6 Reasons Why Every New Writer Needs To Be On Twitter

This article, from Caroline Smailes, originally appeared on her website on 8/12/09.

It seems that everywhere you turn writers are being told that they need to build an online platform. They need a blog, a website, a Facebook page and, perhaps most importantly, a twitter account.

Here are six reasons  I (@Caroline_S) have found twitter to be essential for new writers:

It is big and it is clever: The explosion in twitter users has made twitter the thing all the cool (mainly over 25s) ‘kids’ are doing. It’s new (ish) and to be honest its reputation as the best social media tool out there is well deserved. The simple fact that twitter is the latest trend is reason enough to get involved. The fact that is gives writers the chance to entice hundreds of new readers makes it, well…irresistible.

Conversation is King: Twitter’s biggest advantage is that it makes millions of people so damn accessible. Once a member of twitter, you can follow and interact with anyone else on the system. Now (for me) this isn’t about famous people, it’s about normal people and people that you can connect with and who you’re interested in. As a writer it allows you to make friends and build a following. However, it also allows you to interact with people that can help solve problems. For me, twittering isn’t about trying to get someone to buy my books, it’s about connecting and having a laugh. Need a bit of advice about grammar, or which publisher to approach or even the best type of dog food – twitter can help.

You might just bag yourself a book deal: A growing number of publishers and agents are using twitter. Most are open and ready to interact. This means that, for the first time, writers have the chance to skip the slush pile and go straight to the people that count. Build a relationship with the correct agent or publisher and you never know there might be a book deal in it for you.

Read the rest of the article on Caroline Smailes’ website.

Cloud-publishing; or, Why "Self-publishing" Is Meaningless

I don’t like the term "self-publishing."

Cloud-Publishing

In the emerging world of "cloud-publishing," it’s meaningless, and does not reflect what’s coming, what we’re already seeing signs of. Cloud-publishing — what we’re doing at Book Oven — is providing a toolset, on the web, to publish books; a publishing model native to the web, with all the benefits:

  • instantaneous global distribution
  • simple, web-based collaboration (editing, proofreading, design)
  • networks of creators and collaborators (new and existing)
  • networks of readers (new and existing)

How book creation gets organized in such a model will vary greatly, from the lonely writer, to a small press wishing to focus on content & not technology, to collections of colleagues and friends, to professional associations, collections of strangers aligned by topical interest, or financial interest, or just aligned in the interest of making books.

The key here is: cloud-publishing (and Book Oven) will provide the tools to allow groups of people to easily coalesce around the production, distribution and sale of a particular book or books. How those groups organize themselves will look different from book to book. But Book Oven’s tools will mean that book makers can focus on the important thing, the content, and not worry about the technical hurdles of making, printing & distributing books.

What’s Wrong with the Status Quo?

Others of course, will prefer the current model, and that is wonderful and excellent and good. I love publishers, and books, and book stores, and libraries, and they have brought me great joy over the years.

But the web offers new, parallel ways to make books, not necessarily better, but more flexible, more easily global, more connected.

That’s the larger movement afoot. And if all goes well, Book Oven will be a big part of this movement.

Self-Publishing Doesn’t Cut It

So "self-publishing" doesn’t cut it as a description of what we’re building at Book Oven. It’s too limiting, and doesn’t get anywhere near the vision we have of a new, parallel, model for publishing as a whole.

As the availability of web-based tools for making books grows, the distinction will be between what you might call "corporate publishing" — blockbuster, and top-end publishing; commercial textbook production, etc. — and the rest of us. The rest of us are "independent": the smaller presses, groupings of people who put craft and time into making something with various motivations, and yes, individual writers. That doesn’t mean there won’t be money on the independent side, but the structures around the businesses will be very different than on the blockbuster side.

We’re All Indie Now, or None of Us Is

Though as Richard Nash suggests, we’re all indie now (except the big guys), so even the term indie doesn’t mean much:

So now the phase of indie is over, now that the monopoly on the production and distribution of knowledge, culture and opinion has been broken, what next, a new phase, a drive to, perhaps, create, maintain, defend a New Authenticity arises?—Ah, am I opening myself up for derision with that…? Never mind, I toss it up there, a wounded duck. Power will try to hide behind the people, let’s use a new authenticity to stop them. [more…]

Bloggers Suck, Right? And Amateur Talkers?

But back to "self-publishing": once upon a time, it conjured in some people’s minds a negative slew of adjectives: Bad. Sub-par. Not selected.

Deserved or not, that’s how many react to the term.

They said the same thing about blogging in the old days, and yet I can (and do) now find 10 times as much wonderful, thoughtful, well-written content from blogs than I do from professional outlets. Every time I hear people claim that blogging is "bad" (amazingly, you still hear that), I roll my eyes. As I said to Henry Baum: you might as well complain about bad "talkers." Some talkers are wonderful. Others insufferable. Some of the worst "talkers" are paid lots of money to talk; some of the best are friends of mine and they do it for free. So you would never consider complaining about "talking" as a method of communicating, just because lots of people talk nonsense. You assume that is the case, and seek out the good talkers. So on the web with bloggers, and music, and indeed, books.

Talking is just a means of transmission of words and ideas.

But for whatever reason, it’s hard for people to think of distributing text in the same way that they think of distributing verbal words. While talking might be free, distributing text, audio, video has only recently become (effectively) free. And just as the world is getting used to blogging, and maybe podcasting, along comes this idea that books can be distributed essentially for free. Think about what happened with blogging: suddenly, the means of transmission of text – to a global audience – became free. When the cost restrictions on producing written text disappeared, so did the power of the established system to decide what was worth printing and what wasn’t. And people did what they are wont to do when systems blocking them disappear: they started publishing text like crazy on the web. That made people very uncomfortable. It meant lots of "bad" writers were publishing their text for global consumption. But more importantly, it meant that we saw a beautiful flourishing of great writing that no one had bothered printing before – the topic was too narrow, the audience too dispersed, the return on investment too low. It turns out that the calculations about what’s "worth" publishing is very different when the cost of publishing approaches zero. And that means that now, if you have an internet connection, you can read just about anything produced anywhere in the world. Lutes and Violins? Bespoke tailoring? Goats? You got it.

In the end though, blogging is just a means of transmission of words. And it turns out that there were millions of people willing to write excellent stuff that for whatever reason the traditional media set up did not, or could not publish.

We expect to see something similar with cloud-publishing.

[We’ve had easy access to the tools of publishing for a while, see for instance Lulu. But the most important shift we’re about to see, I think, is the network of readers and writers and book makers. I’ll write more about this later].

