Comment by hengheng

Comment by hengheng 3 days ago

53 replies

I've once talked to a semi-successful author. His day job was Mechanical Engineering at the local university. He eventually quit once he had his formula worked out.

He writes crime novels. Doesn't even like them, but if you want to sell, you either write smut (big gamble) or crime novels (less crowded). Anything you actually want to write about, you have to shoehorn into the crime novel. You also have to keep your protagonists whether you like them or not, or else every book will be your first one.

He also found that he had to write local novels that take place around the local tourist sights. He couldn't write about his actual hometown of course, but there is a touristy spot an hour's drive from him, so that's where the detective had to be based for every single adventure. The touristy area must also be a city. That way you have half a million inhabitants, and the same amount of tourists whose relatives are looking for gifts.

He was basically playing bookstore SEO.

Unsurprisingly, being an ME, he had a product lifecycle. He was working on several books at once in a pipelined fashion. One was being drafted, the next one was being written, the third one was in early proof reading, the fourth one was being finalized. That way he had a good balance between creative and menial work at all times. He also explained how he was careful to use few proofreaders in the early stages, because apparently, his work is a dire read before any corrections. He has a process where he rotates through his early stage proofreaders, and mostly gives them later stage work that is more readable.

Being a successful author is no more romantic than being a successful programmer. Or painter. Or mathematician. Any romanticism is at odds with professionalism, e.g. what works. And that's the same across all these professions.

TheOtherHobbes 3 days ago

This is called write-to-market, and it's a well-known thing in self publishing - even though many wannabe fiction writers choose to ignore it, because they'd rather believe their book will have publishers swooning and readers gushing. (Spoilers: odds of that are very, very close to zero.)

In fact all publishing is write-to-market now.

Most traditionally published books are picked to chase trends. There's also a huge market for ghost-written titles with a celebrity on the cover.

It's a shamelessly conservative industry. It's unbelievably hard to pitch a fresh fiction franchise, even if it's wildly creative and incredibly well-written.

  • DanielBMarkham 3 days ago

    "Most drama today sucks" --- "This is called write-to-market"

    Yes. I doubt you disagree, but I needed to point that out. These two, along with writing-by-formula, are intricately related. There's nothing wrong with writing being a racket.

    If you want to feel depressed and lack a sense of optimism in humanity, spend some time learning about the publishing industry. Woof. It's nothing but formulaic conservative market-driven darkness all the way down. AND all the players are well-established, they've driven out inefficiencies, and they've got plenty of tricks to keep the riff-raff out. They've been doing that for centuries.

    I don't like joking on HN, but this is a personal joke I've used for some time and seems appropriate: Want to start a new streaming series? Throw together a bunch of marketing-driven adjectives and end with "and they solve crimes."

    "She's a gay little person goth time-traveling alien, he's an autistic left-handed incel Quaker. They live in Portland, and together they solve crimes."

    My opinion is that people are going to eventually get sick of this stuff, much the same as they got tired of the B Monster Movies in the 50s, but who knows. Detective and True-Crime novels are perennials. Not my circus, not my monkeys. Working like this sounds to me like having a job I hate.

    • sph 3 days ago

      > "She's a gay little person goth time-traveling alien, he's an autistic left-handed incel Quaker. They live in Portland, and together they solve crimes."

      I'm pretty sure a Netflix executive would have signed on this concept based on this sentence alone half a decade ago. Now it seems the entire world is waking up to these formulaic data-driven products that have been pushed by media conglomerates for a decade. This is especially apparent in the gaming world, where big productions seemingly flop out of nowhere (cough Concord cough) while indie studios keep innovating.

      It's so easy to blame this phenomenon on rose-tinted glasses and older people like us thinking all old things are better than modern, but when the world wasn't decided by "data scientists" and corporate committees, there was more variety, more volatility. Lower lows but higher highs as well.

      I've been thinking about this a lot the other day while watching snippets of the movie "O Brother, Where Art Thou?", wondering where pure, plain fun movies that are not pushing an agenda or pandering to some audience have gone.

