Recently a writer I know remarked on his deep disappointment that so few people had shown up for one of his readings. He said he felt “pathetic” and mentioned low book sales.
I advised him to treat three attendees the same as he would have treated 300 and it would still be rewarding.
He agreed that he always mustered genuine enthusiasm for the audience no matter the size, but admitted that he did not feel as gratified when there were fewer attendees.
I would argue that size doesn’t matter. (Get your mind out of the gutter.) I’ve spoken to standing-room only crowds and to an audience of one. Both were satisfying, but in different ways.
When I read to a room full of people, there’s an energy there that rouses the performer in me. It’s fun to read the different expressions on the faces in the crowd. They give me cues as to how to proceed. It’s large-scale interactivity.
On the other hand, when I’ve had only one person show up to a reading, I find myself connecting on a deeper level with that individual. It’s only happened to me twice, but both times I did the same thing. I came out from behind the podium, pulled up a chair to face the visitor, and gave the reading. Afterwards we sat and chatted: small-scale interactivity, but very meaningful.
On one of these occasions the attendee told me that I was very likeable. It tickled her to death that I sat down with her to read and talk.
While literary readings are great opportunities to sell books, I don’t look at them as serving just that purpose. To do so is to diminish the importance of the spoken word.
Yes, I want to sell books. However, I also want to enjoy the shared social literary experience.
The act of reading a book is one of isolation and interpretation. When I’m allowed to read to an audience – even an audience of one – I insert myself into someone else’s world temporarily. And, hopefully, I provide clarity to the story. I give it a voice.
Neva Bryan, author of St. Peter's Monsters - a novel.
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 2
I understand your friend to be saying that a small turnout reflects poorly on him as a writer. I know what he (might) mean; I've been in that mind frame myself.
This past week I attended a small solo music gig. The turn out for this fellow who's won a Grammy with his band, who is an accomplished, awarded musician, was less than thirty people. That simply *cannot* reflect on him as a musician. So there truly are other factors in poor turn outs, which account for the lack of audience. Your friend (and me!) might remember that next time the audience doesn't measure up.
That said, I once gave a reading with two other readers and the only ones to show up were the three readers. We sat in a small circle and read to one another and discussed our work. One of the most memorable times in literature that I've ever enjoyed!
Audience attendance often depends on factors like weather, other events, and how well the event was marketed. If it's a sunny Saturday afternoon, I don't expect the room to overflow with people.
I think writers need to be realistic. At the same time, they should make every effort to market the event themselves and not rely solely on the host to bring in listeners.
Thanks for your insights!