AnLog In is "the composer of a literary work, as distinguished from a compiler, translator, editor, or copyist," while aLog In is "... an author " I suppose that what makes one different from the other is that the author has beenLog In (and I don't think 'paid-per-post to a website' normally counts, as that sort of publisher doesn't usually read your writing before paying you). And that answers my main question (at least for new publications): whose writing costs more to 'the end-consumer' (that's us)? Because 'buying a new book,' you're paying the retailer who paid the publisher who paid the author-&/or-writer(s); second-hand/used books, it really depends on 'what you want the book for.' A reasonable assessment?
I get what you say about author being paid by a publisher and a writer can possibly be someone who paid to get published (self-publishing or POD), BUT...what about those that consider themselves "authors" because they have a book a publisher published for them and paid THEM for it...that they never really wrote, because they used a ghost writer. So this "author" is making this money when they cant even put together a sentence properly. LOL But, I dont think one costs more than the other. From retailer bought book, they all get their royalties, but a secondhand book you're helping out other people that werent involved in the process (this also depends what kind of thrift store or whetever you're getting it from).
I usually see a writer as someone who writes articles or as a hobby but has no published books. Once they have published books, no matter how they're for sale, I think they're authors. I do think that books by the big name authors with publishing houses are worth SLIGHTLY more than unknown Indy authors just because the editing is better and you know the quality level of what you'll be getting. Indy authors that I've read and liked their work previously are worth as much to me as the big names though.
This is my opinion as well. Once you get published, I think you're already considered as an author. As for the word "writer", I think it's just a general term for anyone who writes.
I use the words interchangeably. Author = Writer. Hardly matters though these days since anyone can be an author but not everyone can be a writer. I admit though, that since printed books tend to be more expensive, a book by an "author" will be more expensive but whether s/he [eventually] makes more money than a writer who publishes their book online and sells it as an ebook, is debatable.
Exactly. Some indie books I've read online are a pretty good story plot-wise. But then when I am really into it some bad writing will snap me back into the real world. I hate that. And one of these authors has won some awards for these books (local awards or not, the writing should've been taken into consideration). What I've noticed is that printed books are not always more expensive than their digital counterparts. Which to me makes no sense, except that maybe they want a fair chance at selling their tangible book. I always thought that when ebooks became more mainstream they would be cheaper because there is no actual publishing involved.
The words are interchangeable, but an author creates an original piece of work, where a writer can edit or summarize an article. People can be both depending on what they are doing. Journalists call themselves writers until they have written a book, as they write articles, yet their work is still considered an authorship. Does it matter who pays you? You can write and not get paid, but that doesn't mean you are not a writer. Some people write for free or contribute in exchange for something.
That's because the respective 'producers' have each "planted" those names in your mind ... the same reason theater-owners buy a lot of movies---because people fly to familiar headliners like moths to a flame. Log In,Log In it's the other way around (the first link is my main source for the blog at the second, where I'll compare the two 'etymologies' (word-histories) ... 'when I gets `round to it'). The word "author" (I haven't even researched the roots yet) somehow seems to carry more authority, while "writer" just sounds like a 'journal-keeper' ... kinda like the difference between a composer & a song-writer.
That's definitely true. Some of the really big-name authors I end up STOPPING reading them because their series seems to have gone on too long or seems repetitive to me. A few of the long-term big names seem almost lazy about new books to me. That's disappointing and if I'm disappointed by one of their books, I stop reading them. There are a lot of people though who will keep picking the books up because of the name, even when the stories aren't as good anymore.
It really doesn't matter which book is more expensive. Whether it's a book written by an author or a writer, the terminologies do not directly affect my choice because the content is what I'm after. If you're talking about the merits of independent publishing and the setbacks of traditional publishing, it's hard to pinpoint which option is more profitable. Independent authors would still have to shoulder the initial cost of publishing and marketing and then cross their fighters they'll get a good ROI. Advantage: they get 100% of their royalties. As for traditional publishing, authors don't get 100% of their royalties but the publishing company pays them prior to publishing their work. Setback: they receive their royalties only after their book sales hit a certain threshold.