Good Books vs. Bad Books

Now, I can guarantee something. As the ability to publish books gets easier, we’ll have more "bad" books than you can shake a stick at. (In fact, we probably already do, published, unpublished, self-published…).

But the lines of distinction will not be, as they were previously, between traditional publishing and self-publishing, but rather just between good books and bad books (with caveats about eyes of beholders etc).

We’ll have corporate publishers making good books, and independents making more good books. And everyone will make lots of bad books too. But how independents organize themselves will change greatly too.

Publishers and the Web

Fact 1: many corporate publishers are having a hard time coming to terms with the web. It’s going to get harder for them – they already are having trouble sustaining their cost structures, and have off-loaded much of the work around the web to their authors.

Fact 2: The web has a wonderful ability to allow people to sort through huge piles of information, and seek, rank and share gems.

Opinion 1: People will find more new writing on the web; so "book publishers" must start to be native to the web, and see the web as integral to their task of connecting readers and writers; they cannot continue to see the web as some kind of add-on to their marketing departments.

Opinion 2: Big corporate publishers will have trouble with Opinion 1; so new publishing models need to emerge.

Nothing Is New Under the Sun

We’ve seen this in music and blogs/newspapers and encyclopedia, where the web, and cheap tools of production have spawned an explosion of creative activity, excellence, choice, and a toiling mass of music and writing of all shapes and sizes (along with lots of dreck, but that’s a side effect of all the great stuff).

We think the same is going to happen for books. With a global audience hungry for content, and cheap easy tools for creation and distribution, and a growing network of creators and readers connected on the web and an explosion of devices that allow people to be reading at times and in places they never did before, the distinctions about where or how books were made will fall away.

Do I Want to Read It?

All that will matter are these two questions:

1. is it any good?

and

2. do I want to read it?

And so "self-publishing" is a term that should be retired.

[Cross-posted at the Book Oven Blog and elsewhere …]

27 Ways To Breathe Life Into Your Blog's "About" Page

This article, from social media expert John Haydon, originally appeared on his site on 8/11/09. The tips here are not aimed at authors and publishers specifically, but will be very useful to anyone with a site or blog.

Every three or four months, I take a look at my About page and ask myself two questions:

  1. What are my business goals for this page? In my case, I do strategy consulting and build what I call “social web systems” for small businesses and non-profits. I want this page to help visitors imagine getting results by working with me.
     
  2. Is this page a true reflection of myself? This is a hard one because, like you, I am constantly evolving – and evolutions resist being bound by words.
     

The answers help me to start breathing new life into my About page. Below are a few things I’ve picked up along the way, either from other About pages and/or through trial and error. ;-)

The obvious

  1. It’s not about you. It’s about the visitor. Speak to them – as if they’re sitting across from you at a coffee shop.
     
  2. Answer questions. This person sitting across from you – what questions will they have about who you are and what you do?
     
  3. Open your door. Put links to your about page in a few places. I have mine in my footer, my nav bar and sprinkled throughout posts.
     
  4. Testimonials. Still the quickest way to establish confidence with potential clients.
     
  5. Have a photo. The quickest (and oldest) way of reading someone is through their face. And for God’s sake, smile!
     
  6. Keep it simple. Depending upon your strategy, less can be much more. Danny Brown teases visitors with an outline of services and provides a link to contact form at the bottom of the page. Beth keeps things short and sweet too. 

    Beth Kanter About

     

  7. Make it interactive. If you have a lot of information that people need to know, break it up into sub-pages, like Epic Change did.

    Epic change about

     

  8. Page Directory. Lots of info still? Try putting a table of contents at the top, just like Alltop does.
     
  9. Have a phone number. I can count on one hand the number of times new clients have introduced themselves with a paypal payment. Most of the time, we talk a few times -through email and on the phone.

    [Publetariat Editor’s Note: This is a good tip if you do consulting or other for-hire work, but you’ll probably want to keep your phone number, address and other personal information private otherwise.]
       

Read the rest of the article, including tips #10-27, on John Haydon’s site.

The Little But Really Useful Guide To Creativity

This post, from Leo Babauta, originally appeared on his zenhabits site on 8/5/09.

“The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources.” – Albert Einstein

It’s easier than ever to be creative, to create, to imagine and make what’s imagined become reality.

It’s also tougher than ever, with distractions surrounding us in ways never before imagined.

No matter what kind of creative type you are — writer, painter, musician, marketer, blogger, photographer, designer, parent, business owner — you are likely always looking for inspirations, for ways to let loose your creative genius.

And while there are millions of creativity tips on the Internet, I thought I’d share the ones I’ve found most useful — the ones that I’ve tried and tested and found to be right.

Here they are, in no order at all:

 

  • Play.
     
  • Don’t consume and create at the same time — separate the processes.
     
  • Shut out the outside world.
     
  • Reflect on your life and work daily.
     
  • Look for inspiration all around you, in the smallest places.
     
  • Start small.
     
  • Just get it out, no matter how crappy that first draft.
     
  • Don’t try for perfect. Just get it out there, asap, and get feedback.
     

Read the rest of the post, including 23 more tips to keep the creativity fires burning, on zenhabits.

Technological Evolution Stirs A Publishing Revolution

This article originally appeared on the Knowledge@Wharton site on 8/5/09.

For publishing, 2009 may go down as the year of the machine.

Consider Amazon’s electronic-book reader, Kindle. Though the first version launched in late 2007, a lighter, faster, cheaper version went on sale this spring. And while the online-only retailer doesn’t release sales figures for the reader itself, its cultural impact was clear by late July, when USA Today announced it would include Kindle editions in its popular weekly list of best-selling books.

With slightly less fanfare, 2009 has also seen the emergence of the Espresso book machine, which will make its New York bookstore debut this fall, having already popped up on campuses in several states. Where Kindle offers consumers a chance to buy some 350,000 books at the touch of a finger — and then read them electronically — the Espresso allows them to print a professional-looking paperback book in about the time it takes to drink a cup of coffee.

At first glance, the machines are diametrical opposites — physically, economically and philosophically. The smallest Kindle weighs 10.2 ounces. The Espresso weighs in at about 800 pounds. The cheapest Kindle costs $299. The cheapest Espresso, produced by On Demand Books of New York, goes for at least $75,000. The Kindle is all about virtual books and online transactions. The Espresso is about physical objects that consumers buy in person.

Yet Wharton faculty who follow the complicated, emotionally fraught subject of how we buy and sell literature say the two devices share something even more important: A role in upending longstanding customs in the slow-to-change business of publishing.

