Love this post. I don't know of any other industry that extracts so much unpaid time (and guilt) from the people who provide the work. Maybe the music biz, but then musicians generally aren't encouraged to be good musical citizens. I am especially offended by the idea that writers also need to be book promoters. Shy and introverted… yeah, we make the best marketers. The amazing thing is that both publishers and writers buy into this nonsense.
All good points! I wonder why this is so too-- I think all good writers must be introverts at a fundamental level, for writing always comes from 'within', be it mind or soul. And when one looks 'within' so much, it's easy to become insecure I suppose. Then too, like politicians and actors, we scribes have egos too and crave recognition--and so we tend to sell ourselves cheap.
But in the end , we have the last laugh, for how many humans can ever claim to having their words/thoughts transcend time and space?
Ah—I was thinking about this very thing this morning. I have been practicing literary citizenship for years—unpaid managing editor of a small literary journal, unpaid reader for journals, free workshops, free Substack that promotes books, free newspaper columns on books for inland So Cal newspaper group. And more, but you have the idea. And I have a novel launching today from a small press. So this week, I’ve pretty much talked only about myself and that book. And this morning I thought, “Oh, crap, if someone new comes to my socials, they will think I only care about myself and am a bad literary citizen.” Way too much in my head.
Yeah, Victoria, self-love, as in taking care of self, is not egotism, but as important as loving another self-- and I don't think you can really have one and not the other.
My advice: just put your work out there and let it sail the ocean of time, going wherever it will go, which is always beyond the writer's control.
Congrats on the book! And I say: screw people who jump to quick conclusions and enjoy judgement! (Though I know the thoughts zooming through our heads aren't easily convinced that we are indeed good.)
This quote-“ Instead, the publisher just pays a small author royalty…It’s a win-win, right?’” Exactly what’s wrong with the system- squeezing every bit of work they can out of writers so they can make more money.
I totally agree with you. & some don’t have the ability to do all the extra work because they are sick or work 2-3 jobs or are caring for a loved one & working full-time etc etc. It’s another class issue.
I'm not sure I heard of Literary Citizenship before. It definitely smacks of obligation and retribution. I prefer the softer "sense of community", it's less binding and implies a measure of choice. I believe in supporting writers I like and need the push, lifting one another up - emphasis on "one another". That's where choice comes into play, community volunteering cannot suffocate one's own work.
If you are doing it correctly, "community volunteering" does not "suffocate" your own work. Instead the gratitude of other writers can bring goodwill & open doors. On Saturday, June 21st, I was one of the readers (on ZOOM) to launch a new poetry zine. Realizing there were numerous poet-scientists in attendance, I mentioned a well-paid opp for writer-scientists and poet-scientists with a June 30th deadline and asked if they were aware of it. NO ONE HAD HEARD of this no-fee call that is quite well paid - - so I sent the link to this group. * * * Literary citizenship is appreciated. * * *
I was telling that to myself ... I tend to accept too many requests for writer friends and pack my schedule to bursting. I love them dearly ... I just need to come up for air sometimes!
For me, my "literary citizen" tactics are not generated by "requests." But, yes, I can see how such a thing would crowd the day. But keep in mind that any request goes TWO ways; here's your opp to ask for a favor, too. (big smile)
“Literary citizenship” seemed to come up from under the concept of “exposure” that dominated during the 2000s; well after my patience for the concept had been completely wiped out. At that point, I had decided to take my writing into academia—which wan't the best move either. However, I did discover I real passion for teaching—where livable job prospects have also dropped into the gutter, and institutions would prefer to employ adjuncts instructors for what amounts to hourly wages competitive with work in fast-food.
Fast food employees and adjunct instructors both deserve a great deal more for their time and labor.
I’ve never believed in working for free, and I don’t accept being told that what I’m hired to do is only fraction of my job. At the same time, there was no one around to help me contextualize the environment of the literary community, or academia. The pervasive impression that tends to rule is that commitment is all or nothing in self-driven roles; that if you’re not braking your back, you’re not going to make any progress; and that everyone else is finding success by doing the things that you can’t—because you still need to maintain a life, as well as your health. The zero-sum approach of success and stability. Filling in the gaps, and finding the will to get more involved, has meant coming to understand how much of the culture surrounding creativity, inspiration, and “genius” is mythology, and not reality.