      And now, in the current era of the remake, which still has to reach the film industry, it is gonna get worse. When they'll find they are unable to invent the new multi-billion franchise, why not go and remake and "modernise" an older one? It's basically free money.

      • techjamie 3 days ago

        I would say that a reasonable person could have foreseen Concord failing. Perhaps not necessarily as hard as it did, but there were a number of red flags before it released. The character designs were bland and bad, which is worse than just being bad. They drummed up a whole bunch of controversy, and the marketing outside of that controversy was basically non-existent. Almost nobody had heard of the product until it already had failed. Even when it was in beta for free, they only garnered about a couple of thousand players at any given time.

        Then you add on that they already missed the train for hero shooters by about eight years and their modern competition is all free to play and has already sucked up the entire market for the most part. I saw an analysis by a former game producer that thought that perhaps they had a work environment that stifled criticism and commentary from developers and I think that that might have been an accurate assessment; The entire product was released in a way that myself and a number of other people that I've seen online simply can't believe that nobody was throwing their hands up and saying that this was a bad idea before release.

        • sph 3 days ago

          > I would say that a reasonable person could have foreseen Concord failing.

          > Then you add on that they already missed the train for hero shooters by about eight years

          There's an analysis video I saw on Youtube which touches upon this fact: data-driven production suffer from two major problems: when they register a signal (i.e. people like hero shooters), it's already too late. It is impossible to catch a growing trend, just one that has already reached its peak.

          The second problem is that the data is misleading in the first place. Using social media sentiment, for example, is pure nonsense because social media personas are not real people. They don't buy toilet paper, they don't talk (or Google) about 99% of their boring existence, and the signal is manipulated by bots and malicious agents. It is absolutely crazy that companies still haven't learned that you cannot hire a bunch of data scientists and predict the next major hit. They have tried for the past 20 years, but human ingenuity (and the chaotic human psychology) is totally elusive to their silly models.

      • guitarlimeo 3 days ago

        > "And now, in the current era of the remake, which still has to reach the film industry"

        You haven't heard of the Disney live-action remakes of the old classics? It's already starting to happen.

      • bonoboTP 3 days ago

        > It's so easy to blame this phenomenon on rose-tinted glasses and older people like us thinking all old things are better than modern, but when the world wasn't decided by "data scientists" and corporate committees, there was more variety, more volatility. Lower lows but higher highs as well.

        There's a trend of thinking that our age is the most accepting and inclusive and the past was rigid and conformist but in many regards it's the opposite. Through all the metrics and quantification and SEO-like data analysis-based incentives and judgments we are being "snapped to grid". The risk averseness is growing. There's only a narrow path and people must tick many boxes or get disqualified. Just as movie producers make the nth superhero movie and everything is a sequel of old IP, science is similarly turned into a formulaic churn.

        Just think about how Peter Higgs said he couldn't fit the mold of today's academia and the pressure of producing a stream of consistent (and hence typically consistently mediocre - like the consistent taste of a BigMac) output.

        The other day I watched this interview with a pioneer of artifical neural networks Warren McCulloch (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wawMjJUCMVw). I wonder if today we're letting such personalities thrive in academia. He was originally headed to the Christian ministry and learned a lot of theology then got drawn rather to math, and his pondering of abstractions, understanding, humans and theology moved him to study neurology and to use math to model logic expressed as neural networks. Nowadays, you must specialize early and grind for tests, no "forgiveness" if you go off-track, you must be single-mindedly focus on optimizing your path towards tenure for it to be realistic. Can't even get a PhD position without having published several of your original research papers beforehand. While hiring committees say they reward well-roundedness and try to avoid a monoculture, what that becomes in practice is checking if your parents sent you to one of these trendy types of extracurriculars or foreign "volunteer" programs, and whether you later were engaged with some shortlist of trendy buzzword issues.

        This breeds conformity, uniformity and bland predictability.

