In the self-publishing blog-o-sphere, I’ve noticed a somewhat invisible (or perhaps not so invisible) war raging between self-publishers that use an assisted publishing service and those that take the DIY approach. I personally am in the DIY camp and will gladly explain why this is the best choice for me. I repeat, for me. However, I’ve received fire from the other camp in blog comments or conversations that go something like this:
Well, good for you miss technologic-mc-technology fingers. I don’t even know how to tri-fold a piece of paper into an envelope, you think I can figure out where margins go?? What should I do, just quit my life and get a PhD in graphic design? Have fun making really bad covers while I have professionals work on my book. Because I am an AUTHOR. I WRITE. My readers care about the STORY and that’s my job, the STORY part. I can’t just waste my time learning about indents when I have all these STORIES. And just like any good writer I get an editor. I do IDEAS not COMMAS. Besides, I get up at four A.M. eight days a week just to get all my writing done, where will I find time to format a 200,000 word book? Real authors ain’t got time for that! You’re the reason self-publishing sucks because you think you can do it all by yourself and publish horrible covers and badly put together Frankenbooks. Hope you can sleep at night knowing you are turning self-publishing into a laughing stock while I get people who actually know what they’re doing to package all my awesome authorly ideas! It’s your fault books like mine don’t get a chance.
On the flipside, I’ve read blog posts outlining why using a publishing service has been the right choice for an author. Inevitably there are comments below the post that read like this:
Ooh, it looks like somebody has money! I’d like to bring you down to the real world. I’ll only ever have fifty, maybe, MAYBE, seventy-five cents to put toward my book, but I’m glad you had fistfuls of cash handed to you to burn on publishing. You know you can publish a book for free, right? Sure I don’t have any money to spend on marketing, advertising, giveaway copies, promotional materials, book events or business cards, but at least I don’t have five grand to make up for just getting an ISBN and some cute impersonal stock photos for my cover. Because guess what? I’m a MICRO-PUBLISHER and it says so on my facebook page. I’m like a CEO. I do way more than write. I have to think about things instead of handing out some greenbacks for someone else to do the not-fun parts of self-publishing. It’s all your fault for turning self-publishing into a vanity fair! You just need thousands of dollars and ta-da, author! How about some blood, sweat, and tears, huh? You’re the reason books like mine get a bad reputation.
All right.
I don’t care what side you’re on, if you’re so defensive about how you’re doing publishing, you just make yourself look dumb. Because both the tirades above are right: either route done badly is a great blow to the “self-pub image.” But either route done well is likely going to be the best choice for that particular author. Time, money, and management skills are necessary in self-publishing, regardless of the means. And what matters most is the book. If you aren’t writing the best book you can, it doesn’t matter how you publish or how that guy over there is publishing. If the book isn’t the center of your focus and falls short in execution, you’ll have no one to blame but yourself.
Showing posts with label ego. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ego. Show all posts
Sunday, April 14, 2013
Sunday, January 13, 2013
"Good enough" is not good enough. Balancing technique, marketing, and my worst critic.
I let my husband read chapter one of The Corridor, the book I am currently editing the proof of and hope to have out by the end of March. Not to say this isn't the first time he read chapter one. He read chapter one a year ago. Since he likes math and has no desire to be a writer, I put in a lot of his suggestions where he thought I was getting a little too "irrational." I enjoy having him as a super cerebral, logical beta reader. On some things he's way off and my socioanalytical-emotional side balances his scientific-mathematical side. But more often than not he has a strange 6th sense that exorcizes even the best concealed B.S. And for some reason I thought he wouldn't find any in my proof. The dialogue was as follows, starting with him:
"It's not good enough."
"Why, give me examples."
"You don't mention this, this, and this."
"But I mention this, this and this here."
"It's too late, you already made me put the book down."
"But my writer's workshop loved this."
"Well, that's fine, but you can do better."
"This is the proof, I've edited this already!"
"Edit it again."
"Why?"
"It's not good enough."
"Is the whole thing trash?"
"No, you do some things very well, but not well enough. Good enough is not good enough."
First I was in denial. Ok. Whatever. So says the math genius who sees the world in 1's and 0's.
He kept on me so I tried being combative to which he told me I would get nowhere if I couldn't take criticism, especially from him.
I attempted playing to his rational side. This is genre. To succeed in the commodity market I have to pump out a book every six months. Maybe this is great for that pace. He told me that attitude would only get me mediocrity and he would not tolerate mediocrity.
So I tried victimization. I'm so tired, I'm in pain, I work too much for too little and it keeps me from writing, I've edited this so much, not everything can be perfect. Well, the math genius doesn't understand this language, it's not in 1's and 0's.
Then I got indignant. I've been writing and studying this business and craft for ten years, I'm just getting to a point where I think I'm doing decent work, maybe I should have some faith in my own knowledge, skills and intuition and know I'm in control. Exactly, he said, and that means knowing chapter one needs work.
I want to say that next I did NOT throw the book across the room and start crying. But. Well.
Nervous breakdown aside, I'm reworking chapter one. And editing the rest of the book. Again.
"You know you don't have to listen to me," he said when I recovered my sanity. "I'm just trying to help."
But the truth is, I know he is right. I was aiming for good enough. I achieved good enough. It's not good enough.
It's hard to keep sight of personal goals amid daunting news about shifting publishing formats, flooding of the market, a dwindling importance on reading, an acutely concentrated consumer base, and how to adequately flaw your characters and balance your plot.
There are a few things I believe. I believe you must publish at least a book a year, if not more, to build your brand and start selling. I believe genre will make more readers happy and build a more loyal readership for the author. I believe you will fail if you write to appease your audience rather than work on projects that really mean something to you. I believe there are no rules, and all my statements are wrong.
What I do have to work with are my goals. My first and foremost is to publish a book every six months. I think this goal is not only achievable, but achievable beyond "good enough."
In many ways, aiming for good enough got me to this point. I didn't agonize over super small things. I powered through. But now I need to dig deep and make it better. Take the advice I've been given. Keep going, because the journey is not over. But eventually there will come a point when I will say, stop. Close the book. It is finished. That is where I will rely on my intuition, knowledge and skills.
I would not have recommended such a swift publishing pace to myself a year ago. And if I find it doesn't work out, I will rearrange my goals. Maybe I'll need 8 months. Maybe I can overlap projects. But more than that, I need to stay focused and work harder. So simple, but not the most easy answer to hear.
I noticed a trend in many hobbies/professions/random things people do. A skill set is like a ladder. When you start learning about, say, writing, you begin to climb the ladder. After awhile you'll find you're climbing higher than some of the people around you. Then higher than most people around you. It is at this point you think, "Groovy. I'm so far up here and so many are below me." We stop climbing. We are good enough.
Now don't take that as an egotistical statement that I'm so high on the writing ladder. I am still staring up at the heels of many, many others. But I have made great strides in the quality of my own work. I was very happy with how The Corridor came out in the first proof. But ultimately, I know there are a few more rungs to be had. As an author, I know what good enough looks like.
And yes. I have health issues, I work crazy shifting hours, I feel that I am forcing time to write instead of making time. But that's what writing is. If you want to be good, you have to answer to yourself. If you want to be good, you have to make yourself stronger. And that means you push harder when the weight doesn't seem as heavy.
Like I said, I made it to good enough. Equating good enough to bad is unfair. I have the foundation. What I am going to build on that will only make it better. I got the hard part out of the way. I have a book. A complete book. But there are some places that need fixed. It's not the end of the world.
(Not to mention, I've been over some of this before with a different first proof.)
In many ways, good enough means you've gotten better. Maybe there were things you settled for in the past. Don't do it again. Make it better. Move forward. Know you can have marketing goals and retain the integrity of your writing, your process and your technique. Keeping the balance is a challenge, but one that needs to be met for any improvement to occur.
Usually I don't like posts like these, that claim there's a right way for doing things and any form of "settling" means it's not good enough. I feel terribly inept some days, crafting covers out of toothpicks and bubblegum, or writing on a scrap piece of paper on an hour drive home from a wedding reception with my cell phone light because it's the only way I'll make word count. Good enough is personal and unique to each author. But you know when you've found it.
So when you do, do something about it. Good enough doesn't have to be bad. Being stuck with it is.
Monday, January 7, 2013
Better than you
I like to read blog
posts about the philosophy of writing, why we're all so crazy to be doing what
we're doing. I glean a lot of insight from traditionally published,
independent, and self-published authors. I usually find the blog posts
themselves don't particularly fire me up, even when I disagree with them. The
comment wars that tend to rage beneath the posts, however, sometimes do. Mainly
because it boils down to two camps throwing serif-ed insults at each other:
Traditional publishing is stupid! Self-Publishing is stupider!
