You’ve got to give a little, take a little, and let your poor heart break a little.
— Benny Goodman, The Glory of Love
Publishing — like music, film, business, or sports — is not a solo act. Therefore, climbing the ladder of success always involves some sort of compromise, some sort of give and take. Of course, what one is willing to give and take along the way is the cause of much heartbreak.
Writers typically frame their dilemma this way:
“Do I compromise what I really want to write in order to make a living or get my foot in the door?” or “Do I write the story of my heart and let the chips fall where they may?”
There is a certain nobility (sometimes feigned) by artists who rage against the machine. You know some of these people, right? They refuse to adapt their style to the market. They rail against the money-grubbing gatekeepers. They scoff at “the rules.” They chafe against industry decorum. They denounce the status quo. They disparage what is commonly accepted as popular art. They would rather die anonymous than be a patented sellout.
They are [insert angelic choirs] principled.
Sometimes being “principled” is a cop-out. No, I’m not suggesting being a sell-out isn’t. I’m suggesting that we sometimes use the term “principled” as a smokescreen.
Sometimes being “principled” is really just
- Pigheadedness
- Inflexibility
- Disdain
- Institutional prejudice
- Lack of professional savvy
Of course, there’s many artists who have resisted conformity and we are better off for it. But is “resisting conformity” the golden rule? Truth is, the “starving artist” is often one who holds the ticket to her next meal. Your “hunger strike” could be avoided by simply seeing your talent as a tool rather than the Holy Grail.
Nevertheless, knowing when to compromise and when to hold your ground is the gist of creative enterprise. Just don’t be fooled into thinking that all compromise is selling out.
- Compromise is “selling out” when you become a puppet of the institution; your talents exist only to oil the machine, your originality and vision is replaced by groupthink, the ties that bind are actually nooses, you are an organizational prop.
- Compromise is “selling out” when your integrity, morality, and highest principles are sacrificed in the process; you lose yourself for the sake of success / power / fame / advancement / personal gain, “high ground” is vacated for “safe ground,” your birthright is squandered for three square meals a day.
- Compromise is “selling out” when your unique voice and vision is squelched; you no longer have any real creative freedom or input, you are coerced into complicity, you cannot air opinions lest you bite the hand that feeds you, someone else holds the deed to your creative license.
No matter how unique your vision, you probably can’t go it alone. You will need to compromise, involve others, solicit others, confide in others, team up, and make concessions along the way. This is definitely true in publishing. I know, I know — the publishing world is changing, you say. The self-published author can do it “their way” (which is code for remaining [cue angelic choirs] principled).
But while the solo artist might maintain creative freedom, they often lose something in the process, namely collaboration. It is precisely the thing that they most fear (other eyes), that they can most benefit from.The self-published author may not have sold their soul to the devil, but the chances of them selling their book is equally remote.
Compromise can be painful. But if it makes my product better and gives me the opportunity to make more of it, then it’s the smart thing to do. Or as Benny G said, “You’ve got to give a little, take a little, let your poor heart break a little.”
* * *
Question: Do you agree that being “principled” can sometimes be a cop-out? Do you think it’s better to compromise what you really want to write in order to make a living or get your foot in the door? Or is it better to write the story of your heart and let the chips fall where they may?
Selling out v. being true to your vision is an arguement I hear quite a few authors have with themselves. I think what is interesting about today is how there is a valid method for sidestepping the gatekeepers and putting out whatever you want, lack of editing and all. Now the “artist” can be judge on the same plane as “hack” and we’ll all get to pick which we like more.
Thanks for the great post.
-Ben
Truth is, the “starving artist” is often one who holds the ticket to her next meal. Your “hunger strike” could be avoided by simply seeing your talent as a tool rather than the Holy Grail.
Classic. Writing for pulps won’t win you a pulitzer, but it can keep the repo man off your doorstep.
“Do you agree that being “principled” can sometimes be a cop-out? Do you think it’s better to compromise what you really want to write in order to make a living or get your foot in the door? Or is it better to write the story of your heart and let the chips fall where they may?”
I agree “being principled” can sometimes be a cop-out, but I also believe “compromise” can be a cop-out.
I can’t speak to the writing to make a living, but in order to do that I’m positive compromise must happen. “Getting your foot in the door”, yes, I’m sure compromise is required. After writing “the story of your heart”, you’ll decide whether your principles allow you to compromise or if you must go with your heart into self-publishing or give up the publishing gig and just write for friends and family.
The philosophies behind the rules for CBA publishing can be both valid and inane. An example from the genre in which I’ve chosen to write tells me I can’t have a male protagonist “because women don’t want to read about men; men’s problems; from a male POV”. Hmm. Well, I do. Other women readers I know do. This isn’t a compromise: it’s denial. I write heroines or c0-protagonists in some of my novels, but I’m not going to eliminate the focus on the hero just because of this misguided philosophy of a governing few who seem out of touch with an audience they don’t reach–or seem to want to reach.
