The End of Feudaism

Insight often comes from strange places. At least it does for me.

I was watching Cranford and one of the characters, Lady Ludlow, was opposed to young Harry being taught to read and write. She didn't want to end up like her cousins across the channel in France with her head lying in a revolutionary's basket beneath a guillotine because she had allowed her serfs, or retainers, to learn to read and realize they could have a better life with an education. Slaves, serfs, peons, and servants who could read could topple her from playing Lady Largesse, the magnanimous and gentle tyrant that allowed then to work for her for tuppence and have regular meals, wear nice clothes, and wait to serve her at her pleasure -- or be dismissed to a life of poverty without a reference.

Of course, all of this is going on in my head in about 2 seconds and I realized how much like feudalism is publishing, especially now that the masses who want to publish their own books have gained control of the presses --  virtual and real. How the aristocracy must have cringed when the printing press became a reality and religious institutions no longer had to illuminate manuscripts and keep safe the written word, often for monarchs and landed gentry that couldn't read. They had servants to do that sort of thing in the good old days.

As books became cheaper and easily available, revolutions began. The Catholic church, once a nearly global power and anxious to convert newly discovered savages to the worship of the Trinity and Jesus Christ, began to topple as people learned to read and question the status quo. Why should the clergy be the last word on who does and does not go to heaven? Why should the poor pay the wealthy to pray for their souls and sell candles to light so a loved one would spend little time in purgatory and ascend to heaven?

Feudalism is built on the backs of the working classes, the serfs, peons, and slaves, a lesson that Rome learned at the point of a sword when Spartacus, and several other slave leaders, rose and threw off their chains. Even when a slave is treated well, he remains a slave, the person who does all the work and gets none, or few, of the benefits. How is that different from publishing? Oh, that's right. It is no different.

Publishing has been the gatekeeper for centuries, built on the words and hard work of every person who ever wanted to write a book and was found worthwhile to promote. It's much like allowing a slave to serve in the main house instead of in the fields, as long as the slave learned his place -- beholden to the whims of his master.

Publishing is feudalistic. Think not? The feudal system is based on a 3-tiered pyramid. A lord, king, or ruler is at the top and determines the fate of everyone beneath him. Knights, mercenaries, and retainers keep the peace and protect the lord. Serfs, servants, and peons, the poor working class, do all the work and tend the land, livestock, and businesses that supply the lord; they are the base of the pyramid, without which the lord would be a deluded aristocrat ruling nothing and unable to work for his bread or even know how to mill and bake it into cake or bread.

In publishing, the publishers are the lords. Agents are the knights, the strong arm of the lord that protect the publisher's business and vet the more acceptable serfs (writers) to work as servants to the publisher, those chosen from among the poor who have some talent and ability that can be exploited to make more money for the publisher. And then there are the remaining slaves/serfs who buy the books produced by the servants for the publishers and pay for the lavish lifestyle to which the publishers have become so accustomed. Better to live on Park Avenue with a view of the park than to live in Alphabet City or Harlem among the poor.

Contracts that keep the lion's share of earnings in publishers's pockets so they can maintain their vast wealth polished and intact, are part of the chains that bind the writer in servitude. There are certainly writers that have made millions, even hundreds of billions, but who has stopped to ask how much the publisher made on the deal. If a writer is worth $200 billion and they get 12-15% royalties on net profit, what the publisher keeps is an obscene amount of money, even after they pay employees, marketing staff, and the cost of creating books, something much more profitable since the advent of pulp wood paper instead of the more expensive and longer lasting rag and hemp paper. Paper that crumbles and turns to dust in 5 years means selling more copies as readers replace worn out books. More books means more sales and more profit for the publisher, most of which the writer will never see.

With the introduction of POD (Print On Demand) publishing and electronic books, the game changed. Publishers continued to denigrate the vanity presses, but e-books changed things forever. A book that never goes out of style, takes up no warehouse space, and can be kept virtually forever undermines the whole structure upon which publishing was built. Writers finally had control and could strike out on their own and rise above the masses by writing and selling good books that had a shelf life beyond 3 months. No more remaindering. No more binding contracts to greedy publishers. No more supporting someone else's lavish lifestyle when a lavish lifestyle, or at least publication of books publishers turned down. The gatekeepers are out of a job, which is why publishers and Apple decided to fix prices on e-books at near or above the cost of paperback books. If a paperback book is cheaper or the hardback, when discounted, was not much more expensive, then books were safe and the e-book revolution would go away. Writers would get tired of doing all the work of producing a book, from cover art to marketing and sales. I'm sure the aristocrats felt the same way before the French revolutionaries arrested and led them up to Lady Guillotine. Look where it got them.

The revolution has come and the class war between the people who produce the books -- writers -- and the people who have profited the most from books -- publishers -- are at war. What we need is a truce and a coalition of forces that benefits everyone, just not with the 90/10 split that has ruled publishing for so long, or 88/12 split that currently passes for business as usual. Not everyone is J. K. Rowling or Danielle Steel. Most people have been relegated to the middle ranks, writers that produced good quality books in genres that sold well, but not spectacularly, the mid list writers that have been the bread and butter of the publishing industry, writers that never got fabulously wealthy but were upper middle class with a solid back list that still sold books decades after they were published.

Instead of struggling to the bitter end, publishers would be better served to give a hand up and offer their services as book packagers, marketing specialists, and sales teams to up and coming writers instead of trying to maintain a crumbling edifice. Publishers have vast resources that could benefit revolutionaries without all the rancor, price fixing, and game playing that currently exists. It's a choice of adapting or dying, and dying is a distinct option right now as more and more published authors are fleeing publishers for more lucrative deals that offer better benefits and more freedom creatively and financially. It's the choice of 12-15% or 35-70% of sales, and not net sales but gross sales.

The class war is waging with no end in sight. Emotions are high and at this point the results are volatile. Better to work with writers, those hard working people who dream in prose and are the only reason for publishers to exist, than to fight to maintain a system that no longer works.

The slaves, serfs, and servants have learned how to read. They have educated themselves and now know the score. I wonder if publishers have gotten the message yet or if they are still in denial as they climb the stairs to the guillotine while the masses surrounding them howl for blood and their heads.

To DRM or not to DRM.

It was Helen Ginger's post about DRM this morning that made me think seriously about book piracy, and piracy in general.

I used DRM on my first foray into self-publishing, but I no longer use it. The bottom line is that there will always be pirates, so why not make it easy for them. It's not just about pirates, though; DRM is about making life better for publishers and less so for the people who read. That's why Benjamin Franklin created the library system in the first place, a system that is in dire straits in the United Kingdom where libraries are being closed faster than a publisher's purse strings. 

DRM or Digital Rights Management keeps, as Helen writes, people from sharing a book between devices. You can create a Cloud as Amazon did or as Apple did with iCloud. Without DRM, a file sharing application isn't needed and you won't need a cloud just a connection between devices to share a book with a spouse, child, or friend, or even with someone you don't know. That's how libraries do it. No cost. No fuss. No membership. Go to the library, pick out a book, movie, CD, or magazine and take it home. You have to take it back to the library so someone else can borrow it, but that's a small price to pay.

I remember reading how Paul Coehlo, author of The Alchemist pirated his own book and uploaded it to BitTorrent to beat the pirates at their own game. The pirated copies were dreadful and had lots of errors. Coehlo uploaded a clean copy of his novel. His publisher was incensed, but the author felt it was the right thing to do. His magnanimous gesture didn't kill his book sales either. With more than 7 billion people on the planet, many of reading age, it's a big pool to fish for sales.

After I read what Coehlo had done, I decided to do the same with my novel, and I often hold promotions to give my first self-published novel, Among Women, for free. What I was surprised to find was that people continued to buy the novel after it was no longer free, even from as far away as Estonia. Of course I've sold more copies of my novel in Estonia than I have in the UK, but it's a beginning, and sales in the US have exceeded my expectations, both as free books and books sold. 

DRM is more a benefit for publishers than it is for authors or readers. DRM means you cannot share your book and another copy must be bought. That's short sighted, but publishers aren't known for their long game or for thinking beyond today's sales. If they did, books would be available, marketed and advertised for more than a few months. Instead, publishers end up dumping millions of books into landfills and selling them to remainder businesses. Very short sighted indeed.

If I can sell more books by giving away a few thousand, that should be enough evidence that removing DRM will not hurt book sales. Like I said, there are 7 billion people on this planet. That is a very big pool of potential readers and book buyers. Even if 1 billion people get the book for free, there are still 6 billion people left, some of which would be able and willing to buy a copy.

There is an old saying that you have to spend money to make money. In this case, it could be said that you have to give books to get book sales. If my recent experience is any indication of what is possible, I'll be giving away more free ebooks. The odds are in my favor, and you can be certain there will be no DRM. I invite readers to share and share alike. There are plenty of electrons -- and ebooks -- left.

In the end, I have to ask, what is the difference between DRM and censorship. What do you say?

As in Cross-Stitch, so it is in Writing

One of the things I love most about cross-stitch is the way the picture emerges from tiny stitches and colored threads.

It begins with a blob of color that grows with each stitch and each new color from nothing special to something quite beautiful -- if I do it right. I have moments when I get frustrated and tear out stitches because I've counted wrong or read the wrong part of the pattern, but mostly I get it right and can't resist stopping to unroll my work just to look at what emerges.

I'm working on Xmas stockings for my grandchildren this year. It's different than what I've given them in the past and I hope it will be something they will treasure and use each year, remembering that it was made especially for them.

I'm working on a cute pattern that is much prettier as it emerges from the amorphous collection of stitches and colors. I have just finished the bottom half of the stocking and am now working on the top, finishing off stray stitches and making sure the back is as neat as the front with no loose threads. The cat and kitten's eyes are finished and I'm moving on to the rest of the tree and ornaments.

Cross-stitch is calming, despite scattered moments of frustration, and reminds me of how I feel when I paint or draw -- and especially when I write. I begin with an idea, begin writing, and from the words and sentences, paragraphs and pages, emerges a book complete and far more inventive than what it was when I began. That is true of all the creative projects I have done and continue to do.

I feel best and happiest when I'm creating and, for a while, cross-stitch has fulfilled my need to create. I will continue with the stocking and the last 2 I need to make for this year well ahead of schedule, and I will also continue writing, exorcising the dreams that plague me with snatches of conversation, plots, description, and the urgency the dreams fill me with when I'm not writing. There is room enough for more than one creative art in my life and I must have writing or be caught in an endless cycle of realistic dreams that invade my waking and sleeping worlds. At least with cross-stitch there is an end and with writing there is always one more thing to add, one more paragraph to trim, and a few more words to choose to exorcise or leave.

In a couple more weeks, I will have another Xmas stocking for one of my grandchildren, and maybe a new book to begin fleshing out and preparing for publication. It is the journey I love with a goal at the end that never fails to make me smile.

Book Review Dos and Don'ts

There is something disheartening about reviews. Either a whole bunch of negative people review a book, most of whom have no sense of spelling, grammar, or punctuation, let alone story, plot, characterization, or few people write a review. They might email and tell the author the enjoyed the book and try to engage the author in a long, drawn out email conversation, which isn't productive and often means time lost writing, or they come up to an author at a con or book signing and gush about a book, never having taken the time to go online and review the book.

In this cyber age, it is important to put the remarks in writing -- and not just the negative remarks since that seems to be most of the kinds of reviews made. So many people with so many grudges. You can tell the author how much you liked a book, or books, but put it in writing. Amazon has the most visible and oft used review system of all the bookstores, but take the time to cut and paste your comments into B&N, Goodreads, or your favorite indie bookstore, like Powell's, all of which have good review forums.

One thing the online review process has created is a forum for the discontented and disgruntled to write their opinions and be heard. It's best if authors don't check the websites very often. It can be deflating, disheartening, and downright down casting if you've a thin skin or are new to the game. It seems people like to trash an author's work, but there are plenty of reviewers (and I use the term loosely) who have not a clue how to write or score a review, so I'll offer a couple of points.

First, if you liked the book but it had a few errors in formatting (check for an updated copy if it's a free review copy) and the story didn't turn out the way you wanted it to, and was well written, the least score should be 3 stars. Giving a writing 2 stars and saying how much you enjoyed the book is like sending mixed signals on a first date. Good thing the author can't drop a roofie in your drink and have their wicked way with you.

Secondly, if you loved the book and there were no errors or formatting problems, and the story was well written overall, give it 5 stars. The more errors or the more problems you had with the story, down grade by 1-star increments.

Two-star reviews are for those books that had merit but were not particularly well written, had too many formatting or spelling/grammar/punctuation errors and didn't come up to the mark.

One-star reviews are reserved for utter crap, including that the author couldn't write his or her way out of a paperback with a hole it and a sharp knife to hand.

Above all, be fair. Be honest. And don't take out your bad day on the author. It's not their fault.

If the book didn't end the way you wanted it to, don't take that out on the author either. It is the author's view and not yours. If you want a different ending, write one, but don't penalize the author by exercising your fits of pique with a low review when otherwise the book was good, or even excellent.

Reviewing is an art form that professionals learn how to do through years of experience and background in writing critiques. Reviewing in the cyberworld is somewhat different and mostly akin to a group of people talking about a book in a book club or among a group of friends. Keep that in mind. Very few reviewers are professionals on Amazon, but a few pros do slip through from time to time. Learn to write a substantive critique and keep it clean.

It's a tough world out there and Amazon reviews are the currency favored by the market right now. If you need help writing a review, ask someone with some experience, or write it the way you would tell it to a friend. Use a voice recorder if it helps.

Review books, preferably on days you're not having a major case of PMS, haven't fought with your boyfriend/girlfriend/boss/mother/father/siblings, got up on the right side of the bed, and didn't have car trouble or a bad hair day. Reviews are about the book, not your personal perils and petulance.

You can say whatever you like but do it with some class. It makes a difference.

Time, Consideration, and Thought

Technology makes everything easier and the Internet makes everything happen faster. What more could we want? How about people willing to stand up for what they believe is right?

A writer friend recently dumped her Kindle review site because of "threats of litigation." That's Net speak for whiny authors who demanded five-star reviews for their books in the name of solidarity and did not get what they wanted. The authors threatened to sue over the reviews and the website owner shut the site down, and it all happened in the space of a couple of days. In the old days, before electronic and online submissions, email at the speed of the ISP, and tantrums speed by electrons and fueled by tech-savvy self-publishing, such actions would have taken weeks, and most likely months. Now it all happens at the touch of a button.

The level of professionalism visible on the world wide web is pretty low right now. Writers who gain sudden fame and sell millions of dollars of ebooks are celebrities and every wannabe writer wants to emulate them. The wannabes seldom look -- or read -- beyond the dollar signs and have no clue what it takes for a book to sell. As far as they are concerned, it's all about Amazon, B&N, and other website review ratings, and those ratings, while not actually for sale, are available for the right kind of coercive tactics. Litigation is a favorite.

"I'll sue you and have your website taken down if you don't give me a great review."

My response? Write a better book. Brush up your grammar, punctuation, and spelling and make sure your book is as good as possible before you hit the button and put it out on the web. If you're not willing to do the work, don't expect a great review.

Even if a writer is willing to do the work, there is no guarantee a reviewer will like and highly rate the work. It just doesn't work that way. Some readers will love the work, some will hate it, and most will fall somewhere in between, but the last thing you want to do is whine about the review and threaten the reviewer and website manager/owner with litigation. It never works out well -- except in this case where the website owner folded.

Jennifer Brozek, editor of The Edge of Propinquity shared an email exchange with a wanabe writer who questioned whether or not she had read his submission because it took only 30 minutes. Most professionals would be thrilled by that kind of turnaround, but the wannabe writer wasn't thrilled. His turnaround came with a rejection. An email discussion ensued. Jennifer posted the results in an early post and the email exchange that resulted in the hate mail. Several other editors who read Jennifer's LiveJournal posts asked for the wannabe writer's name and email address. They don't want to contact him; they want to avoid him. And that, dear reader, is how business is done in the publishing world. I've brought the brouhaha to you the speed of ISP guided electrons.

Jennifer will not be closing down the website, nor will she shut down the magazine, even if the wannabe writer threatens to sue. Should he decide to sue, he will waste his time and money and the judge (if it gets that far) will throw out the case as frivolous. You cannot litigate or force someone to write a good review and you cannot force them not to publish a bad review. You can only roll with the punches, and they will come left, right, and center, and sometimes a rabbit punch to the kidneys on occasion. It's the nature of dealing with people, and wouldn't the world be a much nicer place without people mucking it all up?

In the old days, editors knew how to deal with tantrums and wanabe writer pique. They ignored them.

Considering the amount of work that goes into putting a magazine out every month, online or in print, there's not enough time to coddle whiners and hissy fit throwing wannabes. Next!

I've had my share of negative reviews, and got another one this morning, but that is all part of the process. There were no negative comments about grammar, punctuation, formatting, or spelling, just that the reader didn't get the point of the book. A woman is abandoned in New Orleans, left with $50, and no way home. She is homeless for six weeks, mistaken for a notorious prostitute, and spends the next six weeks in jail, except she doesn't know how long she is going to be in jail. Over the ensuing weeks, she changes from a woman fearful of her surroundings and the other inmates, women she views as shadowy and monstrous, to someone who is able to see the women as not so very different from herself, women who have been abandoned and left to fend for themselves in whatever way they could manage. When she gets out of jail and goes back to her friends, she is glad to be back, but she is also changed. That is the point of the book, seeing the women through her middle class background and prejudices. Some people won't get it, but most people do.

Luckily, some of the readers who did get the point were from New Orleans or had worked in the women's prison system. Those are the reviews to treasure. The others are the opinions of people I was not able to reach, and that's all right. No one reaches everyone. If they did, we would have one person in Congress and one president and everyone would agree who it was to be. We'd also have one religion, one monetary system, one type of government, and no wars. Nice world if you can get it, but not practical and not possible.

In the end, all that matters is that everyone is done with careful consideration and thought. The rest, those that fail to think or consider anything before they punch the button and give virtual life to their creations, do not matter in the grand scheme of things. They are the low bar, the lower end of the Bell curve, the lowest common denominator, and exist only to show what should not and cannot be done. The parts of the curve that have weight are the vast majority in the middle and the rest that rise like cream to the top.

The trick is to rise with the cream, and that takes time and work, something not found among whiners, wannabes, and litigious jerks believing they can force their way to the top through intimidation and threats. Best thing to do is ignore them, like sand fleas, mosquitoes, flies, and other annoying pests. Don't give in. Hold the line. Ignore the screaming, kicking, red-face child on the floor. He'll eventually get tired and quit.

The Man Behind the Curtain

The Big 6 publishers' ire and animosity toward Amazon for venturing into publishing waters is not unexpected. It is, however, laughable when considered in light of other forays in the publishing world.

Where was their anger when the Big 6 began offering their books to Wal-mart, grocery stories, and big box outlets? Were they not cutting out the sales that bookstores should have received and creating a monopoly whereby drug stores, grocers, and big box outlets were selling books as well as other goods? Borders no doubt failed to appreciate the irony of the move. After all, people spend far more time in those stores than in bookstores, like Borders, browsing the shelves for necessities, so picking up a book at the same time is little more than good time management. Get the product to the consumer in the best way possible. I guess buying a book at a bookstore is passe, and no one mentioned the monopoly word.

Then there were boutique and micro publishers -- aside from the university and college presses, which were no threat to be begin with -- that entered the publishing fray and the Big 6 yawned. How could a boutique publisher come within shouting distance of being a threat? They didn't do what the Big 6 did, and a new crop of possibilities opened up for authors. Smaller advances and nowhere near the Big 6 budget for advertising and marketing, but legitimate publication -- on a much smaller scale. What's to worry?

Then Amazon entered the arena and the crowd was silenced, their silence followed by oohs and aahs of wonder and possibility, and the Big 6 called, "MONOPOLY!" and demanded something be done. Where was the monopoly when they parceled their books out to retailers already selling so many other articles, including food, furnishings, electronics, televisions, games, software, cameras, and everything else under the sun. Why isn't Amazon, an outlet for all those products, and books, suddenly a threat?

Because Amazon can command as much money as the Big 6. It is in the end all about money. In this instance, it's the Big 6's money.

Consider what a publisher does. A publisher is like a bookie with lots of money and the one place where bets can be made. Since the publisher has the wherewithal to showcase and fete the jockey, outfit the horse in the finest silks, and bankroll the whole project, who do the touts bet on? The horse that will earn them a modest return on their food and rent money. Only suckers bet on horses with big odd, praying for a fluke or a miracle to pay off, and sometimes it does. It's all about the show -- and money runs the show. Win or lose, the biggest wad of cash goes to the house. The house has the best odds.

A publisher chooses an author, or the author's work, fetes the author, puts their money and talent to work showcasing the author, and telling everyone that this is the real deal. People listen. Books are sold. Author makes some money, but the real money goes to the house. Win or lose, the money is with the publisher -- the house. But what does a publisher actually do, beyond the showcasing, tarting up, and talking up the author and his words? Not much.

A publisher usually publishes nothing. A publisher is a clearing house for copy editors, proofreaders, artists, salesmen, marketing and PR representatives, and editors. Very few publishers own the printing press. They usually rent or subcontract the work to an actual printer, and no one is the wiser, until now.

Amazon, with its deep pockets and its own printing press, approaches authors and says, "Look. We have the resources and we'll pay you good money to let us print and market your work. We list the product at basement prices, but we will give you a big percentage of sales. How about working with us?"

Amazon has the distribution -- publishers have used them for years to sell books -- and is hooked into the biggest mall in the world -- the Internet. Bigger percentage, even on lower prices, sounds like a good idea. When the numbers are crunched and the contracts offered, what can an author do but sign? Amazon has just outdone the Big 6 and that is why they are calling foul.

It comes down to semantics. If you know how the business works and can break it down to its basic components, then manage the components in a more effective and lucrative way, you can take over the market.

Borders is a lost cause. Whatever the reason for its demise, the Big 6 definitely helped push them over the edge by distributing books through retailers, chain stores, big box stores, and grocers, bypassing bookstores completely. Talk about monopolies. Get your groceries, your prescriptions, and a book to read while shopping, and the gas and time saved is worth it. It's just not worth it to bookstores. It's called consolidation and not monopoly -- at least in current business parlance. After all, bookstores don't have the deep pockets of Amazon and can't afford to bite the hand that feeds them -- less and less each year.

Even with the move to digital publishing, the Big 6 still haven't figured out what's what. By pricing digital books out of the market at near the cost of hard cover, they are bleeding red ink all over their bottom line. The bookies have tanked it and don't know how to make up the loss because someone changed the odds and another house has almost all of them. Authors are fleeing the Big 6 like a a nerd trying to get a date at a sorority house mixer.

Some authors will stay. Someone always stays with what they know, but authors who know more about how the business works will step away and choose a bookie with better odds and a higher payout. It's loose slot machine time and the marks are lining up to cash in.

We live in a volatile and changing world where the marketplace is undergoing major changes. Those businesses that move with the times will prosper as they morph into a different business model and the rest will go the way of Borders. As more elements disperse through the marketplace, more changes will cause further destruction and construction and the world as it used to be will become a point along the historical time line.

Amazon isn't really monopolozing but maximizing business and giving the people who make books possible -- the authors -- a fair shake. Amazon doesn't need to put on a show and live the high life because they found that it is better to sell a thousand widgets at $1 than to sell one widget for $1000. It's the same number on the bottom line, but the column that totals widgets sold tells the real story.

I have a bit of advice for the Big 6. Had you paid attention to producing more books and sharing the profits more generously, you could still be the biggest bookie in town. Greed goeth before the fall. You've taken down Borders. Who will be next? Monopoly? I don't think so. It's just called business.

The man behind the curtain is pulling the levers and you've been watching a special effects show of pyrotechnics, mirrors, and lights. Keep an eye on the man. That is where all the action happens.

Technology: Making Life More . . .

Technology has its uses, but there are times the old fashioned way is easier -- and better.

I've been preparing a package for mailing that needs to be out by June 15. Unfortunately, my laptop did not recognize my printer and every time I deleted a job it hung the computer up for about 24-48 hours. I had to delete the printer and re-install, something I've had to do three times with regard to this particular package. I won't even go into printing the proper postage so I can send the package. It would have been easier to type out a label and take the package to the post office to be mailed, except that since I pay for being able to print my own postage and labels with my laptop it seemed such a waste of money. It was also a waste of time.

So much is made easier by technology and so much has been made more complicated by relying on technology. Heaven forbid we should have to go back to the old days when manuscripts were handwritten and posted to publishers in brown paper tied up in string. There are far too many wannabe and actual authors to have to go through each handwritten manuscript one at a time. The luck of the leprechauns was with you if you received a typewritten manuscript since so few people owned typewriters and knew how to use them. Reminds me of the dark days when the average person couldn't read, and then the printing press made printed books available and then everyone had a better chance to learn to read and decide things for themselves.

Now that I have that last task completed, I think I can move on, but technology may get in the way again. This time the technology is my job, which I do from home and which requires the bulk of my time, leaving little time for reading books to review, or for entertainment, and writing, not if I plan to bathe, do laundry, cook meals, wash dishes, clean house, run errands, buy food, vacuum and garden. No wonder people feel they need servants. There aren't enough hours in the day.

Technology helps with the usual household tasks, like washing dishes and clothing, vacuuming, etc., but the tasks still take time. Machines have to be set up, primed with the right kinds of liquids and powders, loaded and unloaded only to load and unload another machine. Then there's the folding, putting away and hanging up of clothing, and the putting away of dishes to take up more time. And then it's time for shopping for food to prepare for cooking, actually cooking and then eating, creating more dirty dishes, and often dirty clothes when food is spilled, and we're back to the laundry and dish washing again. There are some items that have to be hand washed (dishes and clothing) and that requires more time. I need a housekeeper, and I'll hire one as soon as I can afford it, which I cannot do on the salary I earn with my day job, and there's not enough time to write so I can get another book published and begin earning money on it. It is a vicious circle.

Virginia Woolf was half right. A woman needs a room of her own and sufficient monies to support the writing, but she also needs servants and money to pay for them and technology that doesn't require too much time and energy to work and keep working. I don't want much, just a cabin high up in the Rocky Mountains with a good bit of land, no neighbors, a town that is not too far away nor too close, a guest house and a sturdy lock on the door to keep people out when I'm creating. I also need a housekeeper. Now all I need to do is write more books, publish them and begin to build a recognizable name so people will buy lots of my books and help me afford my decadent lifestyle. I won't even go into the social and business online networking time that needs to come out of the writing, chore, and day job time because it's the reason I am deep into sleep deficit already.

