NEWS 9 NOV 11
Passive Guy reblogs Flame Wars and F**kwads on The Passive Voice
...and now, back to our original post:
Picture
I wasn't at the World Fantasy Convention this year, but from what I hear there was considerable debate about Michael A. Stackpole's use of the term "house slave" in blog posts to describe a type of mentality he observes in some writers who decry the trend towards author-centered publishing. Stackpole's first post to use this term, House Slaves Versus Spartacus, published in the spring of this year, likened  traditionally-published authors who defend the author-unfriendly environment of traditional publishing to the Roman house slaves whose interests lay closer to their masters' than to their fellow-slaves involved in the rebellion of 73-71 b.c.e. 

An Apt Analogy, or Trivializing?
There's been a lot of talk since then about Mr. Stackpole's use of the term "house slaves" trivializing the horrors of American slavery. In fact, there's been a  lot more talk about that than about the actual points Mr. Stackpole makes in that post, and in subsequent ones (Swimming Lessons for House Slaves, and Degrees of Slavery), about the economic and contractual inequalities that have always been part of the publishing industry, and the notion that with the predominance of digital delivery and the move towards independent publishing, the balance of power has shifted to the authors. 

In addition to Mr. Stackpole's writings, blog posts and comments by Dean Wesley SmithKris RuschJoe Konrath, and Barry Eisler, to name a few really smart people with their fingers on the pulse of publishing, have been trying to explain the inadvisability of throwing all your eggs into what they believe is a sinking basket. And they've been attracting no small amount of hostility from writers who are doing just that, and from others who insist on attacking Mr. Stackpole's choice of analogies, for instance, or Mr. Konrath's tone of voice, because they can't or won't debate the actual points they're making.

On Not Being a Raging Fuck-Wad
Today, Tobias Buckell posted a journal entry taking Mike Stackpole to task for his choice of words. He titled it "Self publishing doesn't mean you have to be a raging fuck wad." He's quite angry about the "house slave" language, and he does make an attempt to debate Mr. Stackpole's points, but he gets his facts wrong. He claims neither Konrath nor Eisler are independent authors: "They’ve both exchanged one corporate relationship for another. So anyone who champions them as self publishing masters immediately demonstrates a lack of perception."...and..."...neither of them sell direct via websites with their own turnkey credit card systems like anyone actually *serious* about disintermediation..."

I'm not sure who died and put Mr. Buckell in charge of defining "*serious* about disintermediation," but a quick fact-check would have shown that both authors have traditional publishing deals for some of their books, other books they publish independently, and of course their famous contracts with Amazon, and that between them they sell dozens of books from their websites. "Want to read about changes in the field, want to read about the business?" Mr. Buckell asks. "Start finding people who are utilizing all the options available." Well, Mr. Buckell may not like these three authors, but they are pretty well known to utilize all the options available, and I'm amazed he's not aware of that, since it's a key point of his criticism. 

“I’m tired of hearing their vile denunciations of everyone and everything," he continues. "...I hear these types on the radio...they’re no different than Rush Limbaugh or anyone else.” These don't strike me as useful or reasonable arguments in a post warning of the dangers of fuckwaddery. Vile denunciations? Everyone and everything? Rush Limbaugh or anyone else? I'd be saying this in the comments on his blog, but he doesn't allow comments.

In the Midst of Rage, Some Sage Advice
Mr. Buckell is, of course, within his rights to dislike the term "house slave," and to dislike Mssrs. Eisler, Konrath, and Stackpole and their opinions on anything whatsoever to whatever degree he desires. I'd never say otherwise. And he did offer me one piece of advice I intend to follow, so thanks, Mr. Buckell, for this: "Listen to people who don’t have to denigrate, shout, and insult others to make their point." 

Amen.

 


Comments

11/09/2011 06:07

I can't give much credence to a man who doesn't allow comments. What, someone might disagree with him? Calamity.

'House slaves' seems a fair analogy to me - though Stockholm Syndrome also covers the way some authors defend the publishers who undervalue and underpay them.

Let's not forget that without writers, there would be no publishing industry. Yet we are the only workers involved who are not supposed to expect a living wage.

Reply
Bridget
11/09/2011 06:36

It would be refreshing if more people would debate points like how publishers and agents treat writers, and fewer would fly off into arm-waving rages. Comments aside, Buckell's rhetoric is inflammatory, and he got his facts wrong.

