The Elephant in the Room: profit margins, the exploitation of authors and the demand for more ethical wages

Did you know authors earned 3% of publishing industry profits back in 2016? And I thought the career of a fine artist was harsh.  You hear the term “starving artist” a lot (and I would know) but what about “starving author”? Really the phrase pertains to anyone in the creative clan: they are creating the product for which society consumes and enriches civilization—either visually (fine artist), through entertainment (actors) or listening (musicians). Well, just like the whole creative crew, we are not without greedy middleman and a place called Amazon that has forced the publishing industry to keep up with their crazy low retail rates. The royalties paid out to authors today are almost criminal.

“Whitney, never lose your hunger to create”, someone once told me. ‘Tis true with the vast majority of artists across all fields. I believe one needs a certain amount of “hunger” in life to achieve exceptionally great works—but there is threshold. When you are starving an otherwise good artist from providing the minimal amount of cushion and financial security in her life to create, then the hunger is no longer an endearing quality to have. You’re just trying to survive, so you have two options: you can continue to sell your soul to the beast who takes more money off your creations than you do OR you can sell your soul by getting a better-paying job outside of your craft which takes you away from the creations you could be making. Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to an artist’s conundrum.

I thought being a fine artist was bad—but this industry is next level. I am quickly learning that being a book author is not only one of the lowest margin industries but it is outright exploitive for the amount of creativity (brainstorming), time and money it takes for an author to create, publish and market a book.  I never got into this industry thinking about the money I would make, but when its a negative return on investment then I call foul. This is with no advance; and even if you do have the opportunity to land a traditional publishing deal the advances are low average $5k range.  Not to mention the pesky chain of middlemen—what I like top call the “chain gang” because they are robbing authors of ethical wages.

There are so many hardworking individuals and families working in low margin industries out there. My father is one. I grew up the daughter of a 4th generation fishing boat captain and started working in the family business at the age of 8. Commercial fishermen have massive overhead, here is a glimpse: $500k boat, $2700 to fill up the fuel tank each time, crew pay (10% out on average), and of course a fishing license for a particular fishing district ($60k-100k). My dad gets paid about $1.50/lb for sockeye salmon and when it reaches the end market it’s about $12/lb. Back in the late 90’s the price for sockeye salmon dropped to $0.50 cents in the Chignik district and the fishermen went on strike for weeks until they came up with a resolution to just bring it up to $0.70 cents. My dad ended the strike, but it was a stressful time in our lives trying to redeem an industry we knew for so long being pushed into tighter margin territory.

As a book author you will be trying to break even for the years on just the labour you put into it—before it becomes a legitimate income. Be that self published or published, it is all the same barbaric game. Granted, the people at Bookbaby, Ingram publishing and bookstore buyers are some of the warmest hearts and have welcomed me with open arms into this industry. Perhaps that is to alleviate the glaring truth that we authors get paid chump change for our work. That is why I wrote this blog:

1) to impart wisdom on the general public as to what is going on behind the scenes

2) to console and rally other authors who feel this way

3) to inspire the current system to provide more livable wages to authors so we can keep the arts thriving in our culture. ..

 While the digital age has afforded the democratization of authorship and more books to be published in recent decades, it was nearly impossible to bring a book to the public without being signed with a tradition publisher. Modern day is different and affords more voices to be heard. But it’s the publishing industry who make authors invest a small fortune into getting their book produced before they get their ROI—which, could take years. After you have written and illustrated a book (which my first one “Roku & Tanza took me over 100 hours) the set up costs start around $150 (Ingram Spark fee $49, ISBN $25, CIP block $80.) In the meantime the people who are making a fortune off of authors are the publishing companies and their monopoly on distribution channels. 

 So, how do authors make money to recoop their investment and then (hopefully) make a living? Well, let us run through the different avenues that one can take using my book retail price:

1)    DIRECT. Direct sales to customers work best because you have higher profit margin—only one middleman (the manufacturer).  My average childrens’s book retail cost is $19.50. It takes $8.10 to manufacture the book so you have to subtract that number after multiplying the percentage by the retail price. I’ll make $10.40 (after factoring in shipping/handling costs.

 Pros:  establish a more personal repoir with customers and earn higher wages per book. You can reach out and get them to write more reviews on your books because you’ll know to whom you sold books. 

Cons: not enough connections, often more localized, less overall sales

2)    INDIRECT (one degree of separation).  Secondly, would be direct sales to bookstores. You have two middleman-- manufacturer and a bookstore—'between you and the end consumer. With a 42% (industry average for a bookstore buyer), the wholesale discount your royalty rate drops down to $3.21

Pros: Reach more customers, establish bonds with the bookstore and partaking in future books signing events there

Cons: less profit per book, you have to cold call/email reach out to the bookstores. Also, a lot of them are so used to bundle buying books through Ingram, they don’t want to deal with buying a DIRECTLY (one-off order). They want a seamless buying process—which is why a lot of them like to order straight of Ingram wholesale so they can buy directly from them instead of you, which bring me to….. 

