One of the things I consider before starting on an author's stories is if they interact with there readers. I got spoiled by my favorite dead tree author having an active Facebook and fourm where he frequently interacts with fans and gives unpublished background on his universe's. My question for authors here is how do you balance the good of reader interaction with the constant trolls? Have you ever been close to stopping interaction and what keeps you going?
Well... it's been pretty well established in the modern era that authors who engage with their fans sell a lot more books than those who don't. It's basically a requirement if you're a professional. Hobbyists have more latitude.
I personally have very few trolls directly engage with me (one-bombing or leaving bad reviews is a different thing). So pretty much all of my interactions are pleasant, even if the reader doesn't like something about my story. It's easy to say, "oh, I'm sorry you didn't like that" and move on.
As for behind the scenes details--those are saved for my Reamstories subscribers.
I asked the same question to several moderately successful authors I am on good terms with and one responded in part that the part time author is dead. That to have a book published you not only agree to work on the next one, but spend set hours a week on promotion and fan interaction. She said she puts in far more hours now then when she was a high school teacher.
I think part of that is true, while part is not. There are part-time authors out there who are doing well. They're not all in 'traditional publishing,' though, but they do exist.
Promotion and fan interaction is part of the game, especially for traditional publishing, but there are traditionally published authors who limit that fairly successfully.
Some of it depends on where you're coming from and also where you're trying to get. Or, in other words, your definition of 'moderately successful.'
The very few extended interactions I've had with readers have all been positive. No trolls, but one reader told me about the time he'd seen his daughter topless in the pool and, given some of my stories, wondered if I had been describing real life experiences. I assured him that everything relating to sex and most of the nudity in my stories was entirely the product of my imagination. I have a very active imagination.
ETA I forgot to mention the reader early on when I was first posting "summer heat" stories who accused me of taking sexual advantage of my sister, evidently mistaking me for one of my characters
I've had plenty of readers reach out to tell me (politely) that I'd missed something regarding punctuation, or "this is how I'VE seen it happen," but the interactions have been overwhelming positive.
The negative feedback hasn't made me want to stop. The negative comments about how a character should be written, or how they stopped reading because a character had a normal, emotional reaction to an unexpected life experience produced the same reaction every time: "Oh? You don't like it? Go read something else, then. Or (shocking suggestion) go write something yourself."
I respond to every message I receive, and quite often, to comments. I also have an active Discord server.
I've never given a thought to stopping the interactions, and believe the only bad feedback is no feedback. As Dale Earnhardt put it — it's OK when they cheer and OK when they boo; it's when they're silent, you know it's time to hang it up.
I was writing a story with 2 main characters. They were teenage lovers and married each other while in college. I subsequently merged that story with another story and called it The Tasks, and both stories had two parts.
The plot included life after death with an individual's soul progressing through different levels of development, which I called dimensions, as they learned certain lessons. One character had to die and be elevated to the next level so they could provide guidance to the other main character. I tried to warn my readers of a major plot shift in my blog and a tragic occurrence in the next chapter to be posted.
Then, I killed off one of the two main characters who was a young, pregnant female. Of course, I didn't foreshadow her death by explaining the different levels a soul passed through. I brought her back into the story and explained the different levels of a soul's growth in the subsequent chapters.
After I posted the chapter in which she died, I got feedback from one reader who strongly identified with that character. She swore that she would never read anything I wrote in the future. I replied by explaining a bit of the story's plot about life after death. I don't recall ever hearing from that reader again.
The moral of my reminiscence is, you can't please all of your readers all of the time. Readers can provide feedback, but the author is in the driver's seat and is the one to drive the story to its destination.
After I posted the chapter in which she died, I got feedback from one reader who strongly identified with that character. She swore that she would never read anything I wrote in the future. I replied by explaining a bit of the story's plot about life after death. I don't recall ever hearing from that reader again.
I had a reader 'rage quit' after reading about a million words because I killed off a character. I tried to contact them, but they ignored the two messages I sent over the course the the following six weeks.
I did that, too, although my character wasn't a MAIN character... I don't think I had any readers abandon the story because of it, but I could be wrong...
But, I totally agree with you that the writer is in the driver's seat (cue the old Sniffin' the Tears song; "Driver's Seat..."), with gentle guidance from editors in my case... Read something else if you don't like where I'm going...
I did that, too, although my character wasn't a MAIN character...
When I kill, I mostly kill important characters. Every once in a while, it's an NPC, but in nearly every case, it's someone who has a major impact on the MC or those close to him.
Read something else if you don't like where I'm going
Or where you already went.
I got a low rating on a novel (3 stars) with a heading of "Married wrong woman" and a single comment of "Should have married Katie."
Read something else if you don't like where I'm going...