And sadly, if we credit today's Twitter feeds, many agree with him.

Reply
11/09/2011 07:49

This is a calm, measured response as compared to the whole rah-rah around Konrath, Eisler and Stackpole. Thank you for this, Bridget.

Reply
11/09/2011 07:51

I've been getting flack for years from people who think attacking me, or my tone, equals winning the argument. (The argument, BTW, is that the publishing industry is changing and writers need to look closely at the situation so they can maximize benefits and minimize losses.)

I'm right. So are Barry, Mike, Dean, and Kris. We have facts and logic to back up our arguments. We have examples. We've made predictions that have come true, simply by paying attention to what is happening.

And we share that information, in order to inform our peers on what works, and why.

This scares some writers, who are afraid of change. So we get attacked.

It doesn't matter if you like me. It doesn't matter if you like my tone. The argument is sound, and the facts speak for themselves.

Trying to kill the messenger isn't the smart way to approach this changing industry.

And when people say I'm a jerk in posts where they act like jerks--well, that amuses me to no end.

<i>And sadly, if we credit today's Twitter feeds, many agree with him.</i>

Who cares if people agree with him? You can lead a horse to water, but can't make it drink. If writers want to keep their heads in the sand, that's not my concern. Nor do I care if people like me. What is this, high school?

My goal isn't to lead any sort of crusade, or preach to get converts. I've been called a lot of things--pioneer, savior, messiah, guru, sensei, trailblazer, fearless badass--and none of that means anything. I get thanked on a daily basis in emails and comments, and that's nice but doesn't mean anything either.

We can't control what people say and do. But we can control how we react to what people say and do.

What Peter says about Paul really says more about Peter than about Paul.

Lots of people have listened to me and are grateful for my advice. Lots of people dislike me. Neither group effects my bottom-line. I will continue to make a lot of money, whether people listen to me or not.

Thanks for the level-headed post.

Reply
11/09/2011 08:05

Thanks for this, Bridget.

Lexi, STOCKHOLM SYNDROME is far more apt, thank you. I've been trying to put my finger on it for a while and you've nicely framed the idea for us.

Self publishing has inspired a growing polarity among writers, especially at SFF conventions, it seems.

I think the polarity is symptomatic of something other than disrupted publishing imperatives, however.

I think it's what happens when a genre hits a slow arc in its cycle, which has been a trend in hard science fiction for a while now (not so with fantasy).

Established writers get anxious about lackluster sales figures and shifts in the genre hierarchy, while emerging writers despair they'll never "enjoy" such problems.

But writers posturing against other writers is no solution to EITHER market disruption OR to genre decline. This is where community should come together, but obviously, that's not what's happening here.

I'm with you, Bridget, "Listen to people who don’t have to denigrate, shout and insult others to make their point."

I'd add this: "Writers need to make their first priority writing well. The medium for conveying literature is less important than the quality of the literature itself."

Which means, of course, that all of us writers really need to stop judging other writers and their choices and just focus on ways we can all improve our own work. And that should be a practice for both the established and the emerging writers among us.

Reply
Bridget
11/09/2011 08:06

Thanks Eli! And thanks, Joe. When I read Buckell's blog, alerted by a tweet to him from Bob Mayer, I couldn't believe the level of vitriol. And it's one thing to say "I don't like these guys," or even "I don't think my friends should like these guys either," but he backed up his opinions with claims that are just so obviously not true. I couldn't let it slide.

Reply
Bridget
11/09/2011 08:11

Thanks, Tamara. I'm all for raising the level of debate, which would at the very least take us out of the personal attack realm.

Reply
Nik Holman
11/09/2011 08:20

Well, as for Tobias, he has every need to be invested in the Legacy publishers. I know both is editor and his agent, I've played board games with them, and they have him set up as some golden boy. They rave about him. Sadly, it's no surprise to see his commitment to being a house slave.

Reply
Bridget
11/09/2011 09:05

Tobias has been one of the Cool Kids for a number of years. And he may have earned those raves from his agent and editor, but in that blog he was just plain raving. Thanks for weighing in, Nik.

Reply
The Wombat
11/09/2011 09:32

Mike Resnick in the SFWA Bulletin has discused this very point in his dialoges with Barry Malzberg.

