I mentioned the other day I was using Bluesky, the Twitter clone from the founder of Twitter. I heard...somewhere that authors Neil Gaiman and John Scalzi used it a lot so when I got on Bluesky I followed them. Which then brought up the question in my mind of what authors should talk about on their social media.
Of course you don't want authors to just pimp their books all the time. Whether you're a famous author or not that gets tedious. Politics, religion, etc can alienate some of your readers, though you'd think most of your readers would be from a similar part of the political/religious spectrum.
The problem with famous authors is if they're just shooting the shit that's fine, but you can't really talk to them because they have so many followers that they're not likely to ever notice you. So it really makes it a one-sided conversation and it's disappointing when they don't talk to you and talk to some other freak asking or saying something dumb. Then the jealousy sets in.
And why the fuck should I care about your cat or what you're making for dinner? I should care because you're literary famous? Which is barely famous at all considering 75% of the country doesn't even read a single book. (OK, I made that number up but it's still pretty horrible.)
And as such I also don't really want you rubbing your prosperity in my face, showing off your cool office and reading nook and garage of cars or whatever. I guess some people do like that Lifestyles of the Rich and (Literary) Famous or Cribs kinda thing, but I really don't. By the same token I really don't need you to name drop who you're having lunch or dinner with or whatever. And also I will never care about your spouse/significant other, children, siblings, etc. I'm just saying.
Also, I don't really need to see you "shut down the haters." Just ignore them. On Bluesky and X there is literally a Mute button. Or block. Arguing with trolls is for losers like me; you're so much more famous that there's no point getting in the muck with haters.
Like 10 days ago Gaiman mentioned that there was maybe going to be part of an episode in Good Omens 2 where the angel and demon (Michael Sheen and David Tennant) were going to be women in the 60s or something. Then one or more person got a bug up his/her/their ass saying the angels and demons should have nonbinary people playing them or some damned thing. Gaiman showed a lot more class and restraint than I would, but then he's been dealing with people like that for a while. Still, as someone said, it was giving this silly argument a lot more attention than it deserved. Gaiman's response was that if he doesn't respond then those people get upset, which is probably true, but from experience I know people like that generally aren't going to be satisfied or stop arguing. There's really not much point to it. And I'm sure there were a lot worthier uses of his time.
The next day some woman claiming to be from Ukraine was shouting at John Scalzi because in his newest book someone is described as "Russian or Ukrainian." "You think we're the same! That's supporting genocide! You're erasing us!" Or something like that. I'm sure that wasn't the intent; I haven't read the book, but probably it's just the POV character wouldn't know the difference between a Russian and Ukrainian because they aren't that hugely different unless you live there. Scalzi just blew her off with something like, "Sorry you didn't like this. Hope you find something you like." Maybe it's a little cold, but people like that woman are probably just looking for attention. It's probably better to just not say anything at all and ignore them but that's really the next best response.
It occurred to me that when I read volumes of short stories and such what I really like is to read the stories about the stories. You know, how they came into being. How the idea was born and how it went through the writing, editorial, and publishing processes. The old war stories, so to speak--or type. Especially with older authors like Lawrence Block or Robert Silverberg it's kind of a window into another world.
But the problem on social media is I suppose you wouldn't want to discuss that all the time or you'd probably run out of war stories. And a lot of your "followers" probably aren't writers and thus don't really care. They probably would care more about what you're eating for lunch or whatever.
Once or twice I've tried asking people on here what they'd like me to blog about and I usually get non-helpful answers like, "You should just do what you want." Sure, but then people don't read it, so it's sort of pointless. In the same way I suppose as worrying about what to talk about when you have no followers.
Anyway, if you follow any literary famous authors on X/Bluesky/Mastodon/Facebook/etc what do you like them to talk about? What drives you up the wall?
3 comments:
I used to have a blog but I gave it up because I couldn't decide what to write about that would get comments. Plus, I'd rather be writing fiction than talking about it. In fact, what I'd really like to do is DRAW my blog, but it takes time and I would like to be paid if I put that much effort in. I've tried to interest the folks at AMAZING STORIES in doing a cartoon almanac feature, and they liked the idea -- but they can't pay me. And I am not gonna do it for free, because time/work.
All that said, I think you should talk about process, because as a creative person, I find that endlessly interesting. I realize that I am probably in a minority, because no-one cares what we go through to get a story out. Other writers/artists/musicians/dancers/etc care, but let's face it: they do not make up the majority of our audience. So I say to hell with it, and put out a newsletter every so often or vent my spleen on Facebook. Blogging just takes too much out of me.
Responding and arguing with those people is pointless. Why waste valuable time on someone who doesn't matter and will never be a happy camper anyway.
I admit I don't interact with other writers except here in the blogging world.
Oddly enough, I don't currently follow any famous people. The one time I did follow an actor on Facebook. He seemed so egotistical, I stopped following him. It seems knowing the actor behind the character can put a bit of damper on things.
However, if I was going to follow a famous person (author or whatever) I would like to see some gratitude, some humor, and useful news about new books coming out. I agree with your idea of finding out how the idea for the book came about.
Post a Comment