There was a time it was not easy to get the attention of an author. Perhaps we could write a fan letter to their publisher in the hope the author would see it; or, very occasionally, maybe we could meet the author for a few moments at a book-signing among lots of other people. Mostly, though, we just had to accept that the author was not accessible to us and simply enjoyed the books they wrote (or, perhaps, we did not enjoy them that much).
The internet has changed everything, of course. Authors are now far more readily accessible to readers than ever. Email, DMs, and “@”s thanks to “microblogging” (meaning Threads or “X”), Facebook, Tumblr, and web sites, make it quite possible, and even easy, to reach out to an author…
We also see on social media new authors wondering about having “an author web site.” As you might guess, I am a big booster of the idea. An author web site with a “live” blog (meaning updated a couple of times a month or so at minimum; one hardly needs to bother readers then with a newsletter) is, I feel, especially an excellent “base” from which to reach readers, and better than “microblogging” on platforms such as Threads or “X.”
The downside for authors of it being easier than ever for readers to reach out is that authors are now regularly subjected not just to critical/opinionated “@”s and DMs, but also even to demands of them. If you are an author and have not seen true “million seller” author Nora Roberts’s March 29th blog post on “reader demands,” you should read it and maybe print it out and FRAME it over your own writing desk. This part from Nora on an issue of posts made by Nora’s long-time social media person, Laura, is especially worth citing:
…Recently Laura began posting random posts on the Robb FB page as we’d reached a point too close to newer books, and don’t want to spoil them
Apparently this gave a number of readers an excuse to demand—and it came real close to demands (sometimes over the line)—why Eve and Roarke couldn’t have a baby.
Oh God!
Let me say here, we don’t mind readers responding with courteous: Nora said no because. Or something along those lines. There’s just no need to pile on as the poster might be new to FB, might not read the blog where I’ve certainly explained my thought process on this.**
However, this escalated into a particular poster telling me to “open my mind” to the idea as Roarke told Eve he wanted children in a previous book.*** Listen, sister, check your entitlement at the door. What absolute arrogance, telling me to open my mind to kids. Hello, these are FICTIONAL CHARACTERS, ones I created in a series I control. Plus wanting’s not having. I write what I write, and I have good reasons—explained far too often. Don’t like it, don’t read it. And don’t think you can tell me what to do, what to think, what to write…
There’s lots more. I think you get the idea. Naturally, it led me to consider my own take.
I want to entertain and to give readers stories worth reading. However, that is not the same thing as attempting to give an individual reader what they personally “demand.” (That is another reason I consider so-called “beta” readers a wrongheaded idea.) In that above, Nora reminds everyone, and rightfully so, that the author is the primary decision maker.
The new ease of contact with an author has evidently enabled a few readers to imagine that what they assert – what Nora calls “entitlement” – should be taken into account by the author. Such “entitlement” almost certainly comes from more general social media “demands” indirectly made of authors – essentially warnings about what constitutes good behavior to which you had better adhere. I thought I would address a few examples I have seen in recent months:
I have discussed the so-called “representation” issue before – including, recently here. It is raised it feels endlessly on social media. Most who do so, I believe, miss the point.
To start, the opening sentence above from that threader is, respectfully, misguided. No half-decent author even attempts to write of “a community” or of “a culture” because doing that is impossible within the confines of a novel. In writing about people, authors write first and foremost about individuals.
I have always taken this position: Why an author writes any character(s) is entirely their business as the author. I put up with no one demanding of me how to write a character and I will absolutely not tolerate it if they are based on my own observations of someone(s) I know/knew. If a reader disapproves of a “characterization” because they believe it to be “unrepresentative,” they are welcome to go read some other author’s “person(s)” that they deem somehow “representative” based on their own preconceptions (bigotries?) as to what is supposedly “representative” of ALL people in that so-called “group.”’
An aside. I’m noticing this a lot on Threads, too. It is difficult to take seriously any writing content critique from anyone who does not capitalize the first word in a sentence, and especially not from a so-called “beta” reader.1
I would not defend any author “mocking” a reader online. No author should do that. (The exception is if someone addressed the author with an “@“, thereby making it a public discussion that was meant to include the author.) As I’ve said many times, every reader is entitled to a negative opinion about a book. (Unless I am directly contacted with an “@,” I would never question a reader’s opinion.)