No Rhyme or Reason

Everyone offers advice on how to get published and how to market and network and it's beginning to get a little confusing. Use Twitter and Facebook to talk about your book. Don't talk about your book so much on Twitter and Facebook. Be interesting, but not too interesting. Don't let everyone see how bad the days get sometimes. Sparkle, Neely, sparkle. It's just like the five rules for writing. According to Somerset Maugham, no one knows what they are, but they'll try to tell you the only way to do it is their way. More one size fits all and never fits anyone. The three bears all over without the baby bear. It's too big. It's too small. It's never just right. What works for one author may not work for another and seldom works for everyone even though they sell millions of books telling you just that: it works for everyone because it worked for me.

When I was studying art -- the painting and drawing kind and not the art history kind -- my teachers taught me to do it the way they had been taught. I followed their instructions and got good results, but I was never quite happy until I could do it my way. Instead of roughing out the face and placement of ears, eyes, nose and mouth and sketching in the hair, I began with the eyes and worked out from there. For me, everything started with the eyes. I guess that's why people always said the eyes seemed alive. In a way, and especially for me, they were.

I am more than willing to try it someone else's way, just like I've tried nearly every diet I've ever come across, but eventually I fall back into old habits and do it my way.

Write large and add all the details and then pare it down. Instead, I write tight and expand on that once I've finished the book.

Edit once or twice and leave it in a drawer for a week, then go back, read it, made small adjustments and send it out. How about I edit it as many times as I like, forget about it for a couple of years while I work on something else, and then come back, decide I did it right and then send it out, all the while tinkering away at it even up to publication? That works for me. Some stories are easy and come out fully formed and some take time to hone and for me to get into the right frame of mind to hear the voices and get them down. That's what's happening with Whitechapel. I couldn't hear the voices for a while, couldn't get the sound of their voices and their syntax, and so I put it away -- for years. I won't say how many years, but my mother keeps saying she wants to see it in print before she dies. She'll outlive me, but I doubted the book would be finished in my lifetime.

And then it happened. I opened up the file, took a look at the outline, put my fingers on the keyboard and suddenly I knew just where I was going. I heard Delilah's voice again, the way she speaks, the way she engages the world, that special sense of derring-do and vulnerability she keeps hidden from everyone, especially Henry. I have it now and I should be able to keep going. I know where I'm going at least.

In the meantime, I've written two other books, seen both published and am being buffeted by the networking and marketing gurus pulling me this way and that. I don't know if book trailers work, but there was a sale, so why not? I don't know if I should talk about my weird reading habits, like reading three or four books at a time and keeping them separate and distinct. I never mix one with the other. How could I? I'm reading a book about Van Gogh and his last doctor, who wasn't really his doctor because he couldn't practice medicine in his home town; he has an office in Paris and comes home to Auvers three days a week to be with his family and paint. I'm also reading a murder mystery set during the time of Henry II of England and it's really fascinating. I love historical novels that carry me away and put me in the time period without effort. I'm also re-reading Salem's Lot just because I had a hankering for Stephen King and that particular story. Maybe it's a way for my creative brain to tell my scientific brain that it soon will be time for me to get into post apocalyptic vampire fiction, which is what I planned anyway. I usually have to slide in sideways.

There is no rhyme or reason, at least not looking from the outside, to the way I work, but it works. I can juggle three or four (or in my case, twenty) stories at the same time and not lose touch with any of them -- if I hear the voices. No, I'm not schizophrenic; I'm a writer. It goes with the territories. If the characters aren't real to me, they certainly won't be real to the reader. I'm sure about that side of the business, just not the marketing and networking side. I'm more interesting -- and more exasperating -- in person (at times). Just ask my friends. And I leap from subject to subject without the least hesitation. It's my way.

I follow Scott Eagan, partly because I submitted Among Women to him, and this morning his advice was that he looks at the whole writer. He said he liked my story and the writing was good, but it wasn't right for him at this time. I wonder if he found my writings on dismembering corpses or the slashing prose I used when I was battling a cyberstalker? I didn't mention names -- or grave sites -- so it wasn't obvious, but maybe my bounding from subject to subject gave him the idea that I was quixotic or undependable. Could be.

My art teachers told me it was wrong to start with the eyes when painting or drawing a portrait, but I still did it. It worked for me. Don't try this at home. It might not work for you. No one wears my size any more.

It's Easy Being Green

After spending the morning reading articles on digital piracy and showing that you can drive sales to your book, it seems more and more that that publishing is doing less and less and expecting more of authors. In the case of digital piracy, publishers expect authors to give up royalties, and in the case of marketing, it's about what the author can and should do to get noticed by the big publishers.

While the article on piracy mentioned Barry Eisler getting hit harder than a publisher (WHAT?) because he doesn't have the big publisher to do battle for him, it just does not wash. Either way, self-published or traditionally published, the author takes the hit, so what's the difference? The difference is the same as it always was; publishers are pushing more and more off onto author's shoulders (and royalties) and taking fewer risks. Oh, that's right, there is no difference and no change in the way publishers are doing business.

In the article on the Selling Books blog, the premise is that writing a good book is nothing in the end; anyone can write a good book. The trick is to get noticed by marketing and promoting your own work through sales, speaking engagements, promotions, etc. so publishers know you can drive sales up. My question is this: If I can drive sales to my books, then what do I need a publisher for?

Absolutely nothing.

With sites like M. J. Rose's Buzz, Balls & Hype blog about promoting your book, for a fee you can promote your book through their services, even getting the notice of thousands of libraries and book clubs, to drive sales. I would be willing to bet no publisher is going to pay the fees; that's up to the author, like paying for the cost of the publisher fighting digital piracy and getting a publisher's notice. Why? It's the same old song and dance with not a new tune in sight. It's School Days dressed up as Music of the Night without Andrew Lloyd Webber's talent for re-invention.

If I'm going to deal with piracy, the best way to do that is by not worrying about it. At 0.05% of digital sales, that's not a lot of money. That's less than one-half of one percent in total sales, and that's not even a solid number; it's a guesstimation. No one really knows what the cost of digital piracy is or is going to be. In a way, it's about the same as second hand book sales where one person buys the book and resells it so someone else can sell it again. It's money for those down the line, but the author gets paid once, and I don't see too many authors worried about that, especially with paperback books. After all, paper disintegrates and new books are needed to replace old ones, and with digital books, there is no need for replacement. Ebooks, as Joe Konrath is so fond of saying, are forever.

In the end, it's a better use of time and money to invest in yourself and self-publish than it is to let a big publisher take your money and give you back a pittance. I'm not saying that traditional publishing is dead -- it's not. Just as folk songs and nursery rhymes were used as seed for greater works (Andrew Lloyd Webber again, and Bach, and Beethoven, and Mozart, and any number of classical composers, like Liszt), there is a place for traditional publishers. As long as you can do enough work and promotion to get noticed by publishers and broker a six- or seven-figure deal and a healthy (better than the current 12%) royalty, go for it. Having one the traditional publishing route (no, I didn't get the star treatment) and doing it myself (ebook and now print), I'd rather get more of the money so I can choose and buy my own promotions and drive sales that I can benefit from. That way I can pay for future covers for new books, and my editor to keep her in Kindle books, including mine, and maybe be freed from wage slavery and build my own little cottage industry writing good books. I don't need to be halfway to getting notice by a publisher when I can be all the way toward getting notice for my writing and my books from the people who actually buy them. Fewer copies will end up in landfills that way and I prefer the green approach.

It's easier being green.

More Bread and Circuses

An agent asked a question on her blog about why authors really wanted to go with traditional publishing in this day and age of easy access to self-publishing. Almost all of the answers were the same. Many writers wanted the resources (copy editing, marketing, promotion, covers, etc.) of traditional publishers, but most repeated reason was validation.

Self-publishing and traditional publishing have co-existed since the beginning. In the early days, an author went to a printer and paid him to typeset his work and many authors, or their spouses, as in the case of Virginia Woolf's husband, set up their own printing pressed and called themselves publishers. It was the only way to see their work in print.

As Barry Eisler said, getting an advance from a publisher is a short term, or long term, depending on the deal, loan against future advances and self-publishing, or indie publishing, means putting your own money up front. It's not for the faint-hearted. Then along comes Mark Coker with Smashwords and changes everything, offering a free publishing model, complete with do-it-yourself instructions, to publish your own work for free. Coker does offer some other services and allows cover artists, editors and proofreaders to advertise on the site (without recommendations)available for variable fees. This is far different from the vanity publishing model where ancillary services cost more, often a lot more. As I've said before, publishing in the 21st century is rapidly changing, and it's a change that agents and big publishers really don't want to see. Why? Perceived value.

If agents and publishers can continue to convince authors that their best and most accepted route to publication is through them, and that validation comes only with a big publisher and agent behind you, then indie publishing will always be marginalized and the authors diminished in the eyes they see in the mirror each morning.

On that same thread, I mentioned that Mark Twain was a self-published author and the agent responded that Twain's books were classics and had sold thousands, even millions, of books. She missed the point I was making to someone else on the thread that validation can come from indie publishing. Even her response to me that because Twain sold millions of books that made him valid and his work worth noticing. She has it backward.