Reading what he says would be instructive. Mike sells to publishers, puts out ebooks, sells to epublishers, sells reprints off his web site & probably more.

Any writer not making use of all means to sell is only hurting themselves.

Reply
Bridget
11/09/2011 10:03

Absolutely, Jan!

Reply
11/09/2011 10:39

I don't know where all the vitriol comes from. If indie publishing's a foolish waste of time, economics will put a swift end to it. If it's a viable alternative to traditional publishing, economics will make that abundantly clear as well.

I know authors working under each model. I love them dearly and wish them all success. There's more than one route to fulfillment.

As always, Bridget, an excellent discussion!

Reply
Bridget
11/09/2011 11:00

"I don't know where all the vitriol comes from." It seems to me to be fueled by fear. Kinda sad, huh?

Reply
Jimmy Lightspeed
11/09/2011 14:48

This is certainly a well done post that underscores a cultural and intellectual zeitgeist in publishing.

Also,

<em>"And they’ve been attracting no small amount of hostility from writers who are doing just that, and from others who insist on attacking Mr. Stackpole’s choice of analogies, for instance, or Mr. Konrath’s tone of voice, because they can’t or won’t debate the actual points they’re making."</em>

Offense is a tool of misdirection that characterizes politically correct thinking. If one hasn't the ammunition to argue a point, then becoming offended at some provocative phrase or expression of an opponent might keep one from needing to debate at all. This is a kind of "sleazy genius," but in cases like these where the prevailing wind is already establishing its course, it's a little like spitting into it.

Well done Bridget!

Reply
Bridget
11/09/2011 15:40

Jimmy, I couldn't have said it better, which is probably why I didn't. I agree that a dearth of ammunition is part of the problem.

Reply
Fran Stewart
11/10/2011 11:34

Never heard of Mr. Buckell. Is he famous or something?

Reply
Bridget
11/11/2011 07:13

In some circles he is.

Reply
11/11/2011 17:07

I'm not sure why it's come down to this kind of vitriol, but since I have friends on both sides -- not all of them saying nice things about each other -- I think all I can do constructively is plead for a cease-fire.

http://bradrtorgersen.wordpress.com/2011/11/11/truckwads-and-house-knaves/

The New Wave came to science fiction, and it was a war. Indie Publishing has also come to science fiction, and here again, we appear to have a war. Or at least the first skirmishes and battles. Do we choose the nuclear option? How many more people must be maligned, or feelings hurt? I would love to see the genre throttle back and move on. There's enough opportunity out there. And I'd like to think we're adult enough to see it for what it is.

Reply
Michael Perez
11/16/2011 05:39

I'll start out by saying that, while I agree with Mr.Stackpole, I can understand why people would not want to be compared to house slaves. it is an indirect ad homonym, methinks, intentional or otherwise.

That being said, the (valid, I think) points about publishing aside, the very idea that one cannot make mention of or draw analogy to any of the slave populations throughout human history and around the world because it might be potentially offensive to some small percentage of those descended from one particular former slave population boggles the mind.

What are we doing to ourselves? Why do we wish to intellectually impoverish ourselves by demanding that people leave so much of human experience off of the table during rational discussion between adults?

Blergh.

Reply
Bridget
11/16/2011 07:55

Brad: If this is the level of debate in the sf/f/h genre, what do you suppose they're saying up in the big mainstream, where the filial ties encouraged by genre marginalization aren't an issue? , of course...:) Kinda boggles the mind.

Reply
Bridget
11/16/2011 07:56

Michael: Other writers have taken on Konrath and Eisler for remarks they made in a blog which have been construed by some as encouraging rape and sexual subjugation. Right up front, I don't agree. But there's a separate debate going on. It may have begun about the appropriateness of rape jokes (which they felt Eisler and Konrath's remarks were--I disagree), and eventually seemed to me to become about whether it's okay to remind someone that the idea of rape exists, when that person may have been a victim. I see similar thought processes at work in both cases.

Reply
12/13/2011 22:02

And when people say I'm a jerk in posts where they act like jerks--well, that amuses me to no end.

Reply
12/13/2011 22:34

Ha! Me, too!

Reply
12/26/2011 23:49

I recently came accross your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I dont know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.

Reply



Leave a Reply


Web Analytics