Crowdfunding: Connecting Creators and Patrons

My current one is totally failing to get off the ground. Several people have expressed interest in reading it, but nobody's willing to put in the $10 to get it started. I think it's because I offered the starter the right to tell me some of how to do it, and nobody had ideas.

From:

Maybe. However, another possibility is that you may have readers with money, and readers with ideas, but nobody with both.

I think one thing that makes my Poetry Fishbowls work is anyone can give me a prompt, even if they're broke; and anyone can sponsor a poem, whether they inspired it or not.

From:

Thanks. I'll adjust the rules, I think, to try it that way.

From:

Glad I could help!

If you PM me once you've made that change, I will give you a prompt and pimp your project on my LJ.

From:

Thanks! I'm going to think through details and get it going tomorrow, I think. I'll send you a ping about it once I do.

(deleted comment)

From:

Understood. It was originally run through my own journal, which is mostly read by people who do know my writing; I thought I'd toss it onto crowdfunding just in case someone was interested.

From:

The community is here for networking. Sometimes it works, other times not, but we never know until we try.

I don't mind giving away ideas. I have plenty to share. Some of the ones that I get are not even to my taste.

Something that would be fun for a CFC website would be an idea bin, where anybody could leave some ideas or take some.

(deleted comment)

From:

I've scheduled a post about it over on "Hypatia's Hoard of Reviews." Thanks for the tip!

From:

stonetalker.livejournal.com

I'm too new to crowdfunding to really understand its nuances, however my guess would be to agree with pocketnaomi, that very often people that have the time and the interest in this sort of thing don't have the money, and vice-versa.

Cyberfunded activity is a fairly new idea around crowdfunding (probably because the cyberworld really only opened up mainstream this last 10 - 20 years), but I don't think crowdfunding is that new a goose.

When I think of crowdfunding, I think of two very different styles. I think of the busker or the artist with his tip jar, who is going to do what he is going to do, and hope that people appreciate it enough to throw money into the coffers. Then there is the stripper, who peels off a bit more with each donation that is made (I can think of other analogies, but that one works the quickest ).

I suppose 'free samples' come under crowdfunding, too, in a way. Many a time I've been at a folk festival, and someone's been selling a delicacy. They've given away samples, in the hopes that people will like what they've done and come back to make a purchase. I can remember times when I 'have' liked the free sample, but not had enough money (or desire) to buy the full cake, so several of us pitched in, then divided the cake up and had it with tea. Reflecting on this, we did this 'a lot' with cakes, cookies, fudge, savories... I don't know why it wouldn't work with cyberfunded ideas. Maybe it's just 'too new' at the moment, especially with things like _Facebook_ and _Limewire_, even emails and many websites completely free.

Just my 2c worth (and probably worth 2c haha).

From:

>>Then there is the stripper, who peels off a bit more with each donation that is made (I can think of other analogies, but that one works the quickest ). <<

*laugh* That is SO apt! Long live the stripfic!

Actually, another example would be Scheherezade, who told stories with a cliffhanger each night to avoid being executed.

shadesong calls her journal "Scheherezade in Blue Jeans."

>>I can remember times when I 'have' liked the free sample, but not had enough money (or desire) to buy the full cake, so several of us pitched in, then divided the cake up and had it with tea.<<

I think this experience is what fed into the idea of microfunding the epic poems, which are often too expensive for one person to buy so people team up and fund them collectively. I have several of these currently open for donations, with new verse being revealed as they are funded.

From:

My story "Oysters, Pearls and Magic".

Many have expressed interest in reading it. A lot of verbal/textual feedback. But no donations (except one darling soul who did).

What went wrong? I am not sure. I have people telling me that they do read, but they are so busy. So the current/common reason I get is "Busy". Or the second one: "Lack of cash".

From:

Busy/broke applies to me too. Those are common reasons people have given for missing my poetry fishbowls, come to think of it.

From:

Not to sound snarky, but I feel that the "I am busy"/"I am broke" excuse has been used too frequently. It seems to me like a convenient fallback response. "Oh, sorry! I miss your ____. I was busy!/broke!"

To me, the least people could go is to give feedback. At least, I know they are reading.

From:

Fair enough. I do try to give feedback.

For a while, though, my computer has been getting slower and slower; it jams for minutes at a time and makes it very difficult for me to accomplish even the minimum of stuff I need to do. I can't really afford a new one. So that's seriously undercutting my ability to participate in LJ and other stuff. It's really frustrating.

From:

I suspect the reason it's so frequently used is because it's true. :)

The fastest way to drive away an audience is to make them feel like hostages to an artist's ego. Our readers aren't here to validate us; we're here to give them something.

