The old phrase: "Give your little finger to other people and they take the whole hand."

[LizzieMaine]

History is history, unless you're Henry Ford.

 

[tonyb]

oh come now! The "Occupy" movement was all about heaping scorn on those most well off. I hear "privilege" being applied to those in the middle class.

I, too, have about had my fill of people in their various graduate programs telling working-class stiffs who just happen to be white and male that they ought "check their privilege."

But don't hold your breath waiting on me to express much sympathy for those poor picked-on billionaires.

 

[Bigger Don]

But don't hold your breath waiting on me to express much sympathy for those poor picked-on billionaires.

I wasn't expressing sympathy, simply pointing out that saying scorn is rarely directed at the well off isn't accurate.

 

[tonyb]

^^^^^
Oh, it's plenty accurate enough. We laud the tremendously wealthy with far greater frequency than we direct scorn their way, "Occupy" (what became of that, anyway?) aside.

In the interest of "accuracy," please note that I never suggested that you ought hold any sympathy for the picked-on billionaires. Rather, I said that one shouldn't wait on me to do same.

 

[Inkstainedwretch]

I believe it's fine to discuss the politics of the Era. Bringing modern, especially American politics into it is to invite discord. Getting back to the have-have-not thing, I'm a writer and among writers cadging drinks and meals is almost a holy mission, because we spend so many years being broke and hungry. Now that I've had modest success, I do try to help along young writers just starting out because I know what they're in for. I've had to rein in my generosity because I'm putting a granddaughter through college and will probably die in debt as a consequence, but I figure our generation has pretty much done whatever it was going to accomplish and it behooves us to help the next generation along. With luck, I'll die and leave my creditors holding the bag.

 

[tonyb]

^^*^^
My advice to the run of aspiring young writers: Study accounting. Or the law. Consider a career in the trucking industry.

That was my advice 20 years ago, too. But employment prospects are even worse now than they were then, leastwise employment that pays much more than starvation wages.

BUT ... For those with the chops and the willingness to work long, long hours, in full knowledge that fame and fortune will almost surely elude you, well, write. Write and rewrite. Read and read and read. Make a study of the writing you like best until you get a clearer sense of just how the producers of that prose go about their business. And then study it some more.

And it doesn't hurt to buy 'em lunch every now and then.

 

[Fading Fast]

^^*^^
My advice to the run of aspiring young writers: Study accounting. Or the law. Consider a career in the trucking industry.

That was my advice 20 years ago, too. But employment prospects are even worse now than they were then, leastwise employment that pays much more than starvation wages.

BUT ... For those with the chops and the willingness to work long, long hours, in full knowledge that fame and fortune will almost surely elude you, well, write. Write and rewrite. Read and read and read. Make a study of the writing you like best until you get a clearer sense of just how the producers of that prose go about their business. And then study it some more.

And it doesn't hurt to buy 'em lunch every now and then.

I used to earn my living doing two things - writing about financial markets / the economy and managing / trading money. I don't bother with the writing anymore because so many people will do it for free it has little economic value (thankfully I can still make a living at the other thing).

I miss writing professionally, but the time, energy and effort that it takes for the few dollars I could bring in makes no sense to pursue as I can do much better focusing on trading / managing. The internet has been such a wrecking ball to everything I did for the first 15 years of my career that I had to - genuinely - reinvent myself (develop new skills, relationships, approaches) twice since '96 just to survive in the business.

 

[LizzieMaine]

I've been writing professionally for thirty-five years, and it was my sole source of income for about half of that time. During those full-time years I had to give up any notion of writing what I wanted to write about and learn to write about things I didn't care about in the least -- which turned out to be the best writing course I could possibly have taken.

The deregulation of the broadcating industry in the '90s meant the end of that career -- local radio news disappeared, and I wasn't inclined to throw myself into the shark-pit of competition for the few jobs that were left. But I found other writing to do on a freelance basis -- just enough to realize that if I wanted to eat regularly and stay out of the cold, I'd better find something else to do. I've been asked more times than I can imagine to write for free for this publication or that website and my response is always the same: No. Period. The only "free" writing I do is for this place. And I tell kids who want to be "writers" that if they want to be writers they'd better have a backup plan in place -- maybe a job selling popcorn.

 

[Fading Fast]

... I've been asked more times than I can imagine to write for free for this publication or that website and my response is always the same: No. Period. The only "free" writing I do is for this place. And I tell kids who want to be "writers" that if they want to be writers they'd better have a backup plan in place -- maybe a job selling popcorn.

Despite core philosophical beliefs that couldn't be further apart - I have the exact same view on the "free" writing thing as you do. I have been asked to write for free or a token amount more time than I can count and, like you, say no: If you are a for-profit business, either pay me or find someone else. Then, of course, I spit out a ridiculous amount of words here just for enjoyment.

 

[LizzieMaine]

What really gets me steamed are the big-time blogs like the Huffington Post that don't pay the "guest contributors" that make them possible. Given the huge revenue streams enjoyed by such operators, there is absolutely no justification for a no-pay policy, and writers who enable such operations by creating "content" in exchange for "exposure" are suckers, chumps and fools at best, and scabs at worst.

