I want all the publicity, including the very very bad, because I’m a sensitive bird and will never read reviews or commentary on my work. Lalalala I have blinders on. But ask me when my debut comes out next year.
Now that I think about it, I think part of that satire phenomenon is a reaction to “cringe” or like embarrassment culture which is just a reaction to vulnerability culture!! Gah!
Yes, I have to wonder if fiction authors and memoir authors exist at different places on the vulnerability/sensitivity scales.
For the most part, memoirist choose to be vulnerable in their books, and might be therefore more sensitive to bad publicity.
Often (sometimes?), fiction writers have more detachment built into their books ie "this is really not MY life" - and therefore might (possibly) feel a little less sensitive?
Mostly, I think the variation is from author to author but I do wonder how much genre plays a role.
I think this is why the Memoir submission process is especially fraught because each rejection feels like a rejection of not just your "book" but of "you" - so I can imagine similar situation in the publicity stage (?)
I am fully on the “no publicity” rather than “bad publicity” train! I think that kind of upheaval (which it would be, for me) would really harm my ability to write the next book.
I realize I framed this as an all or nothing, which it never has to be! But I agree, how the modes of writing and publishing feed into one another is definitely in consideration. Emotional upheaval for me for sure!
I have many THOUGHTS on Molly the person, who I knew, and Molly, the book. I will keep these thoughts offline for now, but it is always startling to see her referenced in this context. One of her poems was almost an epigraph in my book. Thank you for writing this, as always, Cassie.
I bought & read Molly on the strength of that first excerpt in the Paris Review, and was pretty rattled by all the negative publicity that came out shortly after. Seems like it did raise Blake Butler’s profile (and Archways’, which I think is great!), but it also seemed pretty miserable for him. I think I’d be totally paralyzed. (GREAT read, thank you Cassie!)
Same here! And I also don’t know how I would sit back and NOT defend myself (not sure his considerations there obviously, but I’d have to be like banned from commentary or something). I also usually strongly dislike commentary on commentary—like if you haven’t read the book and you’re going solely off marketing framing, that isn’t fair (probably guilty of this here a bit!). I’m waiting for Zoe to finish it to tell me whether o should read it. 😂
And yes, Go Archway! (He also had a great publicist, Lauren Cerand!)
I think he did defend himself a bit on Twitter initially but then it just got out of control. It’s all so fraught but I felt sorry for him. And lol (lol!), yes to excerpts as essays!!!
I love this, Cassie. Especially the part about what really sells books - a good story or a literary feud or a styles piece or some other drama? So many things to think about and I don't think there is ever one clear answer
I love these considerations! It reminds me of the idea of "pain points" in marketing (aspirational vs inspirational), or the idea that in order to sell something we must identify a "lack" or need, which in the current age of unsustainable consumption seems like pure fiction manufactured on the back of a collapsing culture. In some spiritual and ethical sense, we try to nurture the idea of "abundance" and the sense that we have enough; we are enough. However, the whole economy is hinged on marketing around lack. Of course if we privatize everything, we will in fact need it sold back to us, but that is because we've created systems based on the human mind instead of some rhyme with nature. Surely we are drawn to drama and attention at all costs, but what is our ethical responsibility towards the energetics of the larger culture? It seems like we're beginning to see the reality of those costs. (As an aside, I noticed in those dueling memoirs that a NYT article headline was "Two Writers Fell in Love, Married, Then Divorced. Who Gets the Story?" which would have been an interesting epistemological question given the state of the world, the decline of consensus reality (science, etc), and our generally dueling (siloed) stories, however, the article wasn't about "who gets the story" at all.) As for being misunderstood - and I say this as a completely non-religious person - Christ performed miracles and people happily crucified him. (I don't know why I find that a comfort, but I do. There's dignity, integrity, despite the disconnect.) It does ask the crucial question again: Who gets the story?
You’re totally right that a piece selling the NYC wealth of an author is a serious turnoff—I buy books by some big names but it’s almost always because I’ve read an excerpt or some poems in a magazine (I preordered Citizen for a whole class on the strength of poems that appeared in Poetry). OR a recommendation from someone whose opinion I trust. A sense that a book is buzzy actually makes me skeptical. As far as bad publicity in venues with a ton of reach: sigh. I’m glad I haven’t faced that choice.
I definitely read Molly because of the discourse (and I felt icky reading it the whole time).
And would I rather have “bad” publicity or no publicity? Eek. I like discourse, but I also hate feeling misunderstood (but I’ve been preparing myself for it because who among us can be fully and generously known? Though that is the dream).
I want all the publicity, including the very very bad, because I’m a sensitive bird and will never read reviews or commentary on my work. Lalalala I have blinders on. But ask me when my debut comes out next year.
No Goodreads for you! 💌 from one sensitive bird to another!
As an author, I say NO to bad publicity as much as it can possibly be avoided. I suppose every writer will have a different tolerance for this.
As a reader of this substack, I say YES to the brilliant phrase "...snow globe of oversaturated satire..."