After awhile I feel
like I'm beginning to see the Matrix. We're all really super human gravity
defying martial artists, the mediums we practice are fake and pliable. It's the
other people swearing other ways work is what's keeping us from success,
keeping the Matrix in place.
Or let me put it this
way: We're all full of crap.
Because, whatever we
do, it has to be because it's better than how someone else does it. And knowing
we're doing it the right way isn't enough.
If someone posts
something about how it worked for them differently, it MUST be because they
never gave your way enough of a chance. They don't believe.
I'm not a Christian.
I'm a Buddhist. I've thought about this before. But plenty of people see me as
a wannabe hipster with weird hats and even though my religion is based in
compassion and Karma, I'm still probably mean to the cashiers at McDonalds.
Because all hipster Buddhists with beret hats that you've seen at McDonalds are.
So what if I read over a thousand pages of Pali Canon translation. That Mala
bracelet isn't a cross, I'm obviously wrong. And of course I've seen plenty of
"free thinkers" that turn into a sputtering pile of defensive
self-righteousness at the mention of Jesus. We've all seen this.
Sadly, the more I read
author blogs, the same principle is surfacing again and again. Writers that
read a perfectly well thought out and informative blog post, but find SOMETHING
in it they disagree with and go nuts in the comments.
Now, I supposed I
understand if someone is completely and unfairly bashing the way you do things,
you would probably feel upset. But even when an author puts a disclaimer at the
beginning of the post saying "this is the way it works for me and I'm
sharing, you do not have to do this" comments still get crazy. It makes me
wonder if writers are reading these blogs to gain insight, or just looking for
affirmation that their way is right and to argue when someone does something
different. I still have faith that there are plenty of writers learning from
these blog posts, but they just keep quiet and don't try to skewer other
authors on literary sticks when they disagree.
When I first started
writing, there was still a stigma attached to self-publishing, and ereaders had
not taken off yet, so I was very much swayed toward traditional and print
publishing. But I changed my mind and found independent publishing worked very
well for me. Unfortunately, I'm seeing a lot of Self-Pubbers trying to trash
the traditional route, trying to attach a stigma to authors that are having a
good go at traditional publishing. Trying to steal the elitism from "an
editor approved my work and I was paid an advance, I'm better than you,"
to "I had to direct the formatting and cover design and plan all my own
marketing, I do way more than just write, I'm better than you."
Well, if that makes you
feel better about yourself, go for it. But why tell either a self-published or
traditionally published author, who is happy, successful according to their definition,
and has a readership, that they are wrong and stupid? I certainly can't imagine
walking up to a successful traditionally published author and saying,
"Hello, have you heard of Smashwords? Allow me to enlighten you."
I obviously live in
the Matrix, since I have a writing blog and opinions on such things are keeping
me from jumping up and flying around like superman delivering my bestsellers to
the puny drones below. If only everyone listened to me and shaped the writing
game to my standards, but noooo we all have to do things differently than me to
keep the Matrix in place, to keep everyone asleep, and make stupid authors more
successful than me.
Right.
Here's the deal, or at
least, my opinion: There's no formula for success. Success is defined by the
author and each book, author, target audience tastes, and means of transmission
are going to have so many factors, there will never be a perfect way to publish
a book. There's no perfect combination for a great cover, no super-elite tips
or tricks for a synopsis that will get everyone to read the book. There's no
scale to rate perfectly-flawed characters. There's no way to determine exactly
how abstract or how relatable a plot should be. So don't argue like there is.
There are good ideas
out there. I have gotten excellent marketing tips from traditionally published
authors. I've found wonderful ideas that work in crafting my non-fiction books
from fantasy e-book authors. I've looked at hundreds of covers and observed things
I liked and things I didn't like and applied it to what I was doing. There are
great ideas out there.
The only way you can
learn and advance is to look at how others have done things, put things
together, arrived at their conclusions, then arrive at your own.
Sunday, December 16, 2012
6 ways to be "that" annoying author on Facebook
With all the talk of author brands, online platforms, and finding more outlets to promote work, Facebook seems like an ideal place for an author to connect and advertise. In many ways it is, but if you're not careful you will quickly turn into that annoying person on Facebook, who gets blocked or removed from your friend's news feeds. As an author that uses Facebook with other authorly friends, here are the six most annoying things (in my opinion) an author can do on Facebook.
1. Creating too many pages, and wanting your friends to like ALL of them.
Having multiple pages for pen names or keeping your personal page separate from your author page is often necessary. But don't go overboard. I know authors that on top of having a personal page and multiple pen name pages, they make pages for each book published. Way too much, especially when the author sends like/friend invites to their entire friend's list each time they make a new page. There are only so many things friends will like before you start getting ignored.
2. Word for word multiple postings and shares.
Posting things on your author page AND your personal page word for word will show up as repetitive clutter in friend's feeds that are linked to both your pages. I am guilty of doing this from time to time and I should stop, because it is annoying. Not to mention it doesn't give anyone a reason to like/friend an author page if you post everything to your personal page as well. If you want to promote works via other pen names or your personal page, spread it out and don't copy paste. It's easy: Post. Wait a day. Post with different wordage. But only on really important things like a new book or maybe a promo.
3. No content other than "buy my book."
Not only will you get boring to your friends, new people that check out your page (who may have already bought your book) won't want to subscribe to you on FB unless you provide more content. There are plenty of LOL cats relating to books, writing, or topics you write about (zombies, cooking, rodeos).
If you want to be more serious, do book reviews, post smart things people from history have said, or cats doing serious things. Linking other social networking accounts to automatically post to your FB can be good to up content but not if you post the same things on twitter that you post on FB. (I personally like the goodreads app. For FB, as it updates automatically and I post things there I don't post anywhere else.)
4. Abusing tagging and messaging
Just because someone liked your page/friends you doesn't mean they've signed up for the mailer too. Private messages are a little better, as these are private, but tagging means it'll show up on the tagged friend's wall.
Which, yeah, then people that aren't friends with you will see you have a new book! Awesome!
No, more like annoying because it feels like you're stealing the friend's opinion and using their space for advertising. Bad.
If a friend chooses to post: "New book by Authorly Awesome, read it!" Then great. But when you say "New book by Authorly Awesome, read it!" and stick it on their wall with the clever use of tags... ouch. Sure, people can untag themselves or remove themselves from messages, but really, do you want to wave something in front of their face and annoy them to a point of taking action? They probably won't check out what you're telling them about if that's the case. Especially if you just posted it on your author page. And again on your personal page. Oy.
5. Being too casual.
Personally, I would love to post naughty words and angry self-righteous rants on my personal page, but I don't. I'm super PC, because I'm paranoid. So I'm usually extra paranoid on my author pages. Keep in mind that strangers will be looking at your page even if they don't friend/like your page. So personal, heated drama should probably stay out of your updates. Life updates like moving or kidney failure are probably good if you can tie it into why your next book is late, but daily wallowing is bad. Also, keep it professional. Have a cleaner layout, use complete sentences. No pixilated pictures for your cover photo and do not make your Schnauzer your profile picture. Using profanity is up to you. Of course if it's in your book or your book has adult themes you don't want to present yourself as having a book full of gee-whiz and sexuality that goes as far as the midriff. Just use your best judgment.
6. Calling FB "advertising" or using it as your primary marketing tool.
Having an author page is not advertising. Maybe if you pay lots-o-money for those side ads, but there are debates as to how effective those actually are. And if you think just making a FB page for the book is a good enough marketing plan... um. It's not. And if you think all 437 friends on your personal page will buy your book, you are dreaming. From the local authors I know, and from my experience, only about 10% of your friends will actually buy. A little bit more will read/download free stuff like short stories or blog posts. And less than 10% will come to a live event. Facebook only goes so far and you will soon exhaust your pool of fans and annoy them into blocking you from their feeds/unliking your page if your only advertising is done there. Which defeats the purpose when you have a new book or an event to share.
In my experience FB is best when you have NEWS which is very rare. A new book is news. The first book signing is news. An award is news. Reminding friends to buy the book you published 8 months ago is not news. Reminders are okay, if you get an influx of likes/friends from say a blog post being featured or a book event you went to. But posting every week (or every month) about old books is a good way to turn off your audience. Constant posting is good to stay updated with content, but keep it minimal. A quote here, a link there, an lol cat once a week. That way when you have NEWS you can have a cluster of postings and not be annoying/actually have people pay attention.
FB is a double edged sword, and I will return to the topic to further depress authors in a post I have in the works: why FB will disappoint you as an author. Cheers.
