Comments on: Should Writers Be Loyal to Their Publishers? Is ‘Loyalty’ a Virtue? (Quote of the Day / Diana Athill)

By: 1minutebookreviewswordpresscom

1minutebookreviewswordpresscom — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 21:38:08 +0000

I agree with almost all of what you said. So I'd just like to add that the loyalty issue comes up with agents, too; some of them want all of your work, too, even if they have little experience in a genre. And sometimes this can hold writers back much more than publishers who want to have all their work. I have an author friend, reasonably well known, who works on a lot of projects at once and who has insisted on the right to have different agents for these, sometimes as many as five agents at once. He's the only writer I know who has been able to pull that off. And I admire him for it. Jan

By: Talula

Talula — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 19:53:35 +0000

Jan, One more point about this subject. Many (if not most) writers today write in several different genres (ie; picture book, Middle grades, YA, Adult, fiction, non-fiction, novels, articles, etc) in order to survive and support themselves. Many of the different styles are being produced at the same time, working on sections of each as time, muse and deadlines arise. Not one single publisher is willing to publish all the various formats; projects that one writer has written; nor would all those different projects meet the needs/requirements of one publishing house. So how in the world did ‘loyalty’ become an issue between a writers and publishers in the first place? Again, if “Is ‘Loyalty’ a Virtue?” is the question; I’d have to answer “Absolutely not in this transaction!” When a writer has a project that is not what the publisher likes or requires; the publisher has no such reservations about rejecting the work of the writer point-blank. Then, if the writer has no other polished manuscript to offer at that time ~ the writer is out of a job instantly! Not so the publisher; he just hunts for another writer/project to publish what they (the publishing house) prefer.

By: 1minutebookreviewswordpresscom

1minutebookreviewswordpresscom — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 21:50:32 +0000

I’ve seen the situation you describe often: Someone who doesn’t share the feelings of a group is seen as “disloyal” when the person may just be an original thinker or believe it’s dishonest to pretend to agree when you don’t.

You see this a lot in publishing right now, because the industry is going through such a difficult time that some authors think they can’t say anything negative about their publishers. The authors think that if they complain, they’ll upset their publishers and may not be able to find others. I understand this view and have avoided talking about a few strong concerns of my own. The problem is that if authors don’t talk about their experiences in publishing, other writes can’t learn from those experiences. So it’s a complex issue. Maybe your comment will inspire a few of them …
Jan

By: Talula

Talula — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 18:29:36 +0000

I agree with “pobept” about “loyalty ‘must’ be earned” but it seems that almost all employers, businesses, and organizations today demand loyalty, as if that is something they have copyrighted. However; when a situation of disagreement with the original person/contract/business situation happens; suddenly the original person is “disloyal” when they do not share the feelings/actions/behaviors of the larger group. Since the writer/publisher transaction is based on financial dealings; it hardly qualifies as a “loyalty” issue. So I must say I have to side with a writer, in that “loyalty” has absolutely no valid point to be considered in the contract between writer and pulisher. Perhaps a better word(s) to use would be those of “mutual cooperation and respect” in those financial & management dealings of the writer’s work. Diana Athill sounds as if she has her finger on the real pulse of publishing/writing today! Great Post!

By: pobept

pobept — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 19:11:22 +0000

Loyalty ‘must’ be earned. It is not given because of who you are or the position you hold.