Replies: Michael Loucks Switch Blayde
I actually said this to someone who
a) said they skipped a lot of material
b) accused the MC of being someone he's not and of being severely mentally ill
c) ridiculed my response
I invited them to read something else. They'd already read 4,000,000 words by that point (if they actually read them).
I actually had a reader say my MC in one story would be better if she were an LGBTQ+ character...
Hey, wherever you find your happiness, but I'm NOT changing my entire story for you, especially since LGBTQ+ did not even EXIST when I started writing that story...
Hey, wherever you find your happiness, but I'm NOT changing my entire story for you, especially since LGBTQ+ did not even EXIST when I started writing that story...
I've had people write me to tell me how wrong X is in my story (where 'X' could be just about any issue) because they are insisting my 1970s/1980s characters think and behave the way people do in 2025.
There are days when I long for the 60s, 70s, and early 80s.
Star Wars on 8-Track...
We had a Winnebago Chieftan 27' motorhome in the early 70s (when gas was around 25¢ in California) with an 8-track player. We toured the country each summer, and I listened to dozens of 8-tracks from my dad's collection, everything from Herb Alpert and the Tijuana Brass to the Carpenters to Johnny Cash to Frank Sinatra.
Of course, then came the Oil Crisis…🤬
especially since LGBTQ+ did not even EXIST when I started writing that story...
There were very definitely gay men, lesbian women, bisexual individuals, transgender individuals, and people questioning their sexuality and/or their gender identity when you started writing the story. None of those are remotely new phenomena.
Edit to add:
Even if you started writing whatever story it is in the late 1940s, before Christine Jorgenson got reassignment surgery in 1951, the Cercle Hermaphroditos was founded in 1895 and Jennie June was publishing his autobiography in the early 1900s.
The term "transgender" may postdate the genesis of your story but that's just a quirk of language; the fact of identity is much older and the label has changed over time.
None of those are remotely new phenomena.
There is a difference between what you wrote (individuals struggling with/discovering their sexuality) and the entire LGBTQIA+ political/philosophical/social movement.
My best friend in JH and HS (74-81) didn't come out because it would have been life-threatening to do so.
I added an edit with more details, specifically calling out some specific historical touchpoints that I'm quite confident predate The Outsider's writing.
Edit: and if you want to say that the A is crucial to the argument, I'm equally confident that Public Universal Friend was doing their thing before The Outsider started writing.
I do appreciate you pointing out the salient points to me... (Provincetown, MA, was an open secret while growing up outside of Boston... No one in the state cared...)
I guess the main point (for me) is that I was absolutely NOT rewriting my entire story to cater to one reader...
I guess the main point (for me) is that I was absolutely NOT rewriting my entire story to cater to one reader...
Absolutely fair, and the correct call!
I added an edit with more details, specifically calling out some specific historical touchpoints that I'm quite confident predate The Outsider's writing.
Edit: and if you want to say that the A is crucial to the argument, I'm equally confident that Public Universal Friend was doing their thing before The Outsider started writing.
I think you missed my point entirely. I was NOT arguing that there were no individuals, I was arguing about the social/politica/philosophical movement AND the public expression we see now that was mostly closeted. You simply will not find, except in the rarest of instances, general public behavior similar to 2025 in the 50s/60s/70s.
And yes, having lived in Boston, I was aware of Provincetown, and in Chicago of Boys Town, but those were serious exceptions to the rule.
I was arguing about the social/politica/philosophical movement AND the public expression we see now that was mostly closeted.
I didn't miss your point, I just dismissed it as irrelevant. The assertion (as stated by The Outsider) was that they would not want to include an LGBTQ character in their story because LGBTQ did not exist at time of writing (an assertion which has since been walked back, cheers). Those identities absolutely existed at time of writing, and the fact that the modern philosophy came after is an interesting historical note but the philosophy isn't what's being debated.
Those identities absolutely existed at time of writing, and the fact that the modern philosophy came after is an interesting historical note but the philosophy isn't what's being debated.
Obviously, given I have plenty of them in my 70s and 80s stories.
The political movement is a very different thing, and when it's expressed as LGBTQ+, something basically unknown in the 20th century. It was LGB in the 60s/70s/80s.
It was LGB in the 60s/70s/80s.
My novel "The Breeder" takes place in the Old West in the 1880s. There's both a lesbian and a bi female character.
My novel "The Breeder" takes place in the Old West in the 1880s. There's both a lesbian and a bi female character.
My comment was on the distinction between LGB and LGBTQIA+
My comment was on the distinction between LGB and LGBTQIA+
I know. I'm simply going back further in time where it was less spoken about. I don't think they assigned letters back then.
The political movement is a very different thing, and when it's expressed as LGBTQ+, something basically unknown in the 20th century. It was LGB in the 60s/70s/80s.
You're the only one bringing up the political movement.
You're the only one bringing up the political movement.
