Why do (some) people hate and resent writers?

[sheenaghpugh]

The immediate cause of this post is that, as you can see here, the government has a consultation underway on proposals, basically, to put their hand in authors' pockets and filch the small sums some of them get when their work is copied and used for educational purposes. Those of us who are authors ought certainly to support ALCS's efforts to maintain the principle that writers deserve to be paid for their work.

But there's more, as Mr Carson used to say; when I saw this, I could predict with some certainty what the reactions of many Joe Publics on newspaper forums would be, namely the folk who honestly seem to hate and resent any artists, but especially writers, actually earning anything from their work. Whenever any writer complains online about people nicking their work, someone commenting below the line is sure to protest that authors should think it an incredible privilege to be published and read at all; if they were "real artists" they wouldn't have filthy mercenary motives like making a living (I've seen it, in more or less those words, more than once). Others will suggest they ought only to be paid once, after which it should be in the public domain and copyright shouldn't exist at all. This principle would certainly make a considerable difference in the price of medicines and commercial inventions, but no one ever seems to suggest applying it there.

Nor is it just Joe Public. A while ago on Facebook, a writer complained that having done some freelance work at a university, for an agreed fee, a year had passed and she hadn't seen the colour of their money. Some snooty academic commented that it was the ethos in academia to share one's knowledge for free and if professional writers couldn't live with that, they should avoid working in an academic environment. Ooh, get him, who like all these academics nobly sharing their knowledge for free has a permanent, secure, full-time job - unlike many writers. Anyway, since when does one apply this "ethos" to people coming in from outside? If the University of Wherever find they need the services of a plumber or electrician, do they expect these obliging fellows to supply their expertise free? Not if they've any sense, they don't!

But writers are different. Perhaps this is a hangover from the irritating Romantic image of the writer starving in a garret, but I don't think that is the whole of the reason. I suspect that very, very many people want to be published writers so desperately that they resent bitterly those who are, and feel these writers should be more grateful for what they themselves want - as if getting published were purely a matter of luck and in no way down to talent and hard work. You'd think, in these days, folk who want to be published and can't find an outlet could just do it themselves; self-publication has never been either so cheap or so easy, but maybe that doesn't give them the seal of approval they need.

That's my guess, but has anyone else any theories on why so many people seem to want writers to prove their authenticity by starving in garrets?

Comments

[julesjones]

Combination of factors, and the mere fact that some are mutually exclusive doesn't stop people holding both views at once. You've already mentioned the popular ones:
-- Should starve in a garret to be a Real Writer
-- Should be *grateful* to be published
-- it's easy to write, and anyone could do it if they could find the time, so why do you expect to get rewarded for it
-- it's not as if it's a real job, rather than a hobby

and the biggie amongst the book pirates simply seems to be all of the above as a cover for "I don't want to pay for it if I can get away with stealing it, but I don't like you pointing out that I'm stealing from you when I take it without paying"

[sheenaghpugh]

Ah yes, your reasons 3 and 4 are very often mentioned and I should have thought of them!

[entropy-house.livejournal.com]

And then there's the 'you enjoyed doing it, so it doesn't count as work'. I've seen that attitude for pretty much any creative activity done by self-employed, including people who design websites, people who quilt, people who perform music, people who take photographs, people who design fabric patterns... any and all of these activities can result in 'offers' to give you credit for what you've worked on, if you give them the results of your labor for free! And they honestly think they're being generous because you should be *honored* that they feel your work is worth taking even for free.

If you do something creative on your own, then people feel it doesn't deserve pay.

[sheenaghpugh]

Yes, that sounds familiar too....

[angestoique.livejournal.com]

There are no doubt brain-surgeons who enjoy their work, and who get a lot of satisfaction from it. I'm yet to hear anyone suggesting that THEY shouldn't be paid adequately. Someone suggesting that would be laughed out of court. . .

You're right : this attitude is levelled at the creative. I do think it's all tied up with the widespread view that we are (largely) harmless cranks pursuing a hobby.

I've also encountered creative women (and it has been all women) who consistently undervalue what they do.This lets the "Oh, but you should just be happy to be published" brigade off the hook.

[azdak.livejournal.com]

like all these academics nobly sharing their knowledge for free has a permanent, secure, full-time job

That's the exception rather than the rule these days, though.

[sheenaghpugh]

Tenure may be the exception, but most academics I know are as secure as most employed folk can be these days, and it ill becomes them to be snooty about freelance writers trying to make a crust.