Wow! What a thought-provoking and well put together post. I think you're right that the gatekeepers have simply shifted, and at least for me personally, I feel like the only way to proceed as a writer while keeping my sanity is staying true to my work and my vision, if at the same time finding ways to work with whatever changing tides/gatekeepers is going on as best as I can. But I will say, as a white girl I fully acknowledge that I haven't had to face some of the specific challenges and hurdles that many others face, and in my world of kid lit I'm really grateful for organizations like We Need Diverse Books (https://diversebooks.org/) that are doing great work to slowly but hopefully surely bring improvement and progress to the industry.
A thought-provoking post! I'm ambivalent about Gatekeepers. The proliferation of books that are being self-published does make it harder for an author to break-through, if you will. But I've seen a lot of books that just don't look very high quality and I would hope that readers who are discerning will be able to discern that. If people want to self-publish, let them. I probably won't read those books anyway. As someone who would like to be traditionally published and wears multiple minority hats, I know the odds are against me especially because I don't fit the popular tropes. So yes, Gatekeeping can also kind of suck. I'm still very early into my book-writing though, so I guess I don't really know.
I gotta say those stats are devastating. Those are not just stats in a post, those are actually words written with blood, sweat, and tears by Black people who had dreams that were never materialized and they never had a shot. Those stats weren't present during any of my training as a writer, as if my mastery of the craft was the only concern. So those stats are stunning. I'm not convinced the mob is the perfect judge of quality or value but I trust the mob more than the elites. Often the very idea elites have on quality is about exclusion, which is present in this very post. Why do writers care if their writing is next to less serious writing? It's such a present concern for serious writers, they've become gatekeepers too. But it's not a real concern. Why do writers care if the reader can't tell the difference between a gourmet meal and casual dining? For the industry it's about money, for writers it's ego. But both don't grow the overall industry, but lead to retraction. As long as White women refuse to see Black men as separate from White men and help Black men accordingly, away from their own stereotypes about Black men, then White women being in power, won't be helpful to Black men. Thank you for your piece.
Wow, really interesting insight, Andrew. Those racial stats jumped out to me too, and I had to do some double checking to make sure they were accurate and unfortunately they are. It is sad in so many ways and I truly hope things can improve drastically.
And your comment about the crowd vs the elites is a fair one. I also didn't consider the author also representing a gatekeeper. Really good insight!.
I’d like to think things are improving, or at least I hope they are. My personal library is so diverse (both in languages and race) that maybe I am more hopeful/ positive than I should be…?
Do you know if similar stats are available for 2000-present? 97% is a truly shocking number. But 2024 is a different world than say 1980. I’m curious if it’s improving.
Pen.org has a good report on these trends and while it’s improving it’s certainly still disproportionate. My thought being, as “elite” gatekeepers get less racist will that be reflected in the output of the publishing industry. The answer seems uncertain.
Kern, again I have to agree with you. I look forward to the day we actually disagree on something! ;) The problem with traditional gatekeepers as you noted is that they are biased and limited. But, they can also spot quality. I am a regular reader of the New Yorker. It’s rare that a short story I read in the New Yorker is less than excellent. But it is also a small clique of writers, almost impossible to penetrate. I think your chances of getting published in the New Yorker are something like 0.0000000001. On the other extreme you have those “influencers”/ “YouTubers” who have such a large following that they will have no problem publishing their book with a major publisher, even if the quality of the writing is atrocious! I have recently received such a book as a gift, published by Random House and wanted to throw it against the wall. The book had no originality, and was terribly written. I also never understood how a book like “Fifty shades of gray” took off the way that it did. I couldn’t get past the first paragraph. So yes, I think you are right. The gatekeepers have just changed. I used to think that Substack was the platform that cancelled journalists went to (seriously!) before I discovered that George Saunders was here, and then discovered the most amazing creative writers (you among them!) Now, I must admit that I don’t even know what BookTok is… so I obviously have a lot to learn…
Thank you for the additional insight, Kern. It helps to understand where balances have to be checked in my own understanding (-operating in a functional way).