That's got to be enough. Because for 99% of the time we're working, that's all the satisfaction we'll get.

From:

I am wondering aloud here, feel free to ignore if I am a little offside. :)

To me, there is a certain degree of give-and-take when it comes to art or writing or any creative projects. Our audience doesn't have to validate us, but as artists/writers/creative people, we have to know that our art is indeed working and not just in a vacuum. Art doesn't exist in a vacuum.

What if we keep on giving? What's our reward? True, satisfaction is one. But what else do we get?

Just thoughts. I have to attend my daughter's Primary One registration/orientation session.

From:

I think you have a point. Most people have things they want to get out of writing, beyond just the satisfaction of having done it. You have to understand what it is that you want and how you plan to get it. But you can't demand that people give it to you, or you'll drive them away. You have to do your job well enough that they want to help you meet your goals, whatever those are.

From:

But you can't demand that people give it to you, or you'll drive them away. You have to do your job well enough that they want to help you meet your goals, whatever those are.

Just so. It is not your right to extort their cooperation or interest. And praise given under duress is worthless.

From:

I don't think we necessarily get anything else.

That's my point. It's not about what we want. It's about what happens, most of the time.

My art advisor teaches a required course at the art college for all outbound students called "Real World", where he attempts to prepare them for the realities of working as an artist. One of his key points is that ours is a culture that does not appreciate art; it understands the value of it implicitly (no one wants to live in a world without music or books or movies or tv or graphic design or art), but it doesn't know how to express that valuation, nor does it really care to learn, all that much. So to survive as an artist, something else has to keep you going, because if you need external validation you're going to run into your first dry spell and decide, "Heck with this, I'm going to do something else."

"Artists," he likes to tell me, "are survivors. If they're still making art in this culture, it's because they're tough."

So while theoretically I agree with you, that it's nice to get something more directly connecting from your audience, in practice if you can't go without it, you will stop making art.

From:

>>I don't think we necessarily get anything else.<<

I think we should, because other professions do. But people seem to feel free to take creative material without giving anything in return. That attitude contributes to many problems in the industry, such as publishers holding onto writers' money. Professionals get paid. If they're not, that's a problem.

From:

>>The fastest way to drive away an audience is to make them feel like hostages to an artist's ego.<<

That's true.

>>Our readers aren't here to validate us; we're here to give them something.<<

I think there needs to be a balance. Most creative people don't enjoy it if their audience just mooches and never gives anything back -- although "give back" can be anything from linky love to comments to cash to whatever else people think up. And online, many audience members enjoy having some kind of interaction with the creative folks they admire.

>>That's got to be enough. Because for 99% of the time we're working, that's all the satisfaction we'll get.<<

There are different aspects to bear in mind. Some people write because they have to, whether or not they get anything else. Some people write and want to make at least some money from it. Some people write because they want attention; they may not care about cash, but feedback sends them into squeeing gales of glee. Some people write for the sheer fun of it, and just enjoy sharing it with friends, whether or not anything else is forthcoming.

It's important for each person to know why they write, and why they choose the subjects and genres they do, and what their goals are. If you don't know those things, you can frustrate the heck out of yourself and everyone around you. But those aren't necessarily the same things for everyone; what fuels one person's engine may be unusable or insufficient for another.

From:

Hmm. I think we've run into a disagreement then. I don't think it's my audience's job to give me something back. I like it when they do, but it would never occur to me to label it as "mooching" if they don't.

I think of the many times I've enjoyed something by an artist and haven't give them anything back, and the reasons are broad and encompass everything from "I didn't have the time" to "I couldn't find them again" to "I didn't have the money" to "I wasn't in a good enough place to reach back." I think all those reasons are valid. But the art affected me anyway, and changed me, and helped me. And I don't think saying that I'm mooching just because circumstances didn't permit me to get in the artist's face and fangirl at them or shove money at them is fair. :,

(deleted comment)

From:

That's okay. Sometimes people have different feelings about a topic, and it's not always easy to describe in words made of language.

From:

Mmm, good points there.

I write, because I have to. It's like breathing or eating. But then again, I write because I appreciate the feedback/interaction I get from my audience (a bit like teaching - same principle: interaction with students).

I am not sure about the others doing crowdfunded projects. But I suspect that my audience doesn't really understand the meaning of 'crowdfunding', hence the zero signal ratio. It got a little frustrating for me, because I felt as if I was sending out pings but getting nothing in return. I know what I wanted to do, but I am not sure if my audience knew that.

Perhaps, for me, this came during an intense period in my life: my pregnancy and eventually the birth of my daughter. I was brimming with creativity and I just wanted to share with people. However I ended up feeling as if I was dealing with a mute audience (or least, my f-list is).

From: