Amazon.com first started selling used books in 2002. It was a huge success. By 2004, 67% of used books sales were online–a higher percentage than any other product category. (Only 12.7% of new books sales were online.)

The Author’s Guild urged its members to de-link Amazon in protest…

I never said anything of the sort, friend. I said this:

1) I like it when people read my books, no matter how they get it. If I were worried about libraries, I wouldn’t have given away one of my upcoming books on my website free for download.

2) I like it when people buy hardbacks. People have written me emails asking why hardbacks cost so much. I wrote this article as a response. I told them to buy paperbacks if they like them–that’s fine! But, the reason in my business we publish hardbacks is because they’re what make the money.

3) Paperbacks make money for people in my sub-set of the business, but hardbacks are what drive the market. (My market being thick fantasy novels.) We have a smaller readership than a lot of other genres, and many authors are supported solely from their hardback sales, with paperback sales mostly being a form of promotion for the next hardback.

Word of mouth is very important, and we love it when people check out our books from the library. I have no complaint with that. I apologize if my article is confusing in this regard.

actually, according to Sanderson, all libraries should be banned since they are stealing authors’ money…
honestly, I’m not an expert in the publishing business, but if paperbacks hurt authors that much, why don’t they simply refuse to publish their books in paperback?
for instance, musicians lose hell a lot of money when their CDs are illegally copied, but they can’t help it. book authors can do that!

I find myself backed somewhat into a corner! In my last comments, I suggested that as a writer I want to do what the readers wish of me. And yet, you–as a reader–suggest that what YOU want is to stay out of the process and not influence me. And so, we enter an infinite loop. Perhaps there’s a science fiction story in that somewhere…. :)

On a more serious note, I do find that the more I discuss this topic, the more I think that you have a point. The last thing readers need is to be beleaguered by sob stories from authors. I wasn’t intending to sob (I’m actually quite humbled by how well my own books have been doing, all things considered, and am quite easily able to make a full-time living as an author right now. Believe it or not, most of the reason I wrote this essay had to do with seeing the sales numbers of some authors I respect, and wishing they were better supported by the community.)

However, I don’t realistically think I can approach a subject like this one in the way I once did, when I was unpublished. The simple truth is now that I make my money from this profession, I’ve lost my ability to speak about something like this with any sort of assumption of objectivity. And so, all I end up doing–despite intention–is make readers feel bad about the books they ARE purchasing.

In short, well argued. Bravo.

You wrote: “I do find that fascinating concept. But in the system of patronage, don’t you the writer owe something to the reader beyond just the writing? In the old days of benefactors, there appeared to be obligations that the benefactee would have to endure in order to keep the patronage.”

I think, indeed, there are things which the author owes to his or her readers. The system is much less formal than the classical example we’ve been using, but I do think that the readers have a right to certain courtesies. For instance, I think that we authors should finish the series that we start, and should do our best to meet deadlines so that readers don’t have to wait too long between installments of a trilogy or series. More importantly, I think we should treat readers with respect–as you are, essentially, our employers.

There are authors who decide they do not want to have much of a public image, and I think this should be respected. However, if an author decides to become a public figure–such as by, say, publishing essays on their blogs–then I believe they should be ready to accept criticism. To post on the internet, where things are much less formal, is to invite discussion, comments, and the sharing of ideas.

A writer such as myself can’t, therefore, complain when someone notices an opinionated blog post he has made, then makes their own opinionated blog post in response. Books are, generally, faceless–and criticism of books should rightly focus on the book and not the author. However, essays and blog posts are personal. By making them–as has been noted in comments–an author exposes himself or herself up to personal criticism. I think that it’s only fair to expect this, and be willing to accept it and not take personal attacks. . .well, too personally. If that makes any sense.