1. Creating too many pages, and wanting your friends to like ALL of them.
Having multiple pages for pen names or keeping your personal page separate from your author page is often necessary. But don't go overboard. I know authors that on top of having a personal page and multiple pen name pages, they make pages for each book published. Way too much, especially when the author sends like/friend invites to their entire friend's list each time they make a new page. There are only so many things friends will like before you start getting ignored.
2. Word for word multiple postings and shares.
Posting things on your author page AND your personal page word for word will show up as repetitive clutter in friend's feeds that are linked to both your pages. I am guilty of doing this from time to time and I should stop, because it is annoying. Not to mention it doesn't give anyone a reason to like/friend an author page if you post everything to your personal page as well. If you want to promote works via other pen names or your personal page, spread it out and don't copy paste. It's easy: Post. Wait a day. Post with different wordage. But only on really important things like a new book or maybe a promo.
3. No content other than "buy my book."
Not only will you get boring to your friends, new people that check out your page (who may have already bought your book) won't want to subscribe to you on FB unless you provide more content. There are plenty of LOL cats relating to books, writing, or topics you write about (zombies, cooking, rodeos).
If you want to be more serious, do book reviews, post smart things people from history have said, or cats doing serious things. Linking other social networking accounts to automatically post to your FB can be good to up content but not if you post the same things on twitter that you post on FB. (I personally like the goodreads app. For FB, as it updates automatically and I post things there I don't post anywhere else.)
4. Abusing tagging and messaging
Just because someone liked your page/friends you doesn't mean they've signed up for the mailer too. Private messages are a little better, as these are private, but tagging means it'll show up on the tagged friend's wall.
Which, yeah, then people that aren't friends with you will see you have a new book! Awesome!
No, more like annoying because it feels like you're stealing the friend's opinion and using their space for advertising. Bad.
If a friend chooses to post: "New book by Authorly Awesome, read it!" Then great. But when you say "New book by Authorly Awesome, read it!" and stick it on their wall with the clever use of tags... ouch. Sure, people can untag themselves or remove themselves from messages, but really, do you want to wave something in front of their face and annoy them to a point of taking action? They probably won't check out what you're telling them about if that's the case. Especially if you just posted it on your author page. And again on your personal page. Oy.
5. Being too casual.
Personally, I would love to post naughty words and angry self-righteous rants on my personal page, but I don't. I'm super PC, because I'm paranoid. So I'm usually extra paranoid on my author pages. Keep in mind that strangers will be looking at your page even if they don't friend/like your page. So personal, heated drama should probably stay out of your updates. Life updates like moving or kidney failure are probably good if you can tie it into why your next book is late, but daily wallowing is bad. Also, keep it professional. Have a cleaner layout, use complete sentences. No pixilated pictures for your cover photo and do not make your Schnauzer your profile picture. Using profanity is up to you. Of course if it's in your book or your book has adult themes you don't want to present yourself as having a book full of gee-whiz and sexuality that goes as far as the midriff. Just use your best judgment.
6. Calling FB "advertising" or using it as your primary marketing tool.
Having an author page is not advertising. Maybe if you pay lots-o-money for those side ads, but there are debates as to how effective those actually are. And if you think just making a FB page for the book is a good enough marketing plan... um. It's not. And if you think all 437 friends on your personal page will buy your book, you are dreaming. From the local authors I know, and from my experience, only about 10% of your friends will actually buy. A little bit more will read/download free stuff like short stories or blog posts. And less than 10% will come to a live event. Facebook only goes so far and you will soon exhaust your pool of fans and annoy them into blocking you from their feeds/unliking your page if your only advertising is done there. Which defeats the purpose when you have a new book or an event to share.
In my experience FB is best when you have NEWS which is very rare. A new book is news. The first book signing is news. An award is news. Reminding friends to buy the book you published 8 months ago is not news. Reminders are okay, if you get an influx of likes/friends from say a blog post being featured or a book event you went to. But posting every week (or every month) about old books is a good way to turn off your audience. Constant posting is good to stay updated with content, but keep it minimal. A quote here, a link there, an lol cat once a week. That way when you have NEWS you can have a cluster of postings and not be annoying/actually have people pay attention.
FB is a double edged sword, and I will return to the topic to further depress authors in a post I have in the works: why FB will disappoint you as an author. Cheers.
Sunday, December 9, 2012
10 Ways to Make Your Editor Angry
I was an in-house editor at my college for my internship and since graduation I've delved into the world of freelance editing, on a small scale in between drafts of my own stuff. I've learned a lot, especially about author/editor relations. So here's a handy list of things to upset your editor, in case you ever want your editor shaken, not stirred.
1. Giving your editor your first draft.
I'm begging and pleading here: do not give your editor your first draft. If you say to me "Brandon and Jeremy are the same person, I just haven't decided the character's name yet," you are not ready for an editor. Unless both you and the editor know it's an early draft to be gone over for general suggestions, you won't get a very good edit from an early draft.
2. Giving a ridiculous deadline.
"Yeah, I want to start formatting this next week."
Well… It takes me at least two months to edit a book. Longer if you insist that all 250,000 words in this behemoth is necessary. I've had some writers practically laugh in my face when I say it takes me at least an hour to edit 5 pages well. And I never edit more than two hours in a row because then I start rushing or looking over things. Trust me, my suggestions for plot and character development are going to take more work than just adding a comma here and there. Getting an editor may be one of the last steps in the process, but it's one that takes a lot of time, so please don't have unrealistic expectations.
3. I'll pay you in pickles.
It was really rocky for me to transition from "I need the experience, I'll edit anything for free" to "I will need some money from this." Even now I charge way less than pro editors. But I still get, "I can't pay you, but I'll take you out to lunch." or "I have half a tub of cool whip and some toilet paper to give you if you'll look this over." Really strange things. (Unfortunately, no one's offered peach vodka, which I would probably go for.) I understand it's hard for an author to shell out a lot of money, especially if they aren't sure the edit will be good. (I personally hate it when I hear stories about an author paying a crap editor. Just because they like to write or have been to college doesn't instantly make them a good editor, even if they think they are. Makes me sad.) I do my best to tell the author exactly what I would do in an edit, how I make it mandatory that they sit down with me and we go over everything together after I have edited a section to clear things up/get better ideas. I show them my work and my process so they know where I'm coming from. Unfortunately just like graphic artists and photographers I've known who have made the jump to charging for their services, people think that because it's more of an intellectual/abstract service that it doesn't deserve as much payment. I do a good job, act as a professional and truly believe I can assist authors with my skills. Please don't offer to pay me in sandwich toppings.
4. Not taking any of the editor's advice.
I know as an author myself, sometimes you think your work is so fantastic, when someone else reads it they're going to say, "Whoa, this is amazing! I mean, this comma here might not need to be there, but other than that, this is great!"
End daydream sequence here. An editor is there to edit. Cut. Chop. Murder all your sweet, innocent darlings. I actually like when an author is a little feisty and defends their ideas. Or maybe I don't get something and they say, "Well, I was trying to get this point across." Then we edit an earlier part to make the troublesome part make sense. That's editing. But when an author completely shuts down every suggestion I make, I stop making suggestions. And that is an utter waste of everyone's time and money. An author certainly does not have to take all the suggestions an editor makes. Part of being a good writer is knowing when to veto some suggestions. But don't let your ego destroy your work and your relationship with an editor. Even if it means putting the piece down for awhile and looking at it later. But yes, as an editor when I spend hours reading and editing something, just to see the final published version is EXACTLY the same thing I read…. Uh oh.
5. Giving an editor's credit without permission.
Now, this may be different for some editors. Some editors will be offended if you DON'T give an editor's credit. But for me, at the stage I'm at, I don't want an editor credit. I'm also an author, so I don't want my name popping up too much on other work that is drastically different than my own. I'm also not officially pro and can't take on several projects at once, so my name as an editor doesn't need to be out there. What I would rather have is a short write up of how I helped the author and how the edit improved their progress, so I can show that to future authors that want me to edit something. HOWEVER, if the editor does do a good job and wants a credit, give it to them. Basically, be clear about what the editor wants and never put an editor's name out anywhere unless they approve.
6. Stealing the editor's exact words.
I usually circle problem paragraphs and offer loose suggestions, but this does not mean I'm rewriting the paragraph for you. I say "this is an example," not "put this in verbatim." But often I will see the author put in the exact word or sentence that I suggested. Or I'll say, "Maybe start this differently" and start a sentence then fade out… but the author will say, "You didn't finish this sentence for me here."
No… because you're supposed to.