3)    THRICE REMOVED. The most indirect way is through POD wholesale distribution on ingram Spark. There are now three middleman between you—the manufatur, distributor and bookstore. This is WHY I am writing this blog: a bookstore buyer emailed me other day and said he noticed only 20% wholesale discount on his end. I said that’s where because I gave a 42% discount from my end. Come to find out, there was Ingram Distribution taking a cut between us! They is a whole different entity and they take between 10 and 20% profit when distributing to bookstores. So that’s why book buyers was seeing so low on there end. Ingram Spark does not make the discount price that the  bookstore sees on their end visible to the you the author.i believe there needs to be more transparency and I already reached out to Ingram about this. In my email I also laid down their glaring exploiltation of authors. If they expect a bookstore to see 40% on their end, then I need to bring my wholesale discount up to 55%  because distribution is going to take a piece of the pie in between. And there you have it: authors are left with a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of the profits. With a 55% wholesale discount (industry standard competitive rate) I am left at $0.70 cents royalty per book sold

Pros: the most reach out of all the outlets, your book is exposed to the global market and all bookstores 

Cons: You have now joined the parallel universe of Spotify’s starving artist musicians—they get pennies in royalties per song.

The higher the royalty, the lower the reach and visa versa. It’s essentially an inverse equation.  The real bone to pick with Ingram Spark is their lack of paper weight options—that’s huge in terms of presentation. See my Trust Pilot review of the company.

Now anyone with a 5th grade education and a little self respect will quickly realize that distribution and book buyers are making more off the author in earnings per book. And here is another disturbing inverse equation: while publishing houses have been exploding in profits in recent years, the wages and royalties for authors have decreased. 

Solomon estimates that payment of authors accounted for a mere 3% of publishers’ turnover in 2016. “The industry pays so little for the raw material. Publishers talk about diversity then pay lip service to sustaining writers’ careers. They have a responsibility to see that authors are properly paid and their earnings do not go down,” she added.      

-The Guardian

They gave us no choice. The industry standard is 55% discount rate as I mentioned—anything beneath that and you risk being cut out of the market.  The book buyers and the manufacturer are making more than the author in the chain of wholesale. This is barbaric. Yes, they have employees to pay and they need to “keep on the lights” but the candle of creativity and innovation can only burn so brightly in the harsh reality of publishing that keeps authors from having a liveable wage for the product that THEY produce to fill the pockets of publishing that leech off them. This is what concluded my email with Ingram when I told them to put up this disclaimer on their site:

"You will basically be per persona non grata, cut out of the market place if you don't sell your soul (mark it at 55%) to feed  US--the bigger industry--that earns MORE money off the product of which YOU create for us to make money."  Say something like that. I'd respect you all a whole lot more if you just said that.

NOTABLE COMMENT SECTION (from The Guardian article:

The catch 22 angle (damn if you do, damn if you don’t):

In 2013 I had a book published by a major publisher. According to my royalty statement, I sold almost 10,000 books and yet I still owe the publisher money for the advance they paid me. Since then I've been self-publishing and I make twice as much selling 400 paperbacks myself than 10,000 books for a major publisher. Go figure. So you can either reach a big audience and starve or concentrate on a niche audience and just about survive.

 Authors are meant to get between 7.5% and 15% of the RRP. However, when books are discounted by retailers, the "high discount clause" kicks in, which automatically reduces that percentage down to far below the original royalty. Some authors are earning as little as 1% from their cover price because of the high discount clause.And the fact remains that other pars of the supply market are making bigger profits, which authors share is going down. Typically a retailer will take the biggest chunk of money - as much as 75% in some cases to account for the very cheap price they retail the book for. I hope that helps,

The nepotism angle:

It is now becoming a harsh reality that careers in The Arts are becoming a luxury only rich kids can indulge in with Daddy’s support.
Much has been written about how only Etonians and their brethren can now become professional actors.
Writers, I fear will suffer the same fate . The future of literature, and a writers vision will then become one long endless main stream publishers dream of Downtown Abbey, with few exceptions.

The only way to survive in this cruel environment is to self publish. Whether, you are an up coming photographer or writer it seems the best way to go. Screw the publishing houses.

But the point is that if you don't have well off parents or the right connections a career in the arts probably won't be possible.

  More comments

10% royalty? Even that is a pipe dream if you want to be competitive in the market….

The Society of Authors suggests a royalty of 10% of the retail price, which is what we at Akeman Press pay our authors. Few publishers do. I have written for other companies and only one, a little local publisher like ourselves, paid that. 
We started our own company because we wanted to produce high quality books that people could afford. We will not pay the crazy discounts demanded by people like Waterstones and Amazon because this pushes down the quality of the book and the amount left to pay authors. As a result, Amazon frequently declares our books are not available when they are and Waterstones is reluctant to stock our books. Since our last one was a local best-seller, the independent bookshops were delghted but bemused. 
Support your local independent bookshop and local publisher and the book trade will flourish.

 I'm in the book trade, albeit collectable books, but know a fair few authors. Every one that I know has a "day job", and some are successful, authors of best sellers, yet still cannot make a living from it. The age old adage comes to mind: we live in an age where everyone knows the price of an item, but not it's value.

So much bile in the comments. It's surprising that the essential unfairness of this is so hard to understand - publishers' profits and sales are rising, but authors' income is dropping. That means other people are making money off their labour and creativity.

Why are creative people expected to work for free? It's not like we're talking about wannabes moaning about people not buying their work. These are hardworking authors who are connecting with their audience, whose value is being extracted by everyone else.

