I’m intrigued by the disconnect between the prestige and legitimacy afforded by being a “published author” and all the friction inherent in trying to spread your ideas by writing a book.
Think about the dropoff from:
The number of people who hear about a book → The number that buy the book → The number that read the book they’ve bought → The number that spread the word about that book
If you aren’t a known name or you don’t have an existing tribe whose permission you’ve earned (often over a number of years), simply getting the word out about your book is a herculean task. And so, most books sell only a few thousand copies.
Nevertheless, being a “published author” still carries a real caché. Especially if you write nonfiction, “published author” is a chalice of purported legitimacy and expertise (e.g. it’s a lot easier for a journalist or a TV producer to justify interviewing a published author). What that means in reality is that the book gives you permission to talk about the ideas in the book, not the other way around. It’s a pretty roundabout, lumpy way to spread an idea.
Which gets me thinking:
- 25 years from now, will the notion of being a “published author” be anachronistic, and, if that happens, what will replace it?
- Or, will the notion live on, because as a society we will always need a way to separate out “legitimate” idea merchants from the chaff.
If anything, it seems like we are going to see a proliferation of pathways to legitimacy, which gives people who want to spread ideas (but who don’t have access to the gatekeepers) more options. That seems like a good thing, as the volume of ideas that will spread will likely go up.
The open question is whether, overall, more of the best ideas will get out. My bet is: Yes.
What do you think?