In an industry where inventory problems and overprinting of books is a perennial money drain, the Espresso’s premise — not paying production costs until a reader buys a copy — is a revolution. And in a business where the cumbersome task of routing books to your local bookstore has been a continuing burden — not to mention a risk, since the book may be sitting on the shelf for years — the idea of cutting out the supply chain represents a major development.

"Inventory waste and/or printing time are very important drivers of profitability — maybe the key drivers," says Wharton marketing professor Eric T. Bradlow. "Now the marginal cost of production is zero and the cost of inventory is zero…. The impact that technology has had in both of these cases, whether it’s a Kindle or some sort of print on demand, is that it has increased the opportunities we have to interface with content."

For consumers, the new ways to buy and read books — and the new price points at which to do so — represent a rare expansion of the playing field. "Both [Kindle and Espresso] are great for bookselling," says Wharton marketing professor Yoram (Jerry) Wind. "They basically expand the range of choices that people have. What we must keep in mind is that markets are heterogeneous. There are many segments, and people’s preferences may vary depending on the situation. What we have here is technology offering more options. Some people, especially younger people, may find Kindle terrific. Print on demand is a great solution for people who would like to have a hard copy. They’re not mutually exclusive."

Different Values

The book business has always been more important for culture than for the economy. All the same, moving beyond five centuries of Gutenberg-style production raises questions about how consumers determine value, what they want to read and even how much shelf-space home-builders should design for the living rooms of tomorrow.

For instance, says Joseph Turow, who studies new media as a communications professor at the University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg School, many readers are subconsciously affected by knowing that the book they see in a store was produced and shipped at significant expense by a major company — a sign that someone who knows the business saw fit to invest in the author. "A large part of the problem is psychological," says Turow. "The fact that publishers have to pay a lot for making a book is kind of a gate to ensure that it has value…. I think the fact that there’s a physical copy that has to go through hoops is part of how people judge the value of something. And that is going to be with us for a long time."

But just how long a time is open to debate. "There are real generational differences," says Wharton marketing professor Patti Williams, who studies the role of emotions in decision making. The rapid decline of news media brands, for instance, suggests consumers of other forms of media have been able to move beyond long-established hierarchies. "Look at what’s happening to readership of newspapers and magazines," she says. Many of those readers are turning to blogs, and in doing so they are saying that they do not "rely on some third party to validate" everything that they choose to read.

Read the rest of the article on Knowledge@Wharton.

The End Of Indie

This article, from Richard Nash, originally appeared on his website on 8/9/09 and is reprinted here in its entirety with his permission. In the piece, Richard proposes "indie" has become so mainstream that the term is now meaningless.

I awoke in the middle of the night last night and checked email and Twitter around 4am (they say when you can’t sleep, it’s best to get up, and tire yourself out, before returning to bed). A Twitter follow announcement came in from Kaya Oakes, with whom I had been trying to schedule an interview off and on in 2007 and 2008—I felt a pang of guilt as I checked out her tweets and saw that the book, for which the interview was to be conducted, was done. Finished, published. Slanted and Enchanted: The Evolution of Indie Culture is more or less what the subtitle says it is.

I’ll spare you the appalling copy from the publisher, which manages to be both glib and patronizing, and give you a little of Publishers Weekly’s description:

“[A] lively and highly literate explication of various American indie scenes and art forms . . . [Oakes’] focus on independent publishing and writing—provides a worthy parallel narrative to Michael Azzerad’s essential indie music history, [Our]Band Could Be Your Life . . . Oakes begins the book with a much appreciated primer on some of the intellectual forebears of her book’s central characters, including the poets Frank O’Hara and Allen Ginsberg and the revolutionary street theater group the Diggers. As an explanation and excavation of the already fading recent past, it is essential reading.”—_Publishers Weekly_

I was momentarily rather bummed that I’d missed out on a chance to discuss the topic with Kaya when it dawned on me that I’d have had nothing very useful to say eighteen months ago. All is changed, changed utterly. Indie doesn’t mean anything anymore. It’s dead. Which is OK, because it won. Open source, Twitter. Indie won. Etsy. The irresistible decline of major labels and network TV and corporate publishing. Indie won. We won, but at the cost to many folks personally of suddenly becoming unnecessary. This was most visible in the last few years in the magazines like Punk Planet, Kitchen Sink, Clamor. But it’ll come for us all.

You see, to the extent that indie meant anything, it was as its root word, independent. It was about seizing the means of production. Independently produced. Aesthetics can be imitated, ethics faked, attitudes mimicked, but large bureaucracies could not possibly replicate the indie production process—how could they seize the means of production? They already had it! And now the means of production has devolved yet farther down, past the indie publishers and indie record labels and pirate radio stations of yore.

This is not to say we’ve entered Nirvana. Just because we’d seized the means of production in the 1990’s didn’t mean that poverty had been eradicated, racism ended, and the intellectual property land grab thwarted. We all have to use the tools we’ve been given, find value in, rather than discard, the tools of the past, hold feet to the fire, undermine monopoly, and so on. All things we tried to do with the means of production we seized in the 90’s, we have to continue do with the means of production that technology has handed to us in the 21st century. Moore’s Law* is value-neutral, apolitical, amoral, just like Gutenberg’s press. It’s how we use it.

So now the phase of indie is over, now that the monopoly on the production and distribution of knowledge, culture and opinion has been broken, what next, a new phase, a drive to, perhaps, create, maintain, defend a New Authenticity arises?—Ah, am I opening myself up for derision with that…? Never mind, I toss it up there, a wounded duck. Power will try to hide behind the people, let’s use a new authenticity to stop them.

*link added by Publetariat Editor

Richard Nash ran Soft Skull Press, now an imprint of Counterpoint, from 2001 to 2007 and ran the imprint on behalf of Counterpoint until early 2009. Here’s why he left.  He’s now consulting for authors and publishers on how to reach readers and developing a start-up called Cursor, a portfolio of niche social publishing communities, one of which will be called Red Lemonade.

DRM Is Not Evil

This post, from Michael Bhaskar, originally appeared on Pan Macmillan’s The Digitalist blog on 7/14/09. Agree? Disagree? Add your comments below. 

At Pan Macmillan we are no great fans of DRM. For a while now we have been selling a limited range of titles DRM free from our website; these are titles where the authors have requested that we retail sans DRM.

Many writers are in favour of this, and so we see as it as an important service. Recently we have added the novels of David Hewson to the non DRM stable and they can be found on the website.