Media links for further educational reading on this subject: 

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/jun/27/publishers-pay-writers-pittance-philip-pullman-antony-beevor-sally-gardner 

https://www.indiebound.org/spotlightamazon

OVERBOARD: the essence of Goldie Hawn

Redneck life and high society never coecoexisted so well as they did in the 1987 classic film Overboard. The chuckles come early, too: right in the introduction of this movie the landscape and music form the comedic soil in which the rest of the film grows. I just love the juxtaposition of the honkytonk score as the yacht cruises in the background—it’s two worlds colliding in cinematic fashion—without characters even introduced yet! I usually don’t relish in the beginning of films that have just the music playing while introducing the credits, but older movies awaken the nostalgia of yesteryear for me (I was born the year this movie came out!) and its nice to soak that in. Some of the most tacky-fabulous classics were filmed on the Oregon coast as well—The Goonies ring a bell to my GenX tribe? Interestingly, Joanna’s yacht in Overboard is almost identical to the very first yacht I worked on back in 2011. The movie loosely inspired me to enter the yachting industry (for which I worked as a stewardess and chef for +8 years). I remember the owners/guests were great—it was the captain that was rude to me and full of drama!

House Sitter, Death Becomes Her and First Wive’s Club are three of my favorite Goldie Hawn movies but the humble pie she receives in Overboard makes it the cherry on top. I believe it is her most intriguing and dynamic work, almost running like a gag reel of memorable quotes. The food scenes are the most hilarious. Going from the “gelatinous muck” of caviar to crudely cooking a whole chicken in a pot at Dean’s house—those scenes enhanced the outrageousness on both food spectrums. Annie’s crash course in preparing meals comes early in the morning when she has to send “her” sons off to school—I could rewatch the sandwich-making scene over and over, I’ve never laughed so hard in my life! Mayonnaise, peanut butter and jam sandwich anyone? Randomly squishing that M&M into the bread was so cute, nothing short of culinary white trash excellence. This contrasts with her glamorous life onboard in that caviar scene. I probably don’t need to explain the suggestive innuendo of her caviar preferences—the two men’s reactions do it for the audience. 

Joanna turning into Annie is like watching a Rolls Royce morphing into a fourwheeler. Once there, the lower class family chaos is very humbling to Annie, no doubt her amnesia helped in forgetting the bougie previous world from which she came. Heck, the movie almost makes blue collar livin’ fun in the woods with 5 wild boys around you—versus the peace and quiet of yacht life. I think it’s even more romanticized over the pretentious attitude and shiny yet emotionally stagnant existence of being wealthy in Joanna’s world.

It’s not every day that a movie like Overboard stands out in the cinematic archives. The actors don’t try to get your attention either—in fact, one could see a couple acting like this in the backwoods without a camera crew even around. The comedic factor is so organic and subtle nestled into nostalgic 80s atmosphere that it creates this diamond in the rough. And it’s a diamond that my contemporaries have been slow to discover because it unfortunately didn’t hit big at box the office. To date it has made 27 million against a 22 million budget and only holds a critic score of just under 50%. I think this makes it one of the most underrated movies of all time with film analyzers being too harsh and not seeing the movie for what it is: a classic screwball comedy that holds its value even after seeing it over 10 times (just ask me). Overboard movie night anyone?

My latest collage of the golden girl // 50x50'“ hand-cutout collage created from 100% recycled magazines

BEYOND THE ART: THE virgin ENIGMA

A picture is worth a thousand⬛️⬜️🟨🟧Creating a pixilation-style painting is a tedious process: technical, time consuming and requires a finely attuned eye for different color hues than regular brush stroke paintings. Just prepping the canvas is a mini project in itself. The art of mosaic/pixelation is the rewardings of its details from afar—the inverse of most traditional paintings where appreciation is upclose.
•••••••
ERA NOSTALGIA || I am a 90s enthusiast, so when I came across a rare polaroid of my muse Helena Christensen on the runway it enraptured me. It was just her in a graphic Versace tee with “virgine” on it. 2 months later after filing it in the back of my mind it’s loud voice got my attention enough that I decided to paint it. But it went beyond just the aesthetics: when you spend +25 hours on a project there has to be something powerful on a subconscious level that makes you devote that much time to a painting….

••••

“VIRGINE” || Although I was struck by the clean simplicity and sobering color scheme, I liked showcasing the juxtaposition where  erotica and innocence collide: enter in the word “virgine” (Old English vernacular of virgin). Virginity is an enigma of a word: it encapsulates the beginning and the end of innocence which makes up so many of humanity’s very personal stories. Studying this piece on a sociological level, one has to, interestingly, step farther away to get more clarity—to understand the bigger picture of what almost cosmic importance it really is. That brings me to the paradox of virginity : it carries both a stigma and a virtue in this post Sexual Revolution we have lived in for over 50 years. Depending on age or cultural standards, one will pretend they lost their’s when they still have it—or pretend like they still have theirs when they already lost it.  People are so quick to cross over this boundary, to lose their innocence, to downplay the  sacredness and enigmatic power of such personal encounters. It’s the farthest you can go with someone physically but the truth is third base has always been more overrated than first and second.—where you get to know one’s heart and mind. Nonetheless, people are losing the context of its power to appease such fleeting popularity and pleasure, short circuiting themselves into adulthood per say and facing a certain level of cognitive dissonance in the process. I wonder what it is doing to the collective soul of our nation—and of our world…

••••••

FEMALE EXISTENSIALISM || When I think further about some of my other artwork I’m passionate about, I realize I have a whole egg collection that encompasses paintings, collages and drawings. That makes me understand why I pick the subject matter so closely related to my XX humanity: I like to tease out the fundementals that exemplify the female existence and that which is attached to us on innate, historical, scientific and spiritual/metaphorical levels. 

