In 2010 I received an email from Antanas Sileika, a novelist and the director of the Humber School for Writers. Back in 1987, he read a New York Times Book Review essay which stated that the average age of a first-time published writer in the USA was 47. Antanas wanted to do a survey of writers in Canada to see if the age was similar and determine any trends of writing school influence among those published. He sent 1,547 email surveys and received 432 responses. The end result was “Who Publishes When: An Analysis of Writing and Publishing Statistics”, a study that revealed much more than the answer to that simple question. His findings were presented at the founding conference of Canadian Creative Writers and Writer Programs (CCWWP).
who-publishes-when-draft-4-2-copy
Some data:
Question 4: Age at Which First Book Published
20s – 7%
30s – 34%
40s – 36%
50s – 15%
60s – 7%
70s – 1%
Those who don’t publish until their late forties are well within norms. In fact, writers are twice as likely to publish their first book in their 50s rather than their 20s. The average age was 42.43 years, almost five years younger than the American figure. Assuming Canadian and American writers are similar, the average may be coming down a bit, but not by much. Antanas also found that the majority of writers (51%) had not studied creative writing in school. Only 8% had between 2 to 4 years (the amount of time it would take to complete a BFA).
Question 8: Years between First and Second Book
Not applicable: 21%
1 to 2: 37%
3 to 4: 17%
5 to 8: 16%
More than 8: 9%
The “Not Applicable” group is a little depressing, with 21% not publishing another book after the first. What happened there? Poor sales prevented the publisher from giving the writer one more chance? The writer was deeply wounded by the lack of critical acclaim and decided to quit? The writer ran out of tales to tell? The results suggest that if you don’t publish within two years of your first book, you may have missed your window. I’d love to see if the N/A category was greater or smaller in past years. If your first book doesn’t sell well, are you done?
Re the answer to the question of how many years after your first book was your second one published, and the answer being 21% n/a … technically, if the second book was published within less than a year, the answer would be n/a as well, so that’s a bit of a design flaw in the survey.
Speaking as someone who even from high school dreamed about writing The Great Canadian Novel, and who now 40 years later has never had a publisher accept or publish any of my books — well, at some level that’s a big fat failure, but at another level, well, I’ve actually completed 4 or 5 novels, and have various non-fiction projects at different stages of completion, and that’s got to count for something. I guess what I am saying is that if a person has had a publisher accept even just one of their books, and has published it, then goddamn it, that’s a success.
I tried to find to some other explanation, but yes, it does look like a flaw there. What would be a better way of handling that? Say 0 to 2 years? Add another category of 0 to 1 years? Now I’m curious to know if there are any 6 month gaps between publication in the N/A group. It seems unlikely, but it would be possible if someone had a number of projects in circulation. A writer in that position would probably check the 1 to 2 year box, knowing Antanas’ likely intention.
Yes, publishing even one book is a success. Speaking personally, I know that I will never be satisfied with whatever level of success comes my way. At least I know that in advance. The special torture reserved for those who publish one book is to feel elation on acceptance, optimism on publication, and despair when none of it goes anywhere.