I am changing the way I present myself on Substack, and elsewhere as a writer. This action changes nothing but my alias.
This is a necessary development, weighed with the fact that most writers, and indeed most artists and creative practitioners need to hold down jobs and careers in other fields, often simply to survive, better still to prosper – this is an increasing trend in a technology led economy where people who produce creative and artistic work, and in a best case scenario are being paid, are still too often bottom of the food chain when our art and output is presented, used and exploited.
According to a report by The Authors’ Licensing and Collecting Society (ALCS) and presented by the Society of Authors, the average income for a writer in the U.K. has now fallen to below £7,000 a year for those lucky enough to be classed as primary occupation writers - this does not even come close to a living wage and data dates from 2022, already arriving from a downward trend. Furthermore, many writers survive not by writing, but by teaching writing, coaching writers, and running workshops, perversely developing even more writers living off a decreasing pool of revenue, all of which are embracing a form devalued over time largely due to major players in the digital technology space eating more and more of the pie and extending influence offline. Issues are systemic, there are writers who have sold stories to Hollywood who are still dependent on teaching the craft to others. The devaluation trend is across all creative forms. 80% of UK musicians and music creators earn less than £200 a year from music streaming. This is exacerbated by the weakened state of the recorded music business since the turn of the century which is still playing out its effects today with the lowest investment in emerging artist development since the birth of rock ‘n roll, directly causing less opportunity for those from lower socio-economic groups – the key demographic of the greatest music artists of all time.
So why write? Why create?
If you are a writer (or a creative or artist of any kind), you do so because you have a burning compulsion to do so. Without that spark and its fire that burns bright in your life, nothing will happen - because there is certainly no monetary incentive at all. We all want to be able to continue to burn bright. Offer our words into culture. Offer the art we create in whatever form it takes. To share with others and leave something of us behind when we are gone from this mortal coil. Our efforts however successful, must be commended; we hope to connect with people first and foremost, we hope for some sense of critical acclaim and recognition. Certainly, when meeting audiences and reaching commercial success, efforts must be rewarded fairly. However, the contemporary creative economy and its increasing reliance on technology for distribution and connection to audiences has great flaws. It’s a problem yet to be fixed in the tech saturated 21st century. The creative industries were not invited to the inception of the contemporary system at hand. This was led by tech bro’s with a different agenda all together. Perfect cohesion between writers, creatives, artists and the owners of tech infrastructure looks unlikely any time soon, if at all.
I’ve written previously about the parasite economy, especially in the first decades of the internet, and the precedence it has set. A business model that grows like a fat bloated parasite living off the IP and copyright of others, feeding itself all rewards in totality, creating empires of powerful influence on society. A system without enough respect and understanding of the creative process. A broader system that promotes emerging global monoculture, shallow rehashes and AI produced content too often built on mass IP infringement. History is repeating. Too often theft has been whitewashed under the story of disruptive technology, which in truth serves the agenda of an ivory tower of delusional greed pigs detached from the daily realities and rights of most people.
More broadly, as a society, we must look to what unites us rather than the contemporary obsession with what divides us, which too often plays into the hands of our common foes and agenda’s that do not serve the common good, our rights or democracy. Closer to home, the creative industries are regressing at a concerning pace away for the golden era of post war socio-economic inclusion and thriving ecosystems of liberated creative output in multiple forms.
Attaching itself to this landscape is the social influencer, now viewed by society as the creative pioneer of today. However, the influencer by and large is not an artist or creative, but in a great deal of cases, simply a vacuous and malleable device for brands and corporations to speak through. Like an actor in a TV ad, but more sly, deceptively authentic, splurging the materialistic narratives of others to sell you more shit you don’t need or solutions you don’t really need to pay for. Artists deliver substance and their own visions through a magical process as ancient as humankind, influencers by and large do not. Influencers are largely an extension of commercial advertising, not art. If anything, more Warhol, who was just in it for the money and fame, than Picasso or any other great.
For the writer, author, artist, photographer, film maker, musician, producer, and so forth, for any artistically creative person, more than ever in our post war society, we must depend instead on a deep set of experience and skills in broader fields of work, beyond natural creative impulses, to grow careers. Keeping the essence of who we are and how we burn bright creatively in a parallel avenue of our lives. Keeping connected to our compulsion to create, to draw from our natural impulse and soul. I’m entering a phase where I need to keep the wolf from the door. The romanised life of the writer for most is sheer fantasy. I’m focussing on regaining a fair value exchange between work, my time, and the recognition and economic reward received. I need to re-establish the balance. I need to work in other forms, cross different lanes. Be agile. For many of us that means commitment to at least two avenues in order to both essentially earn an income, and when possible, reconnecting to the bright burning flame to attain a fulfilling life.
Every word Duncan. Quality of analysis higher than anything I've read in mainstream (guardian/NY times/Washington Post/online). Every line, true and right. Keep that fire going. Your focus as described is the contemporary version of a commercial model. Goldsmith's entrepreneurial program takes account of the SIDE-HUSTLE.