.•••••••

Interview with a Danish Fashion House

MUNTHE ART MONDAY: WHITNEY L. ANDERSON

Name: Whitney L. Anderson
Instagram: @whitneylanderson_art
Website: www.whitneylanderson.com

Please introduce yourself and tell us about what you do.
My name is Whitney L. Anderson and I am a self-taught multi-disciplinary fine artist practicing in the mediums of drawing since I was 3, painting since I was 15 and collage since I was 27. I was born into a 3rd generation commercial fishing family and raised on my dad’s boat in rural Alaska during the summers. My Scandinavian roots mean a lot to me because my great-great grandfather actually sailed from Åland to Alaska in the late 1800s.

My lineage is made up of strong matriarchs and patriarchs that were integral in creating sustainable fisheries and, to this day, providing healthy wild seafood to the rest of the world. Athletics were also a big part of my upbringing: I was one of the top high school runners in the nation when I attended Duke University on full athletic scholarship, graduating in 2009 with a B.A. in Fine Arts.

My signature art style is contemporary realism with a flare of pop-cultural nostalgia. I consider myself “old school, raw and a purist” in that I do not intermix different mediums or partake in the liberties of this modern tech era to achieve my collage masterpieces. Everything is free-handed and that stems from the thousands of hours I’ve spent refining my fundamental art skills ever since I picked up a pencil 30 years ago. Reflecting on my childhood, I often tell people” I didn’t like colouring books or tracing, I was always a blank, white slate kid.”. 

Could you explain more about how being a woman has affected your career? 
I think being on this journey, so far, as a single woman provides me the luxury of time to create and have less burden to care for an immediate family. However, the caveat to that is the absence of support - both emotionally and financially. As a woman living in the 21st century I still have this shadow of doubt when it comes to stepping out on my own and making it as an entrepreneur - I don’t know about other women but it’s still a novel concept in my mind!

I didn’t set out to make a career out of this, it happened by necessity. I just had to keep paving my way. I think growing up with a self-employed dad who was a fishing boat captain since he was 21 got me on this path and my mom nurtured my cultural side. She brought me traveling to over 40 countries since the age of 9 years old—my first trip was to Europe! ”The world is an open book,” she always used to remind me.

Can you name some other female (artist) that inspires you and explain why they do so? 
I just realized this last year that I don’t have any female artists that I look up to—just males. That’s when I had the personal epiphany of just how underrepresented female fine artists are in the art world! As a pop cultural artist, I have been highly inspired by female artists in the other mediums of music, movies, and fashion modelling. I discovered Helena Christensen when I was 18 and she has been my favourite muse that I have drawn, painted and collaged over the years, I adore the actress Cate Blanchett, she is so prolific and versatile with her film roles. As far as music I was a big Robyn fan growing up (now Zara Larsson has taken her place!). The elusive Sade is exceptional though. Did you know Drake asked to do a duet with her and she declined? As we say in America, she is too cool for school.

What has been the most challenging aspect of being a female artist?
Working for yourself is liberating but it is a lot of pressure and you never know when your next art piece will sell—there is no guaranteed salary/check coming in. I have to wake up every day and remember the phrase I made up for myself long ago,”the ripples you make today will be the waves you ride tomorrow.” I just know I had no choice but to keep going and trust my gut in one of the most solitude careers you can be in. Yes, art is an alone job—and sometimes very lonely! I had no leg up or art connections in life, either. For the first decade after leaving home at 18 I had to work a side job to support my art endeavours and just giving me the free time to paint and come up with novel concepts. I didn’t focus on the end result (selling it), I just focused on the process of creating. I believe the majority of time that we as artists put into our work only represents a fraction of the polished masterpieces that the public will see down the road.

It’s imperative that kids doodle when they are young, draw whenever they get the chance. Whether we are child or adult: creating art for art's sake with no agenda is pivotal in laying the foundation of those few masterpieces that could possibly be cemented in the public art world for all to see.

What would you like people to notice in your artwork?
I want people to see the details and the thought put into it. I believe what makes me a successful artist is often a paradox of mindsets: whimsical and free thinking with my ideas yet disciplined and commanding to execute those ideas. I spend countless hours on my art - from conception to completion, my mind is always calculating the next move to bring everything I visualize to life. My creative mission is to consistently move towards new challenging work: I believe that is what enthralls the viewer to see beyond the art and into my soul as it in turn touches their own.

Each Monday we bring you a fresh interview with a female artist.

Follow MUNTHE ART MONDAY

Original source article: https://www.en.munthe.com/blogs/munthe-art-monday/munthe-art-monday-whitney-l-anderson

Why I write Children's Books

Hello, World!