Making more friends in the literary sphere early on would have been more beneficial to me than blindly pursuing a nebulous imperative to establish better “contacts,” and network until I couldn’t close my wallet for all of the vanity business cards. And no one explained to me that showing up is 90% of any professional role—not doing 90% of the work (for free) while other people in the room “appreciate” your efforts. In fact, being too dependable, and too available was was a quick way to become invisible—and taken for granted. Certainly no one flagged that personal boundaries are essential, while granting free access to your time and energy is essentially putting yourself on-call.
In any social context, citizenship is part of a tacit social contract—and that can only function through cooperation. Opportunists aren’t the people that take on disproportionate amounts of work—they’re the ones who know that someone else will, if they don’t raise a finger. The biggest problem I see again and again, is how the middling ranks don’t call bullshit—when that’s what makes the biggest difference.
No told me that. No one demonstrated it. I would have been more inclined to participate in active forms of “literary citizenship,” before now, if more people had been willing, or confident enough, to get together and name exploitation for what it is, and draw attention to expectations that are unreasonable or unacceptable—or, how most people constantly feel like they are a) failing to live up to unachievable standards, and/or b) unhappy when they see naïve over-achievers being taken for a ride. Like so many areas that count as collective life, cultures of silence are often what do the most harm.
As a former adjunct myself at a couple of colleges, I can surely relate--I felt like the 'n-word' of academics in the way we where treated-- no offices, crap pay, and virtually unseen by the tenured profs--yet we semi-slaves did most of the teaching load!
But then the world has always been divided between the givers [majority] and takers [evil minority]!
As many know, being the change in the world I wish to see in the form of my own personal way of literary citizenship & stewardship is something that I'm all about. There are many good points in this piece about writers getting to focus on being writers— which is what I want for most writers.
For me, literary citizenship is about participating in the literary community. Attending readings. Subscribing to select lit mags. Engaging with members. Registering for workshops. Supporting other writers and even reviewing/promoting their work.
For me, it is NOT about marketing my own work which to me is a contractual obligation. I suck at marketing my own work, despite the fact I'd been an MBA'd marketing director in a large high-tech company for decades. A publisher refused to pay for me to attend a major conference as a panelist, and I didn't have the money to pay for it myself. As it turned out, I lost my mobility and had to pull out anyway.
As an introvert who as a child couldn't even sell Girl Scout cookies that sell the themselves, I find it very difficult to market my own chapbook though I wrote myself a marketing plan.
I did some readings locally at bookstores and libraries, got an article in the local Review magazine that covers arts and entertainment, had the publisher send books to possible reviewers but didn't get any hits. I had planned to send press releases to libraries and newspapers and bookstores in other towns I lived in over the years but winter blues hit. I always post on social media but am very limited on which I use. I am a member of my state poetry society and local group. The literary citizenship was to compile and edit the group's 50th anniversary anthology.
Check out my website jeanneblumlesinskiwriter.com for a description of Tethers End and my other work. The site needs to be updated to reflect work published shed in 2025.
Barbara, sorry to hear that you lost your mobility which made you lose out on attending the conference. Sometimes there are grants and stipends for such career opps via Poets & Writers, Poets House, etc. etc. One of the benefits of Literary Citizenship is in its contagiousness. One day you are boosting the books of 3 writer friends - - and the next day 8 writers are doing you a good turn by reviewing your book, boosting your work on social media, asking you to send an audio to their podcast, letting you know about a submission opp you overlooked, etc. This is the gift that keeps on giving - - not unlike the porridge pot in the fairytale. :-)
What authors owe lit mags is high quality work. No more, no less. If a publisher wants their endeavor to be popular and profitable, they need to be the drivers of that. And additionally, they need to broaden readership outside of the insular community of writers, a task which is ill-suited for writers, especially given that most of us already have day jobs.
Great post. The first time I heard the term "literary citizenship" was (recently) in grad school, from a very well-known, beloved poet whom I greatly respect. I wondered if the beloved poet had to do a lot of good literary citizenry before they became a famous poet. I know this poet has worked very, very hard and sacrificed a lot to pursue their chosen vocation. However, it was a different time when they were starting out as a poet and writer. There were far fewer MFA programs (and degree holders), far fewer aspiring poets and possibly far fewer aspiring prose writers--at least fewer who expected to actually be published in their lifetime. I wondered if the beloved poet realized that, today, being a "good literary citizen" is all that most of us can ever aspire to. They probably do know that--they are literally a genius. I am no expert, but I sense that there is a problem with the balance of supply and demand in our literary magazine industry. More writing is supplied than readers demand. Who wants to change this? Could we, if we even wanted to? I hope I don't get too beat up over this in the comments cuz I am just noodling here--but without patrons (god knows we don't have enough of them in any form), what else could we possibly expect?