I don't know if other editors just rewrite entire paragraphs for authors, but I don't. Usually I talk with the author instead of writing suggestions. If you think you can just plop a manuscript down and insert the corrections the editor made and move on, you are mistaken. Which brings me to…
7. Not rebuilding your piece.
I hate it when I make suggestions and the only changes I see are commas and misspellings but no real overhaul to the piece. I do not try to change the integrity or point of a piece, but STRUCTURE, PEOPLE. You will have to perform some surgery after an edit. You can't just put in what the editor put in red. Or worse, something at the end is re-written but that just makes something at the beginning not make sense. As an author, you still have to write and see the whole picture. Or else you just make both you and the editor look dumb.
8. Sending three stories when I said I'd only look at one.
Each transaction must be agreed upon. If you say, "Hey I have this 2,000 piece work, can I pay you twenty bucks to look at it?" and I say yes and get three stories in my inbox? No good. Or I edit one book for someone, eight months goes by and suddenly book #2 magically appears in my inbox with "We can get together Wednesday about the first section edit." No, no good. Also, if I say "Well, I have too many things going on right now, I can't take this on," don't try to guilt trip me into looking into it anyway by saying I don't have to look at allll of it, just sooome of it. I don't work that way, I'm sorry. I've learned the hard way when I was not charging that if someone asked "Could you look over something for me?" I would get anywhere from 3-7 pieces sent to me. Know exactly which ONE piece you want edited when you approach an editor.
9. "So, uh, since you edited my book... and you've done this before... can you format my ebook and print book for me? And can you set up a Facebook page/tweeter thing/manage my Createspace account too? I have more toilet paper money."
Uh… No.
I have absolutely no problem showing authors how social networks work. I'm a bit of a junkie in that aspect and am on goodreads every day. I even ask about post-production in the editing process, with marketing ideas etc. because I firmly believe it is important to keep in mind during editing. But I cannot manage all those accounts for you and send updated royalty reports to you. And while I may format books for authors in certain situations, I will want to be paid in addition to the edit. I will most likely charge less than a freelancer on Craigslist anyway, so don't take advantage of the fact that I taught myself the skills you need by throwing the service in with the edit or giving me more pickles.
10. "Thanks for editing my book! It's on sale now. It's 25.00 but for you, 21.95!"
No comment. Just don’t.
1. Giving your editor your first draft.
I'm begging and pleading here: do not give your editor your first draft. If you say to me "Brandon and Jeremy are the same person, I just haven't decided the character's name yet," you are not ready for an editor. Unless both you and the editor know it's an early draft to be gone over for general suggestions, you won't get a very good edit from an early draft.
2. Giving a ridiculous deadline.
"Yeah, I want to start formatting this next week."
Well… It takes me at least two months to edit a book. Longer if you insist that all 250,000 words in this behemoth is necessary. I've had some writers practically laugh in my face when I say it takes me at least an hour to edit 5 pages well. And I never edit more than two hours in a row because then I start rushing or looking over things. Trust me, my suggestions for plot and character development are going to take more work than just adding a comma here and there. Getting an editor may be one of the last steps in the process, but it's one that takes a lot of time, so please don't have unrealistic expectations.
3. I'll pay you in pickles.
It was really rocky for me to transition from "I need the experience, I'll edit anything for free" to "I will need some money from this." Even now I charge way less than pro editors. But I still get, "I can't pay you, but I'll take you out to lunch." or "I have half a tub of cool whip and some toilet paper to give you if you'll look this over." Really strange things. (Unfortunately, no one's offered peach vodka, which I would probably go for.) I understand it's hard for an author to shell out a lot of money, especially if they aren't sure the edit will be good. (I personally hate it when I hear stories about an author paying a crap editor. Just because they like to write or have been to college doesn't instantly make them a good editor, even if they think they are. Makes me sad.) I do my best to tell the author exactly what I would do in an edit, how I make it mandatory that they sit down with me and we go over everything together after I have edited a section to clear things up/get better ideas. I show them my work and my process so they know where I'm coming from. Unfortunately just like graphic artists and photographers I've known who have made the jump to charging for their services, people think that because it's more of an intellectual/abstract service that it doesn't deserve as much payment. I do a good job, act as a professional and truly believe I can assist authors with my skills. Please don't offer to pay me in sandwich toppings.
4. Not taking any of the editor's advice.
I know as an author myself, sometimes you think your work is so fantastic, when someone else reads it they're going to say, "Whoa, this is amazing! I mean, this comma here might not need to be there, but other than that, this is great!"
End daydream sequence here. An editor is there to edit. Cut. Chop. Murder all your sweet, innocent darlings. I actually like when an author is a little feisty and defends their ideas. Or maybe I don't get something and they say, "Well, I was trying to get this point across." Then we edit an earlier part to make the troublesome part make sense. That's editing. But when an author completely shuts down every suggestion I make, I stop making suggestions. And that is an utter waste of everyone's time and money. An author certainly does not have to take all the suggestions an editor makes. Part of being a good writer is knowing when to veto some suggestions. But don't let your ego destroy your work and your relationship with an editor. Even if it means putting the piece down for awhile and looking at it later. But yes, as an editor when I spend hours reading and editing something, just to see the final published version is EXACTLY the same thing I read…. Uh oh.
5. Giving an editor's credit without permission.
Now, this may be different for some editors. Some editors will be offended if you DON'T give an editor's credit. But for me, at the stage I'm at, I don't want an editor credit. I'm also an author, so I don't want my name popping up too much on other work that is drastically different than my own. I'm also not officially pro and can't take on several projects at once, so my name as an editor doesn't need to be out there. What I would rather have is a short write up of how I helped the author and how the edit improved their progress, so I can show that to future authors that want me to edit something. HOWEVER, if the editor does do a good job and wants a credit, give it to them. Basically, be clear about what the editor wants and never put an editor's name out anywhere unless they approve.
6. Stealing the editor's exact words.
I usually circle problem paragraphs and offer loose suggestions, but this does not mean I'm rewriting the paragraph for you. I say "this is an example," not "put this in verbatim." But often I will see the author put in the exact word or sentence that I suggested. Or I'll say, "Maybe start this differently" and start a sentence then fade out… but the author will say, "You didn't finish this sentence for me here."
No… because you're supposed to.
I don't know if other editors just rewrite entire paragraphs for authors, but I don't. Usually I talk with the author instead of writing suggestions. If you think you can just plop a manuscript down and insert the corrections the editor made and move on, you are mistaken. Which brings me to…
7. Not rebuilding your piece.
I hate it when I make suggestions and the only changes I see are commas and misspellings but no real overhaul to the piece. I do not try to change the integrity or point of a piece, but STRUCTURE, PEOPLE. You will have to perform some surgery after an edit. You can't just put in what the editor put in red. Or worse, something at the end is re-written but that just makes something at the beginning not make sense. As an author, you still have to write and see the whole picture. Or else you just make both you and the editor look dumb.
8. Sending three stories when I said I'd only look at one.
Each transaction must be agreed upon. If you say, "Hey I have this 2,000 piece work, can I pay you twenty bucks to look at it?" and I say yes and get three stories in my inbox? No good. Or I edit one book for someone, eight months goes by and suddenly book #2 magically appears in my inbox with "We can get together Wednesday about the first section edit." No, no good. Also, if I say "Well, I have too many things going on right now, I can't take this on," don't try to guilt trip me into looking into it anyway by saying I don't have to look at allll of it, just sooome of it. I don't work that way, I'm sorry. I've learned the hard way when I was not charging that if someone asked "Could you look over something for me?" I would get anywhere from 3-7 pieces sent to me. Know exactly which ONE piece you want edited when you approach an editor.
9. "So, uh, since you edited my book... and you've done this before... can you format my ebook and print book for me? And can you set up a Facebook page/tweeter thing/manage my Createspace account too? I have more toilet paper money."
Uh… No.
I have absolutely no problem showing authors how social networks work. I'm a bit of a junkie in that aspect and am on goodreads every day. I even ask about post-production in the editing process, with marketing ideas etc. because I firmly believe it is important to keep in mind during editing. But I cannot manage all those accounts for you and send updated royalty reports to you. And while I may format books for authors in certain situations, I will want to be paid in addition to the edit. I will most likely charge less than a freelancer on Craigslist anyway, so don't take advantage of the fact that I taught myself the skills you need by throwing the service in with the edit or giving me more pickles.
10. "Thanks for editing my book! It's on sale now. It's 25.00 but for you, 21.95!"
No comment. Just don’t.
Sunday, October 21, 2012
The Unenthusiasm for my book runneth under
One of the first people to buy my print book "19 Years 10 Months 24 Days" after I got my first shipment was my mom-in-law. She texted me that she could stop at the library when I was at work there and buy it quick. I said, sounds good. The next day, mom-in-law comes in. "Hi," I say, "How are you?" "Great," she says. "I'm here to buy your book!" "Oh!" I say, "I totally forgot it!"