Nope. Using 'LGBTQIA+' (or modern variations) IS political.
When somebody says "[the] MC in one story would be better if she were an LGBTQ+ character..." I disagree that this should be interpreted as an expression of the character's politics as opposed to their sexuality or gender identity.
When somebody says "[the] MC in one story would be better if she were an LGBTQ+ character..." I disagree that this should be interpreted as an expression of the character's politics
It would be an expression of the reader's politics.
It would be an expression of the reader's politics.
Acknowledging that something is a political, social, or philosophical issue is NOT taking a side.
The reader's politics are completely orthogonal to the question of whether or not transgender or bisexual or gay or lesbian individuals existed at the time of The Outsider beginning to write their story, which is the question that I was answering.
Edit: lmao god i hate this forum interface sometimes
It would be an expression of the reader's politics.
Indeed, otherwise the reader would have specified specific sexual orientation(s) rather than using the political campaign group alphabet soup.
AJ
Indeed, otherwise the reader would have specified specific sexual orientation(s) rather than using the political campaign group alphabet soup.
Yep
Anyone else notice that they have 2 designators for Male homosexuality?
Queer used to be a derogatory term for a homosexual man. But under the LGBTQ unbrella, it means something different.
It's NO different than when blacks attempted to claim the derogatory and utterly racist term "Nigger". Unfortunately, the racist backlash was overwhelmingly negative. However both the reclamation of 'Queer' and 'Gay' was, until recently, a resounding success.
But then, what else would you expect from the nation that Hitler patterned his entire Nazi republic after, fully expecting the USA to fully accept and champion his tactics, and was shocked when they refused to.
Yet another reiteration of the Hegelian philosophy of history, where any issue not fully resolved will continue repeating itself, until it is OR the entire nation collapses under its own oppressive history!
In short, for a long time, whites could claim whatever they wanted as the 'truth' and no one questioned it. Yet now, our new CIC attacks anyone who dares object to his baseless claims.
We've had a long run, yet Democracy has Never been a stable form of government, and it did work for a long time, but all good and decent things only last so long.
1) Q pulls double duty here, it represents both Queer and Questioning
B) "Queer" in this context is a broader umbrella than just referring to gay men, which is why it's included as a separate term.
According to Wikipedia (spit!):
The Stonewall Inn in the gay village of Greenwich Village, Manhattan, site of the June 1969 Stonewall riots, a landmark event in the struggle for LGBTQ rights in the United States, which opened the door for the advancement of LGBTQ movements worldwide.
AJ
which opened the door for the advancement of LGBTQ movements worldwide.
And yet, that SITLL didn't match what we think of as LGBTQIA+ in 2025. Which was my point.
What's right for one (group) should be equally right for all. You can't just arbitrarily pick one group for full rights while also rejecting everyone else, as that's the hight of hypocrisy—and why we're in such an utterly lawless quagmire today. With no accountability, there ARE no freedoms at all.
And I'm proud to NOT proclaim my name in this post, as it's pointless arguing a point when no one gives a damn about anyone but themselves. The few times I was stupid enough to, I was ruthlessly attack for simply having a point of view.
I am proud to admit my opinion anywhere else, just not HERE, as again, there just ain't no damn point to it.
What's right for one (group) should be equally right for all. You can't just arbitrarily pick one group for full rights while also rejecting everyone else, as that's the hight of hypocrisy—and why we're in such an utterly lawless quagmire today. With no accountability, there ARE no freedoms at all.
Once again, a non-sequiter. I did not, in any way, shape, or form, express the opinion you are excoriating.
The term "transgender" is new (i.e. recent) yet there are many cases, especially in the great western expansion (U.S.A.) when everyone ran from their families to seek their fortunes on their own terms. And among those were many women who took on male roles and were only 'exposed' after their deaths, though of course, their 'spouses' long knew the truth. Yet it was simply too dangerous revealing who you really were in those days.
There were also the male to female individuals, yet for whatever reason, they were fewer in number and they tended towards the more isolated communities (think Canada or Alaska's 'outback') where everyone depended on everyone else, so everyone know not to question other's histories. Only, in those cases, they tended to take on even more non-standard, polyamorous roles—where others were more comfortable covering for them—including safely during them when they eventually died, so their true identities were never uncovered during routine death investigations.
As noted, history is littered with such stories, yet those who've never searched for them, are always shocked when they eventually realize that every isn't exactly like them. After all, the wild American west were open to certain things, yet polyamorous relations were not accepted even there.
The moral of my reminiscence is, you can't please all of your readers all of the time. Readers can provide feedback, but the author is in the driver's seat and is the one to drive the story to its destination.
