What "The Cuckoo's Calling" Means for Writers, Readers, and Rowling Herself

By now, almost everyone has heard of JK Rowling's 'new' book, a crime novel called "The Cuckoo's Calling" which was written under the name Robert Galbraith who just recently got revealed to be JK Rowling herself. I did a post denouncing all those who thought the 'reveal' of the name was a publicity stunt by either the author or the publisher. Look at the post here.

But now we'll go into the impact of it. Because of this big reveal, what has changed?

For Writers

Nothing has changed at all.

And I mean that. Other than the fact that now there'll be a mania behind "Oh gosh this debut might be Rowling in disguise!" (that might even help debut novelists!) nothing is different for us writers.

I respectfully disagree with the idea behind Nathan Bransford's post on the subject. (He, by the way, is a man I respect to a GREAT degree - such amazing knowledge of the publishing world.) Honestly, little has changed. It is not hopeless for debut novelists at all because that's not the fact. The facts are these:

1. Due to obvious reasons, JK Rowling did very little (and probably, no) publicity for this book, "The Cuckoo's Calling." No Twitter account or website was set up before the reveal, and only a few hundred books were signed (and that too, by a bookseller's request, not by Rowling's desire).
   
   And, most importantly:
2. Crime fiction, especially nowadays, is not a 'hot' genre at ALL, no matter how well-written the books may be.

Everyone is crying about the fact that the only reason this book shot up so high in sales is because of JK Rowling's name. Well. Yes. Exactly. No crap.

This is not doom for aspiring writers. 

According to Rowling herself (whose numbers I'll trust before any other's), the book sold about 8,000 copies across all formats in three months and received two film deals, before the book got revealed to be written by Rowling herself. That is INCREDIBLE for a debut, nothing to laugh at. 

Also, very little publicity was done for this book in the first place. The above numbers, coupled with this fact, should have writers rejoicing, especially because almost all writers nowadays are expected to do massive publicity for their own work to boost sales. Rowling didn't do that. It's almost obvious that the book wouldn't have sold hundreds of thousands of copies  (and it wasn't meant too, straight off the bat).

Even more so, very few people ever expect a crime novel to reach massive sales. It's all about the commercial draw of the novel, we know that. Crime fiction is a tough genre and a small one. Stieg Larsson's Millennium Trilogy ("The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo") is the only crime series I can think of, in recent times, to hit massive numbers. If the book never had a huge selling angle, I don't understand why everyone's crying that it didn't sell much. It was never expected to, not until the reveal happened and gave the book a selling angle - it was freaking JK Rowling. It's all about how commercial the novel is, and it's just logic that if the book is not commercial, it won't sell a lot. It's plain logic.

And as for all the great reviews it got, I'd wager to bet that I'd only be reading debuts for the rest of my life if I had to read every single book that got a review to the extent of "A scintillating debut," (a quote which so many articles are harping about, saying that "Look, this book was so good, but few people read it!"). 

It's a great review to get, sure; but not unique. Let's not over exaggerate here. "The Cuckoo's Calling" is no Millennium Trilogy (I know; I've started to read Cuckoo). It got great reviews. So did so many other debuts for many years, and yet now we're starting to complain about it. 

Books can be good or well-written and not sell. By definition, to sell, it must have a selling angle. It's all about the commercial aspect and, artistically speaking, it's not horrendous to leave out a roaring commercial aspect.

It is what we already knew.

For Readers

This is an interesting subsection.

Hands up. How many of us were avid crime-fiction enthusiasts before we bought a copy of "The Cuckoo's Calling"?  Unless you were, count me out of that group. I haven't even read the Millennium Trilogy. I'm no crime enthusiast unless you count CSI: NY and Monk (those shows are awesome).

But I bought the book. And I'm reading it now (I'm around page 180 as I write this now). And sure, I like it. But do I love it yet? No. Why not? Maybe because it's too early in the book, but maybe because crime-fiction isn't my thing.

JK Rowling might have adopted the name Robert Galbraith in an attempt to target her true audience - crime fiction lovers. (I think it'd have been AMAZING if Rowling had adopted a pseudonym for "The Casual Vacancy." I loved that book, like seriously I'm in love with it, and the main reason other people didn't like it is because they wanted a "JK Rowling/Harry Potter" novel.) 

Now the whole world is buying her crime novel. The only 1-star reviews on Amazon have popped up after the big reveal, and people who've never read a crime book in their lives are now reading this and expecting witches or something.

What does this say about readers? They should only read what they truly enjoy? Never embark on a new genre? Probably not.

But what it is saying is this: Know what to expect as a reader.  Read something because you love it, because you're interested in it. And if it's not something you'd usually pick up (like in my case with Cuckoo) exercise strong caution in determining whether you like or dislike the novel because of your own prejudices and/or expectations.

For JK Rowling Herself

Now HERE is where the big deal really is.

Instead of a doomed market for debuts, its a doomed market for "type-casted" authors. Ever wonder, truly, as to why Rowling wanted a pseudonym in the first place? Think about it. She would have gotten more money (and less backlash and hassle) if she published this book 'normally'. Why did she want to hide?

She wanted a fresh experience. A clean slate. Something to distance herself from the hoopla surrounding her name and get back to what she loves: writing. But she's so famous, so well-known, that it took just three months for the secret to be leaked.

Can an artist not work for herself? Is she always doomed to being the "Harry Potter" author? It's disgusting and revolting that she must always be compared in that light because she has so much more to offer. And a pseudonym would have helped her. But the fame that surrounded her name was just too much.

It's too hard to please everyone. I say, Ms. Rowling, that you go for another pseudonym and tell us all about it a year or so later, enough time for you to get a clean slate, and then time for us (please!) to read more of your amazing work. But it's all in your hands, as it should be (and sometimes, sadly isn't).

The world hasn't fallen for us writers at all, but what this whole experience has taught us is that we must be more careful as readers, and also that we must let artists be artists: experiment, be free, and not hassled.

Hope you enjoyed! Keep your heads up, writers, it's not hopeless for us.