Lets face it. DRM can be a nightmare – confusing, fiddly, prohibitively sensitive to basic uses of media. A couple of weeks ago I was setting up a friends Sony Reader and forgot quite how dis-orientating an experience setting up an Adobe ID can be. Ok, so most of us used to the web will not struggle. But what about all those other readers who get by without Twitter and Adobe IDs? No doubt, DRM isn’t perfect and makes life difficult for people legitimately using files they have paid good money for. Worse, it can lead to those files becoming unusable (a situation which is inexcusable).

However the anti-DRM lobby, as vocal as it is appealing, makes DRM sound like some cultural apocalypse. Culture, the argument goes, thrives on being shared and the modern mass media is a recent aberration that cuts against the grain of creativity and the natural flow of cultural production. Advocates like Cory Doctorow and Larry Lessig make a case that is compelling, persuasive and important. Yet in the hands of many acolytes this is converted to a simple outright denunciation of any DRM and the assumption that the presence of DRM provides a moral carte blanche for piracy. Google might not be evil, but DRM sure is.

The whole DRM debate is hardly a new one but it’s time someone in publishing said something positive for DRM. Yes, it often sucks, but it’s not evil. Why?

Firstly because paper is a form of DRM. If you buy a book you can lend it out to a few of your friends. Can you send it to all of them? No. You are inherently limited in the spread of that book. We don’t assume that it would ever be possible to distribute that book to everyone we know, only that we can do with it what we want. This is both sensible and sustainable.

Secondly and more significantly because mass culture relies on a mass business model undermined by piracy. An argument against DRM is that the web will engender a liberation and proliferation of culture free from the corporate bonds currently suffocating it; get rid of the suits and we end up in a grass roots web driven artistic utopia. This might be true. However in this scenario there will be no more Hollywood blockbusters, huge epoch defining albums and tours, door stopping bestsellers and all the other accouterments of mass culture that rely on a company infrastructure.

These require scale, a corporate scale, which requires direct and secure revenue which to date has existed in the form of unit sales. Last.fm, Spotify et al are pointing the way to a fantastic new business model, but alone it is not enough. DRM is one of the only tools available to prevent catastrophic loss of revenue.

My argument here is simple: if we want Harry Potter- the books, films, computer games, the whole phenomenon – then DRM has a role. While some of the web elite could happily do without this kind of mass market stuff, and while I believe the web is important in promoting material antithetical to it, I think most of us would not want to see it go away.

Read the rest of the post on Pan Macmillan’s The Digitalist blog.

Will Publishers Ever Make Money Off Ebooks?

This article, from Paul Sweeting, originally appeared on Gigaom on 7/21/09.

Barnes & Noble’s launch of a full-scale ebook challenge to Amazon, including a deal to be the exclusive ebookstore provider to Plastic Logic’s would-be Kindle-killer when it’s released next year, means the emerging market for digital books will finally see some real competition. That’s good news for publishers concerned over Amazon’s iTunes-like dominance of the ebook business.

But not as good as it could have been, for Barnes & Noble’s pricing is keeping ebooks firmly in the loss-leader category, at least for the time being.

While Amazon has never disclosed the number of Kindles it’s sold since they were introduced in 2007 (analysts estimate it at roughly 1 million), the Kindle is clearly the most popular dedicated ebook device in the U.S., with a market share of at least 80 percent, probably higher. Thanks to the Kindle’s proprietary technology, however, there’s only one way for publishers to reach that audience of avid readers: through Amazon’s ebookstore (unless they’re willing to sell ebooks without DRM, of course, as most publishers are not).

Just as Apple did with its walled garden around the iPod, Amazon has used the leverage of its captive audience of Kindle users to set retail prices for ebooks. And, like Apple, it has set those prices largely to advance its own strategic interest in selling Kindles, not to maximize revenue for publishers.

Thus most new bestsellers at Amazon’s ebookstore can be downloaded for $9.99, less than half the list price most carry in hardcover. But Amazon still pays publishers a wholesale price of $12-$13 for those books, a loss-leader retail price that is quickly becoming the industry benchmark for new ebooks — to the deep chagrin of publishers, who worry that wholesale prices will eventually be dragged down as well. Google managed to bring a smile to publishers’ faces in June when it announced plans to launch an e-commerce platform for ebooks allowing publishers to sell directly to consumers at prices of their own choosing. But the big “get” for publishers was always going to be Barnes & Noble, the world’s largest bookseller and Amazon’s toughest potential competitor.

So what has Barnes & Noble done? Essentially, it’s gone and adopted Amazon’s pricing structure. Monday’s announcement boasts that the new Barnes & Noble e-book store will feature “hundreds of best-settlers” at — you guessed it — “only $9.99.”

Read the rest of the article on Gigaom.

Redhammer’s Peter Cox Partners With Publetariat Vault

The Publetariat Vault , the groundbreaking new service that connects successful self-published books with publishers and content producers, announced today it will be partnering with Redhammer Management, a literary agency headed by Peter Cox.  

Publetariat Vault founder April Hamilton says, "The Vault provides a listing service only. Authors who list their books don’t enter into an agency relationship with the Vault, and the Vault has no involvement or stake in contract negotiations arising from Vault listings. Still, authors in that situation definitely need a qualified representative at their side to protect their interests, and that’s where Redhammer comes in. Upon the author’s request, Peter Cox has agreed to represent Vault authors in contract negotiations on a one-off basis. Peter’s agency is well-established, international, and represents some top, bestselling authors, including Michelle Paver, author of the hugely successful Chronicles of Ancient Darkness young adult series."
 
"Peter also founded the Litopia  online writers’ community, and he is well-known for all the guidance and feedback he and his clients offer aspiring authors on the Litopia site; he’s truly a friend to authors, and that was important to me."
 
For his part, Peter says, “The Publetariat Vault is an inspired and much-needed idea. Until now, there was no easy way – in fact, no way at all – for the publishing business to discover tomorrow’s rising stars in the burgeoning self-publishing sector. But now there is – The Publetariat Vault makes it easy for publishers to spot the hottest manuscripts that have real traction in the market. It’s brilliant!” 
 
The Vault is currently open for self-published authors to create listings, and expects to open for publisher and producer searches in late August.
 

[Publetariat Editor’s Note: the Vault is running a promotion for its grand opening, in which the first 300 published book listings will be free of charge for 90 days from the date the Vault opens for searches.  It’s a no-cost, no-risk opportunity for self-published authors to try the service. If you’re seeking mainstream publisher/producer attention for your self-published book, sign up for your free Vault account and get those listings in!]

Publisher Spotlight: Interview With Flying Pen Press Publisher David Rozansky

David Rozansky is the founder and publisher for Flying Pen Press and its numerous imprints. In this interview with Publetariat founder April L. Hamilton, David discusses how and why he got into book publishing, what it’s like to work with Flying Pen as an author, and his opinions on matters related to the economics of publishing and self-publishing.

ALH: Following over two decades of experience as a writer, journalist, and then magazine publisher, you decided to launch Flying Pen Press. Why?

DR: There are two forces at work here.

As I entered publishing, I started with magazines back in the early 1990s, mostly because it was easier for a struggling writer to launch a magazine on a shoestring than to start a book publishing house, but my real interest was in publishing books. Then, not too long ago. it became possible to launch a fully functional book-publishing house with no capital outlay. I had the knowledge, the passion and the contacts, so launching a book-publishing house was a natural progression of my career.

The other factor is that in 20 or so years of writing, I often came upon unfair or predatory practices among publishers. I wanted to give my fellow writers a place where they would be respected, and where their work was the reason for being [in] business. Once it became practical to launch a book-publishing venture, I felt like I had an obligation to do so.

ALH: Flying Pen initially faced some serious skepticism from authors who believe a publisher which doesn’t offer sizable advances isn’t a legitimate publisher at all, but when the Harper Studio imprint launched last year, it was with the announcement of the imprint’s intention to forego author advances entirely in favor of a profit-sharing approach to author compensation. It seems Flying Pen was a bit ahead of the curve on this new trend of reducing author advances and looking for alternative compensation schemes. How does Flying Pen compensate its authors?

DR: Before I answer, I would like to say I don’t see any reversal of any trends. There have always been small publishers that could not afford to pay advances. An advance requires a great deal of speculative capital on the part of the publisher. If the book does not earn enough to clear its advance, that publisher is out of money. The larger publishers have enough cash reserves to entice the bestselling authors with large advances, and with their large title lists, they can afford to gamble. But smaller houses just can’t take that risk, because it only takes once for a poorly performing title that does not earn back its advance and then that company is bankrupt.

I also believe that writers should stand behind their work, as I always have with my own writing. That means sharing the risk that the writing will not find a following with readers. I don’t mind giving writers a better-than-average share of the rewards for sharing that risk, but authors that demand an advance before they have proven themselves with a fan following are telling me that they are not sure of their writing, and authors who are well established in the trade with a large number of readers have told me that they prefer more royalties over any advance.

When an author has enough of a fan following that bestseller status is almost all but assured, then advances become a way for large publishers to convince a writer that they are more dedicated to the book’s success than their competitor. But small publishers just don’t have the money to play that, and the large publishers, in this economy, have been bitten pretty hard by their overestimations and are shying away from big advances.

I have instituted a fairly innovative royalty schedule, however, one that no one else has tried. Instead of paying a royalty that is based on cover price or on net sales, I have set it up so that authors earn royalties based on shares of gross profits of each book sold. Gross profits is based on the net sale price less printing costs and some marketing costs that both publisher and writer agree on, such as review copies printed or special ads.

This changes the publishers-author dynamic a bit. Instead of seeing authors as vendors of content, where we try to drive the price for content down with creative accounting, Flying Pen Press becomes a partner with the author. As a typical example, the author earns 100 shares, Flying Pen Press earns 115 shares, and the cover designer and the contracted book editor earn about 30 shares each. The only way that Flying Pen Press can make more money is if the author makes more money, since we all get a cut of the same profit numbers. This falls in line with my philosophy of giving as much respect as possible to authors.

We are now playing around with the idea of giving authors profit shares of the company, as well, over and above their royalties, provided they continue to write books each year and they communicate regularly with their fan bases. Once we have more cash flow, my plans are to offer authors health benefits, disability insurance, and other perks that are sorely lacking among my competitors, but that will have to come only once we have developed a rich and successful catalog.

We also pull from our authors for staff positions. Authors make the best editors, I have found, and as an author-centric publisher, it pays to bring on my fellow writers as key decision makers.

ALH: On your website, under submission guidelines, it says Flying Pen has "an immediate interest in science fiction, fantasy, and mystery novels, and in poker books and role-playing-game books." Is Flying Pen evolving into a genre-specific imprint, or do you have plans to broaden your range in acquisitions?

DR: While we have a strong interest right now in those particular genres, it is because we have developed inroads into those markets. Our acquisitions interests, however, are in most all fiction genres except for erotica, children’s, young adult or poetry, and our nonfiction interests can include most anything except new age or religious titles.

I have always said that Flying Pen Press would determine its own direction, regardless of what my interests are. That is, it is easier to market books to people who are already familiar with your company than to try and beat a path into a new genre. Two of our first three books were science fiction novels, and then last year, we decided to fill the catalog with science fiction because the World Science Fiction Convention came to Denver, our home town. As a result, we have strong roots with science-fiction bookstores and readers, and so it is less expensive to operate along that path. Thus, our predilection for science fiction. As we draw on our authors for staff, the staff comes form this pool of science fiction writers, and that causes an even deeper association with that genre.

Having said that, we are interested in all commercially viable fiction. Key to that is the author’s fan base and quality of writing, not the genre.

When it comes to nonfiction, it is a little different. Our first nonfiction book is a poker rulebook. Finding nonfiction writers is harder, but marketing nonfiction is very easy. You don’t have to explain what the book is about, the reader gets it from the title. There is less of a "beaten path" associated with what subjects we can market, and more of matching the reader’s needs to the writer’s ability to fill it.

We do have specific imprints for certain nonfiction imprints.

Game Day is the imprint for game books and books about games. This includes poker and role-playing games. It can also include books about video games, board games, fantasy sports, collectible card games, party games and children’s games. We also look for books about casino games and gambling, as well as books about the gaming and gambling industries and books on game theory. Puzzle books also fall under this imprint.

Flying Piggybank Press is our business imprint. In this title, we are addressing the subjects of business management, small-business operations, personal finance, and career management. If we can get a juicy corporation expose, we’d love to have it.

Flying Pen Press Aviation is an imprint for aviation and aerospace topics, including fiction, how-to, technical, textbook, history, pilot travelogue, and any other subject that we can market to pilots and aviation enthusiasts.

Traveling Pen Press titles are travelogues. Such books don’t sell well, but I spent three years as an expatriate in Central America, and I have a soft spot for such writing.

Flying Pen Press Travel Guides is self-explanatory. We want to publish travel books. We don’t have the operating capital to compete with Fodors or Lonely Planet, but we can easily market quirky travel guides. I would say that being in Colorado, we find that there is a strong need for ski-resort guides that is not being met. One of the big challenges with travel guides, at least for Flying Pen Press, is that we publish in black and white only, and these books tend to rely on color photographs rather extensively.

We want to publish some regional titles. Flying Pen Press Colorado focuses on anything about the state. Flying Pen Press Southwest focuses on the Southwest U.S., and Flying Pen Press Rocky Mountain West addresses the mountainous states.

The one imprint that means the most to me is The Press for Humanitarian Causes. I spent three years as a volunteer in Central America during the 1980s, and I learned that there are many people in this world who are suffering but for the need to be heard. This imprint gives those people a voice, either written by the people in those places, or the volunteers who help them. Flying Pen Press keeps none of its profit shares from these titles but instead donates them to the volunteer humanitarian organizations helping the people who are the subject of the book. I believe that the freedom of the press goes a long way to bringing hope, peace and freedom to the people of the world, and this is my way of giving back to the community.

ALH: Within the preferred genres, what is it that Flying Pen looks for in its acquisitions?

DR: As you can see, we have a lot of preferred genres.

In fiction, we want a really good story well told, by an author who has developed a fan following and communicates with those fans regularly. This holds true for narrative nonfiction and memoirs as well.

In nonfiction, we want topics that appeal to readers by an expert that can actively instruct and answer questions about the subject matter. And we are looking for strong, ethical, thorough journalism.

I can’t really say that when it comes to "what we are looking for" in our acquisitions, I can’t say that we are really much different than other commercial publishers. We want books that can be sold in bookstores, of the quality such stores require.

Flying Pen Press doesn’t publish books, per se. We publish authors, and it is the attitude, skill and passion of the author that is more relevant in our acquisition process. We expect authors to write well and professionally, but we also expect them to write on a regular basis. If an author can write one, two or more books a year, we are far more likely to publish them than someone who will turn out only one brilliant book.

And also, Flying Pen Press does not buy manuscripts, we buy readers. If there is a demonstrated passion for the author’s work, then we are more likely to see value in that material.

ALH: What kind of experience can an author expect after signing with Flying Pen, in terms of editorial, cover design, marketing and support services?

DR: Flying Pen Press is a commercial publisher, so we do all of that. We are a virtual company, in that all of the staff work from their home offices.

How much we need to work on a book after the author turns in the manuscript depends on the book and the author, mostly, but we try our best to make the book the best it can be.

Generally, we bring on a book editor as a contractor that is best suited to working with the author, who agrees to work for shares of gross profit. We have found that this creates a fairly close working relationship with the author in the prepublication stage. However, we want to bring more of this in house because we find that freelance editors are not paying close attention to the post-publication marketing of the book.

In any event, I have a tight hand on the editorial side, and I am always ready to step in if there is any disruption in the editorial process.

As to covers, Laura Givens is our art director and designs the covers. She is an excellent artist in her own right, and as she has been designing book covers for some time, she has a fairly competent stable of artists to draw from. We engage the author in the cover design stage, but in the end, Flying Pen Press has artistic control over the cover design, and we have found that some authors nitpick at the cover so badly that it becomes a negative influence on the artwork quality, so sometimes we have to say, enough is enough. The author’s involvement, when reasonable, is very important to us, though, and we show authors every sketch and draft as the cover develops.

As to marketing, we do what we can. We primarily market on the Internet, like most small publishers do. We produce a catalog, and we call on bookstores. However, as the gap between author and reader closes, it becomes imperative that the author do more of the marketing. We focus on training authors on how to attract fans, how to connect with them, and how to communicate with them. We are establishing new routines where Flying Pen Press helps authors with blogging, newsletters and publicity, to help give the author more time to write, but ultimately, the readers follow the author, not the publisher.

I am not sure what you have in mind when you ask about support services. I forge personal friendships with each and every author, and I treat them as if they were family. I give them any support I can, and they have an open invitation to knock on my front door at any time, even at my home…which is also my office, being as Flying Pen Press has a virtual office. I want writers to succeed and to be respected, because those are the seeds of my own prosperity and self worth. There are no stockholders at Flying Pen Press, no bottom line, no ego. In my mind, as a publisher, I work for the authors, not the other way around. I give whatever support I can, though I cannot send company jets, pay for transcontinental book tours or put Oprah on speed dial. But I will be there with my truck when the author moves, and come with food when the author is sick, and clasp the author’s hand whenever we meet. I can only offer my friendship as a support service, but I can think of no support more powerful.

ALH: To what extent does Flying Pen employ, or plan to employ, Print on Demand and ebook technologies?

DR: We leverage Lightning Source, a print-on-demand printer owned and operated by Ingram, and we turn all of our books into ebooks, although we are still experiencing the learning curve on ebook technical matters.

Every day, more publishers are turning to Lightning Source. It is practically cornering the market on Long Tail publishing. Lightning Source provides more than just the highest quality print-on-demand technology in plants in the U.S. and U.K., they provide distribution through Ingram, Baker & Taylor, NACSCORP (a distributor serving college bookstores) and all the major wholesalers in the U.K. to serve all of Europe. More plants will be opening in countries around the globe. They also serve Amazon and the online arm of Barnes and Noble. Lightning Source allows Flying Pen Press to set our discounts however we want, so that we can offer standard terms to the trade. Lightning Source also handles returns, which is critical when marketing books to the trade.

In return for a higher print cost per copy, Flying Pen Press is freed from the costs of warehousing and the costs of inventory risk. No book is ever printed that is not wanted. Books ship directly from the Lightning Source Plant (wherever it may be) to the store, or more often than not, directly to the reader. Flying Pen Press never has to invest capital in a print run in the hopes that the readers will buy all the copies. This makes it easy to invest effort in new, untried authors, and to keep publishing their work even when their first title does not take off right away. It also allows us to make more profit with niche titles that may not necessarily find a large audience.

Should we ever get a large order, Lightning Source immediately sends our file to an offset printer, and the print savings are passed on to Flying Pen Press. Lower print costs increase gross profits, which helps increase the author’s royalties, because it is all based on shares of gross profits. That is the beauty of print-on-demand: it can use either offset or electronic printing presses, and never is a copy wasted. Waste in this business is very expensive, so it is no wonder that even the biggest publishers are turning to print-on-demand technology.

As to ebooks, it’s clear that the public is now hungry for more titles on more screens. Because we are more focused on having authors build their careers than on selling copies of a single title, we encourage authors to allow free ebook distribution for about half their books, or at least for their first few titles. Then, when the author has created a name for herself, it is a good time to begin selling ebooks for profit. This is always a controversial subject, and we follow the author’s lead when it comes to ebook pricing, but Flying Pen Press is not one of those publishers that demands that profits must stand in the way of the author building a fan base; we see that as counterproductive.

ALH: In recent publishing news, we’ve learned of an author who landed a contract with Harper Collins after acquiring a sizable following for the Podiobooks version of his novel, and another who got a 2-book deal with Simon & Schuster after self-publishing his book as Kindle edition and promoting it himself. It seems hardly a week goes by without similar self-publisher success stories; as a publisher, do you feel this is an exceptional blip on the radar, or the beginning of a new trend in acquisitions?

DR: Again, I would say neither. Small presses and self-publication have always been a great way for authors to build their fan base to a point that large publishers make offers. This is as old as commercial publishing itself. It only seems different now that self-publishing is so economical, but it is neither new nor a mere fad. Rather, it is the normal means of getting noticed.

It is important to note that getting published by a big name publisher is not the ultimate prize. After the publisher, distributors have to be talked into warehousing the book, then sale reps have to be convinced that the book is the best in the catalog, and then the bookstores have to take to it, and finally, the reader has to buy it in large quantities or it all comes tumbling down, with the author left in a pile of failure.

However, if the author takes care of her end of business first, by convincing enough readers to buy the book that there becomes a subtle buzz for the book, then everyone’s job at the bigger publishers becomes easy. And because of this, a successful (and I need to stress *successful*) self-published book stands a very good chance of snaring the big marketing dollars–even if it’s only self-published as an ebook or podcast.

ALH: Is Flying Pen open to acquiring the rights to successful self-published books?

DR: Yes and no. We are certainly open to acquiring a successful book of any type, but successful means that it has a following, not that it looks nice and has the pages in order. I have had many self-published books, ebooks, web books, audio books and print-shop books land on my desk. And so far, all but the print-shop book has been deplorable. The grammar is usually awful, spelling errors are rampant, not thought at all is given to style, plots have large open holes, Characters are stilted, and there is no skill or talent in the writing. The reviews on Amazon–if there are any–are often negative. When I Google the author’s name, nothing comes up. The core market of the author’s friends and family have been mined out years ago, making it impossible to ignite the spark of buzz marketing that is so crucial to book marketing.

For some reason I cannot fathom, many authors turn to self-publication as a way of sidestepping the vetting process. But self-publication means that the book has to be more attractive to readers than what a large publishing house puts out, and so a self-published book requires more vetting, at the author’s own expense. An editor *must* be hired. The author’s own online marketing efforts must be ten times more intense than her traditionally published peers.

Self-publication is often seen by authors as a way of avoiding the torrential demands made by commercial publishers, but in reality, it is actually a deeper immersion into the tempest that is the publishing world. Those writers who are prepared for the tempest have a great challenge before them, with a great reward waiting for them if they succeed, but self-published writers who think they are above the tempest will find themselves drowning in the whirlpool of an apathetic market.

Flying Pen Press will never want the self-published author whose attitude or record indicates that the author is burned out on marketing and promotion and just wants a commercial publisher to take over. Instead, it must be clear that the author has mastered these tasks with vigor before a self-published book becomes the least bit interesting to a commercial publishing house like Flying Pen Press.

Unfortunately, every publishing house is looking for the successful self-published books that have proven themselves. Chances are, a small house like Flying Pen Press cannot compete when one of these rare gems comes along. So Flying Pen Press is more likely to work with unpublished authors, or with midlist authors who have grown tired of the ivory-tower publishing establishment in New York City.

ALH: Can you tell us something about Flying Pen’s latest release, and what led you to acquire this particular book?

DR: Our latest release is actually part of our first acquisition.

The latest book from Flying Pen Press is Riders of the Mapinguari, the final novel in the Feral World series. Here is [some] information:

Riders of the Mapinguari.
The third novel of The Feral World series.
By Gaddy Bergmann.

Riders of the Mapinguari by Gaddy Bergmann is the final novel in The Feral World trilogy, a post-apocalyptic odyssey set 3,000 years in the future. Humanity has barely survived a near-extinction-level event – the collision of a major asteroid with Earth in the middle of the Twenty-First Century.
Riders of the Mapinguari takes The Feral World in a radically new direction. Blake and his friends have traveled through the Great Plains and are living peacefully in the Warmland, when they are attacked by an enemy quite unlike any they have ever faced before: the Terran army. Poised to conquer the Warmland, the Terrans not only greatly outnumber the natives, but they also have hundreds of mapinguari – giant beasts that can overpower anyone who would oppose them. Blake and his people must face them, though, if they hope to save not only themselves, but the entire Warmland. The Feral World trilogy is unique in offering an optimistic view of post-apocalyptic society, which has come to consist of local tribes that depend on hunting and gathering. Gaddy Bergmann (Denver) is an ecologist and zoologist, and he carefully crafted a world where the biosphere develops naturally in the absence of humanity’s misguided management of the planet.

Biography:
Gaddy Bergmann is a naturalist and scientist. He has performed research in both ecology and microbiology. He has also worked in education, teaching elementary, secondary, and university students in the subjects of math, science, and composition. An admirer of animals and wildlife since childhood, he was inspired to write /The Feral World/ books by the beauty of the natural wonders he saw all around him.

I first met Gaddy in October, 2006, at Mile Hi Con, a science fiction convention in Denver. I had just started looking into Lightning Source and realized that my dreams of book publishing without any capital outlay were now feasible, but I did not know if any writers would appreciate the no-advance, shares-of-profit payment schedule. So I went to the first conference where I might find writers to see what the response would be. I put a sign in my hat that said: "Writers and Editors Wanted." I arranged a pitch session at the convention, expecting no one to show.

Instead, I was surrounded for the entire weekend by aspiring writers, and the pitch session brought was well attended. I went to Mile Hi Con to get a feel for interest, but I left with eight manuscripts to review. One often hears from publishers that unsolicited manuscripts are usually dreadful, but somehow I was very lucky–of the eight manuscripts, six were very well written and worth publishing.

Gaddy Bergmann was the first person to hand me a complete manuscript, in a very large three-ring binder. I was drawn into his world of rubbletowns and feral dogs and Bebelishi culture. But it was much too long, twice too long. Fortunately, the novel had a major plot shift exactly at the halfway point, and Bergmann agreed to split it into two books, which required very little effort at all. Bergmann also mentioned that he was working on the sequel. This resulted in a three-book contract: Migration of the Kamishi (ISBN 978-0-9795889-1-4), Trials of the Warmland (ISBN 978-0-9795889-4-5) and Riders of the Mapinguari (ISBN 978-0-09795889-5-2).
 

I would like to end this interview by inviting people to ask me questions about the publishing industry. My email address is Publisher@FlyingPenPress.com, and I can often be found on Twitter: @DavidRozansky. I am happy to take calls at 303-375-0499, but please keep in mind that the nature of a virtual office means that I do not keep any regular business hours.