My marketing and art direction skills are terrible, and I love doing editorial sessions with other people about my work. My traditionally published books have gotten exposure and have worked well because of that in ways my self-published work has not.
Great piece. Thank you for writing this. I definitely agree with the idea that the gatekeepers have just changed hats, and I don’t know if it’s in a way that democratizes or equalizes anything.
While “influencers” may have more freedom to follow their personal tastes, they will also be following their personal biases. And they are driven by the demands of the platform to produce content popular on that platform to maintain their relevance. So it’s just trading one set of capitalist forces for another.
This is such an insightful post - thank you! Trying to take an optimistic slant on this, I think they'll always be gatekeepers in some form or another, but hopefully talent will rise to the top, gatekeepers or not. As others have pointed out, the stats are shocking.
The gatekeepers are still here, they've merely shifted -- this is a powerful observation.
I also think there's a lot to be said about the way that old and new gatekeepers conspire to keep new writers out. Publishing is an industry, and the decisions publishers make ultimately come down to money. It's expensive to print a book, and publishers need to bet on future bestsellers to keep their operations afloat. One of the best ways to do that is to print what you already know will be popular. This means chasing trends and signing contracts with authors who already have a huge social media following.
In this sense, many authors have to pass through two gates. First, they have to build an audience. Then, they need to woo a publisher. So yes, while the system has become more democratic in some ways, it's become more difficult than ever in others.
Wow! What a thought-provoking and well put together post. I think you're right that the gatekeepers have simply shifted, and at least for me personally, I feel like the only way to proceed as a writer while keeping my sanity is staying true to my work and my vision, if at the same time finding ways to work with whatever changing tides/gatekeepers is going on as best as I can. But I will say, as a white girl I fully acknowledge that I haven't had to face some of the specific challenges and hurdles that many others face, and in my world of kid lit I'm really grateful for organizations like We Need Diverse Books (https://diversebooks.org/) that are doing great work to slowly but hopefully surely bring improvement and progress to the industry.
A thought-provoking post! I'm ambivalent about Gatekeepers. The proliferation of books that are being self-published does make it harder for an author to break-through, if you will. But I've seen a lot of books that just don't look very high quality and I would hope that readers who are discerning will be able to discern that. If people want to self-publish, let them. I probably won't read those books anyway. As someone who would like to be traditionally published and wears multiple minority hats, I know the odds are against me especially because I don't fit the popular tropes. So yes, Gatekeeping can also kind of suck. I'm still very early into my book-writing though, so I guess I don't really know.
You may be early into writing, but you are a writer with an opinion and I'm glad you shared it, Rafia.
Thank you, Kern! I appreciate that!
I gotta say those stats are devastating. Those are not just stats in a post, those are actually words written with blood, sweat, and tears by Black people who had dreams that were never materialized and they never had a shot. Those stats weren't present during any of my training as a writer, as if my mastery of the craft was the only concern. So those stats are stunning. I'm not convinced the mob is the perfect judge of quality or value but I trust the mob more than the elites. Often the very idea elites have on quality is about exclusion, which is present in this very post. Why do writers care if their writing is next to less serious writing? It's such a present concern for serious writers, they've become gatekeepers too. But it's not a real concern. Why do writers care if the reader can't tell the difference between a gourmet meal and casual dining? For the industry it's about money, for writers it's ego. But both don't grow the overall industry, but lead to retraction. As long as White women refuse to see Black men as separate from White men and help Black men accordingly, away from their own stereotypes about Black men, then White women being in power, won't be helpful to Black men. Thank you for your piece.
Wow, really interesting insight, Andrew. Those racial stats jumped out to me too, and I had to do some double checking to make sure they were accurate and unfortunately they are. It is sad in so many ways and I truly hope things can improve drastically.
And your comment about the crowd vs the elites is a fair one. I also didn't consider the author also representing a gatekeeper. Really good insight!.