      • taormina 3 days ago

        Check out how Snow White has been going. The film industry is absolutely there, but the good news is it's going exactly as horribly as you predicted.

bonoboTP 3 days ago

Prolific professors who publish dozens of papers at scientific conferences year after year also have similar methods. There's a pattern, there's a method. There's always some novelty of course but it's a production line nevertheless. (I'm talking about real successful academics with real status in the community, not fakes).

It also reminds me of the MrBeast document from the other day.

Once you hit the formula, you keep grinding it. Consistent high performers almost all do it, no matter the field. Whether it's songs, books, YouTube videos, science papers, blog posts, paintings, consultants, etc.

Of course science papers are a team effort but so are novels and music and paintings. Hans Zimmer didn't single handedly compose his recent film scores, he has lots of people working for him on the project. Master painters used assistants. Stephen King isn't typing every character himself.

Amd then there are one hit wonders who are at the right place at the right time, saying what needed to be said in that moment, and then sink back into obscurity or become a parody/tribute of their own self as they try to milk that one insight from their 15 minutes of fame.

Outlier level work by one person that keeps being novel in truly surprising ways, on a consitent basis, is so rare that there are probably only a handful of instances.

  • ghaff 3 days ago

    As someone who gave hundreds of talks and wrote at least hundreds of articles etc. over the years, I basically agree. Some I look back on as being particular insightful or clever. But you pretty much have to mostly crank at least to a minimum standard. And, yes, there's a lot of reuse in various ways.

    • bonoboTP 3 days ago

      Yes, I'm not trying to disparage it too much, it's just the reality of the job. But I found that even junior PhD students can have a romantic illusion that real scientists just spend their time musing and thinking and sometimes they have a flash of insight which they then enthusiastically share with the others. But the more mundane reality is that papers are projects with their own life cycle. You have to be on time, you have to cater to where "the discourse" is right now, the metagame. But to be fast, you need a process, a formula. It's sales. Everything can be approached from a sales and marketing mentality and it tends to bring success to a scary degree. Some apply similar tools in their romantic lives too, where optimizing your dating profile is just the start. I tend to think this is not the real path to something fulfilling, but pursuing this question veers into religious territory.

      • ghaff 3 days ago

        I've even had this discussion with people in at least adjacent roles to mine. We could put together ten very serviceable conference submittals tomorrow that we could spend a week turning into very competent conference presentations within a week. They wouldn't be brilliant but they'd be "good" relative to the norm. It's just one of the things we can crank out like we crank out blogs/columns.

passion__desire 3 days ago

This was depicted in The Simpsons.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Book_Job

> "The Book Job" is the sixth episode of the twenty-third season of the American animated television series The Simpsons. It originally aired on the Fox network in the United States on November 20, 2011. In the episode, Lisa is shocked to discover that all popular young-adult novels are not each written by a single author with any inspiration, but are conceived by book publishing executives through use of market research and ghostwriters to make money. When Homer hears this, he decides to get rich by starting work on a fantasy novel about trolls together with Bart, Principal Skinner, Patty, Moe, Professor Frink, and author Neil Gaiman.

  • hotsauceror 3 days ago

    There was also a wonderful little throwaway gag, with a sign outside a bookstore reading “James Michener $3.99/lb”

    • 082349872349872 a day ago

      Mostly we rate authors by readability, but in this century it's also possible to judge them by how well their books serve as impromptu laptop stands.

QuesnayJr 3 days ago

I read some subreddits for authors for a while, and all of the advice was like this. A few authors get lucky writing what they like, but most of them find a niche and relentlessly optimize for it. Romance sounded like the most optimizable, because it's a bunch of microgenres, and within a microgenre the readers want to read the exact same thing over and over. Some authors were making good money writing a book a month and self-publishing.

At that point, I'd rather be an accountant.

  • beezlebroxxxxxx 3 days ago

    It's partly a transition in the industry towards less risk taking. You see it in the movie industry as well.