I don’t blame anyone who desires to “write for a living” for the compromises they must make. It’s an individual decision, and for some I’m sure it’s not an easy one. However, having self-published, my novel underwent professional editing just like the royalty books. I made some changes and chose not to make others. Self-publishing is not always about inferior writing, etc., anymore. Sometimes it really is about not quite fitting in to the place you’d like to be (CBA), so you do it yourself. Certainly not the easiest way to do it because of money and marketing. But a choice.
Nicole, I think there will be “inanities” in any industry (book, film, music, etc.). I suppose the question is, What inanity is intolerable for you? Personally, I don’t think the gender of a protagonist is worth quibbling over. For every Indiana Jones there’s a Lara Croft. Just put different clothes on your protag. Perhaps acquiescing to “the rules” could eventually give you the freedom to write your male protag. (Secretly, I am hoping my books do well so that I can spring my deep sea mermaid tale on my publisher, you know, foot-in-the-door like.)
My problem with the self-publishing route is not just the lack of quality (I realize that is a generalization, but one I think that has merit), but that self-publishing is often chosen as a way to avoid “the system” and its perceived inanities.
” . . . but that self-publishing is often chosen as a way to avoid “the system” and its perceived inanities.”
So does that mean ” the inanities” you’ve written about here are all “perceived”?
Absolutely not! I had to remove curse words from my story. That was not perceived. However, my perception of that inane rule is not such that it would keep me from doing it.
Mike, no offense intended here but removing a few cuss words hardly compares to the total reversal of a story.
Self-publishing earned its stigma, and it’ll take a long time or some superior “hits” to undo it. Many people have self-published precisely because of the premise you’ve given here, but others of us don’t fit as easily into the stereotype.
But while the solo artist might maintain creative freedom, they often lose something in the process, namely collaboration. It is precisely the thing that they most fear (other eyes), that they can most benefit from.The self-published author may not have sold their soul to the devil, but the chances of them selling their book is equally remote.
****
Amen to that.
Excellent post.
“Principled” can be a cop-out, no question about it. You run into that excuse everywhere in life. But “Compromise” is equally prevalent.
Sometimes, it feels like a tightrope, but other times that precariousness is only hypothetical. All it’s doing is keeping me from actually writing.
Regarding writing decisions – A lot of this comes back to the individual writer. Why am I writing in the first place? What’s my motivation ratio of cash to integrity?
I think you can only really write the stories God gives you. Those are the ones that have substance, that ring of authenticity. I didn’t write about vampires, or zombies or boy-wizards not because I (indignant angst) “refuse to handle such tripe and prostitute my artistic integrity”, but that’s not the kind of stories that come to me. If they did, I’d write them.
As Lady Bracknell says in The Importance of Being Ernest, ” Never speak disrespectfully of Society, Algernon. Only people who can’t get into it do that.”
This is a multi-layered, astute observation. And clearly ironic. “Society” or the “system” is hypocritical and cares little for the individual. It attempts to maintain the status quo at any cost, even after corruptness has eaten away at its foundation. But it also serves a purpose and has an order to it.
Without getting too philosophical, I’d have to say that a true artist is outside the system because he is too busy observing and critiquing it. A successful artist uses the system to his advantage, however. He’s the tightrope walker, speaking truth without alienating his audience.
All that sounds very noble. And makes me want to gag. So I think I’ll just write the story of my heart and let the chips fall where they may. Oh, and as for self-publishing–it has a long and beautiful tradition in our literary history. Self-publishing gave voice to women, specifically, and to people who would not normally have been published. I’m fond of a do-it-yourself attitude. The ability to do for oneself rather than whining about not being accepted “in the system” is admirable.
Jill, this is a great comment (and I love the Lady Bracknell quote). I agree with you about self-publishing when it involves no “whining about not being accepted ‘in the system’.” However, too many people seem to thumb their nose at the industry by self-publishing. Rather than having a pro-active entrepreneurial plan-of-attack, self-publishing becomes a knee-jerk response to rejection or industry “rules and guidelines.” Obviously, self-publishing can be a wise, strategic thing. Nowadays, I wonder that it has become an enclave for the disgruntled. Thanks for your comments!
Great post.
I will never compromise my beliefs. I will never write a YA book full of graphic sex and séances.
But I think the hills we are willing to die on should be few and far between.
“Do you think it’s better to compromise what you really want to write in order to make a living or get your foot in the door? Or is it better to write the story of your heart and let the chips fall where they may?”