Well apparently what literary citizenship means for me is that I end up doing various technical, skilled jobs for my press that not that long ago someone who worked for a book distributor was paid to do. It's no one's fault, but the situation sure does make me wonder how working in publishing got to the point of such extreme de-monetization of skilled work. Meanwhile the apps and middlemen (Substack, Submittable) seem to be sucking up plenty of funds. But actually publishing books--just enough to break even. I dunno. I have no immediate solution. I know the situation is just as bad if not worse in music but that's hardly reassuring...
Thanks--this is a very interesting post. And you really nail it toward the end, in reference to being attentive to the needs of others: "This is not only true of succeeding as a writer. It is simply true of succeeding as a person." This is the crux of the matter. And however worthy many of the particulars of being a "literary citizen" are, if they're wrapped up in an exploitive mind-set, it all too easily bleeds into being a literary politician.
A lot of being a good literary citizen in the writing community seems to be based on inauthenticity toward fellow writers, using superlatives for example to describe the commonplace. In fairness, I think a lot of people these days (not just writers) don’t have the experience to know how much more exists. We all grow. Still, if all is extraordinary, then nothing is.
These days it’s more about the author and their perceived level of involvement with the community than it is about the author’s work. But it’s more than just any involvement; it’s involvement of a kind that meets the status quo expectations of the community. Those who see though the cracks in the façade – and especially those who point out the cracks – aren’t that welcome.
We used to like dissidents. And we still do, to some extent. Thankfully. But there’s been a movement toward conformity, not just in one’s work that shouldn’t diverge too much from what the factory workshops sell, but in one’s viewpoint to what it means to be a writer.
Man, you nailed it! It is, and always has been the work itself that matters-- every creator is human , and so flawed, but their work can echo 'perfection', rarely perhaps, but that is what makes it immortal. The enemy of that has always been the censorious mindset, demanding conformity to its particular ideology, from the Roman emperors to the Inquisition to the Marxists to now the p.c. police and tomorrow? Same ogre, different name....
"overwhelmed by obligations with not enough time and attention on your own writing"
This pretty much says it. That and the fact that most writers don't have the skillset to promote their writing, which is why there used to be nurturing editors and agents in the first place. Those are the people who have the skill to promote books. But their jobs have changed, and expecting writers to do what editors and agents, etc. were trained to do kills the imagination, and you don't have writers anymore. You have self-promoters who don't have time to write.
One of the things I've learned about literary citizenship is that we have to be willing to accept what people can offer in terms of free labor, even if it's not what WE are offering or could offer.
There are some people who can work a day job and still write and volunteer for literary organizations. I know they still feel the strain of doing these things--but they physically can. It's wonderful that they do.
I'm self-employed as a freelancer in order to have enough flexibility for my neurodiversity and physical conditions. However, that means I can't do certain things for free *most* of the time because I need to do those things for a living; there's a finite number of things I can execute, and doing them for free means I can't adequately make that living. (The medical conditions plus being single means that "living" number is suddenly a lot harder to reach.) It feels like it also matters whether someone is in academia or not-- whether they might get a grant for their travel somewhere or get "service" points or a tenure boost.
I have been so, so, so honored when people ask me to blurb my book-- and, I've only made the deadline to offer said blurb twice, even when I try really hard. It's just too much of the same type of work I'm already pushing to complete in my business. But, I have a writer friend who is brilliant and wonderful and supported by a lawyer husband. She's able to adjunct without worrying about the pay and participate in more unpaid work in the literary world. I fully support this and am grateful that some folks have the resources to move more flexibly through this difficult industry of ours. Literary citizenship depends on people coming together from where they are, and therefore it can't look the same for everyone.
Thank you for this brilliant essay. For articulating the reasons for the ambivalence I have long felt. For those of us with scant time and $ it has always felt burdensome.
Love this post. I don't know of any other industry that extracts so much unpaid time (and guilt) from the people who provide the work. Maybe the music biz, but then musicians generally aren't encouraged to be good musical citizens. I am especially offended by the idea that writers also need to be book promoters. Shy and introverted… yeah, we make the best marketers. The amazing thing is that both publishers and writers buy into this nonsense.