Now that I think about it, I think part of that satire phenomenon is a reaction to “cringe” or like embarrassment culture which is just a reaction to vulnerability culture!! Gah!
Yes, I have to wonder if fiction authors and memoir authors exist at different places on the vulnerability/sensitivity scales.
For the most part, memoirist choose to be vulnerable in their books, and might be therefore more sensitive to bad publicity.
Often (sometimes?), fiction writers have more detachment built into their books ie "this is really not MY life" - and therefore might (possibly) feel a little less sensitive?
Mostly, I think the variation is from author to author but I do wonder how much genre plays a role.
I think this is why the Memoir submission process is especially fraught because each rejection feels like a rejection of not just your "book" but of "you" - so I can imagine similar situation in the publicity stage (?)
I am fully on the “no publicity” rather than “bad publicity” train! I think that kind of upheaval (which it would be, for me) would really harm my ability to write the next book.
I realize I framed this as an all or nothing, which it never has to be! But I agree, how the modes of writing and publishing feed into one another is definitely in consideration. Emotional upheaval for me for sure!
I have many THOUGHTS on Molly the person, who I knew, and Molly, the book. I will keep these thoughts offline for now, but it is always startling to see her referenced in this context. One of her poems was almost an epigraph in my book. Thank you for writing this, as always, Cassie.
❤️ I’m sorry for your loss, Penny. I do hope that when she’s talked about—it leads folks to her work.
🩷
I bought & read Molly on the strength of that first excerpt in the Paris Review, and was pretty rattled by all the negative publicity that came out shortly after. Seems like it did raise Blake Butler’s profile (and Archways’, which I think is great!), but it also seemed pretty miserable for him. I think I’d be totally paralyzed. (GREAT read, thank you Cassie!)
Same here! And I also don’t know how I would sit back and NOT defend myself (not sure his considerations there obviously, but I’d have to be like banned from commentary or something). I also usually strongly dislike commentary on commentary—like if you haven’t read the book and you’re going solely off marketing framing, that isn’t fair (probably guilty of this here a bit!). I’m waiting for Zoe to finish it to tell me whether o should read it. 😂
And yes, Go Archway! (He also had a great publicist, Lauren Cerand!)
I think he did defend himself a bit on Twitter initially but then it just got out of control. It’s all so fraught but I felt sorry for him. And lol (lol!), yes to excerpts as essays!!!
Same! I bought it based on the Paris Review excerpt.
Good to know excerpts work! 😂
I found this very interesting, and now I want to read Molly. I guess all this drama pulled me in, and also that she was a poet.
I read all the coverage of the drama FOR SURE and zero of the books themselves. Not sure what that makes me...literary rubbernecker??
I've never understood the appeal of the divorce memoir. they all strike me as samey. "my ex is a jerk who didn't appreciate me, the end."
I love this, Cassie. Especially the part about what really sells books - a good story or a literary feud or a styles piece or some other drama? So many things to think about and I don't think there is ever one clear answer
I love these considerations! It reminds me of the idea of "pain points" in marketing (aspirational vs inspirational), or the idea that in order to sell something we must identify a "lack" or need, which in the current age of unsustainable consumption seems like pure fiction manufactured on the back of a collapsing culture. In some spiritual and ethical sense, we try to nurture the idea of "abundance" and the sense that we have enough; we are enough. However, the whole economy is hinged on marketing around lack. Of course if we privatize everything, we will in fact need it sold back to us, but that is because we've created systems based on the human mind instead of some rhyme with nature. Surely we are drawn to drama and attention at all costs, but what is our ethical responsibility towards the energetics of the larger culture? It seems like we're beginning to see the reality of those costs. (As an aside, I noticed in those dueling memoirs that a NYT article headline was "Two Writers Fell in Love, Married, Then Divorced. Who Gets the Story?" which would have been an interesting epistemological question given the state of the world, the decline of consensus reality (science, etc), and our generally dueling (siloed) stories, however, the article wasn't about "who gets the story" at all.) As for being misunderstood - and I say this as a completely non-religious person - Christ performed miracles and people happily crucified him. (I don't know why I find that a comfort, but I do. There's dignity, integrity, despite the disconnect.) It does ask the crucial question again: Who gets the story?
You’re totally right that a piece selling the NYC wealth of an author is a serious turnoff—I buy books by some big names but it’s almost always because I’ve read an excerpt or some poems in a magazine (I preordered Citizen for a whole class on the strength of poems that appeared in Poetry). OR a recommendation from someone whose opinion I trust. A sense that a book is buzzy actually makes me skeptical. As far as bad publicity in venues with a ton of reach: sigh. I’m glad I haven’t faced that choice.
I definitely read Molly because of the discourse (and I felt icky reading it the whole time).
And would I rather have “bad” publicity or no publicity? Eek. I like discourse, but I also hate feeling misunderstood (but I’ve been preparing myself for it because who among us can be fully and generously known? Though that is the dream).
love this - so much to think about here - thank you