7 FACTS ABOUT Whitney L Anderson Children’s books 

#1 I was bitten by the storytelling bug back in 2018

Writing my first children’s book started more out of a necessity: a deep angst to express something near and dear to my heart. I wrote a whole blog about this in reflecting and expanding on my inspiration behind my first book Roku & Tanza (https://www.whitneylanderson.com/blog/Behind%20the%20creation ).  Right then, I wanted to connect my art with storytelling. My subsequent children’s books have sprung up in different ways but they all still have that one thing in common: a strong vision that is bursting in my soul. I either come up with the drawings first and then create a storyline around that visual concept, or I will have a cool story I made up in my head and create the art around that story.

#2 Children’s picture books and movie classics have always been a powerful force of nostalgia in my life

I want to create classics like my favorite books growing up: The Napping House, Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs, Johnny Apple Seed, and Down on the Funny Farm. Movies that inspire me in a similar matter are Fern Gully, Fievel Goes West, The Rescuers Down Under and Thumbelina. 

#3 I have been expressing creativity outside of my art through writing for a very long time

When I was 19, I started www.whitneylanderson.com, my earliest digital house for my paintings. At 23, shortly after graduating college, I started blogging. At 24 I started writing poetry almost everyday—today, I have amassed over 70 pages. My mid to late 20s was an emotional chapter: coming of age into young adulthood, trying to make sense of the world around me, experiencing being alone most of the time, not settling, wanting more out of life. Its an ostracizing experience constantly swimming against the tides of societal mediocracy. Expressing my sentiments in poetry helped me navigate through love and heartache while I blossomed as a fine artist. No doubt those years of writing laid the foundation for the creation of my rhythm and rhyme storylines in some of my children’s books.

#4 My personality is conducive to writing Children’s books

My personality is naturally conducive to writing and illustrating in this genre /// After publishing my first book I imagined a waterfall of other storylines, mostly out of thin air. My corny and clever imagination gives way to my whimsicality. That term “whimsical” is what I’ve always described myself as an artist and as a person—even long before writing children’s books came into inception.

#5 My children’s books have no agenda, they are pure and simple.

I was recently doing a podcast with Joseph Haeker from “In Crowd” and he asked me what makes my books different from the rest. I replied simply with this: they have no agenda—that is why they are different from most modern children’s books on the market right now. They come from a place of art for arts sake, whimsicality for whimsicality sake, entertainment for entertainment’s sake, Sure there are light lessons one can draw from the books but my books are less about teaching and more about inspiring a child to use his own God-given imagination. Maybe he won’t be in the arts when he/she grows up but everyone needs an imagination to have hope in this world—seeing beyond our current reality and creating our own visions for life. It also spurs curiosity and risk-taking—seeking more than meets the eye. That is what imagination does for the young mind. There is no agenda or propaganda in my work, unlike other children’s books headlining the shelves today.

 #6 My children’s books are a refreshingly clean visual experience, a keen reflection of the contemporary realism found in my fine art.

We live in an overly saturated over stimulating environement as it is. So, when adults comes across my more artistic work brought down to a child’s levels, even they will find the book subcouncioulsy refreshing—compared to the other books they read. My refined minimilistic style is something both child and adult will appreciate. I think that so many Children’s books look too “busy” and overstimulating.  My covers and even content of the pages are clean and artfully rendered—but not too ostentatious. They give the adult and child something appeasing to look. My writing and illustrations form this juxtaposition between corny entertainment and modern refinement, something my readers will find delightfully novel.

#7 I have a subconcious need to leave a legacy for the younger generations to look back on—just as others have done in my life.

My knack for rich fine art illustration stemming from thousands of hours as an artist (in combination with my 15 years of blogging, creative essays and poetry) is what gives me so much drive to have one or more of my books become classics. I will never forget when I moved my little hand across the Caldecott Medal for the first time reading The Polar Express. I want mine to be this new generation’s favorite books that stick with them through adulthood. I want my stories to be filed in the backs of their minds and have them retreat to these stories as a strong memory of their childhood. That would be so special to me because I know that is how I always felt about my favorite books.

THE CASE FOR CATS

“You have to earn their affection, Greg”

Sounds like a knock off of Lee Strobel’s best selling book  titles “The Case for Christ” or “the Case for a Creator.” Although probably not on the scale of great cosmic importance as those subjects, I will say it at least exposes “the elephant in the room” that America has clearly not fessed up to: cats really do rule (they have nine lives after all) and dogs drool. OK doggies, I’ll throw y’all a bone early on: you do rule, as well, but I’m going to expand on the metaphors of why you “drool”, too. Here goes…

YOU DON’T HAVE TO PARTICIPATE IN A CAT’S CALL OF NATURE

I’m going to start with the obvious: you have to pick up after them. Seriously, what other pet do we universally love so much that we need to do that? You take them out to do their business and obligingly pick up their warm excrement off the ground like that’s totally normal?  FOR THE LOVE OF OUR HUMAN DIGNITY, why are not more people talking about this? And here it’s those “crazy” cat lovers that have been censored for all these years…The closest thing one of my childhood cats (yes, my family had 5 generations) ever came close to mimicking this nonsense, was the time when I had to pick up after our fat orange tabby named Tom. One day he started pooping right next to his litter box instead of in it. During that time he had also started rolling down the stairs like he was dead. We theorized later that he could have been struck by lightening when he was outside on the porch during a storm one day and that’s what caused the strange laxidasical behavior. 