 

[Trenchfriend]

Oh yeah, The Huffington Post, saying "it's an honor to write for"...

 

[HudsonHawk]

I was once asked to write about baseball for the online version of a local sports publication. For free, of course. I thought, what the heck, I happily give my opinion all the time on various websites, at least I can opine without having people respond with what a lousy, no-good dumbo nothing I am. So I turned in a few pieces, just recaps and comments about last night's game or thoughts on the current standings...nothing major. That's when I learned what an "editor" is. That cured me of my desire to be a writer.

 

[Fading Fast]

What really gets me steamed are the big-time blogs like the Huffington Post that don't pay the "guest contributors" that make them possible. Given the huge revenue streams enjoyed by such operators, there is absolutely no justification for a no-pay policy, and writers who enable such operations by creating "content" in exchange for "exposure" are suckers, chumps and fools at best, and scabs at worst.

That's the thing - writers do it or it wouldn't be possible. I'd like to get mad at them, but if someone wants to work for free (without being forced or deceived into doing it), then who am I to say they can't or even get mad at them for doing it?

It kills the value of our work, but again, if someone wants to write for free, I can't see a reason in the world why they shouldn't be allowed to do so. When it first started happening, I thought it would be short lived and once the internet "novelty" wore off, website owners (blogs, etc.) would need to pay for content, but that would just be another thing (in a long list of things in life) that I got wrong.

 

[tonyb]

I know of no creative endeavor that attracts more wannabes than writing.

Everybody wants to be somebody. Everybody (well, most everybody) believes he or she has something to say and that it ought be heard.

As Elizabeth alluded, the best training is writing about matters of no personal significance. The task is to clearly impart information -- not to express an opinion, not to dazzle with one's writerly prowess.

Among the best advice I ever received was to major in journalism. The English majors talk about writing, which is fine, and they even write on occasion. But if the J student aspires to decent grades in his news and features writing classes, he or she had better learn how to tell a story plainly, clearly, and quickly. And a person learns how to do that only by doing it, over and over and over again.

 

[LizzieMaine]

Yep. There's "technique," and then there's writing.

 

[Fading Fast]

That's the thing - writers do it or it wouldn't be possible. I'd like to get mad at them, but if someone wants to work for free (without being forced or deceived into doing it), then who am I to stay they can't or even get mad at them for doing it?

It kills the value of our work, but again, if someone wants to write for free, I can't see a reason in the world why they shouldn't be allowed to do so. When it first started happening, I thought it would be short lived and once the internet "novelty" wore off, website owners (blogs, etc.) would need to pay for content, but that would just be another thing (in a long list of things in life) that I got wrong.

This is the same reason I think teachers - even the good ones who do outstanding and important work - don't make large sums of money (although, today, some - emphasis on some - do get paid reasonably well): too many people are willing to teach for not a lot of money.

I know several (many) friends, relatives and former co-workers who teach for love of teaching and pass up / have given up better paying jobs in other fields for the non-financial rewards they get from teaching.

It kills the monetary value of teaching just like those willing to write for free kill the monetary value of writing.

 

[tonyb]

Most everyone can hum a tune. It doesn't make 'em singers.

 

[ChiTownScion]

Writing is a significant part of being an attorney, or at least it was always a significant part of my practice. You spend years in law school reading published appellate opinions, and you quickly learn which justices employed strained syntax and overly technical wording, and which ones were always a treat to read. In the latter category was, of course, Learned Hand and Oliver Wendell Holes, Jr. Naturally, the US Supreme Court and certain Federal circuits always attracted the best and brightest of law grads to clerkships, and when you got to some state court decisions the talent pool clearly was not so great. You'd have to read some of them several times in order to decipher what were actually pretty simple precepts. (This was more common in civil areas of the law than criminal, obviously: a good homicide case is always more interesting than plumbing the depths of springing executory interests or other arcane future property interest concepts.)

The man whose opinions I always looked forward to reading were those of Justice Roger Traynor of California. Even if you didn't care for his very progressive legal views (e.g., strict product liability, an area where he was a pioneer) his opinions were always well written with a minimum of convoluted legalese. I tried to emulate his straight forward approach when I wrote: keep it simple when possible, infuriate them if you must... but for crizzakes: don't bore 'em to death.

 

[LizzieMaine]

The opposite is true of academics in the social sciences, for whom the use of the most tortured theoretical prose possible is essential to their identity. I read quite a few ponderous works of this nature before I realized they weren't writing to educate or inform the public, they were writing only to impress each other with their erudition. One of the most annoying books I ever read was a dense semiotic study of "the vaudeville aesthetic," which managed to leach every last possible bit of joy out of the topic. Nuts to that.

 

[Harp]

I used to earn my living doing two things - writing about financial markets / the economy and managing / trading money.

Ever write for Financial Markets&Trading? Favorite commodities periodical.
________

I was mistaken earlier about Salman and the current Court's willingness to resolve insider trading by upending the Second Circuit's holding in Newman
in favor of the Ninth's view of Salman's inconsistency with Dirks. And the bench was unanimous. Haven't read the slip yet but the unity itself intrigues.