All good points! I wonder why this is so too-- I think all good writers must be introverts at a fundamental level, for writing always comes from 'within', be it mind or soul. And when one looks 'within' so much, it's easy to become insecure I suppose. Then too, like politicians and actors, we scribes have egos too and crave recognition--and so we tend to sell ourselves cheap.
But in the end , we have the last laugh, for how many humans can ever claim to having their words/thoughts transcend time and space?
Nolo, and yet all the ":introverts" are speaking up today. (big smile)
Ah—I was thinking about this very thing this morning. I have been practicing literary citizenship for years—unpaid managing editor of a small literary journal, unpaid reader for journals, free workshops, free Substack that promotes books, free newspaper columns on books for inland So Cal newspaper group. And more, but you have the idea. And I have a novel launching today from a small press. So this week, I’ve pretty much talked only about myself and that book. And this morning I thought, “Oh, crap, if someone new comes to my socials, they will think I only care about myself and am a bad literary citizen.” Way too much in my head.
Please link your book! Congratulations!
Thank you! I’m very happy today. The book is “Keep Sweet” about a girl in a polygamist cult. https://bookshop.org/p/books/keep-sweet-victoria-waddle/22405594
Yeah, Victoria, self-love, as in taking care of self, is not egotism, but as important as loving another self-- and I don't think you can really have one and not the other.
My advice: just put your work out there and let it sail the ocean of time, going wherever it will go, which is always beyond the writer's control.
Congrats on the book! And I say: screw people who jump to quick conclusions and enjoy judgement! (Though I know the thoughts zooming through our heads aren't easily convinced that we are indeed good.)
❤️
This quote-“ Instead, the publisher just pays a small author royalty…It’s a win-win, right?’” Exactly what’s wrong with the system- squeezing every bit of work they can out of writers so they can make more money.
I totally agree with you. & some don’t have the ability to do all the extra work because they are sick or work 2-3 jobs or are caring for a loved one & working full-time etc etc. It’s another class issue.
I'm not sure I heard of Literary Citizenship before. It definitely smacks of obligation and retribution. I prefer the softer "sense of community", it's less binding and implies a measure of choice. I believe in supporting writers I like and need the push, lifting one another up - emphasis on "one another". That's where choice comes into play, community volunteering cannot suffocate one's own work.
If you are doing it correctly, "community volunteering" does not "suffocate" your own work. Instead the gratitude of other writers can bring goodwill & open doors. On Saturday, June 21st, I was one of the readers (on ZOOM) to launch a new poetry zine. Realizing there were numerous poet-scientists in attendance, I mentioned a well-paid opp for writer-scientists and poet-scientists with a June 30th deadline and asked if they were aware of it. NO ONE HAD HEARD of this no-fee call that is quite well paid - - so I sent the link to this group. * * * Literary citizenship is appreciated. * * *
I was telling that to myself ... I tend to accept too many requests for writer friends and pack my schedule to bursting. I love them dearly ... I just need to come up for air sometimes!
For me, my "literary citizen" tactics are not generated by "requests." But, yes, I can see how such a thing would crowd the day. But keep in mind that any request goes TWO ways; here's your opp to ask for a favor, too. (big smile)
Yesss! to every word here. Thank you.
Marjorie, gratitude as a practice opens new doors. Best wishes to you!
“Literary citizenship” seemed to come up from under the concept of “exposure” that dominated during the 2000s; well after my patience for the concept had been completely wiped out. At that point, I had decided to take my writing into academia—which wan't the best move either. However, I did discover I real passion for teaching—where livable job prospects have also dropped into the gutter, and institutions would prefer to employ adjuncts instructors for what amounts to hourly wages competitive with work in fast-food.
Fast food employees and adjunct instructors both deserve a great deal more for their time and labor.
I’ve never believed in working for free, and I don’t accept being told that what I’m hired to do is only fraction of my job. At the same time, there was no one around to help me contextualize the environment of the literary community, or academia. The pervasive impression that tends to rule is that commitment is all or nothing in self-driven roles; that if you’re not braking your back, you’re not going to make any progress; and that everyone else is finding success by doing the things that you can’t—because you still need to maintain a life, as well as your health. The zero-sum approach of success and stability. Filling in the gaps, and finding the will to get more involved, has meant coming to understand how much of the culture surrounding creativity, inspiration, and “genius” is mythology, and not reality.