How many times have you heard someone say, “I have to get back to my dog, he hasn’t been let out in 3 hours”? Sounds like too much of a co dependent relationship if you ask me. I’ll stick to having a cat and carelessly take off on a three-day vacation and my cat will take care of herself. Time, money, and sanity are things to take into consideration when having a dog versus a cat.

A CAT’S COMPOSURE IS WHAT WE COULD ALL LEARN FROM

Cats have this enigmatic and stoic nature to them that few dogs will ever attain. This doesn’t mean I hate dogs. I adore them—from afar. I appreciate their devotion to society (police and military, handicapped, etc..). Let’s just say in general that I like dogs like I like Channel Westcoast: super cute and funloving  but damn girl stop laughing, you are so annoying! Seriously dogs get excited about nothing and everything when it comes to seeing their owner. A lot of people (which I do aknowledge the majority in America are dog lovers over cat lovers) would say this is an endearing quality.  I see things through a different paradigm, however, with darker connotations. I believe this could be slightly feeding into the narcissistic epidemic that is plaguing America more today than in any other time in history. Just ask psychologists—its happening. And, yes, my off-the-cuff theory is part of the culprit to blame are those choosing to invest more in dog relationships over people ones.  

The fact that an animal shows so much enthusiasm for their owner at the drop of a hat and the fact that we as humans put up with the barking, shedding, and being the designated poop pickeruppers is a weird bondage relationship if you ask me. But this is all masquerading as true love. One of America’s most beloved movies “Marley & Me” secretly was torture watching for us cat lovers—almost like a horror movie if I can buy myself one hyperbole here, Vanna White? Yes, I think I teared up in that movie but driving your owners, their house and their neighbors bonkers is hardly the case for “unconditional love”. I believe the relationship between dogs and humans is overrated versus earned affection when it comes to cats. I’m not saying dogs are stupid and are going to be lovable to an owner who treats them poorly, what I am saying is we praise the presence of constant extroverted enthusiasm.  Not just among dogs but among people, too—does the hot-botton phrase “toxic positivity” raise a bell to anyone? In the self-help world that’s the attitude Rachel Hollis inadvertantly promoted in her company. After so much built-up pressure, that bubble burst.

Sassy was a Himalayan—the most beautiful and adorable cat breed!

CAT’S DON’T WANT TO BE YOUR “FUR CHILD”—JUST YOUR PET IS FINE

We are using dogs as a surrogate to having our own children because we are taught that humanity is over populating. Not true if you look at the nuance of the situation: American couples are having 1.5 babies per household which will not be enough for population replacement in the future (that’s another blog post for another time).  Nonetheless, hearing “my fur child” in conversation is a likely scenario as the new child amongst Millennials and GenZ since so many are holding off marriage or can’t be in a relationship because they keep coming across narcissists in their paths *sigh…* so they say “heck with humans, I’ll find someone that will always appreciate me 24/7. I’m getting a caramel hypoallergenic microlabradoodle (or whatever the latest dog breed is trending right now) says the girl. “And I’m getting a pitbull rotweiller” says the boy. I’m totally steryotyping genders right now just to tick off the dog lovers reading this. Take a chill pill and keep reading. 

A CAT’S SELF AWARENESS AND CONCIENTIOUSNESS IS A BREATH OF FRESH AIR

Sometimes I’m running by a dog with their owner and sometimes the dog will leap out in front of me like he’s catching a frisbee (me). I think in that split second, “now me, as a cat lover, can justifyingly unleash the tension I have built up for so long—Do it! Say it, Whitney!” and out comes the reaction “Ahh! Son of a b***—BAD DOG!” oh the irony. Yes, that dog owns you, you don’t own it, son. Even owners themselves joke about this open secret: “Yes, Toby over here takes me for a walk, I don’t take him!hahaha”  

YOUR DOG’S ENTHUSIASM FOR YOU IS OVERRATED

Cats have a calming stoicism to them, a peaceful demeanor. The best part I love is when they come up to you, press their paws back n forth and start purring—mimicking their kitten days when they were nursing, pressing out milk against their mother’s stomach. Makes my heart melt everytime.

Cats are more introverted; they need to retreat and don’t need to be with their owner all the time. Their Resting Cat Face is a sobering reminder to not take life so seriously, to let down your guard. What could be better in a world full of constant commotion than coming home after a busy day to sit down with your cat in its pure contentment and the both of you stare at the wall. What some would deem boring and depressing I deem therapeutic. Cats are theraputic for me over dogs. Dogs give me anxiety—like a toddler constantly in your face wanting to play. 

Concluding on that note: you don’t need to entertain them and they don’t need to entertain you.

* PAUSE *

Ok, I know I’ve been steryotyping all dogs into one monolith and I do recognize the exceptions. The reserved demeanors of the mastiff and the shar pei are probably the closest one can get to cats. Gosh I do adore the looks of those newfoundlands and malamuts, and the regal look of the Doberman, the cute yet punkish looks of the pitbull. These breeds almost cancel out the drawbacks of dog ownership.

I  think I know what people think when they think cat: perhaps the generic  short-haired scrawny ones with snake-ike tails? Yea, I’m not a huge fan either. Let me tell you about the beauty breeds thought: British short hair, Himalayans, persians, ragdolls, long hair tabbys. If you ever want to become a convert, the medium to long-haired cats are the cutest and most cuddly.  

