Just five authors

[thedarkages]

I read a paper today which casually introduced the fact that in 1994, over 70% of all book sales were of books by one of these five authors:

1. John Grisham


2. Tom Clancy


3. Danielle Steele


4. Michael Crichton


5. Stephen King

I have no doubt that, this year, 70% of book sales will flow to J.K. Rowling alone, leaving Messrs. Grisham, Clancy, Crichton, and King to battle it out for a further 25%, and leaving Michael Chabon at the head of the rapidly trailing 5% pack. It's all about reading the same things and thinking the same things. Bestseller lists -- the author's focus in the paper -- allow for some lateral contiguity, allowing works by "new" authors to take some luster from their predictable and reliable peers. Oddly enough, if you've been on the bestseller list ten or thirteen times, additional times won't help your sales. So, the mega- authors are scoring garbage points to no practical purpose. On the other hand, as happened in the case of a "new, unknown author" whose sales skyrocketed when it was rumored that her name was but a "pen name" for Stephen King, mega-authors could use their accreted standing to help the careers of younger writers. Imagine if it was leaked that my first novel was actually written by Michael Chabon or Nathan Englander! I'd be satisfied with that 5% of the market, and give plenty in kickbacks to the "real" authors to boot! (No, I wouldn't. I'm just getting caught up in the frenzy.)

Meanwhile, back in reality, the paper says that the likelihood of a successful "over the transom" submission is now 15,000 to 1. Why don't I just stop typing and buy lottery tickets?

Comments

[mrbalihai.livejournal.com]

The odds on the lottery are still much worse.

[thedarkages]

The lottery will give me illusions until the time of the drawing, whereas I have no illusions about the slush pile. Even agents have prodigious slush piles these days; said piles will accrue to any entity which has the power to advance the publication of a manuscript by a legitimate press.

[mcohenmn.livejournal.com]

I'm sure you know that its not pure chance that determines success. Your writing is better than most and because you edit as well as write, you must realize this. You increase your own chances of success by creating good work and submitting as much as possible to as many places as possible. As they say about the lottery, "You've got to play to win".

[mcohenmn.livejournal.com]

I'm always embarrassed when I hit 'submit' and see a grammar error before the entry screen even goes away - even more so when responding to your posts. Grrr.

[bugsybanana.livejournal.com]

You reminded me of the Dave Barry column with the following "Tip for Aspiring Novelists":

When choosing a title, try to come up with something that will really "grab" potential readers.

WEAK: "The Death Corpse."

STRONGER: "The Death Corpse by Stephen King."

VERY STRONG: "The Death Corpse by Stephen King with Pictures of Pamela Anderson Lee Naked."

[ikkyu2.livejournal.com]

You would not be the first writer to fail to gain recognition in your own lifetime, and you'd join the vast majority of literature writers of all times and ages if you could not support yourself with your writing.

There are other reasons for you to write. For instance, I would like to see what you - you jkcohen, not "you unique generic snowflake" - what you have to contribute to the world of ideas.

[yesenixan.livejournal.com]

The traditional way of standing out in the slush pile - or so I hear - is to replace the cover letter with a plain manila envelope full of either twenties or incriminating photos of the recipient engaged in a depraved act (no separating recyclables, the mistreatment of small animals for erotic purposes, etc.) Do you own a good telephoto lens?