When The Celestine Prophecy became a wildfire best seller, it wasn't due to a big publisher or an agents because several of both had rejected the book. It wasn't until the author James Redfield put his own money into the venture and sold thousands of copies before publishers and agents flocked to his door to offer their services. The same is true of Amanda Hocking and several other authors too numerous to mention. Redfield, Twain, Hocking and others validated their belief in themselves when they put their time and efforts, and even money, into getting their work before the public. The traditional publishing world just grabbed onto their coattails and came along for the ride.

The publishing world is full of such tales and I seriously doubt that scenario will ever change as long as publishers and agents hold the keys to what they keep touting as the kingdom of validation. It is in their interests to criticize indie publishing and the few who have made it and keep everyone's eyes focused on validation -- on being a real writer. They have no jobs and no product to sell if authors catch on that they can do the same thing themselves and do a better job, as is the case with some of the error-ridden books that have come out of publishing in the past few years, often with terrible covers and no marketing or promotion to speak of.

I am reminded of an old movie about a young man who took New York by storm with his debut novel. The movie was Youngblood Hawke, played by James Franciscus, who was a truck driver and took NYC by storm with his first novel. His book is optioned for a play by a has-been actress and Hawke becomes the toast of the town. His second book is an even bigger success but his third book bombs. What I remember about the movie is the part where the third book was published with bigger type and with generous margins to make the book seem bigger than it is; it's called cheating, and the critics caught on and mentioned it. Hawke eventually goes back to Kentucky to write another book and there the story ends.

In order to capitalize on sales of Hawke's previous books, the third book, which the publishers knew was not a winner, was given the treatment to make it look better than it was, but content always tells. A flashy cover, great end papers and gilding on the edges make a nice looking book, but it all comes down to the words. That is what publishers and agents don't really get. They give million-dollar deals to celebrities that are ghostwritten and hype the dickens out of them, riding the fickle tide of public interest that soon wanes, but they give the public nothing tangible. What they give the public is a modern version of bread and circuses. Is that validation? Is Snookie, the girl from The Jersey Shores who got punched in the face, really worth reading about? Does she have anything to say beyond what she's already said? Then why is she getting a million-dollar book deal when good writers are politely and thoroughly rejected? Because publishing is gambling that Snooki's book will earn back their advance.

Outside of the freak factor and celebrity mania, there is nothing of value to offer the public, except more of the same dreck. There are no interesting stories, no good writing and no validation for writers unless they prove themselves first. Snooki has proven that she can get people to look at her, but that's about all. An MTV teen mom is coming out with two books about herself, but from the ads, I doubt the book will be worth buying or reading. More bread and circuses.

Meanwhile, on the indie front, there are terrible writers who are slapping up any old thing on Smashwords and Amazon and Barnes & Noble, but that is nothing new. Garages, attics and dumps are full of boxes of vanity published books that never sold and were not worth publishing, but there are always vultures. With the new technology available and the bad taste left in the mouth of traditionally published midlist and best selling authors, they are flocking to do it themselves and reap the benefits, only one of which is money. They are seeking to be validated in their belief that good books written well and with professional covers and editing (yes, some of them actually do pay editors and artists) will sell -- and they do -- by the thousands. Indie publishing will find its level and there will be midlist writers and best sellers who emerge from the press and whose work will endure as long as Mark Twain's, or even beyond. They have the reins and they're not going to take their obligatory lap around the colisseum before fading into the sand.

Agents and publishers fear the technology and they fear the authors who are flocking to indie publishing to get a bigger share of the pie, but most of all to be validated. Agents and publishers will never go away, and maybe agents will turn their businesses into e-distributors, as Joe Konrath speculates, while publishers keep doing the same old things the same old way and expecting different results. I believe that is the definition of insanity.

Instead of taking a hint from the exodus of solid midlist writers who have earned millions of dollars over the course of their caareers, publishers will keep the focus on validation and the services they offer. It's true, they have hundreds of years of experience, nearly half a millennium, in knowing how to manipulate the public and authors to stay on top, and that may be changing. Publishing is sliding down the chute, but it isn't out. They have too much to lose and too much money invested in their monolithic businesses to quit. Whether they reinvent themselves or continue with business as usual is anybody's guess, but from what I read on the agent's blog, the belief that only traditional publishing can offer what an author values most, validation that what they have produced is worth publishing, will not change until more authors like Barry Eisler, Joe Konrath, Amanda Hocking and even Mark Twain show them the way.

There is room for traditional and indie publishing without slinging mud and denigrating what the opponent has to offer. It's a matter of the bottom line, not the immediate value, but the long term bottom line, which is something traditional publishers never think about. Publishers and agents focus on the immediate bottom line, on immediate perceived value, but that will change.

If Mark Twain can do it, so can other authors, and I hope I'm one of them. It's not about how you got your book to the market and onto the shelves, but that you did and people picked them up, bought them and took them hold to read and then told their friends who told their friends who told their friends until people began to speak their name in whispers and then in shouts.

Publishing shouldn't be about bread and circuses, keeping the masses fed and entertained for the moment so they forget when they get home there is no bread and no more circuses. Publishing should be about bringing good books to the masses and feeding their souls and their minds, not just their bellies. Only time will tell which way the wind blows, but I'd say the wind from indie publishing that whispers validation is growing in strength and offers, as it has always offered, a different path to acceptance and success. Publishers seems to be more interested in EX-clusion than IN-clusion and that may be their downfall, or maybe it's just their dogma. The long term bet is on a mutually effective and useful co-existence with bread at the circus and at home. Keep your fingers crossed.

Elbow Room

On Castle this week, the murder centered around a body shoved into a pizza oven and nearly burned beyond recognition. The owner, Authentic Nick, whose real name was Ralph, was certain the culprit was one of his three competitors, each with their own Nick's Pizza store and a different version of Authentic on one of the four corners on Mott Street. Each of his competitors had once worked for Ralph and had stolen his recipe to create their own empire, and thus the pizza wars. Their tactics were strictly sophomoric: soap in the pizza sauce, flaming bags of poo, etc. No one admitted to having put the body in Ralph's oven, which was admittedly the best and served as a way to ruin sales. After all, who wants a pizza cooked in an oven that also cooked a human being?

As I watched the show, I was reminded of the tricks that writers will pull on each other to thin the field of competition, like bad mouthing someone's hard work when there is no reason to do so or spreading untruths about their competition's personal life. As hard as I try to understand, I just don't get it. I thought we had matured past the need to ruin the competition. There is room for us all and I've found the best revenge is not living well but writing well.

As in the case of one upset writer who carried on a virtual shouting match with a reviewer, it seems there really is no such thing as bad publicity -- at least for the reviewer. Everyone wants to read the exchange and find out what there was about that particular writer that was so nuts. First of all, she should never have taken on the reviewer. That was bad form and highly unprofessional. The only other worse thing the author could have done was lampoon the reviewer in series after series of articles in order to shore up her self esteem. Honey, it was just one review. Fix the problems and move on.

As a reviewer, I have had to consider first whether or not I should review someone who has hurt me personally and tried to hurt me professionally. If I cannot be completely objective, then I don't do the review. Fortunately for me, I have had to deal with this situation very few times. Since that reviewer didn't know that particular author personally or professionally, and since she had approached him for a review, the point of whether he could be completely objective is moot. However, I doubt he will consider reviewing any more of her work and there is little doubt that she will approach him again, even though the review was on the whole a good one.

What we need is more professionalism and less of the schoolyard rivalries in writing. Authors and reviewers have enough problems finding room for their work; they do not need to squabble with their colleagues. There is plenty of room for all writers, even the bad ones, who make the good ones look that much better. All we need to do is keep a few rules in mind.

1. Don't engage the reviewer except to thank him for the review and move on. You'll gain notoriety, but it won't be the good kind. Instead, thank the reviewer for his time and take a good hard look at the comments to see if you could improve the work.

2. Make your work error-free. You've written complex and interesting characters, plotted flawlessly and written sparkling dialogue, but don't forget the basics: grammar, punctuation and spelling, and get rid of all the typos whenever you find them. This is easier with self-publishing. And make sure you use the correct words. For instance: You sight a gun, but you work at a building site. I recently found that mistake in a work I'm currently reviewing from a respected and award-winning author. We all make mistakes.

3. Be professional. It doesn't hurt to mind your manners and keep professionalism uppermost in mind. It's like wearing a suit to a first interview instead of your favorite jeans and a T-shirt or simply treating everyone around you, especially those that can help or hurt your career, with respect and honor. An interviewer asked the Queen Mother of England why she never spoke in public. She told him it was because she didn't want to give a bad impression or give anyone the chance to misquote her. It's like the old saying about appearing stupid and then opening your mouth to remove all doubt. The Queen Mother was reportedly one of the most intelligent and politically astute women of her time.

It's simple when you get right down to it and it boils down to the Golden Rule. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. It is also true for writing. Do your job. Do it flawlessly and treat everyone with respect and professionalism. How hard is that? With a good attitude and professional matters, there is elbow room for us all.

Be a Real Writer

I am beginning to wonder why more authors don't self-publish. Oh, that's right. It's because of the onus of vanity publishing. That is changing.

There are lots of writers who still believe that legitimacy only comes with being published by a real publisher, real meaning established publishing house. They also believe that the only way to go is with an agent to look after your interests because writers just don't know about contracts and rights and all that legal mumbo-jumo.

