I think this is false. My personal experience is that when I put money in an author tipjar, it's in response to product that they've already generated, and which they've often already sold through traditional channels previously or decided not to sell (or initially sell) through traditional channels (released under CC or pure blogging). It's just another way for an author to get that money, letting readers support after having read, rather than supporting before (or during, for advertising). Unless you specifically ask for donations/preorders to support a future product, I don't expect anyone will be contributing except in response to something they've already read.
I think this is naive. As both of us have pointed out, people already feel entitled to control Martin's time when all they've done is buy his book. And you think that asking people for more won't trigger even bigger feelings of entitlement? I'm sorry, but I just don't believe that. In our (speaking US here) capitalist society, there's a word for people who pay for a person's room/board/lifestyle while they work on a product: employer. Or patron, or client; same thing, really. Throughout history, the person who pays for the professional's upkeep has been the person that dictates -- or tries to dictate -- the work that professional produces. This is no different with a publisher, really, except that publishers only contract with artists who are already working on what the publisher wants. They ignore authors, even good authors, who aren't producing something of immediate value. For those who are, they offer support -- but naturally with a measure of control attached. In my case, my publisher changed the title of my book (I liked the new one better), picked the cover art (though I was happy with it), and even dictated some changes to the plot (which I agreed to, and wrote). This is standard for any publisher-author relationship. Since you're essentially suggesting that authors turn to readers to offer the same support that a publisher currently offers, why wouldn't those readers then expect the same degree of control? It would be irrational for them not to.
But while I'm willing to offer that control to a group of professionals (the editor/marketing person/art director/etc. at my publishing house) whose work I've seen elsewhere and respect, and whose judgment I trust... I am not willing to offer control over my work to a bunch of random people who happen to have spare cash. Book writing by committee -- especially when that committee consists of a bunch of people who don't know what they're doing -- is never a good idea.
So I think you're overestimating the goodwill of readers. Only some of these contributors (employers) will offer support based on my past projects alone; many will offer support because they want to see more work from me in the future. And some of those will decide that I should be working on something they want to see.
You do raise a good point about me specifically making a plea for readers to buy (or donate to, in the case of Strange Horizons) the magazines where my work is published. When I get some time, I'll add a paragraph on my biblio page about that. (I don't think it's a good idea to add a second link to the list of stories, note. Partly in the interest of good website design, and partly because I think over-begging can actually be detrimental to the altruistic impulse; there is such a thing as asking too much.)
But back to the main point of your OP. You still haven't offered any solutions to the problem of time support that I referred to in my last comment. Everything, everything you've suggested in this thread takes more time away from my writing, and for very minimal and uncertain returns. (I can't be sure, since not everyone tells me if they donate, but the "donate money if you like this story" links on my website have gotten very, very little in the way of actual donations. Nowhere near enough to pay my rent, or even my heating bill, for a month.) And since you're not willing to buy my novels, or even request them from the library -- which would help give me time support in the form of good sales numbers, which would lead to future publishers who'd be willing to buy my future novels for a good advance -- then you're still not saying anything that would help a working writer. You're still proposing a course of action that's actively harmful to me.
It's clear that's not what you intend, so like I said, I'm not angry about it anymore... but seriously, honestly, I don't think you really understand how this business works. Which is why I think your proposed solutions do more harm than good.
no subject
I think this is naive. As both of us have pointed out, people already feel entitled to control Martin's time when all they've done is buy his book. And you think that asking people for more won't trigger even bigger feelings of entitlement? I'm sorry, but I just don't believe that. In our (speaking US here) capitalist society, there's a word for people who pay for a person's room/board/lifestyle while they work on a product: employer. Or patron, or client; same thing, really. Throughout history, the person who pays for the professional's upkeep has been the person that dictates -- or tries to dictate -- the work that professional produces. This is no different with a publisher, really, except that publishers only contract with artists who are already working on what the publisher wants. They ignore authors, even good authors, who aren't producing something of immediate value. For those who are, they offer support -- but naturally with a measure of control attached. In my case, my publisher changed the title of my book (I liked the new one better), picked the cover art (though I was happy with it), and even dictated some changes to the plot (which I agreed to, and wrote). This is standard for any publisher-author relationship. Since you're essentially suggesting that authors turn to readers to offer the same support that a publisher currently offers, why wouldn't those readers then expect the same degree of control? It would be irrational for them not to.
But while I'm willing to offer that control to a group of professionals (the editor/marketing person/art director/etc. at my publishing house) whose work I've seen elsewhere and respect, and whose judgment I trust... I am not willing to offer control over my work to a bunch of random people who happen to have spare cash. Book writing by committee -- especially when that committee consists of a bunch of people who don't know what they're doing -- is never a good idea.
So I think you're overestimating the goodwill of readers. Only some of these contributors (employers) will offer support based on my past projects alone; many will offer support because they want to see more work from me in the future. And some of those will decide that I should be working on something they want to see.
You do raise a good point about me specifically making a plea for readers to buy (or donate to, in the case of Strange Horizons) the magazines where my work is published. When I get some time, I'll add a paragraph on my biblio page about that. (I don't think it's a good idea to add a second link to the list of stories, note. Partly in the interest of good website design, and partly because I think over-begging can actually be detrimental to the altruistic impulse; there is such a thing as asking too much.)
But back to the main point of your OP. You still haven't offered any solutions to the problem of time support that I referred to in my last comment. Everything, everything you've suggested in this thread takes more time away from my writing, and for very minimal and uncertain returns. (I can't be sure, since not everyone tells me if they donate, but the "donate money if you like this story" links on my website have gotten very, very little in the way of actual donations. Nowhere near enough to pay my rent, or even my heating bill, for a month.) And since you're not willing to buy my novels, or even request them from the library -- which would help give me time support in the form of good sales numbers, which would lead to future publishers who'd be willing to buy my future novels for a good advance -- then you're still not saying anything that would help a working writer. You're still proposing a course of action that's actively harmful to me.
It's clear that's not what you intend, so like I said, I'm not angry about it anymore... but seriously, honestly, I don't think you really understand how this business works. Which is why I think your proposed solutions do more harm than good.