, these two areas are so unlike the other, they're two completely different conversations, not to mention they involve completely differing skill-sets. For those skilled in both...I bow in awe of your ambidexterity.


I recognize that this is how you feel, but I feel differently. For me, the marketing side and the writing side are inseparable. I would struggle to do one without the other. I'm not really sure where one begins and the other ends. Then again, this may be because I see marketing not as a tool to create visibility but as an art in its own right. Writing a blurb that sings or a tagline that jumps off the page gives me the same thrill as writing a great story scene.


----------



## Nope (Jun 25, 2012)

.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

Oh, I don’t know. These are perennially thorny questions for writers, and it has been a good discussion, I think. It may point a way for somebody who has been struggling with aspects of this. Seems worthwhile. I hope so.


----------



## CathleenT (Mar 14, 2018)

I've found this discussion very worthwhile, although I'm glad the criteria for being an artist is that you intend to create art. I've studied visual arts, and I still paint, and nobody in that sphere disputes anyone's right to be called an artist. The process is remarkably similar, at least if you paint acrylics or oils. You block in the rough dimensions of the finished composition and then gradually add in detail. Along the way you get critique from other artists to help improve your work. Eventually, it's as good as you can get it, and you sign it. Poof--more art is born.

I don't see why writing should be any different--it's just a different media for a similar process. Painting skills don't necessarily transfer to sculpting, but there's a certain mental skill set that's the same. It seems like that should apply to writing, too. I hope it's not pretentious to want to create art. It's not for me to say how successful I am at meeting that goal, but the intention is there.


----------



## Jack Krenneck (Feb 9, 2014)

P.J. Post said:


> We're just going in circles...
> 
> Regardless of your take on markets and reader expectations, the important marketing take-away here is differentiation. It's what keeps your books from being interchangeable widgets, it lifts you out of the discount bin and reduces the negative impact of Zon's algos, it's what makes you and your books unique, it's what defines your brand. Differentiation is pretty much the holy grail of marketing. It trumps all 4 p's and just about every other marketing principle. It attempts to answer the question: why me?
> 
> ...


Product differentiation needn't have anything to do with the story. It could focus on price, for instance free, 99 cents and $6.99. Or length. Or it might be standalone vs series. Or individual books in a series vs a boxed set. Or perceived quality such as "New York Times bestselling author". The list goes on.

But it could be about story too. There's no rule you can't write uniquely and still hit most of the tropes in a genre. Game of Thrones hits the epic fantasy tropes. But it turns noblebright on its head and gives us grimdark instead. By my reckoning, the Harry Potter books hit all the tropes of epic fantasy too -- except they're set in our world rather than a secondary world.

Hitting most of the tropes of a genre and being wildly unique with your own voice and distinctive branding aren't mutually exclusive.


----------



## Tulonsae (Apr 12, 2015)

Content removed due to TOS Change of 2018. I do not agree to the terms.


----------



## 10105 (Feb 16, 2010)

Artists don't necessarily "intend to create art" as an object unto itself. That's for folks who want to be _known_ as artists. Instead, artists intend to express themselves by using a craft in which they are skilled. And many don't care how they are known. The craft is the means and the art is the end but the expression is the reason.


----------



## Dpock (Oct 31, 2016)

Lorri Moulton said:


> Buying advertising is one way to get your book in front of readers.


It's perhaps the most effective way. At the moment, AMS, despite its aggravations, works well. It's the sum of my paid promotion activity, supplemented with Instafreebie and a mailing list. All three require learning curves, but they are not steep.

A bad cover can kill a book's appeal, but a good cover is no guarantee of success. It's the same with blurbs, titles, and keyword and category selection. It's not difficult to acquire the talent to excel in those areas, but it's time-consuming as hell. The big leaps in progress seem to come from the small tweaks we make along the way rather than the sweeping broad strokes. I fiddled and fine-tuned for five long months before getting results. In the end, it was about finding the right audience. Duh.

Maybe call the above stage one marketing for a non-genre, newbie writer. I don't think they need to bother with anything more (websites, paid promotional newsletters, etc.) until they've sorted out the kinks and found their audience.


----------



## Flee (Dec 3, 2017)

What an interesting discussion. Once again I'm amazed by the willingness of you experienced publishers. Thank you.



Dpock said:


> Maybe call the above stage one marketing for a non-genre, newbie writer. I don't think they need to bother with anything more (websites, paid promotional newsletters, etc.) until they've sorted out the kinks and found their audience.


