These ducks are swimming AND scratching.
Okay, dearest readers, we’ve all heard the saying a thousand times before. You scratch my back, yada, yada, yada. Now sometime around the moment that political correctness reared it despicable head, people started preaching that we shouldn’t be doing things with an expectation of getting something in return (i.e. scratch others without any demand of reciprocal finger digging).
On the surface, this seems like a relatively benign (and even honorable) notion. It evokes images of giving to charities, or to others in need, from a place of compassion and not expectation. Of course we should all feel that way about giving, we think. The greatest human beings to ever grace our planet—Jesus, Mohammad, Gandhi, Mother Theresa—certainly they did not give to humanity expecting something gifted in return.
But I think the creators of the Back Scratch Theorem (not to be confused with Cat Scratch Delirium, which is brought on by listening to too much Ted Nugent) had an agenda. I think these were the same type of twits that expect good, hardworking authors to read their book, peruse their blogs, and retweet their profundity, but have no real intention of doing the same for you. Try this twist:
Scratch my back at your own risk of emotional damage.
Now, now, before you get all righteous on my behind, hear me out.
Horses. God love 'em.
I’d honestly love to read the blogs (and books) of every author I meet. I try. I really do. And I also do my best to filter my tweet stream so that those authors, followers, etc. that I appreciate aren’t swept away unnoticed in the raging flow of Twitter River across my Hootsuite screen.
I sign up for most blogs that are advertised my way. I read at least an entry or two. I comment.
The thing is, I don’t have the time. It pains me, but I just cannot read every post by every author I’d like to. I can barely keep up with my tweets, retweets, DMs, and emails while trying desperately produce a few more books and blog posts to be ignored. Yes, yes, I know the legends of these people who never sleep. I also know most of them turn psychotic after a while.
So I’ve needed to develop a criteria; I’ve had to decide how to weed out those diligent writers who deserve to be read.
Where to start? I can almost hear you asking.
Not really. I give my readers far more credit than that. (In fact, I was recently told that I needed to realize that readers were savvy. Nothing, and I mean nothing in the past couple of years has offended me so much as that condescending implication. I adore my readers. All five of them. And I do EVERYTHING for them. I know readers are savvy. I know it as well as anyone. ‘Nuff said. </rant>, for all you HTML geeks.)
Suffice to say that I realize, dear readers, you have already connected the dots.
(And if you haven’t, I forgive you. And I still think you are savvy. Maybe just a little slow on the uptake.)
Mutlual pleasuring does not have to be dirty.
Back to the criteria. When I notice a trend—not a fluke, or an anomaly, or a freak occurrence—rather, a definite pattern of me signing up, reading, tweeting, and retweeting your books, blogs, tweets, posts, and grand epiphanies, only to find nothing but crickets each time I take the stage at Rob’s Red-Hot Blog and Tweet…well, to quote Shakespeare:
“I’m done with ye.”
Or maybe that was Ben Franklin.
Either way, I’m guessing that doesn’t sound too unfair. When you have to start weeding, begin with the weeds.
So I suppose I was relatively content with my choices, is what I’m saying. Then my good old friend, Ego, started whispering in my ear.
Who exactly ARE these people? Do they think they’re BETTER than you? Do they know how easy it would be to FIGURE OUT WHERE THEY LIVE?
These primates have the right idea.
Nah, I’m kidding. My ego never thinks anyone is better than me.
But this is when I started thinking about the old saying about back scratches. That saying makes a certain amount of old-school sense. None of this narcissistic, self-centered, egomaniacal twisting of reality that basically means “My back expects all the attention. Yours can pound sand.”
I think a pretty selfless guy also once said, with profundity:
“Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”
Kind of the same principle, but it depends on which side of that coin you flip. I say this:
If you don’t do unto others as you expect they’ll do unto you, you’re an A-hole.
And it really would be easy to figure out where you live.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The blank page is dead…long live the blank page.
Like all things, there are multiple competing pressures.
My system works something like this:
1. I’m not going to scratch your back (promote your book) just because you scratch my back (promote my book) if your book is crap. Because that’s wrong. It’s not fair to readers, and I’m not going to compromise my sense of right just because someone has done me a favour. That’s bribery, isn’t it?