There are even writers who insist that a writer isn't a real writer unless and until the name appears on the spine of the book as the only author, ignoring the publication of articles, co-authoring books and articles, anthologies and anything that isn't a fiction or nonfiction book authored by the writer and only by the writer. Too many qualifiers.

The real reason for placing all those hurdles is to differentiate oneself from what the competition. It's the same old schoolyard game of one-upmanship. If I have numerous articles and have co-authored a couple of books AND have published a novel then I'm a writer and you're not because you've only written articles and contributed to twenty anthologies. It's silly and petty and only silly and petty people still believe that way. A writer is one who writes. It's that simple. The dictionary says nothing about publication, just writing.

The Belle of Amherst, Emily Dickinson, is undoubtedly a poet even though she never published a book of poetry in her lifetime. Only a handful of poetry was ever published. In death, as in life, Dickinson remains a poet.

One thing writers need to do is stop fighting with each other. Our differences are our strength and shouldn't be used as a reason for exclusion, but people tend to be more exclusionist than inclusionist. Too bad, since it makes a sometimes lonely life that much lonelier, and more competitive.

During this time of changes and birth pains throughout the publishing world, we need to celebrate our differences and find ways to support each other. I was impressed with Barry Eisler and Amanda Hocking congratulating each other in a recent tandem interview. They each recognized in the other intelligence and business savvy, despite choosing different paths. They were polite and professional. We need more of that especially now that the face of publishing is changing so quickly.

I have found myself at odds with other writers over these issues and I usually end up shaking my head and walking away. I cannot abide jealousy in any form.

When I was just getting into the whole Internet thing and finding my cyberlegs, I visited many writing forums and offered advice to newbies coming in asking questions. I did have a limit, but when someone was interested in learning, I thought it only fair to spare them some of the anguish and offer tips and point out a few signs along the way. If I didn't know an answer, I knew where to find it and I sent them to the source. I caught a lot of flack from more seasoned writers and professionals because I was wasting my time and making it too easy for them. I was surprised, and I shouldn't have been. People can be mean, no more so than when they feel threatened. I never feel threatened. There are an infinite way of telling stories and an infinite number of combinations on the so-called 12 plots available. Of course, I hadn't heard about Mary Sues then either. I don't write fan fiction.

I have heard of mimics and I think most writers go through a mimicry stage when they try to write like their favorite authors. Some writers have made a very good living mimicking certain writing styles and authors. Mimickry (imitation) is said to be the sincerest form of flattery.

We all have to start somewhere and writing is the very first step. Get the words out of your head and onto the page. Once you do that and do it consistently -- every day is best -- you are a writer. The rest is business. That is what publishing is, a business, a means to earn money as a writer. Real writing is really writing day after day, week after week, weekends and holidays, and every spare moment -- even if it's just for your own amusement or to share with family, or as a legacy to future generations.

Emily Dickinson is not here to appreciate the impact her poetry had on subsequent generations of admirers and readers, but somehow, somewhere inside her, she felt the need to put her feelings and thoughts and ideas down on paper so we could share that corner of her life and abilities . . . because she wrote.

That's how to be a real writer. Sit down and write.

Authors Fight Back

I keep a fairly close eye on publishing news and the news over the past few weeks has been disturbing, especially from writers I know and have reviewed, like Brian Keene, but to find out that Brian is broke until his new projects are launched is stunning, even shocking news. It's not his fault. He isn't one to spend his hard earned money on drinking and drugs, but to his publishing contract with Dorchester (Leisure). Color me shocked. I missed that one and I shouldn't have.

It wasn't that much of a surprise when Dorchester dropped their mass market publishing and went directly into e-books and Print on Demand (POD), but what they did to their backlist writers was unconscionable.  That news came directly from Publishers Weekly, a very reliable source; it also came directly from Brian Keene and he details the incidents in the blog on his web site. Until now, writers moving to publishing their own e-books and POD books was just the tip of the iceberg of discontent between authors and Big Publishing, but this goes beyond the pale. This is what happens when a company ties up all the rights to an author's works, mismanages the money and, when their company goes under, they grab the first support they can find to stay alive -- authors' rights and their backlist.

When Dorchester contacted their authors and told them the company was going into bankruptcy, most of the authors chose to take their rights and backlist in lieu of payment. What they didn't know what Dorchester planned next, to publish their backlists as ebooks. That's called "take the money and run" and Dorchster has been avoiding paying the writers or  returning their rights to shore up their bottom line. 

Brain Keene and at least one hundred other authors have banded together to boycott Dorchester. I have never published with Dorchester, but this could be a sign of things to come. Authors should stick together and this is one way I can support Brian Keene and his fellow writers. It's time to send a message to publishing that this kind of behavior will not be tolerated.

Sign up to boycott Dorchester, let authors considering signing with Dorchester know what's going on, show them how to tell a Dorchster (Leisure) book and spread the word. We have the words; it's time to use them.

There are things wrong with Big Publishing and they need to be fixed, but screwing over the authors is not the way to do it. Many self-published authors want to work with the publishing establishment because authors want the best possible backing for their work and the publishing establishment needs authors, not one-off celebrities whose books are ghostwritten, in order to stay in business. We need to find an equitable working relationship for all concerned so that authors and publishing can capitalize on their strengths and not just feed off each other. It's time for the mainstream publishers to take a good look at where they are and where they're going and realize that it's not a good idea to upset the people who make them necessary. Don't poke the lion in the cage; the door might not be locked.

Cracks in the Vanity Publishing Mirror

I began the process of migrating the data from Word into the template provided by CreateSpace and it went well the first time around, that is until I found out that the cover artist wouldn't have a template that fit the 6 x 9 size paperback. Drat! Oh, well, I downloaded another template and began all over, discovering that all the italics were missing, as were the little masks between time and location changes, and that some of the pages had lost the formatting and were still the 6 x 9 size instead of the 8.5 x 5.5 size. Well, double drat! I spent the next two hours before work and several hours -- until 11 p.m. -- after work putting it all right, checking, double checking, saving as a PDF file and checking and redoing it until it was perfect. I also found two small errors, and I fixed those. Oh, and I fine tuned a few sentences, not much, just a skoch. My part is done, except for the back cover copy and I'm not read to go there yet. I mean, how many times can I tell the story without telling the story and make it fresh and interesting and not something I've written and rewritten a dozen or more times before? It's a difficult and time consuming job, but the effort will be worth it because my book will not be just some thrown together piece of editorial tripe that should have taken much longer to write.

That's the problem with self-publishing. Too many people refuse to take the time to do it right. I could name names, but I won't. It's not necessary, especially when Mark Deniz of Morrigan Books does such a wonderful job of tearing down vanity publishing. I agree with him, but I also believe in a barrel of mostly rotten apples there is bound to be a few that are still fresh and tasty. I will do my best to make sure my book is among the edible.

Since starting this whole self-publishing odyssey, I have spent a lot of time reading blogs and commentary about well known writers jumping the legacy publishing ships to do it for themselves. They do have the advantage of having been published and on top (most of them) for years and that definitely brings up the tone of the general rush to self-publish. What I found most interesting was Kristine Kathryn Rusch's series of articles on the often arcane workings of Big Publishing and I do agree mostly with her. A behemoth like Big Publishing is not going to be able to change overnight, or even over a decade or two from the looks of it, and embrace the digital revolution. It's like trying to take a tight corner at top speed with a stegosaurus. It can't be done.

I do think there are some things that Big Publishing can do right away and that is lower the price of the digital versions of hardback books. An e-book that costs almost as much as hard cover is ridiculous, as is limiting how many times libraries may loan a digital version before getting a new license -- 26 does seem to be ridiculously low. After all, it's not like a hardback or soft cover book that can be loaned out as long as there are covers to keep the pages in place. Digital books do not wear out. That's just pure and simple blindness and greed. That is part of the reason why so many writers are jumping ship.

There will always be wide-eyed and self-published writers tired of doing it all themselves who just want someone to do everything but the writing for them. They'll still have to market and publicize and do a lot of the heavy lifting, but at least they will have more time to write. Putting a book together and making it good enough for publication is a time-consuming process and you have to juggle a lot of balls at the same time in order to get it all done right so you can move on to the next book, which is why I'm still holding off on finishing Whitechapel Hearts. Yes, it is procrastination, but procrastination for a good reason. Luckily, I'm keen on learning new skills and expanding my horizons and, when it gets to be too much, I'll simply hire someone else to do it. I don't see that happening in the near future. I'm too poor. But a time will come and I will be able to afford it, even though I will still have the last word.

I suspect my journey along the self-publishing road will not be as difficult as it is for some because I have some work and background in the business. I've been an editor at a magazine and a web site designer. I've edited a few books, ghost written a few and dealt with publishers and agents. I am learning how to market and I have to say I'm not all that keen on it, but with the bitter . . . . I have a background in art and know what I want and yet am flexible enough to be able to bend when necessary. I've been through the publishing process a time or twelve, give or take a half dozen, and I'm not averse to hard work, and believe me self-publishing, when it's done correctly, is hard work. I will never say it isn't. But, like with anything worth doing, it is worth doing well, and I, unlike many self-publishing writers, prefer to get it right the first time, and I'm not afraid to take the time to do it right.