THE PUBLIC CENSORSHIP AND SCRUTINY OF CATS HAS TO END

When I am at a party or making a new friend somewhere, I get super excited when they hint towards liking cats. They are never overt about it—heaven forbid if everyone stopped talking and just started staring at you like those embarrassing scenes in the movies. We cat lovers bashfully bring up our cat in conversation. Meanwhile, dog lovers will gather a few people around them before they launch into their story of adopting a rescue mutt as if its the most altruistic thing one can do. The cat lover needs to be discreet—kind of like political conservatives in the 21s century. You better be low key on who you pledge your loyalty to.

In making that anology, I have to believe there are a lot more cat lovers out there, we’re just quiet about it. Kind of like our cats, we hide under the bed of our true sentiments and remain a mystery to those around us. When a friend or stranger says “well, I hope you don’t mind dogs, Whitney” that’s more of a statement than a question. “Who does mind dogs?” is what they are really thinking. Because everyone knows the dog is America’s golden boy, favorite child among all the pets out there. And that’s fine, they can have their trophy. The cat people would just think its obnoxious to have such a title. We don’t have to earn America’s affection, we just need to earn our cat’s and that’s good enough.

TWO IN A MILLION: Surya Bonaly & Simone Biles

Their careers started nearly 30 years apart and were separated by the Atlantic ocean but that’s where the differences cease and the intriguing connections of these two enigmatic sports figures come to light. The delightful and apparent epiphanies start on the surface with their skin color and initials but Simone and Surya go far beyond that. Here are seven facts that could be explained, shall we say, coincidence or providence? You decide…. 

THEY WERE BOTH ADOPTED. 

Surya was born Dec 15, 1973 and just six months later was adopted by a French couple. Simone was born March 14, 1997 and grew up with her birth mother until she was three years old when she was adopted by her grandparents who could better take care of her. 

GYMNASTICS CATAPULTED THEIR CAREERS. 

Surya’s first brush in athletic competitions came when she was apart of the 1986 French tumbling team. Although Surya branched off to dedicate herself fulltime to figure skating at the age of 12, her foundation in acrobatics on ice was undoubtedly attributed to her early childhood involvement in gymnastics . It laid the groundwork for her famous back flip on ice she would become known for. Now I wish I could say Simone dabbled in figure skating early on and then decided to go do gymnastics but as far we know she didn’t partake in any skating: she started doing gynmastcs right out of the gate and here we are today.

THEIR EXTRAORDINARY SKLLS RIVALED THEIR PEERS.  

They were not only anomalies as far as their being so few black people within their perspective sports but they were known for their remarkable feet’s. Surya was the only female skater ever to do a back flip on ice and the only skater ever to land it on one foot. Only three other male skaters have done back flips. She accomplished her first in public at a gala in Annecy in 1986. 35 years later in May 2021 Simone became the first woman to ever land a Yurchenko double pike vault. The new vault was given a preliminary value of 6.6, making it the most appraised vault in women's gymnastics.

THEIR LAST COMEPETITIONS WERE THE JAPANESE OLYMPICS. 

What are the odds: since 1940 Japan has only won the bid to host Olympics 4x (two winter and two summer) and both of the women’s last Olympics coincidently were in Japan, Surya’s in Nagano and Simone’s in Tokyo.  Surya had a hurt ankle going in and finished 10th; while Simone had some mental health issues so she opted out of several performances.

THEY BOTH ENDURED PUBLIC SCRUTINY.

While Simone’s criticism came from opting out of the Olympics for the sake of her health, Surya’s criticism was speckled throughout her skating career from what some would deem a passive aggressive attitude after being treated unfairly by the judges. The most notable was at the 1994 National Championships when Surya took off her silver medal in an act of defiance when she lost to Yuka Sato by a miniscule half a point in her total skater scorecard. The nuances of scorecarding figure skating is a little more subjective then that of gymnastics. I believe both sports are a little petty around the edges: Simone was asked to not smile so much—there was this unspoken rule of stoicism that gymnasts were to maintain in their face (perhaps inspired buy the Russians who ruled gymnastics for so long). Simone didn’t experience any undertones of racial prejudice in her scorecard but Surya may have: her hayday was in the late 80s and 90s when she could have experienced some covert racial prejudices from some of the judges due to the sport being so traditionally northern European in looks. Surya shook up the norm with, not just her skin color but her style—she had more of powerful form of skating in comparison to the elegant and demure style of her other competitors like Yuka Sato who out beat Surya’s technical jumps over Yuka’s footwork artistry.  Another episode that may have impacted Surya’s standing with the judges was during the Nagano Olympics. She was getting over a broken ankle and felt the only arsenal she had left to wow the public was doing a backflip which was illegal and judges could have taken points away for that. If Surya was a gymnast like Simone she would have been a gold winner since gymnastics, although graded on artistry, was graded more on technical feets which Surya excelled in on ice. 

BOTH ENDED THEIR CAREERS AS “LOSERS.” 

