Proof myths debunked

With the publishing of my first full-length novel, "19 Years 10 Months 24 Days," I learned a lot about publishing that had up to that point been much theorizing and philosophy. One of the most interesting discoveries was the function of a proof in the publishing process. Here are a few misconceptions that I had. I shall call them myths, and debunk them accordingly.

I used createspace in a DIY fashion, formatting the ebook and directing the cover with my own photo and online tools. When I got the proof in the mail, it was very groovy and pretty much "that" experience that an author has. However, I had to run off to work, so I left the proof to look at later. I closed that night, and I got home an hour and a half later than usual, so I was dead tired. I ate some food and went to bed with my flashlight to read under the covers (so as not to wake the spouse unit) and wind down, as usual. For the fun of it, I decided to go ahead and read my proof, not expecting to edit, just to read. I got five sentences in and realized that reading in bed was a much, much different experience than going over my manuscript poised at my desk with a cup full of something caffeinated. Which brings me to…

Myth #1 − A digital proof is just as good as a physical one.

Now this is only a partial myth as the online and digital proofs generated on createspace were, in my opinion, very good. There was nothing in the physical proof that was not shown in the digital/PDF proofs. If you understand the PDF and digital layouts, you can make all the changes needed to have a well-formatted proof. I would have no problem approving a book for distribution after only seeing the digital proofs, if I had to.

The reading experience, however, was very different in print. I was amazed at how many things I caught that I had not found in my digital editing. I had even read the manuscript backward, five pages at a time to try to isolate emotional ties and dissect the passages from the holistic view that made me skip over words. Even more, things that I had left in intentionally trying to be artsy and descriptive did not work in my brain at midnight in bed with my flashlight. It took seeing a print version to realize many changes to make the book more reader friendly. It's very psychological. It soon became clear that there would be more than one proof to be ordered. Which debunks…

Myth #2 − Your proof is so close to done that it’s just kind of a formality/fun thing for an author to have.

I thought that I would order my proof, fix a few things here and there, and be ready to distribute in a week.

Three months later…

The first proof ended up having edits on almost every page. Having the physical proof gave me a whole new perspective, and one I really needed. I think some authors are so excited to be at the final stages of publishing that they get their proof looking to not find things to change instead of seeing the proof as a stage in the editing process. From this experience I will be ordering a physical proof earlier in the process to use specifically for editing, just because it helped me so much. I know all authors are different and with the rise of ebooks, some authors may have a better eye for screen-editing, but it's good for me to know that the print proof makes a big difference. But if you want my advice, print or screen, don't ever say "Oh, it's okay, I'll leave it" when going over your proof. Your proof is the chance to make changes before there's a copy in the library or people have bought it and you are confessing that there were too many mistakes and you will be uploading a newer version. And yeah, if I order a proof earlier, it will mean ordering more proofs. At CS, to print my book was $3.68 and another $4.00 or so to ship. To me, $7.00 a proof is worth what it allows me to do, editing-wise. And with the DIY capabilities with CS, the only costs I had directly with publishing the book were proofs. Around $21.00 when it was done. Another bit of advice: it will take more than one proof, but, don't fall prey to…

Myth #3 − It doesn’t matter how many times you go over it, you will always want to keep changing things in an endless spiral of doom.

As a writer, I've heard a million times, "Oh, I could never write a book, I'd never be happy with it and just need to keep changing it!" That's great, but my personal experience was, it did shape up the way I wanted it. The first proof was a disaster, but the second proof was much better. The third was even better and I was happy with where it was at. At that point, I took advantage of the digital proofs and formatting the ebooks for my final edits and then approved the proof for distribution. Changes and edits are good, but don't let some artistic cliché like that statement interfere with the process, because if you believe you will never be happy with it, you'll be more likely to skip over changes that do need to be made.


I'm gearing into the editing phase on Matilda's first print book, and I'm eager to put my new knowledge to the test and learn some more. Any other experiences out there with the wonderful, beguiling proof? Share in the comments!

Banned Books Week 7 Day Blog/Facebook Challenge

Happy Banned Books Week 2012!

To celebrate I've made up a 7-day post challenge. Take a look and play along!

Day 1. My favorite banned book.
Day 2. Banned book I read in school.
Day 3. Banned book that makes me laugh because it was ever even challenged.
Day 4. Banned book I really didn't like/didn't finish.
Day 5. Book I didn't know had been banned.
Day 6. Book I've seen challenged in local school/library.
Day 7. Banned book I will always stand up for.

There are many lists online of books that have been challenged or banned in the US and around the world. I probably won't stick to just the 2012 list. I'm interested to see everyone's responses!

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.

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.

