Patrick Rothfuss is younger than GRRM, but 2011 was also the last time he released a novel in his primary series. Scott Lynch is also younger, and fans have been waiting on his next novel since 2013. GRRM doesn't spend his time on social media (he has a blog that used to be a LiveJournal, but that's it). He does some conventions, but not enough to take up THAT much of his time to explain a ~14 year gap. Stephen King is a little older than GRRM and able to crank out books. That's not because he's an avoider of the spotlight like Thomas Pynchon (who produces novels at a rate somewhat like Martin), but because he treats writing like a job.
J. G. Keeley suggested years ago that publishers have gotten scared off of starting new high fantasy series based on writers like Martin failing to deliver, which he called a "silver lining" https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/1459299 because he thinks Tolkien;s influence on fantasy towards greater lengths & worldbuilding was pernicious. I don't know that they're switching to the sort of fantasy he prefers though.
That's a solid review—I would both be honored and scared if I ever found out he had reviewed by work—although I don't agree that maximalism is pernicious. It has a place. The problem with maximalism is that very few people can do it well. But that's true of writing in general. And yeah, having read his review, I can't imagine he's on board with what publishing is up to these days.
I do agree that Martin's problem isn't, at this point, demands placed on him by his publisher. But I think he's way more "modern" in the willingness to market himself than Tolkien or Le Guin were.
As for Keeley's argument that Martin's failure to finish is what broke epic fantasy in publishing, I strongly doubt it. Martin's books are still generating profits. I think the HBO series did a lot more damage. What turned traditional publishing against epic fantasy is that publishers have decided the real game is in on-screen adaptations. We've seen a lot of expensive but also bad adaptations of 400k novels. Meanwhile, 80k novels are cheaper to print and easier to put on screen. This is what's leading publishing to abandon maximalist fantasy.
I suspect that Patrick Rothfuss also contributed, since fans have been waiting on the third/final book of his series since 2011 as well, and his editor has publicly blamed his lateness on her company folding and getting bought out.
Tolkien didn't have to "market" himself because he had an academic day-job. Plenty of literary (rather than fantasy/"genre" writers) have come from that, but there are fewer such jobs available (hence such people going into prestige TV) https://oyyy.substack.com/p/the-cultural-decline-of-literary
I don't think publishers get a cut of TV adaptations, which are a separate version of a work. I suppose that sales get a boost from "earned media" marketing. The recently cancelled Wheel of Time started after Game of Thrones, and my understanding is that those books are even longer than those from A Song of Ice and Fire, but that didn't stop Amazon from adapting them.
Interesting point about Rothfuss. You'd think someone at his level would be able to survive a company collapse—hire his editor freelance, find another publisher—but I guess not. I wonder what happened. And if publishing is just that dysfunctional these days. I've definitely heard of promising authors losing their careers to editor layoffs, but I always thought that was an early-stage threat.
Your point about Tolkien is solid. I think the main reason literary fiction is dying isn't changes in publishing, although those are certainly doing damage. It's that day jobs have gotten so much worse. Very few serious writers began as career authors; it arguably impedes. You really could be a professor and a novelist in Tolkien's day, because you weren't chasing grants and defending your turf against administrative bloat. Today, it's nearly impossible to work and write. Day jobs are more demanding, and getting visibility for serious writing is 100x harder. So, instead, we get MFA fiction by people who've never been anything but writers, who can only write about 21st-century anomie in Brooklyn.
On film adaptations: I don't know how the finances work, but I suspect publishers do get something, at least when the rights are optioned. (They might not make anything more when the film is made.) Usually, in trade, the author gives up all rights. This is also why a book series can die if the publisher drops it; the author gets stuck in a limbo where the ex owns world and character rights, so a sequel is impossible. But also, film adaptations tend to be, unfortunately, how the world discovers new books exist. So they can turn 50,000 sales into 5,000,000. And this might actually be why literary fiction is dying—literary fiction, on screen, generally doesn't produce summer blockbusters.
I don't think the problems of Rothfuss' editor are causing any for Rothfuss himself: she claimed he hadn't sent her ANY of his third book so she has no reason to believe he's written any of it! He got fans to contribute to a charity with the promise of reading the first chapter of that new book, then got them to exceed to ever higher goal levels, and now years later still hasn't provided the chapter in any form.
Tolkien hardly had a typical day job. Jobs overall were more demanding when he was writing (more farmers & factory workers) than our time.
Aside from ASOIAF, GRRM is also known for the Wild Cards series, which has changed publishers multiple times and the longest gap between books being 2006-2008. This suggests to me that publishers don't own rights to it. There have been attempts to make it into a TV series, and as far as I can tell the reason it hasn't happened is because the TV people have been passing on it rather than any rights from publishers holding things up (TV rights were explicitly acquired first). I haven't heard of cases where an author couldn't write a sequel due to rights issues, unless that author didn't originate the series.