When I was a Freshmen in college, I'd always imagined this epic elation I would feel about having a book out. I'd tell everybody and it would be so amazing and wonderful and I'd skip through fields of Literary Poppies.
And now I just forget about it when I actually have someone willing to give me real money for my book?
I did get her a copy, but the completely un-Authorly Behavior on my part continued.
A day or two later I set up a facebook event for my book signing and invited some people. At work at the grocery the next day one of my co-workers asked me, "Oh hey, whose book is that you're promoting?" So, I told her it was mine. No one at work knew I'd published my book. They were all surprised and excited, but I felt kind of weird about the attention. I'd brought some book cards and book signing invites to put in the break room, but I ended up not leaving them there.
Then yesterday a friend came through my grocery line and was all, "Tell me about your book!" I told him about it, YA Underground Railroad time-travel. I then said to look for my next book, a zombie book, I planned to publish in a few months. He kind of laughed and said I didn't seem very excited about this book if I was already trying to promote the second one.
Even before all this has happened, and when my book became available, my first move was to write this blog post, "Don't buy my book, unless you want to."
So, what's the deal? Am I really that ashamed of my book that I'm not posting a million status updates about it or plastering posters all over town?
For the most part it's because I've been too busy with my pen name Matilda's first book that I plan to publish in February/March. Now that I know how this whole publishing thing works the way I want it to for my goals, it's on and I've been working non-stop on this other book. I'm in a whole different mindset. But, there is more to it than just that.
I wrote 19 Years to learn how to write a novel. I published it to learn how to publish. I think there are some painfully obvious literary devices I learned in school in it (parallel characters, I got those), the history is a tad romanticized (though I tried to be historically accurate), and the beginning relies heavily on my own experiences (it isn't until the main character Sophie starts jumping back in time that the tone turns from memoir-ish to fiction).
I knew all these things and I published it anyway because I still think it's a good story and one that is well put together. Things like structure and character development were important to me in the book and I spent time with these things. But honestly, I didn't go into publishing the book really expecting to promote it right away or for it to even have better sales than the other books I have lined up. I know the regular patrons at the library are interested in local history so a book about the Underground Railroad in Nebraska works for them, and I've gotten a nice reception there. However, the majority of my friends and peer authors are more in the blood/action/guts/horror/kick-ass protag category. So, I'm not spending much time promoting my super-PC time travel book to them. You can't market to everyone.
Now, if someone in the blood/action camp wants to look into 19 Years, that's great. I'm not saying that I think all readers are trapped into the box of genre and can't enjoy a book they wouldn't typically read. I'm just not spending much time promoting it to them. And right now, I'm groovy with that, even if I've sold less than 30 books.
My plan is to write a majority of my books under Matilda Loveshack (and yes, I will write about why I chose that name), mainly because they all fit into a horror/supernatural category with naughty words. Under my AJ name I plan to write more non-fiction, and explore writing about disability and maybe try to get some of the articles on literary criticism I've written into academic type journals. But I will keep the naughty words down when I write under AJ. Lastly I have some romance/erotica storylines that I plan to begin a third pen name for.
All this may seem very complicated and annoying. And on paper (or screen), it kind of is. For all my plotlines I have put together "project folders" − a folder containing a rough outline, some written scenes and potential character profiles stuck together with the working title taped to the front. AJ has two, Matilda has seven and my romance name has three. And each has some short stories I've assigned them to publish for free as short story ebooks.
My goal is to have books in many "genres" out so when I go to events (flea markets more likely, let's not lie) I can have all my pen names out and readers that want romance, or historical fiction, or zombies can have their picks. Then as I build, I will promote in line with what the pen name is all about rather than individual books. Of course I'll always have to promote individual books, but I see them more as building blocks right now, and my energy is going into constructing the books as they will work together under the pen name.
Will my grand plan work out like the fortress I have in mind or be more like an unstable, lopsided sandcastle? Who knows. But I do know it works for me, and the pen names have given me focus with my work, and a sense of purpose and organization.
19 Years means a lot to me. When I'm feeling down or lost or trapped I pull out the first handwritten draft in the huge three-ring binder that has snippets I wrote in high school. And it makes me feel better. It is worth something to me. Writing and publishing the book is a huge first step and one that I'm very proud of. But no, I don't carry my business card/book card in my pocket to hand out to whoever might come through my grocery line. I may be a little reserved when explaining my YA Underground Railroad story to certain people. It doesn't mean I think it's bad and I'm not confident or that I don't want to "make it" as an author. I just see the book as having its own place. All my books will have their own place, and I will do them the best by knowing where that place is.
But seriously, stay tuned for the zombie book. It is made of awesome.
Post Script: I wrote this then had to run to work at the grocery. I hadn't been there five minutes when someone brought up my book and a couple people wanted more info. Luckily I had exhibited some Authorly Behavior and stuck a few of my book rack cards in my glove box so I had some to give out. I even acted (gasp!) excited. It kind of woke me up to the importance of at least having my business card on me, or the book, should the topic arise. There is hope for me yet!
When I was a Freshmen in college, I'd always imagined this epic elation I would feel about having a book out. I'd tell everybody and it would be so amazing and wonderful and I'd skip through fields of Literary Poppies.
And now I just forget about it when I actually have someone willing to give me real money for my book?
I did get her a copy, but the completely un-Authorly Behavior on my part continued.
A day or two later I set up a facebook event for my book signing and invited some people. At work at the grocery the next day one of my co-workers asked me, "Oh hey, whose book is that you're promoting?" So, I told her it was mine. No one at work knew I'd published my book. They were all surprised and excited, but I felt kind of weird about the attention. I'd brought some book cards and book signing invites to put in the break room, but I ended up not leaving them there.
Then yesterday a friend came through my grocery line and was all, "Tell me about your book!" I told him about it, YA Underground Railroad time-travel. I then said to look for my next book, a zombie book, I planned to publish in a few months. He kind of laughed and said I didn't seem very excited about this book if I was already trying to promote the second one.
Even before all this has happened, and when my book became available, my first move was to write this blog post, "Don't buy my book, unless you want to."
So, what's the deal? Am I really that ashamed of my book that I'm not posting a million status updates about it or plastering posters all over town?
For the most part it's because I've been too busy with my pen name Matilda's first book that I plan to publish in February/March. Now that I know how this whole publishing thing works the way I want it to for my goals, it's on and I've been working non-stop on this other book. I'm in a whole different mindset. But, there is more to it than just that.
I wrote 19 Years to learn how to write a novel. I published it to learn how to publish. I think there are some painfully obvious literary devices I learned in school in it (parallel characters, I got those), the history is a tad romanticized (though I tried to be historically accurate), and the beginning relies heavily on my own experiences (it isn't until the main character Sophie starts jumping back in time that the tone turns from memoir-ish to fiction).
I knew all these things and I published it anyway because I still think it's a good story and one that is well put together. Things like structure and character development were important to me in the book and I spent time with these things. But honestly, I didn't go into publishing the book really expecting to promote it right away or for it to even have better sales than the other books I have lined up. I know the regular patrons at the library are interested in local history so a book about the Underground Railroad in Nebraska works for them, and I've gotten a nice reception there. However, the majority of my friends and peer authors are more in the blood/action/guts/horror/kick-ass protag category. So, I'm not spending much time promoting my super-PC time travel book to them. You can't market to everyone.
Now, if someone in the blood/action camp wants to look into 19 Years, that's great. I'm not saying that I think all readers are trapped into the box of genre and can't enjoy a book they wouldn't typically read. I'm just not spending much time promoting it to them. And right now, I'm groovy with that, even if I've sold less than 30 books.
My plan is to write a majority of my books under Matilda Loveshack (and yes, I will write about why I chose that name), mainly because they all fit into a horror/supernatural category with naughty words. Under my AJ name I plan to write more non-fiction, and explore writing about disability and maybe try to get some of the articles on literary criticism I've written into academic type journals. But I will keep the naughty words down when I write under AJ. Lastly I have some romance/erotica storylines that I plan to begin a third pen name for.
All this may seem very complicated and annoying. And on paper (or screen), it kind of is. For all my plotlines I have put together "project folders" − a folder containing a rough outline, some written scenes and potential character profiles stuck together with the working title taped to the front. AJ has two, Matilda has seven and my romance name has three. And each has some short stories I've assigned them to publish for free as short story ebooks.
My goal is to have books in many "genres" out so when I go to events (flea markets more likely, let's not lie) I can have all my pen names out and readers that want romance, or historical fiction, or zombies can have their picks. Then as I build, I will promote in line with what the pen name is all about rather than individual books. Of course I'll always have to promote individual books, but I see them more as building blocks right now, and my energy is going into constructing the books as they will work together under the pen name.