Reading isn't just words

I had a problem at the library today. We had a kid’s program in the morning, and even though I get anxious and flinch more than usual around large groups of children, that was not my problem.

My problem was a boy that kept bringing graphic novels up to the desk only to have his mom take them back and tell him to “get real books.” We have some short chapter books that are about Spiderman and Yoda and all those characters guys like no matter what age they are, but even those didn’t pass her scrutiny of the authentic state of “book.”

Eventually the kid got frustrated, threw his arms out and said, “What am I supposed to do, I’m not interested in anything else!”

To which I think his mom said something along the lines of “Well, get interested in something else.”

I’m with the kid here. Granted he was calling them “comic books” which is fine and I doubt his mom would have been swayed by the slightly snobby-sounding “graphic novel.” Unless maybe I said it with an English accent... Anyway.

So what if the kid isn’t reading Hawthorne yet? If you start telling him some books aren’t real and things he’s interested in aren’t put in books then he won’t want to read when he’s older.

And seriously. Look around at all the books in the children’s library… books about police cars or how bulldozers work or bat-eared foxes. Books on colors and numbers and feeling sad or making decisions. Getting dressed, saying please, sharing with others.

Up until we’re teenagers (and probably beyond that into adulthood) we use books to learn how the world works, and most importantly how we feel and interact with our world.

Reading is psychological, social, emotional, and intellectual. So maybe some people feel that authors can cram their agenda or people blindly follow the protagonist’s lead without contemplating how they really feel, but at least there’s an opportunity to explore how you react to situations and social schemas.

Let the kid get swept away in a comic book if he wants to. He’ll be interpreting the images just as much as the words. He will find moral dilemmas, be incited to use his imagination, and give his range of emotions a little workout in a safe place between paper pages. Which is exactly what any other “real book” does.

Matilda Loveshack!

Hello and welcome to my co-author and alter-ego Matilda Loveshack here on ATJK! We've got lots of new topics coming up so stay tuned. But if you're in the mood for some reading check out Matilda's short story "A Knothole in the Window" for free download via Smashwords.

Or download the almost-novella "What Happens in Purgatory" for .99 at Smashwords or in the Kindle store.

And if there are any topics you want to discuss/see a post on, shout it out!

Any other questions/comments/baby zebras you may have for me, direct to one of the following:

ajpvb@hotmail.com
matildaloveshack@hotmail.com

Thanks for stopping by!

Sexiness and book...iness.

Time for too-much-info confession of the day! I secretly try to vamp up my subtle-but-sexy librarian skills when shelving. Even if I am but a lowly clerk and my skirts brush past my knees, damnit, I am a sexy librarian!

The topic I’m attempting to segue into here is a literary pinup calendar in association with artist Lee Moyer that goes to help Worldbuilders.

There’s a bit of a hubbub surrounding the work (as much of a hub or bub that can be generated in the literary world…) about whether the calendar is great or terrible. Thus far the arguments have been pretty balanced: half of the input says the calendar is cute, sexy, fun, and interesting and half say it is offensive, cheapens literature and no one should enjoy looking at pin up images.

Well, this is my blog, so this is my opinion.

If you are turned off by any part of the pin-up girl concept, then you won’t like the calendar. And trust me, I’ve been in enough male-occupied garages to develop a strong distaste for a lot of stuff that the modern pin-up has evolved into.
I can also tell you that this calendar is nothing like that.

First off, I think these are really tastefully done. Even the Twain one, set to be more provocative is very cute in my opinion. No gratuitous side-boob, and she’s not set in a position where you can see both cleavage and a full view of her derrier somehow simultaneously. (I don’t know how a model ever gets into this pose ever, but it’s pretty popular from images I’ve seen.) The outfits are beautiful in themselves and honestly are not that revealing for being pinned as pin-up (See what I did there.) I saw much more the last Halloween party I went to, and there was no intelligent irony to be found. And the women look fairly normal. I mean, yeah they are mostly thin and done up, but they still look real.

Second of all, these images contain a lot of details. I haven’t seen the full calendar, but some are very subtle and you have to look for clues about the books. Which brings me to point three: this wouldn’t work if you didn’t know about literature. Certainly you don’t have to have read the complete works of the authors presented to get it, but the cleverness emerges with the interpretation of the literature.

So, I mean, really, why can’t literature be sexy? Or intelligence, or love of classics? I’ve always held the position that we live in a sex-visible culture instead of a sex-positive one. And right now I’m pretty sure Fifty Shades of Gray is the most reserved book in our collection. People have gone bat-lunatic because it’s all edgy and erotic and crazy and right now holds the top 4 on the New York bestsellers list.

And, honestly, if we are paying homage to literary works through sex, I would much rather have this calendar on my wall than badly written erotica on my shelf.

Showin' some love for Herman ;)