"He got fans to contribute to a charity with the promise of reading the first chapter of that new book, then got them to exceed to ever higher goal levels, and now years later still hasn't provided the chapter in any form."
Oof. What do you think happened?
"Tolkien hardly had a typical day job. Jobs overall were more demanding when he was writing (more farmers & factory workers) than our time."
There are still farmers and factory workers, but I agree that what I'm talking about applies to white-collar jobs. From a social justice perspective, the 1950s equilibrium was just as bad as today's, but in different ways. The difference is that, when the middle class isn't cannibalizing itself through pointless corporate competition, at least a few writers can break through. The problem of geniuses being trapped in grueling labor was still there, as it always has been; it's just that it was only blocking 90% of the raw talent, rather than 99%.
"I haven't heard of cases where an author couldn't write a sequel due to rights issues, unless that author didn't originate the series."
This might not be an issue for famous writers, but it's something you hear about on r/publishing and r/writing... authors who get dropped, but can't take the world and character rights to a new publisher. I wish I could recall specific cases—this is from discussion about ten years ago—but I don't. I have heard of it, though.
GRRM has repeatedly thought he could finish Winds years LONG before now. He said he would have Dance out the year after Feast (instead of ~6 years). I think Rothfuss thought he could write that chapter, but then failed to do so. And Rothfuss' situation is rather notorious in fantasy (I've never read any of his work, but I know about it).
> There are still farmers and factory workers
A MUCH smaller percentage.
> but I agree that what I'm talking about applies to white-collar jobs
Philip Glass worked as a plumber & cabdriver when he composed in the 70s. Eric Hoffer worked as a longshoreman. Scott Lynch is (or at least was when writing his existing Gentleman Bastard novels) also a firefigher. Bill James started writing about baseball while working the nightshift as a guard at a cannery. But, yes, more will tend to be white-collar. George V. Higgins practiced law, Gene Wolfe edited the Plant Engineering journal, Charles Ives was an actuary (and wound up creating his own insurance company) while composing. More typically, Stephen King & David Benioff both taught highschool English. EDIT: Checking the latter's wikipedia entry again, it seems he wasn't teaching when he wrote his first novel but was instead in a Master's program.
> From a social justice perspective
We're not talking about the normative issue of social justice, we're talking about the descriptive issue of what books are getting completed & published.
For those lesser known authors, their world & character rights wouldn't seem to be worth nearly as much.
Patrick Rothfuss is younger than GRRM, but 2011 was also the last time he released a novel in his primary series. Scott Lynch is also younger, and fans have been waiting on his next novel since 2013. GRRM doesn't spend his time on social media (he has a blog that used to be a LiveJournal, but that's it). He does some conventions, but not enough to take up THAT much of his time to explain a ~14 year gap. Stephen King is a little older than GRRM and able to crank out books. That's not because he's an avoider of the spotlight like Thomas Pynchon (who produces novels at a rate somewhat like Martin), but because he treats writing like a job.
J. G. Keeley suggested years ago that publishers have gotten scared off of starting new high fantasy series based on writers like Martin failing to deliver, which he called a "silver lining" https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/1459299 because he thinks Tolkien;s influence on fantasy towards greater lengths & worldbuilding was pernicious. I don't know that they're switching to the sort of fantasy he prefers though.
That's a solid review—I would both be honored and scared if I ever found out he had reviewed by work—although I don't agree that maximalism is pernicious. It has a place. The problem with maximalism is that very few people can do it well. But that's true of writing in general. And yeah, having read his review, I can't imagine he's on board with what publishing is up to these days.
I do agree that Martin's problem isn't, at this point, demands placed on him by his publisher. But I think he's way more "modern" in the willingness to market himself than Tolkien or Le Guin were.
As for Keeley's argument that Martin's failure to finish is what broke epic fantasy in publishing, I strongly doubt it. Martin's books are still generating profits. I think the HBO series did a lot more damage. What turned traditional publishing against epic fantasy is that publishers have decided the real game is in on-screen adaptations. We've seen a lot of expensive but also bad adaptations of 400k novels. Meanwhile, 80k novels are cheaper to print and easier to put on screen. This is what's leading publishing to abandon maximalist fantasy.
Keeley originally wrote the review in 2010 (prior to the TV series), although it seems the remark referencing Caleb Carr is from 2014 https://web.archive.org/web/20130819224712/https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/1459299
I suspect that Patrick Rothfuss also contributed, since fans have been waiting on the third/final book of his series since 2011 as well, and his editor has publicly blamed his lateness on her company folding and getting bought out.
Tolkien didn't have to "market" himself because he had an academic day-job. Plenty of literary (rather than fantasy/"genre" writers) have come from that, but there are fewer such jobs available (hence such people going into prestige TV) https://oyyy.substack.com/p/the-cultural-decline-of-literary
I don't think publishers get a cut of TV adaptations, which are a separate version of a work. I suppose that sales get a boost from "earned media" marketing. The recently cancelled Wheel of Time started after Game of Thrones, and my understanding is that those books are even longer than those from A Song of Ice and Fire, but that didn't stop Amazon from adapting them.