Will my grand plan work out like the fortress I have in mind or be more like an unstable, lopsided sandcastle? Who knows. But I do know it works for me, and the pen names have given me focus with my work, and a sense of purpose and organization.
19 Years means a lot to me. When I'm feeling down or lost or trapped I pull out the first handwritten draft in the huge three-ring binder that has snippets I wrote in high school. And it makes me feel better. It is worth something to me. Writing and publishing the book is a huge first step and one that I'm very proud of. But no, I don't carry my business card/book card in my pocket to hand out to whoever might come through my grocery line. I may be a little reserved when explaining my YA Underground Railroad story to certain people. It doesn't mean I think it's bad and I'm not confident or that I don't want to "make it" as an author. I just see the book as having its own place. All my books will have their own place, and I will do them the best by knowing where that place is.
But seriously, stay tuned for the zombie book. It is made of awesome.
Post Script: I wrote this then had to run to work at the grocery. I hadn't been there five minutes when someone brought up my book and a couple people wanted more info. Luckily I had exhibited some Authorly Behavior and stuck a few of my book rack cards in my glove box so I had some to give out. I even acted (gasp!) excited. It kind of woke me up to the importance of at least having my business card on me, or the book, should the topic arise. There is hope for me yet!
Thursday, August 30, 2012
Don't buy my book (Unless you want to)
I know this pitch sounds like the epitome of reverse psychology marketing, but I’m sincere when I say, if you don’t want to buy my book… don’t.
I think books should be like toasters. You want a toaster because it serves a purpose. To deliver delicious, yummy, gooey poptarts, strudels, or warmed bread on a cold morning or just whenever you want a damn piece of toast. It must work, and you must enjoy it. Otherwise, it’s just a hunk of metal taking up counter space where you could have something you really want, like a waffle maker or a Fry Daddy.
I feel the same way about books. If a reader isn’t enjoying reading a book, they have every right not to read it. (Literature majors, you are excluded this right. Go finish Billy Budd and stop whining.) But even more so, if they know that some genre/topic/era isn’t for them, they shouldn’t feel obligated to buy the book just because the author wrote it. Now I’m not saying don’t try something new -- I’ve been to book signings initially believing I would not enjoy the book the writer wrote only to have a new favorite author a few weeks later. I’m open minded. But if nothing − the cover, the blurb, the author’s philosophy/promo manners − makes me tick, I have no use buying their book if I’m not going to even read it, let alone enjoy it.
I’m not saying I think my book sucks and I’m protecting you and me from a heap of embarrassment by saying don’t read it. Contraire. I happily invite any book club that wants to rip my book to shreds with scrutiny of what makes an enjoyable read and give me the good, bad, awesome and putrid. (You think I’m joking, but book clubs can be vicious.)
What I’m saying is I wrote a historical time travel concentrating on the Underground Railroad in Nebraska and not everyone is going to be into that premise. If you do enjoy that premise, and like a little mystery and more character development, then I’ve taken my time and written you a good story and I hope you enjoy it. If you think you might be interested, by all means, check it out. But if you’re looking at the cover with a tombstone and an 1851 pistol wondering “Where’re the zombies?” wait until my next book. There will be zombies.
Sales don't matter as much to me as readers. I have a pile of books that I haven’t read, but felt obligated to buy at the time because the author gave me that sad, longing “you don’t support the arts unless you buy my book” look as they held out their blood-and-guts ink-and-paper baby to me and I caved. Really, it does no one any good, and I don’t want to be that author.
So there you have it. Seven years, a billion (give or take) drafts and read throughs, and if it’s not your thing, I’m cool with that. If it is your thing, any feedback is greatly appreciated. Let me be your toaster. I won’t let you down.
-AJ
Print book cover. No, the dead people in the cemetery do not rise and conquer. Well, not the way you're thinking.
I think books should be like toasters. You want a toaster because it serves a purpose. To deliver delicious, yummy, gooey poptarts, strudels, or warmed bread on a cold morning or just whenever you want a damn piece of toast. It must work, and you must enjoy it. Otherwise, it’s just a hunk of metal taking up counter space where you could have something you really want, like a waffle maker or a Fry Daddy.
I feel the same way about books. If a reader isn’t enjoying reading a book, they have every right not to read it. (Literature majors, you are excluded this right. Go finish Billy Budd and stop whining.) But even more so, if they know that some genre/topic/era isn’t for them, they shouldn’t feel obligated to buy the book just because the author wrote it. Now I’m not saying don’t try something new -- I’ve been to book signings initially believing I would not enjoy the book the writer wrote only to have a new favorite author a few weeks later. I’m open minded. But if nothing − the cover, the blurb, the author’s philosophy/promo manners − makes me tick, I have no use buying their book if I’m not going to even read it, let alone enjoy it.
I’m not saying I think my book sucks and I’m protecting you and me from a heap of embarrassment by saying don’t read it. Contraire. I happily invite any book club that wants to rip my book to shreds with scrutiny of what makes an enjoyable read and give me the good, bad, awesome and putrid. (You think I’m joking, but book clubs can be vicious.)
What I’m saying is I wrote a historical time travel concentrating on the Underground Railroad in Nebraska and not everyone is going to be into that premise. If you do enjoy that premise, and like a little mystery and more character development, then I’ve taken my time and written you a good story and I hope you enjoy it. If you think you might be interested, by all means, check it out. But if you’re looking at the cover with a tombstone and an 1851 pistol wondering “Where’re the zombies?” wait until my next book. There will be zombies.
Sales don't matter as much to me as readers. I have a pile of books that I haven’t read, but felt obligated to buy at the time because the author gave me that sad, longing “you don’t support the arts unless you buy my book” look as they held out their blood-and-guts ink-and-paper baby to me and I caved. Really, it does no one any good, and I don’t want to be that author.
So there you have it. Seven years, a billion (give or take) drafts and read throughs, and if it’s not your thing, I’m cool with that. If it is your thing, any feedback is greatly appreciated. Let me be your toaster. I won’t let you down.
-AJ
Print book cover. No, the dead people in the cemetery do not rise and conquer. Well, not the way you're thinking.
Tuesday, August 28, 2012
My response to "that" Sue Grafton quote, and self-pub philosophy in general.
So, I'm a little late on this topic, but I feel it's time that I sat down and assembled my philosophy of self-publishing in wordage. And the topic/quote is a springboard for just that.
So, bestselling author Sue Grafton made a lot of independent and self-published authors angry when she basically called self-publishers lazy wannabes. I originally saw the quote in this Forbes article by David Vinjamuri, and soon after on writer's blogs. Grafton has since issued some damage control and explanations about her quote, but the embers still burn.
Here is the quote, I found here:
"The hard work is taking the rejection, learning the lessons, and mastering the craft over a period of time. I see way too many writers who complete one novel and start looking for the fame and fortune they’re sure they’re entitled to. To me, it seems disrespectful…that a ‘wannabe’ assumes it’s all so easy s/he can put out a ‘published novel’ without bothering to read, study, or do the research. Learning to construct a narrative and create character, learning to balance pace, description, exposition, and dialogue takes a long time. This is not an quick do-it-yourself home project. Self-publishing is a short cut and I don’t believe in short cuts when it comes to the arts. I compare self-publishing to a student managing to conquer Five Easy Pieces on the piano and then wondering if s/he’s ready to be booked into Carnegie Hall."
So, here we go.
Honestly, getting mad about "wannabe" writers is the third in the Big Three, as I like to call them, of Things Every New Writer Thinks. One is needing to put a © symbol on everything they submit/don't submit for fear of having their work stolen. Two is honestly believing that their book's themes are universal themes, so everyone will want to read it. Third, I reiterate, "Omg, I bleed ink better/harder/longer that that guy. I'm mad now." (And I'm speaking from experience as well as observation.)
I ran into the same thing in college. I was a lit major, and I took lit classes. I had peers who never read the books assigned. (That's all lit classes are. Reading books. And they didn't. Why. No idea.) Or the scope of their literary criticism/critical thinking was, "Yeah, I didn't really like that book. That wasn't a good book." Well, guess what. I loathed "Cry, the Beloved Country" but that thing is underlined and noted on every other page, and I learned a lot from reading it. At the end of the day, it didn't really matter that they just read Sparknotes and got C's or B's, when I stayed up every night reading 300 pages and got A's. We graduated with the same degree. And since it doesn't really matter if you can list Dante's circles of hell when applying for jobs in telecommunications or customer service, I guess everyone wins. (I mentioned writing literary criticism as a hobby at my interview for the grocery store. Express cashier, baby.)
