Looks like the rest of us could learn something from the romance writers ... https://www.citylab.com/life/2018/01/freelancer-gig-economy-tips-for-success-romance-novelist/550631/?utm_source=SFTwitter ETA: Is this cooperation because most romance writers are women?
Well, to be fair, there's a lot of romance novelists out there. Of course we've got the best community. We're everywhere, bitches. Can't swing a dead cat without hitting a romance novelist.
Possibly, but it also could be because romance is often a maligned genre, which would lead the writers to band together to support each other...kind of like DIY indie musicians did when they weren't taken seriously. Thank you for posting that!
Y'know, maybe this is off-topic, but I just want to say: it amazes me how stereotypes work. Last week, I saw someone making shitty remarks about how women always backstab each other. This week, we've got someone saying women are more cooperative. These are completely opposite ideas... but somehow, they're both common stereotypes. So I googled it. Are men or women more cooperative? These were the top results: According to one study: men and women are basically the same. (Link.) Sometimes men cooperate a little better, and sometimes women cooperate a little better. It depends on who they're with. Men cooperate better when they're alone with other men, but women cooperate better in mixed-gender groups. This essay examines a bunch of different studies. (Link.) Overall, there was no pattern. Every study found something different. Gender has no effect on cooperation. According to this other study: women and men are basically the same. (Link.) Under certain circumstances, though, men and women will behave differently. If other people are watching, women will cooperate more with each other. Men, however, cooperate less when watched. Honestly, I don't know why romance writers are so cooperative. Maybe we're more social. I like other romance writers. Some of them are my friends, even. I don't think it has anything to do with my hypothetical penis and/or vagina.
I feel like this is a big part of it, coming from the world of fanfiction, which is even more maligned and equally more supportive. The more external haters you have, the more your inner community grows to try to ensure both the genre and the individual writers thrive and succeed.
Not gonna lie, I skimmed the article. Though I see the value behind what they have done, and it could be a wise move for other genre writers as well. Though as an indie writer myself, I find it hard to compete with the rest of the crowd in the Sci-fi side of things. Not that it matters, I can't afford to get the exposure that most can, so that is where I fail as an individual. Overall though it seems the Rom community is rather close knit when it comes down to it, as with the others it is all thrown to the wolves.
I had a semi-thoughtful response all drafted up for this thread but it disappeared in the Great Outage... what can I remember from it? Not much. But I cetrainly agree with the "us against them" perspective. If other people are going to disrespect us? We'll respect each other. (And also tell the "other people" to fuck off.) I think there's also an interesting connection with romance writers/readers and the internet. Romance readers (possibly because they're so voracious?) were early adopters of e-books, and along with that have come a lot of online communities dedicated to romance. Since most genre writers read the genre as well, and often first, a lot of romance writers are used to being part of online communities and seem to easily transition to the writers communities from the readers. Also hard to underestimate just how much money there is in the genre. There are so many romance conferences, some for readers, some for authors, some mixed, that just about anyone can take things offline and go visit people in person. A big motivation for at least some of these conferences is marketing, and marketing is justified by the size of the market. And I've worked with several romance publishers who organized their own writers conferences, just for their "stable", I assume as a way of trying to build author loyalty and continue making money. I think self-publishers are pretty similar in a lot of ways (being maligned, being internet-friendly) but I wonder if the difference is that there just isn't that much money? Or, rather, there's a lot of money but it's mostly being gobbled up by a few huge players and the rest is spread really, really thin. So the self-publishing crowd is maybe feeling a bit less secure, a bit more desperate and competitive? Maybe.