Interesting point about Rothfuss. You'd think someone at his level would be able to survive a company collapse—hire his editor freelance, find another publisher—but I guess not. I wonder what happened. And if publishing is just that dysfunctional these days. I've definitely heard of promising authors losing their careers to editor layoffs, but I always thought that was an early-stage threat.
Your point about Tolkien is solid. I think the main reason literary fiction is dying isn't changes in publishing, although those are certainly doing damage. It's that day jobs have gotten so much worse. Very few serious writers began as career authors; it arguably impedes. You really could be a professor and a novelist in Tolkien's day, because you weren't chasing grants and defending your turf against administrative bloat. Today, it's nearly impossible to work and write. Day jobs are more demanding, and getting visibility for serious writing is 100x harder. So, instead, we get MFA fiction by people who've never been anything but writers, who can only write about 21st-century anomie in Brooklyn.
On film adaptations: I don't know how the finances work, but I suspect publishers do get something, at least when the rights are optioned. (They might not make anything more when the film is made.) Usually, in trade, the author gives up all rights. This is also why a book series can die if the publisher drops it; the author gets stuck in a limbo where the ex owns world and character rights, so a sequel is impossible. But also, film adaptations tend to be, unfortunately, how the world discovers new books exist. So they can turn 50,000 sales into 5,000,000. And this might actually be why literary fiction is dying—literary fiction, on screen, generally doesn't produce summer blockbusters.
I don't think the problems of Rothfuss' editor are causing any for Rothfuss himself: she claimed he hadn't sent her ANY of his third book so she has no reason to believe he's written any of it! He got fans to contribute to a charity with the promise of reading the first chapter of that new book, then got them to exceed to ever higher goal levels, and now years later still hasn't provided the chapter in any form.
Tolkien hardly had a typical day job. Jobs overall were more demanding when he was writing (more farmers & factory workers) than our time.
Aside from ASOIAF, GRRM is also known for the Wild Cards series, which has changed publishers multiple times and the longest gap between books being 2006-2008. This suggests to me that publishers don't own rights to it. There have been attempts to make it into a TV series, and as far as I can tell the reason it hasn't happened is because the TV people have been passing on it rather than any rights from publishers holding things up (TV rights were explicitly acquired first). I haven't heard of cases where an author couldn't write a sequel due to rights issues, unless that author didn't originate the series.
"He got fans to contribute to a charity with the promise of reading the first chapter of that new book, then got them to exceed to ever higher goal levels, and now years later still hasn't provided the chapter in any form."
Oof. What do you think happened?
"Tolkien hardly had a typical day job. Jobs overall were more demanding when he was writing (more farmers & factory workers) than our time."
There are still farmers and factory workers, but I agree that what I'm talking about applies to white-collar jobs. From a social justice perspective, the 1950s equilibrium was just as bad as today's, but in different ways. The difference is that, when the middle class isn't cannibalizing itself through pointless corporate competition, at least a few writers can break through. The problem of geniuses being trapped in grueling labor was still there, as it always has been; it's just that it was only blocking 90% of the raw talent, rather than 99%.
"I haven't heard of cases where an author couldn't write a sequel due to rights issues, unless that author didn't originate the series."
This might not be an issue for famous writers, but it's something you hear about on r/publishing and r/writing... authors who get dropped, but can't take the world and character rights to a new publisher. I wish I could recall specific cases—this is from discussion about ten years ago—but I don't. I have heard of it, though.
GRRM has repeatedly thought he could finish Winds years LONG before now. He said he would have Dance out the year after Feast (instead of ~6 years). I think Rothfuss thought he could write that chapter, but then failed to do so. And Rothfuss' situation is rather notorious in fantasy (I've never read any of his work, but I know about it).
> There are still farmers and factory workers
A MUCH smaller percentage.
> but I agree that what I'm talking about applies to white-collar jobs
Philip Glass worked as a plumber & cabdriver when he composed in the 70s. Eric Hoffer worked as a longshoreman. Scott Lynch is (or at least was when writing his existing Gentleman Bastard novels) also a firefigher. Bill James started writing about baseball while working the nightshift as a guard at a cannery. But, yes, more will tend to be white-collar. George V. Higgins practiced law, Gene Wolfe edited the Plant Engineering journal, Charles Ives was an actuary (and wound up creating his own insurance company) while composing. More typically, Stephen King & David Benioff both taught highschool English. EDIT: Checking the latter's wikipedia entry again, it seems he wasn't teaching when he wrote his first novel but was instead in a Master's program.
> From a social justice perspective
We're not talking about the normative issue of social justice, we're talking about the descriptive issue of what books are getting completed & published.
For those lesser known authors, their world & character rights wouldn't seem to be worth nearly as much.