But it's everywhere. In every job I've had, in every hobby I've seen, there are people standing around lamenting over the wannabes. Fearing they may be thought of as a wannabe. Pointing the finger at the wannabe, haha, wannabe! But let's not dwell on the wannabes. Wannabe's gonna wan..na.
The main point that has ruffled so many feathers is "Self-publishing is a short cut and I don’t believe in short cuts when it comes to the arts." Like many of the angered self-pubbers out there, I do not see self-publishing as a shortcut. I have spent hours (Blood! Tears!) teaching myself formatting. I have honed my skills as an editor, because, honestly, good editors are very hard to find. I've read graphic design and art books to learn about cover design and have actively been trying to sharpen my skills in photography. Not to mention that I spend hours in between my three jobs reading fiction, non-fiction, blogs and articles. I take notebooks with me everywhere I go. I write on napkins, in texts, on my breaks, late at night. And many self-publishers do that. They work diligently to polish their product and get better at their craft. But it doesn't matter to anyone else that I'm sitting at my patio feverishly trying to get a page written before I have to go to work. No one's life is changed by me staying up too late again to write this blog post. We're all doing our own thing, to cope, to live, to survive, to escape, to whatever. And we get great books out of it all, that we all enjoy and share. We also get bad books.
Because, yes. The stereotypes can be true. Self-publishing can be a shortcut. Authors are people and people come up with a million annoying marketing schemes and will always feel entitlement for attention and praise. Many out there believe their 30,000-word piece can change souls and minds and make them rich without even taking off their slippers. And some don't edit. I read a self-published book… where the narrator kept making… dramatic… pauses. And one ellipses… had 14 periods. Fourteen. Not, "Oh, typo, there's four," or even "Um, didn't anyone tell you five dots is too many?" Fourteen. It begged to question if the author had ever even read a book, let alone why this person thought s/he had the qualifications to write one.
But that's not to mean a junky self-published book was put together hastily under visions of grandeur. I worked as a tutor in lit when I was in college and I worked with some students who loved literature, wanted to write and critique. But they had a hard time. Even when they read and read and discussed and we went over themes and symbols and everything, on tests they were lucky to pull B's and their writing took several rounds of editing to get to something workable. But they were bleeding more ink into it than students who easily read something once and wrote decent essays. So even if you do work really hard for years and years, your execution might be off, or you just might not be able to tell a story in a way that readers can palate. And there's nothing wrong with that. I'm on the brink of taking the plunge with my first book, and could very well not have executed the way seven years of work should have. But I'll publish again. And again. Which, in my world is exactly "taking the rejection, learning the lessons, and mastering the craft over a period of time."
I want to rally around good self-published books, because I like them, because they're well done, and because I respect the work it takes. But I will be honest, I don't want to give 5-star reviews to books I think are badly written, and don't want to review books in a positive light just because they're self-published. I want to read good books. And that starts with us, as writers.
I think self-publishers have to be on their best game to do well, or even all right. Because traditional publishers have a whole team of people and ideas crafting a product, not to mention money and resources that will far overshadow the capabilities of a softcover POD book as far as physical product goes. But with ebook and even better print technology, it still comes down to what's inside the book.
A wannabe is always going to shine through. Annoying people with self-centered selling strategies are only going to get so far. So, let's be honest. The fact that 50 Shades has allegedly sold more copies than the Harry Potter series makes me want to drink mustard and milk mixed together to induce vomiting. (A guy did that in my high school biology class once. It worked.) Not because of the sex (I want a sociology degree. I have many a sex book.) Nor because I don't think she didn't spend hours working on the book. I think she did. I just think it has the structure of a malformed plastic sack at the bottom of the stack we throw away at the grocery. But that's my opinion. It's a book. Let's look at books and quit worrying over who bleeds more, or who needs to fill a void in their life for whatever reason by writing books. I'm sure we all have one, deep and dark.
If you think a book is bad, say it's bad. If you're a self-pubbed author, for everything lovely and nice, don't solicit reviews or try guerilla tactics by shoving your book/business card in someone's face just because they're in a library. Don't try to force readers to be into something they just aren't interested in.
If you think a book is good, say it's good. Does it irk me that I stay up until 2 a.m. formatting an ebook and someone else is all, "Yeah, I paid my computer friend to format my ebook, she'll get it back to me next week and I'll be published!" Yes. It does. But if it's a good book, well-written and fresh, I will gladly say so.
So, this is where I stand. Research the writing world, but don't get too caught up in it. Work hard, read books, write, and edit every day. A pot always fills one drop at time.
So, bestselling author Sue Grafton made a lot of independent and self-published authors angry when she basically called self-publishers lazy wannabes. I originally saw the quote in this Forbes article by David Vinjamuri, and soon after on writer's blogs. Grafton has since issued some damage control and explanations about her quote, but the embers still burn.
Here is the quote, I found here:
"The hard work is taking the rejection, learning the lessons, and mastering the craft over a period of time. I see way too many writers who complete one novel and start looking for the fame and fortune they’re sure they’re entitled to. To me, it seems disrespectful…that a ‘wannabe’ assumes it’s all so easy s/he can put out a ‘published novel’ without bothering to read, study, or do the research. Learning to construct a narrative and create character, learning to balance pace, description, exposition, and dialogue takes a long time. This is not an quick do-it-yourself home project. Self-publishing is a short cut and I don’t believe in short cuts when it comes to the arts. I compare self-publishing to a student managing to conquer Five Easy Pieces on the piano and then wondering if s/he’s ready to be booked into Carnegie Hall."
So, here we go.
Honestly, getting mad about "wannabe" writers is the third in the Big Three, as I like to call them, of Things Every New Writer Thinks. One is needing to put a © symbol on everything they submit/don't submit for fear of having their work stolen. Two is honestly believing that their book's themes are universal themes, so everyone will want to read it. Third, I reiterate, "Omg, I bleed ink better/harder/longer that that guy. I'm mad now." (And I'm speaking from experience as well as observation.)
I ran into the same thing in college. I was a lit major, and I took lit classes. I had peers who never read the books assigned. (That's all lit classes are. Reading books. And they didn't. Why. No idea.) Or the scope of their literary criticism/critical thinking was, "Yeah, I didn't really like that book. That wasn't a good book." Well, guess what. I loathed "Cry, the Beloved Country" but that thing is underlined and noted on every other page, and I learned a lot from reading it. At the end of the day, it didn't really matter that they just read Sparknotes and got C's or B's, when I stayed up every night reading 300 pages and got A's. We graduated with the same degree. And since it doesn't really matter if you can list Dante's circles of hell when applying for jobs in telecommunications or customer service, I guess everyone wins. (I mentioned writing literary criticism as a hobby at my interview for the grocery store. Express cashier, baby.)
But it's everywhere. In every job I've had, in every hobby I've seen, there are people standing around lamenting over the wannabes. Fearing they may be thought of as a wannabe. Pointing the finger at the wannabe, haha, wannabe! But let's not dwell on the wannabes. Wannabe's gonna wan..na.
The main point that has ruffled so many feathers is "Self-publishing is a short cut and I don’t believe in short cuts when it comes to the arts." Like many of the angered self-pubbers out there, I do not see self-publishing as a shortcut. I have spent hours (Blood! Tears!) teaching myself formatting. I have honed my skills as an editor, because, honestly, good editors are very hard to find. I've read graphic design and art books to learn about cover design and have actively been trying to sharpen my skills in photography. Not to mention that I spend hours in between my three jobs reading fiction, non-fiction, blogs and articles. I take notebooks with me everywhere I go. I write on napkins, in texts, on my breaks, late at night. And many self-publishers do that. They work diligently to polish their product and get better at their craft. But it doesn't matter to anyone else that I'm sitting at my patio feverishly trying to get a page written before I have to go to work. No one's life is changed by me staying up too late again to write this blog post. We're all doing our own thing, to cope, to live, to survive, to escape, to whatever. And we get great books out of it all, that we all enjoy and share. We also get bad books.
Because, yes. The stereotypes can be true. Self-publishing can be a shortcut. Authors are people and people come up with a million annoying marketing schemes and will always feel entitlement for attention and praise. Many out there believe their 30,000-word piece can change souls and minds and make them rich without even taking off their slippers. And some don't edit. I read a self-published book… where the narrator kept making… dramatic… pauses. And one ellipses… had 14 periods. Fourteen. Not, "Oh, typo, there's four," or even "Um, didn't anyone tell you five dots is too many?" Fourteen. It begged to question if the author had ever even read a book, let alone why this person thought s/he had the qualifications to write one.