    Certain authors are the equivalent of blockbuster movie releases. Publishers pay them huge amounts and market the ever living daylights out of them. Sally Rooney is a recent example, or authors like Salman Rushdie or Zadie Smith, where their books releases are "events". Many publishers are moving away from the long tail model that used to let "midlist" authors still eke out a living or at least publish. The consolidation in the industry has also made it difficult for authors to shop their books around to different publishers with their own "brands".

    The other "safe" bet for publishers has been genre books, like romance or crime, with clear templates and the ability to churn out books while relying on the authors name more than anything else, like Grisham. In romance, for example, there is a big emphasis on "family" series, where each book focuses on a different member of a family or group. An example is an author like Kleypas. The books are essentially just variations on a set of tropes, almost algorithmic, but the way they fit together and mutually reference one another keeps people invested.

    In general though, very few authors make a living writing. The midlist era that thrived in the last 19th and 20th century is sadly going the way of the dodo.

    • _tom_ 3 days ago

      The midlist has moved into self publishing. Many more books are published on amazon than by trad publishers. Many of them don't sell, but the numbers (guess) aren't probably that different from fad publishing in terms of success.

      Many authors that succeed at self publishing move to traditional publishers. (Hugh Howe, E L James) Others (Tamara Taylor) like to control and much higher royalties and stay self published.

      • TheOtherHobbes 3 days ago

        Social media is full of trad-pubbed authors (some with NYT best-sellers) complaining they have to keep their day jobs.

        Self-pubbed author groups have far more authors earning far more money. There's a good number of six figure authors and not a few seven figure authors. They're almost all writing to market - tight-niche, mid-quality writing that gives readers a predictable genre experience they want to repeat.

        Successful self-pub is equivalent to a bootstrapped micro start-up, and many of the same ideas apply. It's not trivially easy, especially the marketing. But it's certainly easier than trying to pitch from a cold start to the agent/publisher circus.

Cthulhu_ 3 days ago

> He writes crime novels. Doesn't even like them, but if you want to sell, you either write smut (big gamble) or crime novels (less crowded).

Reminds me of Chuck Tingle, who is an author but also a troll, writing books like "Pounded In The Butt By My Handsome Sentient Library Card Who Seems Otherworldly But In Reality Is Just A Natural Part Of The Priceless Resources Our Library System Provides".

  • dayjaby 3 days ago

    Reminds me of about every single Japanese web novel...

    "I've been killing slimes for 300 years and maxed out my level"

    "I'm a behemoth, an S-ranked monster, but mistaken for a cat, I live as an elf girl's pet"

    The list goes on with even longer titles.

    • Ekaros 3 days ago

      Actually Japanese titles are explained by the reality that market is so crowded that no one reads the synopsis(backside) or even blurbs anymore. So putting it all in the title is best way to get enough information out to catch some attention.

      • tourmalinetaco 3 days ago

        Additionally, although this is potentially hearsay (IANAJCL), from my understanding Japanese copyright law is strict and names cannot be re-used, so to get around this they tack on a single sentence synopsis, so it’s incredibly difficult to run out of names.

    • asddubs 3 days ago

      It's just clickbait titles, because it works. Wouldn't surprise me if we see more of that on books as well in the future rather than short and vague titles

      • cpach 3 days ago

        This fashion was not uncommon before the 20th century or so.

        For example, Daniel Defoe’s seminal work from 1719: The Life and Strange Surprizing Adventures of Robinson Crusoe, of York, Mariner: Who lived Eight and Twenty Years, all alone in an un-inhabited Island on the Coast of America, near the Mouth of the Great River of Oroonoque; Having been cast on Shore by Shipwreck, wherein all the Men perished but himself. With An Account how he was at last as strangely deliver’d by Pyrates. Written by Himself.

        • ants_everywhere 3 days ago

          And well-known enough for Monty Python to make a joke of it

          > Yes...I wonder if you might have 'The Amazing Adventures of Captain Gladys Stoutpamphlet and her Intrepid Spaniel Stig Amongst the Giant Pygmies of Beckles'...volume eight.