Well I recently heard a statistic (don’t know how accurate) that less than 10% of writers make a living out of writing. So in that respect, unless you’re one of that elusive 10%, the income potential isn’t much cause for compromise.
To get my foot in the door? Depends. Things I think are absolutely beyond compromise might be throwaways to someone else. And in truth, compromise would have great limitations for me because too much compromise means I could no longer write and be interested in what I was writing. I admire people who can view it (and do it) from a more business-decision basis and respond and change to the needs of the market.
But as it’s really too early in my writing journey yet, I don’t know specifically what compromises I’m capable of. I’ll keep you posted. 😎
I’m principled. I would never, ever compromise my beliefs without a reasonable financial incentive. 😉
Choosing when to listen to others versus “sticking to your guns” is part of the art of being an artist. A person who writes in shackles according to what “the man (or woman)” says isn’t really an artist, or probably isn’t a very good one. Likewise the “artist” who must always go it alone is likely to stagnate and put out bad movies (M. Night Shyamalan).
As for self-publishing, I’ve had a bit of an eye opener these past few months. Self-publishing isn’t what it used to be. I’m taking part in the ROW80 challenge and one of the organizers of that challenge self-pubbed her book, has sold over 10,000 copies and recently landed an agent based on some of her comments over at Kristen Lamb’s blog. She’s writing in paranormal romance, which I’m learning is booming in the e-book business, so that helps, but who’s to say the same thing won’t happen in other genres.
I’m to the point of considering self-publishing because “the man” (CBA) isn’t a big fan of sci-fi. That doesn’t leave me with a lot of options, and the ones that are out there seem to inundated with Christian-based scifi, fantasy, and paranormal manuscripts. Go figure. I could shop it to the general market, and I may, but…I don’t know if I want to.
We are on the cusp of something, I think, in terms of Christian Speculative Fiction. The big publishing houses don’t get it yet. They may eventually, but I’m not going to sit around and twiddle my thumbs and wait. If I can’t go through them (which I am not opposed of, mind you), I will go around them. I’m not “angry” at the man or convinced that I’m being oppressed by him. I’m just being realistic.
I’m also a fighter.
And, my novel is good and people need to read it. There. I said it.
i love coming over here – something i don’t have as much time for as i used to. excellent few posts i’ve read.
“compromise” in life amuses me. we all do it, but we don’t all acknowledge it. and how we make these choices filters into everything we do, including writing, if that is our passion.
i have a little job where i pick two elementary school-age children up from school and take them home to an empty house where they have chores and responsibilities to complete while they wait for mom to come home from work. what i find intriguing about this situation is that they attend and follow a very legalistic evangelical religion, and mom began schooling the children thru homeschool. then mom went back to school and put the kids in public school … but she attended all school events, ate lunch w/her kids at school, picked them up everyday after school, etc. now she’s working till 6-6:30 every night. i love her kids, and in a conversation w/them while discussing the question, “would you rather be at school or home,” one child replied, “well, i’m alone at home, so i’d rather be at school.”
this family has decided that while it is NOT okay for their kids to be exposed to magic on any level, in movies or books, and it is NOT okay for their kids to be in an environment where they might hear cuss words, and where it is NOT okay for boys and girls to swim together, and where she actually told my Oldest, 13 yo daughter today who doesn’t care for dresses, “but God likes dresses!,” it IS okay to, perhaps one might call it, abandon their children to being alone for hours on end so mom can fulfill her career goals.
as your post about drawing the line on acceptable verbage pointed out, we all have lines to draw. even when we draw those lines, i find we are inconsistent somewhere in our lives … even i. it seems the more rules we try to create and follow, the more room for inconsistancy.
one funny story – when my 13 yo daughter was in 5th grade, she had a horrible science teacher who just flat out didn’t like her. she challenged my daughter, my daughter stood up to her challenge, and won, and the teacher couldn’t handle it. anyway, as i was spending time alone with her one night and we were discussing said teacher, out of where ever my daughter giggled and said, “Mom, she’s a GA.” “GA?” i asked, thinking Girl’s in Action from my beloved baptist childhood. “General Ass,” my daughter giggled. i laughed sooo hard! our little inside joke now. ohhh, her legalistic paternal grandparents would think i was the mom from hell if they knew i allowed and even condoned such a conversation! and somehow, that makes it all the more fun for both of us.
***
btw – hopped over here to see if your book was released yet! yay! i’ve got it on my wish list and will get it as soon as i can – very much look forward to reading it. not surprised this day has come – you deserve it. you’ve worked hard. you’ve taken the time to learn and be taught and to fail and to pick yourself up and keep going. extra kudos to you!
link:link:I was told to read this post and I am glad I did. Your expertise on this is outstanding