But that's not to mean a junky self-published book was put together hastily under visions of grandeur. I worked as a tutor in lit when I was in college and I worked with some students who loved literature, wanted to write and critique. But they had a hard time. Even when they read and read and discussed and we went over themes and symbols and everything, on tests they were lucky to pull B's and their writing took several rounds of editing to get to something workable. But they were bleeding more ink into it than students who easily read something once and wrote decent essays. So even if you do work really hard for years and years, your execution might be off, or you just might not be able to tell a story in a way that readers can palate. And there's nothing wrong with that. I'm on the brink of taking the plunge with my first book, and could very well not have executed the way seven years of work should have. But I'll publish again. And again. Which, in my world is exactly "taking the rejection, learning the lessons, and mastering the craft over a period of time."
I want to rally around good self-published books, because I like them, because they're well done, and because I respect the work it takes. But I will be honest, I don't want to give 5-star reviews to books I think are badly written, and don't want to review books in a positive light just because they're self-published. I want to read good books. And that starts with us, as writers.
I think self-publishers have to be on their best game to do well, or even all right. Because traditional publishers have a whole team of people and ideas crafting a product, not to mention money and resources that will far overshadow the capabilities of a softcover POD book as far as physical product goes. But with ebook and even better print technology, it still comes down to what's inside the book.
A wannabe is always going to shine through. Annoying people with self-centered selling strategies are only going to get so far. So, let's be honest. The fact that 50 Shades has allegedly sold more copies than the Harry Potter series makes me want to drink mustard and milk mixed together to induce vomiting. (A guy did that in my high school biology class once. It worked.) Not because of the sex (I want a sociology degree. I have many a sex book.) Nor because I don't think she didn't spend hours working on the book. I think she did. I just think it has the structure of a malformed plastic sack at the bottom of the stack we throw away at the grocery. But that's my opinion. It's a book. Let's look at books and quit worrying over who bleeds more, or who needs to fill a void in their life for whatever reason by writing books. I'm sure we all have one, deep and dark.
If you think a book is bad, say it's bad. If you're a self-pubbed author, for everything lovely and nice, don't solicit reviews or try guerilla tactics by shoving your book/business card in someone's face just because they're in a library. Don't try to force readers to be into something they just aren't interested in.
If you think a book is good, say it's good. Does it irk me that I stay up until 2 a.m. formatting an ebook and someone else is all, "Yeah, I paid my computer friend to format my ebook, she'll get it back to me next week and I'll be published!" Yes. It does. But if it's a good book, well-written and fresh, I will gladly say so.
So, this is where I stand. Research the writing world, but don't get too caught up in it. Work hard, read books, write, and edit every day. A pot always fills one drop at time.
Wednesday, December 28, 2011
Editors. (Take a deep breath. Everything's all right.)
Does working with editors turn you into the defensive, angry, self-righteous author? Here are four things to tell your ego when the evil editor complex strikes.
1. They’re editors, not readers.
The editors that you choose to let start cutting into your work are not reading the piece on a beach on their vacation. If the only feedback is “It’s interesting, I like it a lot,” they are not being an editor. An editor doesn’t read a piece to enjoy it was a reader. They’re reading it to find weak spots – to make it better. It can be crushing to hear “Wow this needs a lot of work,” from an editor. You already put in a lot of work, after all. But trust me, it takes a lot of work to get to a point where it needs more, so don’t be discouraged.
2. Being defensive defies the purpose.
I like it when writers get a little defensive, but not when they completely shut out everything the editor suggests. I’ve worked on projects as an editor when the author is so adamant, I just stop making suggestions. So what’s the point of the editor if that happens? It’s a waste of everyone’s time. The great thing about being a self-publisher is that you really do have the last word. You don’t have to take all the suggestions an editor gives. But don’t let the suggestions you aren’t going to use interfere with the suggestions you should!
3. You are the expert and nothing changes that.
As a self-publisher, I don’t have the resources to pay a professional editor, but I do have a team of a select few readers that have editing strengths in different areas. Some have studied literature, some have not. Some have worked in the writing field, some have not. Just because someone has a degree in literature doesn’t mean they know more than you. I witnessed a lot of English degree people that didn’t read the books they were assigned in lit classes. That’s all lit classes are! How do you learn anything about literature if you don’t read? A degree doesn’t make you. A degree is what you make it. I’m going on six years studying literature and writing. I have my degree and I continue to read, edit other people’s work, and practice my own writing. When I get overwhelmed with suggestions I need to remember to trust my own knowledge, skills, and intuition. On the flipside I’ve gotten great advice from people who know what time it is and know way more than me. You know when you get suggestions from someone brilliant, and that’s great. But you should still be the expert when it comes to what’s best for the audience, the story, the characters, and the whole point of the book. It’s up to you to take suggestions, leave suggestions, and do the piece justice.
4. If you were holding the red pen, you’d be doing the same thing.
People have asked me what would happen if I launched my own publishing company and were the chief editor. Well. Everything would have to get past me. And I’m picky, rigid, unforgiving and terribly honest. But as a writer, I can’t always give that terribleness to myself, because I truly can’t see the forest for the trees. So I put my trust in the editors I choose to give it back to me. And when that makes me insecure or discourages me, I have to remember that I would do the same thing. And it isn’t for some power trip, it isn’t to tear an author down, it isn’t to rewrite the piece for them – it’s to make the piece better. It can always be better. I’ve said that as long as there’s a book I haven’t read, there are things about writing I haven’t learned. And as long as there’s an Ursula Le Guin book on my shelf, there’s proof I can be better. I don’t know why I can dish so much of it, but get wobbly and panicky when it’s given back. But knowing my own motives in reading other people’s work makes me feel better about taking suggestions from others. It’s very psychological.
I’ll do another post on editor-philosophy at a later date. Until then I hope this softens a few porcupine quills when it comes to editing. If that metaphor makes any sense at all. Happy new year!
1. They’re editors, not readers.
The editors that you choose to let start cutting into your work are not reading the piece on a beach on their vacation. If the only feedback is “It’s interesting, I like it a lot,” they are not being an editor. An editor doesn’t read a piece to enjoy it was a reader. They’re reading it to find weak spots – to make it better. It can be crushing to hear “Wow this needs a lot of work,” from an editor. You already put in a lot of work, after all. But trust me, it takes a lot of work to get to a point where it needs more, so don’t be discouraged.
2. Being defensive defies the purpose.
I like it when writers get a little defensive, but not when they completely shut out everything the editor suggests. I’ve worked on projects as an editor when the author is so adamant, I just stop making suggestions. So what’s the point of the editor if that happens? It’s a waste of everyone’s time. The great thing about being a self-publisher is that you really do have the last word. You don’t have to take all the suggestions an editor gives. But don’t let the suggestions you aren’t going to use interfere with the suggestions you should!
3. You are the expert and nothing changes that.
As a self-publisher, I don’t have the resources to pay a professional editor, but I do have a team of a select few readers that have editing strengths in different areas. Some have studied literature, some have not. Some have worked in the writing field, some have not. Just because someone has a degree in literature doesn’t mean they know more than you. I witnessed a lot of English degree people that didn’t read the books they were assigned in lit classes. That’s all lit classes are! How do you learn anything about literature if you don’t read? A degree doesn’t make you. A degree is what you make it. I’m going on six years studying literature and writing. I have my degree and I continue to read, edit other people’s work, and practice my own writing. When I get overwhelmed with suggestions I need to remember to trust my own knowledge, skills, and intuition. On the flipside I’ve gotten great advice from people who know what time it is and know way more than me. You know when you get suggestions from someone brilliant, and that’s great. But you should still be the expert when it comes to what’s best for the audience, the story, the characters, and the whole point of the book. It’s up to you to take suggestions, leave suggestions, and do the piece justice.
4. If you were holding the red pen, you’d be doing the same thing.
People have asked me what would happen if I launched my own publishing company and were the chief editor. Well. Everything would have to get past me. And I’m picky, rigid, unforgiving and terribly honest. But as a writer, I can’t always give that terribleness to myself, because I truly can’t see the forest for the trees. So I put my trust in the editors I choose to give it back to me. And when that makes me insecure or discourages me, I have to remember that I would do the same thing. And it isn’t for some power trip, it isn’t to tear an author down, it isn’t to rewrite the piece for them – it’s to make the piece better. It can always be better. I’ve said that as long as there’s a book I haven’t read, there are things about writing I haven’t learned. And as long as there’s an Ursula Le Guin book on my shelf, there’s proof I can be better. I don’t know why I can dish so much of it, but get wobbly and panicky when it’s given back. But knowing my own motives in reading other people’s work makes me feel better about taking suggestions from others. It’s very psychological.
I’ll do another post on editor-philosophy at a later date. Until then I hope this softens a few porcupine quills when it comes to editing. If that metaphor makes any sense at all. Happy new year!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)