Making more friends in the literary sphere early on would have been more beneficial to me than blindly pursuing a nebulous imperative to establish better “contacts,” and network until I couldn’t close my wallet for all of the vanity business cards. And no one explained to me that showing up is 90% of any professional role—not doing 90% of the work (for free) while other people in the room “appreciate” your efforts. In fact, being too dependable, and too available was was a quick way to become invisible—and taken for granted. Certainly no one flagged that personal boundaries are essential, while granting free access to your time and energy is essentially putting yourself on-call.
In any social context, citizenship is part of a tacit social contract—and that can only function through cooperation. Opportunists aren’t the people that take on disproportionate amounts of work—they’re the ones who know that someone else will, if they don’t raise a finger. The biggest problem I see again and again, is how the middling ranks don’t call bullshit—when that’s what makes the biggest difference.
No told me that. No one demonstrated it. I would have been more inclined to participate in active forms of “literary citizenship,” before now, if more people had been willing, or confident enough, to get together and name exploitation for what it is, and draw attention to expectations that are unreasonable or unacceptable—or, how most people constantly feel like they are a) failing to live up to unachievable standards, and/or b) unhappy when they see naïve over-achievers being taken for a ride. Like so many areas that count as collective life, cultures of silence are often what do the most harm.
As a former adjunct myself at a couple of colleges, I can surely relate--I felt like the 'n-word' of academics in the way we where treated-- no offices, crap pay, and virtually unseen by the tenured profs--yet we semi-slaves did most of the teaching load!
But then the world has always been divided between the givers [majority] and takers [evil minority]!
As many know, being the change in the world I wish to see in the form of my own personal way of literary citizenship & stewardship is something that I'm all about. There are many good points in this piece about writers getting to focus on being writers— which is what I want for most writers.
For me, literary citizenship is about participating in the literary community. Attending readings. Subscribing to select lit mags. Engaging with members. Registering for workshops. Supporting other writers and even reviewing/promoting their work.
For me, it is NOT about marketing my own work which to me is a contractual obligation. I suck at marketing my own work, despite the fact I'd been an MBA'd marketing director in a large high-tech company for decades. A publisher refused to pay for me to attend a major conference as a panelist, and I didn't have the money to pay for it myself. As it turned out, I lost my mobility and had to pull out anyway.
As an introvert who as a child couldn't even sell Girl Scout cookies that sell the themselves, I find it very difficult to market my own chapbook though I wrote myself a marketing plan.
Thanks for sharing this. What kinds of activities are in your marketing plan?
I did some readings locally at bookstores and libraries, got an article in the local Review magazine that covers arts and entertainment, had the publisher send books to possible reviewers but didn't get any hits. I had planned to send press releases to libraries and newspapers and bookstores in other towns I lived in over the years but winter blues hit. I always post on social media but am very limited on which I use. I am a member of my state poetry society and local group. The literary citizenship was to compile and edit the group's 50th anniversary anthology.
What's the name of the book and what are its themes?
Check out my website jeanneblumlesinskiwriter.com for a description of Tethers End and my other work. The site needs to be updated to reflect work published shed in 2025.
Barbara, sorry to hear that you lost your mobility which made you lose out on attending the conference. Sometimes there are grants and stipends for such career opps via Poets & Writers, Poets House, etc. etc. One of the benefits of Literary Citizenship is in its contagiousness. One day you are boosting the books of 3 writer friends - - and the next day 8 writers are doing you a good turn by reviewing your book, boosting your work on social media, asking you to send an audio to their podcast, letting you know about a submission opp you overlooked, etc. This is the gift that keeps on giving - - not unlike the porridge pot in the fairytale. :-)
What authors owe lit mags is high quality work. No more, no less. If a publisher wants their endeavor to be popular and profitable, they need to be the drivers of that. And additionally, they need to broaden readership outside of the insular community of writers, a task which is ill-suited for writers, especially given that most of us already have day jobs.
Great post. The first time I heard the term "literary citizenship" was (recently) in grad school, from a very well-known, beloved poet whom I greatly respect. I wondered if the beloved poet had to do a lot of good literary citizenry before they became a famous poet. I know this poet has worked very, very hard and sacrificed a lot to pursue their chosen vocation. However, it was a different time when they were starting out as a poet and writer. There were far fewer MFA programs (and degree holders), far fewer aspiring poets and possibly far fewer aspiring prose writers--at least fewer who expected to actually be published in their lifetime. I wondered if the beloved poet realized that, today, being a "good literary citizen" is all that most of us can ever aspire to. They probably do know that--they are literally a genius. I am no expert, but I sense that there is a problem with the balance of supply and demand in our literary magazine industry. More writing is supplied than readers demand. Who wants to change this? Could we, if we even wanted to? I hope I don't get too beat up over this in the comments cuz I am just noodling here--but without patrons (god knows we don't have enough of them in any form), what else could we possibly expect?