Even sarcasm is blushing on the public claim these two ended their perspective careers as losers. They accomplished so much beforehand which can never be cancelled out just because of the way an athlete left their sport.  It is essentially mocking the general spectator looking at the athletes who’s brush with the gold was so close. In the 2019 Netflix documentary “Losers,” Surya was one of the five athletes featured. I believe her story will always generate discussion surrounding the motives of judges not giving her a higher score. Did she have skating flaws at times? Yes, and that impacted her score.  Did her race ever have anything to do with some of the judge’s scoring? Especially Surya performing her backflip during competitions which is banned. Did the judges give her a lower score because of her feisty behavior on ice?” They were losers but they had the same mental grit and skill to get to the podium. Sometimes an athlete is just having a bad day. It’s too bad there isn’t another name for loser. Like Surya, Simone had her hey day mid career—she didn’t end her competitive career on the highest note but she did end it in the smartest.

BOTH HAD A HUNGER. 

What I love about athletics is the objective nature. You can really only succeed through unadulterated merit: no glamour behind it, just long hard hours of training, blood sweat and tears. So refreshing in a world of nepotism where guy or girl gets a  leg up in their career because of who their parents are, models like gigi, kendel and kaia come  from super priviledged upbringings. These skating girls came from normal backgrounds, if not completely disadvantaged. It created a hunger to persevere and accomplish something great. Simone and Surya represent beacons of hope and resilience in their perspective sports. Perhaps that is the greatest soul connection they carry between eachother which has captivated their audiences for a combined 35 years. Surya was never considered to be the proverbial ice princess—and I have to agree. I think she was in fact an ice queen. Princesses are many, queens are few. The judges were playing the scorecard on their conservative ways of a qualifying what makes an ice princess and not a queen.

NOTHING COMPARES TO YOU: SINEAD, A MODERN RENEGADE

I always told myself and other people (if they ask) what I would be if I was not a portrait artist. I tell them a psychologist because it parallels capturing the details/emotions of a face on paper through visual analysis and into constructing the blueprint of someone through mental analysis. Instead of paint brushes, the psychologist uses terms to describe how someone processes their thoughts and emotions that makes them the unique individual that they have become (or born into—enter the murky combination of nature versus nurture). Well, that got me thinking about my latest portrait of the Irish 90’s pop sensation Sinead O’Conner.

I was young when I heard that one song that everyone knows and saw her photographs popping up in media. I thought, “Did she have cancer or was mingling with monks"? No, she was just being Sinead—her name meaning “God is gracious” in Irish and Hebrew. And he was gracious in bestowing a worldwide platform for her to belt out her ballads and controversial opinions, things that needed to be said. She was going to be no sexy wallflower pop musician. Because of her jarring upbringing as a child she had a level of streetwise and gall to expose the dirt within her own cherished catholicism about the child abuse going on. Like an ornate peacock, the Catholic church’s feathers that kept its high-seated priesthood protected and beyond reproach were being ruffled and plucked away by Sinead through the 90s, reverberating to this day. Like Joan of Arc a heroic French martyr, Sinead experienced a similar martyrdom in sacrificing her burgoining musical career for the sake of calling out culture. Sometimes she was right, other times wrong or just plain zany. She reminded me of some other female pop renegades like Sia, Bejork and Alanis Morresette who marched to their own eclectic drum.

God used her, no matter her mental instability she had throughout life. Life lesson: humans will fail you everyday—some more than others; only through our believing and receiving of God’s grace are we made whole again. Sinead makes for a fascinating study on human pyschology and the meloncholic romance that people have with fame.

Embed Block

Add an embed URL or code. Learn more

7 ways Sinead’s dichotomy lifestyle made her a modern day renegade:

1) On the outside babyface yet impish look reflects the dichotomy of her mindset: she was a child of light and darkness. She had this intense fascination, awe, fear, wonder of God growing up Catholic.

2) Meanwhile, she lived in an abusive home brought on by her mentally unstable mother. O’Conner had a complicated love-hate relationship with her mother until her passing for which she wrote the famous song “Nothing Compares to You”. Sinead seems very forgiving and empathetic towards her mother even though she was what led Sinead to have trauma for the rest of her life. Sinead was later diagnosed with Bipolar disorder, a disease developed after 18, such as her case, coming from one’s formative years growing up in an abusive home.

“Child abuse is an identity crisis and fame is an identity crisis, so I went straight from one identity crisis into another.”

3) She shaved her head because she wanted to go against expected female norms but it ironically brought her more attention as this peculiar emo pop diva (at least to us Americans across the pond.). She also felt like her long hair sexualized her and she wanted to go a 180 from that, a coping mechanism to deal with the sexual and emotional hurt she suffered as a child. At one point she started growing it back out until people started mistaking her for the other Irish singer Enya.

4) “The Lion and the Chobra” was her first album and I believe that reflects the war inside her between light and dark forces. The lion personifies God or Jesus and the cobra/snake personifies the devil. That album was a harbinger to her life long struggle with these forces.

“When you live with the Devil you learn there's a God very quickly.”

5) Her tearing of the pope photo simultaneously destroyed her career and built it up. This was a modern Joan of Arc move. Meanwhile, the harlot Madonna trolled off her controversy and morphed the limelight on Sinead into her virtue signaling display when she tore up a photo of some guy that got with a teenager on long Island, saying that was the man too focus on. Madonna knows nothing except how to exploit others to feed her fame machine.

6) She became an ordained Catholic priest which was met with a lot of controversy and then converted a few years ago to Muslim

7) In 2014 he had her cheeks tatted with the initials “B” and ‘Q” of a then-boyfriend to visually remind her of the fight. That lasted under year and she got them lazered off.

“Ok, it's time to get this stupid sh*t off my face.”