There are times when self-publishing is all about vanity, and I freely admit there is a bit of vanity in my decision to journey down the self-publishing road. After all, I believe in my book and my ability to put it all together. In an industry when the final decision is no longer made by editors and publishers but by the advertising and sales departments of Big Publishing, I prefer my judgment to theirs. After all, what do they know about writing a good book? Advertising and sales should be about selling a product to the best of their abilities and not to deciding which product -- or book -- would be easiest to sell. If that were the case, who would have published Dickens or Steinbeck or even Hemingway since they were definitely never the flavor of the month?

It took a visionary to take Harry Potter at face value and see that he had potential. Think of the editors who turned J. K. Rowling down. I'll bet they're kicking themselves for not being able to see the future more accurately and clearly. I'll bet Rowling wouldn't have hesitated to self-publish if she couldn't get Harry to the masses any other way.

Just missed it again, but there's hope

I suppose I should be humble, very humble, about my latest honorable mention, but I wanted at least to get in the running. I did notice that most of the stories in the semi-finals for the Red Room's Scandalously Short Story Contest are literary stories and mine isn't. Two days is not enough time to write and polish a good literary story, good enough to win a prize, especially when I have a full time job and a part time job writing book reviews that takes up so much of my time. Doesn't leave a lot for writing, editing and polishing a literary story, especially when I'm polishing two novels at the same time. I went with a story I wrote for another contest, Legacy, one that I will spin out some day and throw in some length, depth and words so it will be a full length short story. Legacy is based on an idea for another story and may even end up as a sequel to a novel I've written. I do love dark fantasies, especially when they involve Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, one of my favorite Robert Louis Stevenson stories.

Stevenson wrote a lot of dark tales, horror really, in the dark vein of Edgar Allen Poe, and I do love horror. I don't get enough of it any more now that horror is considered to be less interesting than paranormals and thrillers and zombies. Speaking of zombies, I actually have a story mapped out that includes a whole lot of zombies -- in a good cause -- and war. After all, where else would you want zombies but in the battle zone. Lots of material to work with. Believe me, the South will rise again . . . and again. And I'm not a big fan of zombies. There's not much to work with.

At any rate, I began this post to mention the mention of one of my stories and find myself actually eager to continue writing. I hope you don't mind.

Although I've been busy with work, very busy, and keeping up my various obligations with promoting my books and reading review books, I haven't felt much like writing. The muse has been inconsistent and I've been a little less eager to write than I usually am. I work best when I have a deadline and some specific goal ahead. Otherwise, I flounder and waffle and do the avoidance dance. I have come up with an idea that might help boost my energy and get me excited about writing (editing and polishing really takes it out of me) and I wonder if there is any interest here, or suggestions to refine the idea, so I come to you. I've only told one other person, and my paper journal, so I thought I'd toss out the idea and see what comes back.

As some of you may have noticed, I've had a lot of stories published in anthologies, quite a few in Chicken Soup and Cup of Comfort. After years of rejections (no news is no news), I finally began selling all the stories I submitted. I had found the key to getting published and I think it's time to share the key. Many people have interesting stories to tell and just need a little help, or a lot of help, to make their stories publishable. To that end, I thought I'd put together a seminar to help writers get their nonfiction stories published, how to make them evocative, how to polish and hone the main theme (you usually only get 1200 words or less) and make the stories read for submission and publication. There is a method to the madness and I enjoy sharing what I've learned. Here's your chance to stop the madness (me putting together a seminar or workshop) before it gets rolling. Tell me what you think.

In the meantime, I'd also like to suggest taking a chance and writing your 1st or 101st nonfiction story and win an autographed copy of the latest anthology containing two of my stories: Chicken Soup for the Soul: Family Matters. There is still time until October 19th for the Make Me Laugh contest. I look forward to your entries.

That is all. Disperse.

Writing sex and death

Ever since I saw the movie Atonement I wanted to read the book. I find out about a lot of writers by watching adaptations of their work. I finally had some time and had Ian McEwan's book, so I sat down and dove into the story.

Much of the movie stuck pretty close to McEwan's book -- until the end. That's when everything changed. Briony, in her seventies and just diagnosed with a slow decline into senility, has rewritten and sent her story to the publishers who have brought out all her previous work. The first draft of the book was written fifty years and five years after she accused Robbie Turner of raping her cousin Lola the night the twins ran away. She finally understood what was going on between Robbie and her sister Cecilia and wants to make amends. She will recant the testimony that put Robbie in a mental hospital for nearly four years and he can come back and pick up his life where he left off, go to medical school and be a successful and respected doctor without the specter of rape and mentally ill hanging over him and Cecilia. They can be happy and get married and move on with their life. She will have atoned for her sins.

That's not how it ends.

Robbie did indeed die of a septic wound from shrapnel and Cee died in a bombing that took out the tube station near where she lived. Briony's book cannot be published because Lola and Paul Marshall are now married and very wealthy and would sue the publisher for libel. You cannot libel the dead, but Lola and Paul aren't dead and Briony's mind and life are raveling out so fast it isn't likely she will survive to see her book published and Robbie vindicated posthumously. The bad guys win or, in this case, the bad guy and girl win.

From what little I've read of McEwan's work, and some of the reviews of his other books, the bad guys usually win in the end. McEwan has a fascination with sex and death that permeates everything I have read so far, including the stories in first love, last rites, most of which are crude and shocking in their descent into the depths of the connections between sex and death.

A pedophile who blames his unpopularity on his weak chin takes advantage of a young girl, exposes himself and makes her touch his penis and then kills her because no one can know what he's done. Then he poses as an innocent man who just happened to see the dead girl drifting down the canal from the bridge above. That's his story and of course no one believes him because he has a weak chin, almost no chin, just a straight slide from his lower lip down to his neck. The story is creepy and delves into the mind of an anti-social, whining, wretch who is obviously mentally ill. In that sense, McEwan captures the character perfectly.

At first I felt sorry for the guy, but it didn't take long for pity and sympathy to turn to disgust. Most of the stories begin and end in the same vein. One sexually precocious pre-pubescent boy glorying in his mastery of all things bad over his mate decides a trial run before convincing the town tramp, who will let him look at her quim for a shilling, is in order. He lures his much younger sister into a new twist on the game of Mummies and Daddies while his parents are out so he can see the female plumbing ahead of time and have sex with her. He succeeds with the help of his little sister who knows more about her body than her older brother and is shocked and upset when he pees inside her. All of this is told by a bragging, preening boy who is so generous he allows his father and uncles to gift him with a shilling when he makes more money than they do through criminal acts. After all, his father and uncles are so proud of being able to give him the shilling he doesn't want to spoil their feelings of generosity and kindness. It's not the money he enjoys, but the superiority over his elders. No doubt, he too will get away with it, as do all the perfidious and evil-minded characters in McEwan's stories.

It seems McEwan is fascinated by meanness of spirit and spiritually and emotionally stunted people who succeed at everything they do no matter who has to suffer in the process. Sex and death are integral parts of Atonement as they are in McEwan's short stories and, from what I've read, in his Booker Prize winning novel, Amsterdam. There is no doubt of McEwan's mastery of prose and his intricately plotted and executed stories, but the unsavory characters who manage to get decent people to do their dirty work for them seem to be the point of his theme. It's not just sex and death that infuse McEwan's work with life, but the perversion of sex and twisted deaths that are at the heart of them all.

What's needed is more research and more reading to get to the bottom of McEwan's themes and the driving force behind his portrayal of the darkness that inevitably triumphs.

Getting hard

The more I interact with amateurs, the more I am inclined to move to a cave and live like Thoreau. It isn't because they're stupid (they are) or that they're unprofessional (yep, that too) but because they are rude and ignorant and take delight in trampling all over everything that isn't theirs.

I recently critiqued another writer's work. It came up in the queue. In order to get a critique, I have to give one. This person sought me out the next day and trashed my hard work, giving me the lowest scores possible. At first, the comments seemed unnecessarily vicious and hammered away at literary writing techniques that have nothing to do with genre writing. I decided to check the person out to thank them (teeth gritted) for their carefully considered comments. That's when I found out I had written a critique of their work the day before. I pointed out the cliches in their work and the too obvious plot devices, never giving a score below 3/5, and offered suggestions that would elevate their work above the cookie cutter style they had chosen (beautiful, rich, bored woman in expensive car seeks out starving young man living in hostel and selling newspapers in the rain for food offers hot bath, gourmet food and top shelf alcohol for the night in her secluded, well appointed hideaway). There was no sense of place. The dialogue was stilted and obviously pulled from some television show or 1900s melodrama. The characters were one-dimensional and the situation trite.

Unlike my usual methods where I state flat out that someone has screwed the English language with a broken skewer and trampled it with jump boots into the quagmire of a tar pit, I used tact. He used none and simply had a screaming tantrum all over my hard work. I feel like I'm flying with turkeys. It's enough to dishearten and depress, and it has done both in the recent past.