2. If your book is good, then I may well promote it if I have time (even if you don’t promote mine) and it would be nice if you returned the favour, but if you can’t, that’s OK (in an ideal world).
3. However, we don’t live in an ideal world, I can’t promote everyone, and if I have to choose between two people who both have good books, and one has promoted me and the other hasn’t… Well, it’s a simple choice, isn’t it?
The problem doesn’t arise in doing good and helping people out even if they don’t help you. The problem arises in lack of time and resources. We need to allocate our time and resources to the poeple who are most important to us, who are probably going to be the people who help us out as well (because we like them or it’s a good investment).
Harsh but true. Like I said, in an ideal world I’d promote everyone… But it’s not ideal, is it?
If I had asked for someone to give my book a good review, or support it in any unethical way, your point would be well taken. I did not. I spoke of support through reading people’s blogs who give yours support, commenting (positively or negatively), retweeting things other than tweets that promote you,’ etc. My writing and my book will stand on it’s own merit. This is one writers opinion about others who tweet obsessively about their own interests; not about people with no time to share.
If you go back and read my 5,000 tweets over two months, you will find me supporting my fellow writers—not giving dishonest reviews or otherwise demeaning myself. I comment only that, yes, the world would be a much better place if people were less self-centered and self-promoting only.
I love the fact that you commented, regardless of your stance. That is all that was talked about above. Not bribery. You’ve added a word and a concept that I don’t endorse. If you read my blog or my book and don’t care for it, you should say so. Honestly. As you have here. Nowhere did I call out for dishonesty or lack of principle or anything of the sort. You injected that.
If you took it that way, my writing missed its intention with you. Beyond that, I stand 100% behind what I wrote. And I thank you sincerely for reading my blog and voicing your opinion. ツ
Hi Rob
I always enjoy reading your spin on things. You are very honest and heartfelt in your views. Keep up the good fight! I am always happy to give scratches to those I feel deserve it. If it is deserved it feels good to do the scratching. I don’t ask for my back to be scratched. I believe in the adage “What comes around goes around” and if it is meant to come around it will.
I don’t think that the “I’m done with ye.” quote is from Ben Franklin. He was a big proponent of back scratching and insisted that he got where he was by being congenial to others.
Thanks so much, Kellianne. Sorry it took so long to respond. I suppose it’s a good thing when you are getting enough comments (and being busy with other writing-related activities) that it takes a while! 😀 I’m sure you know, but I was joshing about the whole “I’m done with ye” quote. That was definitely King Arthur of Camelot. 😉
Hi Rob,
I liked your message in this post. I agree that we can’t be all things to all people and although it would be nice to be able to devote all our time and attention on every person that would like us to, it’s not always possible due to life’s priorities and limitations.
Like you, I tweet and blog about others and want to make good connections not because they can do for me but because we can do (promote and support) for each other along the way. As such, I’m not just taking, I’m also giving.
As for the rest, just keep doing what you do and the rest will fall into place 🙂
Becky
Hi, Bec. Thanks for commenting, my friend. I know what you are saying, and of course I will keep plugging. I am more interested in seeing others do for others in general, not just for me. I realize when we blog we can’t help but sound self-serving (and I DO get frustrated with my own lot), but ultimately I just wish there were more supporters out there for all writers. I think it is happening, BTW. Slowly. But I see it. And it gives me great hope!! 🙂
Rob,
Savvy huh? I did not know it had two “v’s”. Am I now “one of the five?”
I’ll take that.
Having dealt with people in the world for many many years in face to face sales, I’ve learned one valuable point in my 46 years on this planet: People lie.
I’ve done what I can for you Rob, and will continue to do so, I hope others would be so kind as to do the same.
Luck brother, all the luck in the world to you. And choose your friends wisely…
Yes, Dan-O, they do. Unfortunately. And I lot of people spend 100% of their time on themselves. My theory is, no matter how much free time you have, assuming you have SOME, you give a little to others. Plain and simple. Does it come back to you? I think it does. But it can take a while! BTW, you’ve always been one of the five. And one of the seven. 😀