That said, I believe it is perfectly reasonable here to point out that what we see there is yet another person telling authors as to what is “not optional” and from which that reader will not “budge.” And why? Because presumably if a reader says “Jump!” the author is supposed to respond, “How high?”
The “TW/CW” above is social media shorthand for “trigger warning/content warning.” I have, again, posted at length on that contention already relatively recently. To summarize. My books are plainly meant for “ages 18 and up,” meaning they are for adults, which constitutes my overall “warning.” Beyond that, I am not giving away any possible happenings prior to the story’s opening (and absolutely not before a chapter commences: I have elsewhere actually seen that latter “demand” made on social media, too) in trying to anticipate what some reader may find personally uncomfortable or objectionable in my text, especially given it is impossible to ascertain just what might bother someone somewhere on the planet I have never met in person and don’t know.
Also, social media SHOUTING IS NOT GOING TO GET THE RESPONSE YOU DESIRE EITHER nor DOES IT MAKE YOU CORRECT IN YOUR DEMAND.
Seeing such, I also can’t help but think there is actually not as much difference as some might imagine between those who hold those opinions above compared to those who feel books they assert have “troubling” or “indecent” content should be banned from school libraries. Ultimately, both are trying to dictate, in their ways, how content is presented by authors… or not presented. Frankly, there is also not that great a leap, I feel, from *demanding* listed “content/trigger warnings” in books aimed at adults next to *demanding* anything that might “trigger” any adult reader should NOT be written in a book at all.
Disingenuous they may be, but at least those seeking to ban books from school libraries claim that in their censoring aims they are seeking to “protect” under-18s. In contrast, “content warning” people like those above slam the figurative social media table *DEMANDING* of authors how we *must* be “considerate” of the sensibilities of adult readers – any of whom, remember, at any time may certainly simply turn a page or two, or even skip a “troubling” chapter.
In fact, if an adult is “troubled” by something they encounter, that is actually the way it is supposed to be. Writing for adults should tackle often complicated matters of our humanity and lead us to think. The consequences of thinking is that, occasionally, yes, it may also cause us to feel uncomfortable, unsettled, infuriated, and shocked maybe even to tears. (Anzhelika Shalahina‘s Ukrainian Diary: How I’m Surviving During This War, for example, is one big “troubling” memoir that arguably has something that could be considered “triggering” on every page.)
I have post-graduate degrees in history and political science. I will not pretend to be, in the text of a novel, and untrained as I am in such specialties, some unseen and unknown reader’s personal psychologist/therapist. From that, I will never “budge.”
Lastly, Nora also stated regarding online abuse directed at Laura:
…There would be no social media for me, or for my readers, without Laura. She answers repetitive, and yes, lazy questions, over and over, with courtesy and patience. But she’s not entitled to finally hit a wall, and say, Please, people, pay attention, or take a few minutes of your own time? Suddenly she’s rude, not cut out for the job, she should pass it on to someone else.
Here’s what I say to that.
Bite me…
If someone seeks a safe place with universal applause to come your way, to be blunt writing fiction is not the way to go. Regardless, I have long detected on social media that many new authors are fearful of “troubling” readers. If that is their hope, they will FAIL as authors because invariably someone is going to be “troubled” by something that is written… and, in fact, they should be.
It is wonderful to see Nora Roberts making such a clear push back to a social media world full of those who incessantly *demand* how authors should, and even *must*, write their books.
Have a good day, wherever you are in the world.
NOTE
- I have found the default in the Threads iPhone app is to capitalize the first letter after a full stop (there is no need to shift/caps for a new sentence) likely for ease of use because capitalizing the first word in the next sentence is a standard English grammar requirement that is meant to convey to the reader that a new sentence has begun. Not to use a capital for a new sentence therefore requires deliberately shifting down to the lower case. To not capitalize (a “.” not followed by a capital may mean it is not a new sentence) is to not plainly make it clear where the sentence ends and therefore causes unnecessary confusion in the reader. Apparently, not using capitalization is a “protest statement” of some kind. Others of us, though, will continue to call it what it is: poor grammar. ↩︎
R. J. Nello 