Well apparently what literary citizenship means for me is that I end up doing various technical, skilled jobs for my press that not that long ago someone who worked for a book distributor was paid to do. It's no one's fault, but the situation sure does make me wonder how working in publishing got to the point of such extreme de-monetization of skilled work. Meanwhile the apps and middlemen (Substack, Submittable) seem to be sucking up plenty of funds. But actually publishing books--just enough to break even. I dunno. I have no immediate solution. I know the situation is just as bad if not worse in music but that's hardly reassuring...
Thanks--this is a very interesting post. And you really nail it toward the end, in reference to being attentive to the needs of others: "This is not only true of succeeding as a writer. It is simply true of succeeding as a person." This is the crux of the matter. And however worthy many of the particulars of being a "literary citizen" are, if they're wrapped up in an exploitive mind-set, it all too easily bleeds into being a literary politician.
Amen!
A lot of being a good literary citizen in the writing community seems to be based on inauthenticity toward fellow writers, using superlatives for example to describe the commonplace. In fairness, I think a lot of people these days (not just writers) don’t have the experience to know how much more exists. We all grow. Still, if all is extraordinary, then nothing is.
These days it’s more about the author and their perceived level of involvement with the community than it is about the author’s work. But it’s more than just any involvement; it’s involvement of a kind that meets the status quo expectations of the community. Those who see though the cracks in the façade – and especially those who point out the cracks – aren’t that welcome.
We used to like dissidents. And we still do, to some extent. Thankfully. But there’s been a movement toward conformity, not just in one’s work that shouldn’t diverge too much from what the factory workshops sell, but in one’s viewpoint to what it means to be a writer.
Man, you nailed it! It is, and always has been the work itself that matters-- every creator is human , and so flawed, but their work can echo 'perfection', rarely perhaps, but that is what makes it immortal. The enemy of that has always been the censorious mindset, demanding conformity to its particular ideology, from the Roman emperors to the Inquisition to the Marxists to now the p.c. police and tomorrow? Same ogre, different name....
I don't know. I don't bother with it beyond mentioning and linking to the successes of friends. Outside of that I got nothing.
"overwhelmed by obligations with not enough time and attention on your own writing"
This pretty much says it. That and the fact that most writers don't have the skillset to promote their writing, which is why there used to be nurturing editors and agents in the first place. Those are the people who have the skill to promote books. But their jobs have changed, and expecting writers to do what editors and agents, etc. were trained to do kills the imagination, and you don't have writers anymore. You have self-promoters who don't have time to write.
One of the things I've learned about literary citizenship is that we have to be willing to accept what people can offer in terms of free labor, even if it's not what WE are offering or could offer.
There are some people who can work a day job and still write and volunteer for literary organizations. I know they still feel the strain of doing these things--but they physically can. It's wonderful that they do.
I'm self-employed as a freelancer in order to have enough flexibility for my neurodiversity and physical conditions. However, that means I can't do certain things for free *most* of the time because I need to do those things for a living; there's a finite number of things I can execute, and doing them for free means I can't adequately make that living. (The medical conditions plus being single means that "living" number is suddenly a lot harder to reach.) It feels like it also matters whether someone is in academia or not-- whether they might get a grant for their travel somewhere or get "service" points or a tenure boost.
I have been so, so, so honored when people ask me to blurb my book-- and, I've only made the deadline to offer said blurb twice, even when I try really hard. It's just too much of the same type of work I'm already pushing to complete in my business. But, I have a writer friend who is brilliant and wonderful and supported by a lawyer husband. She's able to adjunct without worrying about the pay and participate in more unpaid work in the literary world. I fully support this and am grateful that some folks have the resources to move more flexibly through this difficult industry of ours. Literary citizenship depends on people coming together from where they are, and therefore it can't look the same for everyone.
Thank you for this brilliant essay. For articulating the reasons for the ambivalence I have long felt. For those of us with scant time and $ it has always felt burdensome.