On a hunch, I checked out the other negative critiques and they were also people I had given low marks for horrid, misspelled and grammar-deficient writing. Flying with turkeys again.

I know professionals can be rude and snarky, but at least they have some credentials backing up their comments. These amateurs have none, as their lack of understanding or familiarity with the English language and basic grammar show. Now I know why successful writers refuse to read amateur work. It makes them despair for the future of literature. And I certainly do.

I don't expect everyone to love everything I write, but I do expect a certain level of professionalism and tact. I give what I expect to get -- the golden rule. Too bad no one has taught these literary anthropoids that being able to use a computer keyboard does not mean they can write.

Oh, well, time to go back to my cave and read good writing or even marginal writing with promise. I have so many to choose from.

That is all. Disperse.

Person or product

With all the talk about branding and shelf life and marketing, my head is in a whirl about being an author. After years of hard work and learning and writing, and thinking that all there was to being an author was writing a good book, I'm at a loss. Then I read Rachelle Gardner's post about choosing a literary agent and I knew what I wanted to find and how to find it.

I am a writer. It's what I do. It's what I think about. It's what I've always been in one form or another. I write books. I also write articles and short stories, and poetry on rare occasions. I didn't want to sell books, or market, brand, network or make books. I wanted to write. And I have written. But looking for an agent has been a disappointing experience, in part because I was so busy putting together winning queries and packaging myself and my book to tantalize, excite and entice an agent who would be enthusiastic about the work when I should have been thinking about what kind of an agent I want.

I want an agent like Lauren Bacall in the movie version of Stephen King's Misery. I want a clone of Maxwell Perkins or Lewis Jackman in Return to Peyton Place, an agent who sees the person behind the writer and wants to publish everything I write. Someone who sees me as more than a single book. An agent who represents a person -- me -- and not just a book, a single title, or series, and then moves on to the next book.

In all of the rejections from agents I have queried, each has said I'm a good writer, but s/he is not passionate about the book I'm offering. They were excited by my query and proposal package, but just weren't enthusiastic enough about the work. Nowhere in all those polite and politically correct rejections did anyone mention being enthusiastic about me as a writer, a person who turns out good work and will continue to do so. But how do I find an agent interested in more than one project? That is the question.

At this point, I'm not sure. What I do know is that I want an agent who is enthusiastic about representing me and sees me as a writer with a bright future. I'm not my book; that is the product of my imagination, experience, evolution, talent and hard work. It is a product any competent person, or people, can package, market and sell. The engine that drives this assembly line of words and ideas continues to run and produce. I need to find someone who understands that and is passionate about a relationship with me. A relationship with my book is a short term affair. A relationship with me is a long term arrangement. That's the person I want and need. Just point me in the right direction.

A time of dreams and fantasies

Movies are compelling with their images and colors brighter than those seen in the living rooms and dens and bedrooms where the movies play. It's no wonder talkies took off the way they did in spite of the people who claimed movies would never take off. In movies there are no limits to the imagination. People have traveled farther in movies than they ever have on land or in sea or air. Makes me wonder how far we would have traveled if the people involved had been as keen to achieve space flight as they did to crack the boundaries of time and space on the big screen.

The first flights of fancy took place around fires in caves and on the plains and in the mountains and hills and at the sea side when night ruled and men huddled close for comfort and protection. Was it a lie that started the first storytellers to spinning fancies and fantasies out of shadow and leaping firelight? Or was it merely wishing to penetrate the darkness and stave off the predators waiting to pounce?

Fiction writers are considered liars, but I don't see us as writers, but rather as dreamers and visionaries. Is it a lie to wish for better or to want to travel beyond the confines of gravity? Anyone capable of such courage and wisdom and ability would have to be special and so the story is born.

I am constantly amazed by the wide variety of stories and movies and even more so by the time it takes to watch someone else's dreams and let my own lie fallow. That's the lure of movies and books, like a come-hither from the king of the leprechauns that leads to wrack and ruin, and the death of dreams.

I'm guilty of following the easy entertainment of the written and acted word, caught like a dazed fool. I'm getting better at discipline, but it's not second nature yet. I'm too much the rebel when it comes to settling down to someone else's rules -- and even my own. I don't like fences even the kind that limit time and spontaneity. Time heals all wounds and wounds all heels so that keeping the roads hot isn't quite so easy any more. It's probably why many take up writing later in life when children are grown and there are hours and time to fill. There's so much to look back on and record, so many thoughts to follow to the rainbow's end and fantasies to to eave from threads into whole cloth. It's also why some begin writing in their youth -- time to fill, dreams to follow and fancies to weave.

I'm in the middle of life, but have always found time to write. Now that there is more time with fewer distractions during summer break, I should be able to finish a couple more books. I write waking and sleeping, but I think for a while I'll leave my working hours for actual work, toiling toward the goal of time to write. There are worse things to do with the time, and I've done most of them. Time to do better and be good for a change or I'll not get a single good night's sleep as stories and characters have found their way into my dreams, luring me with penny bright phrases and evocative prose.

Kick Start Your Writing

My astrological chart says I'm not a self starter and I would have to agree. I am a born procrastinator -- on some things, writing being one of them. I love to write and can sit and write for hours on end, usually irritated that I have to get up and tend to nature's call or eat. I have been known to write for 36 hours straight, with nature breaks, of course, and not get tired. I am in the zone. The words are coming. The characters are cooperating and often teaching me things about them I did not know. My fingers are not tired of typing and my backside has not yet reached the leaden stage where getting up is like trying to free my nether regions from a powerful electromagnet -- must be the endorphins and adrenaline coursing through my bloodstream. Everything works fine. I wrote a 100,000-word biography like that once.

Then there are times that I just cannot face the page, knowing that if I do I will be caught in powerful currents and dragged down into the zone where I will not emerge for hours, maybe even a day or two. I cannot afford it. I have to work my day job and do the laundry and bulldoze the detritus from the last writing stint, definitely not a good idea if avoiding surprise visits by the health department.

I do write every day, but not on my works-in-progress. I journal every day, keep up with correspondence and emails, and work, which consists of 8-10 hours of typing dictation, very technical dictation. On the laptop waits my novel or short story waiting to be finished and it calls to me. Like the hunger pangs I ignore when I am in the writing zone, I ignore the siren's call to write until pretty soon, like hunger pangs, the call fades. Then begins the avoidance dance and the procrastination when a deadline looms. It is my fault; I am not a halfway person. I am either all in or all out, my versions of "Do or do not; there is no try," from Yoda to Luke Skywalker. There stands the problem: inability to commit hindquarters to seat in order to write.

Instead, I play a couple rounds of computer games (I prefer skill and knowledge games), work on blog posts, fire off a couple of quick tweets and a run through Facebook to see if I missed anything and then rounds through the various blogs, all while checking email and getting ready for work while sipping a cup of hot green tea that is cooling fast. One job through the widgets to check hits on the blogs and a quick visit to see if anyone has read the latest chapter of the novel I posted on a publishing site. The novel is unfinished and needs a final edit and proofread. It is the reason I have been procrastinating.

I want to finish the novel. Well, it is already finished and needs a little tune-up and loose ends tied. I need to finish the novel before the editor gets to it. I plan to finish the proofreading but, oops, where has time gone. Almost time for work and I still need to eat breakfast (pesky hunger pangs) and take a shower. Maybe later.

Maybe tomorrow.

Maybe this weekend.

By then, a few weeks have passed. Good thing the editor has not contacted me because I have nothing to offer to excuse my inability to kick start my writing engine.

That was yesterday. This morning, I found the answer. I knew it all along because it works for getting the laundry done, the clothes folded and put away, the bed made after the sheets are washed (making the bed every day provides a warm and moist environment for dust mites and other microscopic vermin to grow and procreate -- that is my story and I am sticking to it), the dishes done, the vacuuming finished, exercising and taking out the trash. Once I begin, the rest takes care of itself.

With writing, it is the internal editor that kick starts my engine. One of my critique partners mentioned an extra word in chapter twelve and a comma missing in chapter fifteen. They cannot be allowed to stand or I will forget and the spell check program will not catch them. Into the breach once more I go.

Control-F and type in a few words of the phrase and the extra word is easily found. Next search coordinates go in and, wait a minute, there is something else. How could I have missed that awkward phrasing? Well, that has to go. A few moments later and I am in the zone happily writing and editing and listening to the characters tell me secrets that I dutifully transcribe and polish. The first step is the problem, but the internal editor makes taking the first step effortless.

I do not have the problem in journaling or editing others' work or writing reviews. Deadlines and missing days in the journals keep me honest, but there is no real deadline for a new book or a work-in-progress that has not been contracted. Yes, the problem crops up when I have a long critique and the first glance at the manuscript ends with groaning sighs after glancing at the first page, but the deadline keeps me honest there, too. No, I will just have to rely on the internal editor and program her to whisper errors, typos and misspellings in my ear that she caught on the way out of the zone so that I am anxious one again to go once more into the breach. When that wears thin and begins to go the way of the hunger pangs, I will have to find another way to kick start the writing.

Someone else will have to whisper errors into my ear that engages the internal editor. I doubt I will ever get past the need to clean up mistakes, especially when they are mine.