Three little words

The recent story of Vicky Ball (48), the British author, whose success went viral after she tweeted about her sales at a marketing event, was touted around the maintstream press as a good news story. And on the surface, it is. A struggling author published by a small press, who suddenly hits the sales jackpot. What’s not to like? Within hours, Vicky’s post on X, which expressed her delight at having sold just two copies of her book at an authors’ event at the Galleywood Heritage Centre in Chelmsford, England, had attracted more than 24 million views and 745, 000 likes. As a result, her 2020 novel, Powerless, written during the Covid lockdown, began selling like hot cakes on Amazon.

Powerless, a thriller “with lots of twists”, shot up the Amazon besteller charts hitting number 3 on its teen and young adult fiction list. ( As a guide, to win an Amazon best-seller badge, you’d need to sell somewhere between 3,500 and 5000 copies within 24 hours.)

I don’t begrudge Vicky Ball her success. Really, I don’t. Who could not be cheered that this middle-aged teacher and creative writing student at the University of Essex has been catapulted into the literary big time in such a gloriously unexpected manner? (Although I am reminded of the words of that great American cynic, author Gore Vidal, who declared “whenever a friend succeeds, a little part of me dies”.)

But what’s really being celebrated here? Not Vicky Ball’s talent as a writer. Unless you count the power of these three words – “sold two books” followed by two grinning emojis – to transform her writerly reputation and her fortunes.

Perhaps it’s evidence of the amount of goodwill that still exists on social media that moved thousands of people to buy a book by an unknown author out of sympathy for her poor sales record. (Endearingly, Vicky Ball said she wasn’t feeling sorry for herself when she posted her X message: “I’ve done some events where I haven’t sold any.”)

We’ve all cheered at those David and Goliath stories where a small publisher gets an author on to a prestigous prize list, beating off competition from the behemoths in publishing, or those unlikely word-of-mouth successes where readers influence the success of an overlooked book by simply passing it on to their friends. But Vicky Ball’s sudden elevation has nothing to do with her work. It has to do with the power of social media. The only difference in this case is that it worked for the good not the detriment of its target.

By responding to Vicky Ball’s plight – one similar to many self-published authors or writers published by small presses – the social media public was recognising the sheer hard graft involved. These are writers who not only have to create the content i.e. write the books, but they have to be their own marketing and PR agents, and they often have to sell the books, one copy at a time. It’s a side of publishing that’s rarely spotlighted.

Vicky Ball has become the standard bearer for that tribe. But she’s only one. There are thousands who will never get the random stroke of good luck she has. I’m not arguing against her massive boost in sales. But my reservations are similar to the argument against giving money to beggars on the street. Your coin may help the person with her hand outstretched but it does nothing to counterbalance the inequities of the system that got her there.

Vicky Ball is exactly the same writer she was three weeks ago before all this happened to her. The only difference is that she has attracted the mercurial attention of social media and it, not her work, has “infuenced” her transformation into a marketing success.

Good luck to her!


	

5 thoughts on “Three little words

  1. isn’t it interesting how this change in the marketing of fiction throws or might throw the entire apparatus of the publishing industry into chaos. Human sentiment expressed as a ‘like’ upsetting the established order along with the critical and social apparatus that has been an essential part of the fiction industry. ‘Value’ is nowhere mentioned. Your post does not mention it. Is that element to be considered later or not at all?

    Like

    1. Thanks for your comment, Barry. I’m not sure what you mean by “value” here. I suppose the point I was making was that X followers identified or empahtised with Vicky Ball’s situation, rather than responding to her work.

      Like

  2. For me, this story is a downer because finding readers shouldn’t be a matter of sympathy and luck. The lone writer’s quest for readers has always been a lottery but the odds were better when publishing houses had “slush-piles” of unsolicited typescripts and it was someone’s job to sample them. Sometimes these typescripts were returned with helpful and actually rather encouraging rejection letters. I was thrilled when my first novel was picked up by a new feminist publisher, but that was only the start of another lottery: paperbacks from small imprints were not “considered” on the literary pages of newspapers and magazines.  Now it’s a different story, and it’s the same story. The internet and laptops have done away with the drudgery of typing and copying, as well as the expense of posting typescripts with paid-up SAEs, And the things I learned as a magazine copy-editor, and the advice received in friendly rejection letters, are accessible through creative writing courses. I’m told that the small and independent presses are sometimes open to submissions from common writers, and there are loads of open online competitions. But getting a start and finding readers who aren’t your friends and relations is still a lottery.

    Like

Leave a reply to Bridget Sprouls Cancel reply