Whether you're writer or a dustman, these days a lot of us spend our time dabbling about bit on the interwebz. It can be a great place to be or a bit of a dark gaffe altogether. It all depends.
One thing that I've sussed out so far is that it can be quite important for a writer to have a decent social media game. Some agents/publishers allegedly won't even consider you if you don't have a certain number of followers. Who knew?
Not I, said the fly. The whole idea is to make as many pals as you can, build a following and flog some books along the way. Talking of books, here's my series so far...
But it got me thinking, how different things are now for writers, in many ways, compared to the greats who were writing in the past. Some things are obviously very similar. You write a book. Look for an agent and submit it to a publisher if you're going the traditional route. Or self-publish as an indie writer. As Proust & Beatrix Potter both did.
At this stage, I have a confession to make. I love reading biographies of writers. Maybe it's because I'm nosy or I want to learn something about the context in which they wrote their great works? Maybe it's both? I like to think, I maybe know them slightly better. That's codswallop of course but it did set me to wondering how great writers from the past would've fared on Facebook, Instagram or Twitter?
I have a feeling that Poe or Wilde would've been great at it, with their undoubted charisma and memorable one liners.
I imagine that their follower counts may have zoomed through the roof, as they regaled all and sundry with their tales of nights on the town or alleged literary tiffs. How would Shakespeare have got on or The Brontës, who seemed to have been far more reserved and private? Emily, especially, I imagine, may well have hated it.
All of these thoughts are ,of course, mere wonderings of mine and I've absolutely no clue at all how any of them would've got on with tweets, writers lifts and piccies on Instagram, but it's quite fun imagining, isn't it?