Finding the audience is the rub, isn't it?

With no list, no _name_, and no followers, the goal seems as difficult as climbing a fog covered mountain in the dark while barefoot, knowing there is a deep chasm on the left and dragons perched upon the crags to the right. Okay, so the dragons are small and only eat toes. Nevertheless, their small puffs of heat tend to drive the fear of failure deep.

The answer, it seems, is that it only takes time and money. And nerve, grit, determination, etc.

I think that marketing is more important than writing when it comes to indy publishing. A decent story can be made into an acceptable book if a competent editor is chosen. If you cannot find the audience, then it doesn't matter how good the story is.

Thanks again,
Flee


----------



## Dpock (Oct 31, 2016)

Flee said:


> The answer, it seems, is that it only takes time and money. And nerve, grit, determination, etc.


It takes _some _time and _some_ money, but there's a lot of data out there to support informed generalizations. What I've drawn from them is, count on it taking six months to a year to get a good grip on indie publishing and collect meaningful feedback on your book(s). My books and income didn't get legs for six months. It occurred after and was very possibly due to publishing my fourth book. That one found the audience I needed to give the shelf momentum. All along I was fiddling with covers and blurbs and experimenting with different categories and keywords, but I'm positive the fourth book was the keystone that pulled it all together.

My monthly indie publishing budget averages $196, all marketing oriented (I do my own covers and editing). The breakdown is $150 AMS, $20 Mailerlite, $20 Instafreebie, $6 PO Box. I'll probably drop Instafreebie at the end of the month (one experiences diminishing returns over there).

So, _some_ time, _some_ money...

Yes, finding an audience is key to your success, but if you're writing in the genres you're set (you know your audience and what they're expecting to find in your books). It still requires marketing to put your books in front of them. There's no reason to debate this.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

One thing I did was publish my first three books together. I hear a lot of arguments about why that is no good, but it sure worked for me. It enabled me to get some critical mass, real fans (do not like that word but cannot think of another for this), and word of mouth going. The first person who wrote to me, three weeks in, is my alpha reader almost six years later. I was her first fan letter in a lifetime of reading! Getting that was when I really thought it might work. 

Also, my books were all somewhat different, though same series, and the third was the best written (I got better, but first book was first fiction), so that sort of showed people that I could tell more than one kind of story. 

This was a couple years pre KU. Yes the market is different, but I would still start that way today. 

I had a strong first four months, published book four, and things really took off from there. As I have said though, for me, it was all about the hook—the subject matter of series 1, and then the strong hook of book 5, which was a very different kind of story but high concept, I believe it is called.


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson (Aug 25, 2010)

After reading through this thread I'm beginning to think that writers outside of the US are at somewhat of a disadvantage
When I started uploading my books in 2010 I could only use the Amazon KDP platform as the other sites presented problems, such as requiring a US zip code in my address, despite having a drop down menu of countries that included SA!  Others required a US banking account (I've now got around that one), so I've never 'gone wide'. 
Several of my books are set in SA, but, as there is no KU available SA, readers can't 'sample' books. 
The exchange rate makes even a 99c book about R15 as we have to pay a whispernet charge. 
The exchange rate also makes paid advertising hugely expensive. I've seen where some authors are paying per month more than my entire income from all sources! 
I believe AMS ads aren't available to us (even if I could work them out  ).
The only paid ad I would risk my money on would be a free BookBub for a children's book, but that could take months or years to be accepted (if ever), especially as my books aren't 'wide' (see above).
With print editions the shipping cost is twice the price of the book, and if I order several copies to bring down the shipping cost I get hit by customs duty, which cancels any savings.

Sorry if this sounds like a 'woe is me' moan. I'm just glad I've been able to put my books out there instead of having them mouldering in a filing cabinet, or the trad pubbed ones having gone out of print.


----------



## Abderian (Apr 5, 2012)

Jan Hurst-Nicholson said:


> After reading through this thread I'm beginning to think that writers outside of the US are at somewhat of a disadvantage
> When I started uploading my books in 2010 I could only use the Amazon KDP platform as the other sites presented problems, such as requiring a US zip code in my address, despite having a drop down menu of countries that included SA!  Others required a US banking account (I've now got around that one), so I've never 'gone wide'.
> Several of my books are set in SA, but, as there is no KU available SA, readers can't 'sample' books.
> The exchange rate makes even a 99c book about R15 as we have to pay a whispernet charge.
> ...


I don't think you would face the same problems with being wide these days. I live in Taiwan and half my series are wide.


----------