I have written a few stories. The inspiration for the three longest ones was either along the lines of
1) "What would I do differently if I took the basic concept of 'Story X' but gave it my personal touch."
or
2) "Let me focus on a side story in Story X"
I almost always respond to reader feedback or comments. I don't get a lot, probably because I'm a short-story writer, not an aspiring novelist, and I think readers are more likely to interact with more serious writers. I've never had a problem with trolls, even though I've noticed that when I post a new story, the first vote is often a '1', so I think there is somebody out there who doesn't like me.
Not quite the same thing, but I wrote a short, superhero story and killed the MC at the end.
People kept asking for the sequel and wanted me to do a "Miracle Max" rewrite. "Not completely dead, just mostly dead".
I've told this tale before but … in one post-apocalyptic series, I decided to kill every single character at the conclusion of the first of a three-novel series. The key is, the only way to pull of anything that extreme, you have to make ALL the characters fascinating, so rather than some minor tertiary character, everyone who dies must rip the reader's heart, as losing a favored character, regardless of their role, is a heart-breaking experience.
Yet due to that extra character development, my 'experiment' paid off in spades. Except, roughly a third a readers couldn't finish the first book, while the second third hated the story yet read it anyway, while the final third were SO captivated, they loved the story despite the many dead favorite characters.
However, whether the finished the first book, they ALL returned for the second, and the whole series ended up being one of my highest rated. The caveat to this—and there's always a caveat to these types of stories—is that the two protagonists who were the last to die in the concluding chapter, wake up again in the epilogue—which accounts for what happens after the story concludes. And thus, in the sequel, they learn that they've acquired immunity to the all-pervasive plague, which they spread as best they can, a single person at a time—treating one then leaving them behind to then treat everyone else surviving in the region.
And such a premise is literary gold, all due to the extra investment if extra character development for ALL the characters, however minor. Thus the protagonists remained the central protagonists, yet each survivor also became protagonists in they own lives.
Still, that's a technique you can ONLY use once, before it becomes hopelessly tiresome. As once readers anticipate characters are dying, they'll then know precisely what to expect, so in the sequels, they each died one at a time, in isolation not in large numbers. A typical reversal of expectations, so the continual deaths are simply teasers.
However, whether the finished the first book, they ALL returned for the second
I can say with absolute certainty that they didn't ALL return, and in fact that completely baffling decision to make the entire story pointless by killing off the entire cast is the reason that I haven't read any story you've posted since.
I can accept that, as again, it's the kind of 'social experiment' which many will object to. And by "All" I was inferring that rather than readers avoiding the sequels, I actually had a steadily building base. Though not knowing each and every person involved personally, there's no way to realize what the exceptions were.
Readers generally accept authors who take chances—especially if they put in the extra effort to help ensure they'll work, but clearly, some bridges are too far for even the most loyal of fans, which is why burning bridges is such a dangerous position to undertakes.
One quick question though, did you read the final epilogue, or did you quit midway through the multiple unfolding deaths, as the final epilogue is what explained the whole thing. So I was well aware that I was losing readers along the way, yet I kept most who had completed the series.
Though again, I've always stated that I write the stories which most challenge me, rather than the most popular stories or themes. And what's more challenging that killing every character?
So it was a very rewarding book to write, just to see where it finally led, though I'm also saddened to have lost you as a reader in the process. Yet, I've never written easy, comfortable stories, as I tend to focus on the 'least told stories'.
I have never been an author, but have been an active reader. Many years ago my personal life, through no person's fault, had become very depressing and intolerable. I could have easily have escaped by a single very dishonorable act, but other equally innocent people would have been hurt. I was escaping my reality by reading The author had written a character in an incredibly similar situation and all indications were he was going to turn evil. I sent a PM to the author explaining how similar my real life was. I let him know I realized it was fiction and his story to do with as he pleased, but I begged his to give the character an honorable path. I don't think he changed what he had planned for his character, but he encouraged me to continue to read. Eventually the character learned to live with his situation and grew into a person who could be respected. Through the help of some counseling and time, I too came to acceptance. In my live it took 10 years for the situation to resolve. It wasn't a happy resolution but it was an honorable one.
To all the authors who give so much of themselves I thank you, and that thanks is without regard to whether I like or appreciate any particular story. They are all fiction but don't minimize the impact you may have on your readers.
I don't know what I did wrong in my prior post as I tried to post a story link. But i the long underlined section of my comment links to the story I was referring to
I'm basically in the same boat as others. I greatly value interaction with readers (even if it's not positive) and expect that to continue. I haven't had much in the way of trolling and try to respond to all personal messages, and often in the comments section. At the point when I get Discord going, I expect to participate there.
I have not been close to stopping interaction and I don't expect to get to that point.
As others have said, sometimes the answer is 'By all means, read something that appeals to you' or 'The characters are the characters, and what they do is up to them.' Often people have good ideas, though, and I appreciate them. But the story, and the characters, are as they are. I write, first and foremost, for myself. I publish for the readers.