      • norman784 3 days ago

        In manga aren't click bait titles, but because there are so many published, you pick basically a title that explains the premise, otherwise it's harder to get users to read your manga. I suppose that also could work with novels, I'm not a book person, but I suppose you read a review or watched some video that recommended you a book, and if the title is self descriptive, then would easier to go to the book store and buy something that might is your liking.

  • Filligree 3 days ago

    Chuck Tingle is a treasure. On the surface all the books are smut, though this is actually because they're smut, but once you dig a little you'll find a ton of other amusements.

    • wizzwizz4 3 days ago

      All of them are smut? I think you've forgotten Absolutely No Thoughts Of Pounding During My Fun Day With This Kind T-Rex Because I'm Aromantic And Asexual And That's A Wonderfully Valid Way Of Proving Love Is Real.

      • Filligree a day ago

        For a moment I doubted that was real, but then I faced reality.

dr_dshiv 3 days ago

> Anything you actually want to write about, you have to shoehorn into the crime novel.

Isaac Asimov figured that out!

  • beacon294 3 days ago

    What do you mean? All I read was foundation, some non fiction, and robot short story collections.

    • cafard 3 days ago

      I did read one out-and-out crime novel by Azimov. You will not be surprised to learn that the victim was graduate student in chemistry, the murder occurred in a laboratory, and the plot twist turned on something known chiefly to chemists.

      (I've forgotten the title--I read the book nearer 50 than 40 years ago.)

      Edit: I see from Wikipedia that it was The Death Dealers, later republished as A Whiff of Death.

    • dr_dshiv 3 days ago

      He used the detective/crime dialogue format to deliver sci-fi.

    • rusticpenn 3 days ago

      Are you being sarcastic? The Robot novels are basically crime novels with robots...

      • beacon294 a day ago

        There's actually a significant corpus of robot stories. However, I did forget that "I, Robot" does have a lot of crimes, investigations, and such.

      • dsr_ 3 days ago

        It's not sarcasm: the conventional wisdom was that an SF novel could not also be a satisfying mystery/detective novel, because the readers could not guess that Aldebaranians can see in ultraviolet, or any other authorial invention.

        Asimov's insight was that it was up to the author to play rigorously fairly: every fact of consequence needed to be revealed naturally.

        • a_bonobo 3 days ago

          And that's what I love about the robot stories. He sets up the law of robotics, just like Agatha Christie and friends set up the detective fiction commandments, and then Asimov sets about finding all the loop holes in the laws of robotics. Every story is one loop-hole.

      • ghaff 3 days ago

        Also the Black Widower stories. I'm sure others as well.

    • cafard 3 days ago

      I did read one out-and-out crime novel by Asimov. You will not be surprised to learn that the victim was graduate student in chemistry, the murder occurred in a laboratory, and the plot twist turned on something known chiefly to chemists.

      (I've forgotten the title--I read the book nearer 50 than 40 years ago.)

andai 3 days ago

If I'm reading this right, the proofreading process massively improves the quality of the work? Could you expand on this?

  • hengheng 3 days ago

    Beyond what u/ghaff mentions, I believe the early editing work was about pacing, whether to include or kill dead-ends and expositional pieces, character arcs and biographical details that could change, choice of setting, time of day, locations, etcetera. I believe he had one change where a different character became the murderer.

    Anything that would get sidenoted, he would do in second stage proofreading only. Not even worth fixing a typo if the whole page could still be axed.

    The guy does a lot of scaffolding and prototyping, and some heavy refactoring.

  • ghaff 3 days ago

    I'm much less familiar with writing fiction but there are continuity errors, abrupt jumps that just lose a reader, errors of logic, organizational problems of various kinds.

    But even if you can mostly avoid that kind of thing whether in fiction or non-fiction, you absolutely need a copyeditor who will carefully look for typos, grammatical errors, spelling and capitalization of company names, etc.

brudgers 3 days ago

Writing is like any other form of creative expression: most people pursuing it need a day job too. Among possible day jobs for writers, most writers can and do do worse than writing.

Even a dream job is still a job and brings some resentment just for the fact it is a job. It ain’t gonna make you a trust fund baby.