I’d like to think things are improving, or at least I hope they are. My personal library is so diverse (both in languages and race) that maybe I am more hopeful/ positive than I should be…?
Nope, stay positive but vigilant!
Do you know if similar stats are available for 2000-present? 97% is a truly shocking number. But 2024 is a different world than say 1980. I’m curious if it’s improving.
I didn't find a study for those precise years, but will do some more research and share once I do.
Hang on. I’ll look it up myself.
Pen.org has a good report on these trends and while it’s improving it’s certainly still disproportionate. My thought being, as “elite” gatekeepers get less racist will that be reflected in the output of the publishing industry. The answer seems uncertain.
What does seem to be the case is as more people of color become elite gatekeepers, more books by people of color get published.
Sorry for all the zillions replies here!
This is true. No worries about the zillion comments. They are all appreciated.
True… and sad.
I think you’re mostly right, Kern. The gatekeepers have shifted but, I’d say the gates are in different locations, too.
Well put! The gates do seem to be indifferent.
Kern, again I have to agree with you. I look forward to the day we actually disagree on something! ;) The problem with traditional gatekeepers as you noted is that they are biased and limited. But, they can also spot quality. I am a regular reader of the New Yorker. It’s rare that a short story I read in the New Yorker is less than excellent. But it is also a small clique of writers, almost impossible to penetrate. I think your chances of getting published in the New Yorker are something like 0.0000000001. On the other extreme you have those “influencers”/ “YouTubers” who have such a large following that they will have no problem publishing their book with a major publisher, even if the quality of the writing is atrocious! I have recently received such a book as a gift, published by Random House and wanted to throw it against the wall. The book had no originality, and was terribly written. I also never understood how a book like “Fifty shades of gray” took off the way that it did. I couldn’t get past the first paragraph. So yes, I think you are right. The gatekeepers have just changed. I used to think that Substack was the platform that cancelled journalists went to (seriously!) before I discovered that George Saunders was here, and then discovered the most amazing creative writers (you among them!) Now, I must admit that I don’t even know what BookTok is… so I obviously have a lot to learn…
Thank you for the additional insight, Kern. It helps to understand where balances have to be checked in my own understanding (-operating in a functional way).
My marketing and art direction skills are terrible, and I love doing editorial sessions with other people about my work. My traditionally published books have gotten exposure and have worked well because of that in ways my self-published work has not.
Great piece. Thank you for writing this. I definitely agree with the idea that the gatekeepers have just changed hats, and I don’t know if it’s in a way that democratizes or equalizes anything.
It's odd to say that but it may also be true, right? So much to think about.
While “influencers” may have more freedom to follow their personal tastes, they will also be following their personal biases. And they are driven by the demands of the platform to produce content popular on that platform to maintain their relevance. So it’s just trading one set of capitalist forces for another.
Love this take!
This is such an insightful post - thank you! Trying to take an optimistic slant on this, I think they'll always be gatekeepers in some form or another, but hopefully talent will rise to the top, gatekeepers or not. As others have pointed out, the stats are shocking.
Yes, optimistic view indeed, Miranda. I share your optimism though!!
The gatekeepers are still here, they've merely shifted -- this is a powerful observation.
I also think there's a lot to be said about the way that old and new gatekeepers conspire to keep new writers out. Publishing is an industry, and the decisions publishers make ultimately come down to money. It's expensive to print a book, and publishers need to bet on future bestsellers to keep their operations afloat. One of the best ways to do that is to print what you already know will be popular. This means chasing trends and signing contracts with authors who already have a huge social media following.
In this sense, many authors have to pass through two gates. First, they have to build an audience. Then, they need to woo a publisher. So yes, while the system has become more democratic in some ways, it's become more difficult than ever in others.
Sorry, Rafia. Your comments were be more credible if you didn’t use jargon (a thing) and knew the difference between ‘fewer’ and ‘’less’.
Regards,
Jesse Cohoon