 

Learn more about Flying Pen Press at the publisher’s web page, http://FlyingPenPress.com, and subscribe to the Flying Pen Press newsletter by sending an email to newsletter-subscribe@FlyingPenPress.com (Flying Pen Press does not share its newsletter subscription list with anyone for any reason, and will only use it to send regular newsletters, press releases, and occasional special offers for Flying Pen Press titles). 

The Fine Art of Feedback

This post, from bestselling novelist Joe Finder, originally appeared on the Writing Tips section of his website in July of this year and is reprinted in its entirety here with his permission.

     VANISHED hits bookstores in a month. As we get closer and closer to the publication date, I get more excited about finally putting the book in readers’ hands. There’s nothing like that excitement of seeing people read something I wrote, and few professional endeavors ever pay off with such a visible reward.

     Yet there’s a certain amount of nervousness, too, a kind of stage fright. Even after having published nine books (eight novels), I still feel it. I’ve learned the truth of Edna St. Vincent Millay’s remark, "A person who publishes a book willfully appears before the populace with his pants down. If it is a good book nothing can hurt him. If it is a bad book nothing can help him."

     I’ve come to value criticism. But I admit, I used to take umbrage, I used to be offended or even hurt — until I realized that anything that doesn’t kill me makes me stronger, and that criticism/feedback/suggestions are the way my work gets better. Now I value it. Getting mad at criticism is like getting mad at a friend for giving you honest advice when you asked for it. Don’t get mad at criticism. Be grateful.

     We write to be read. We write for readers, not merely for ourselves, just as the village storyteller in the old days would refine and improve his stories by noticing what made people yawn and what made them jump or gasp or smile. Any person or business interested in producing a quality product goes looking for feedback, the way Hollywood holds test screenings or Coke does market testing. Good feedback is about making the end product better.

     But every writer – every artist – struggles with this, so I thought I’d spend this month’s writing newsletter on the issue of how best to solicit and process feedback.

     Let me start by saying that my ability to change something in a book, once it’s published, is minimal. Unless a book is libelous or dangerous, a publisher won’t pull it off the shelves to correct it, and even the ability to make changes between one printing and the next is pretty limited. Once the galley proofs leave my office, the book’s pretty well locked. So I have to make sure that what my publishers get is the best version of the book I can give them, and that involves asking for and processing a great deal of feedback before I turn the book in. But the criticism I get on one book does help me write future books, because I’m constantly trying to improve, and writers learn to write each new book as they go.
 

Ten Tips for Soliciting and Processing Feedback – Plus One

1. Don’t ask for feedback on material that’s not ready. Writing, in this sense, is like cooking. There’s no point in asking someone to taste a dish before you’ve finished cooking it, and there’s rarely any point in asking someone to read a work before you’re happy with it. The one exception might be when you know something is missing, but can’t figure out what it is – “What does this soup need?” – and in these cases, writers’ workshops can be useful. Two corollaries to this are: 1a) Don’t let your friends/spouse/parents/etc. read your drafts before the work is ready and 1b) Don’t ask people to read the same material more than once, unless they ask to do so.

2. Don’t give everyone’s feedback the same weight. The opinion of some is more valuable than others. Criticism from my editor or my agent, for example, is like taking a watch in for repairs; my editor and agent have specialized knowledge and an understanding of my work over time. Other criticism might not be as meaningful to me. How do I know which feedback to pay attention to? It’s a gut instinct, something that tells me how carefully someone’s read the book, how well they understood what I was trying to do, and whether they have a valid opinion about whether I succeeded.

On this subject, while it’s nice to get good reviews, I don’t learn as much from them as I do from other sources of feedback. Reviews seldom give me much new information; I’ve lived with the book longer than any reviewer has. I already know all the strengths and weaknesses. I’m like a carpenter — I know where the joints are, where the cracks are. You can’t look for validation from critics. The only thing that counts is your audience, whether they buy your books and keep buying them and recommend them to their friends, because that tells you whether you’re entertaining people. I’m not writing for critics; I’m writing for readers. I’m writing to entertain.

3. Don’t expect feedback – especially from reviews — to give you solutions. Hollywood holds test screenings in front of focus groups, surveying the audience for their reactions. I think of criticism in much the same way. At these screenings, producers ask the audience members what they liked and what they didn’t; they don’t ask for suggestions at how to fix the movie. That’s the filmmakers’ job.

When Paramount screened the great thriller Fatal Attraction for test audiences, they hissed when Alex Forrest (the wacko played by Glenn Close) killed herself at the end. They wanted her to get her comeuppance. So Paramount changed the ending. If you’ve seen it, you know what happened. (If you haven’t seen it, you should). Was it wrong for Paramount to change the ending based on a test screening’s reaction? I don’t think so. The changed ending is far more satisfying – not just to me, but to the many millions who loved that movie. Anyway, the test screeners didn’t tell Paramount how to change the ending. All they did was tell the studio they didn’t like the ending. The writers and producers had to solve that problem themselves.

Likewise, readers who offer criticism usually don’t have a solution; all they can do is identify the problem, and say what they don’t like. Here too it’s a matter of learning to discern the quiet voice within. Advice that resonates will click with me; I’ll recognize that I myself had a problem with a particular character, or plot device, or passage. Trust your instincts. Listen to that inner voice.

4. Know what your goals were when you were writing. That is, know whom your readers should be rooting for, what’s supposed to be a red herring, and what you want your readers to understand about the action at any given point. If an early reader says, “I don’t understand why Character X does that,” you should know whether this is something you need to fix, or the way it’s supposed to be.

5. Don’t ask too many people for feedback. If you ask a dozen people for opinions, you’ll get a dozen different opinions, and I guarantee that at least two of those opinions will diametrically oppose each other. Keep your feedback group small and manageable: three, four, five people at the very most. I once received a draft of a short story from someone I knew only slightly, who had apparently sent it to his entire address book; he asked everyone for feedback. I politely declined.

6. Don’t take it personally. Nothing is more personal than this beautiful manuscript you’ve sweated over for however many months, but your first readers don’t see this as a piece of your flesh and blood. What they see is a piece of work, separate from you, that could use a good trim or a new coat of paint or possibly a second floor. They don’t mean that you need a good trim or a different shade of lipstick or a better personality. (Except when they do.)

7. Pay particular attention to comments you get from more than one reader. If two or three people have the same question about a plot point, or the same criticism about a character’s decision, chances are that it’s a problem. I once had two early readers ask me how a particular character got from point A to point B. I was sure I’d explained it, but when I went back to look at the manuscript, I discovered I’d sent them a marked-up draft that was missing several chapters. Whoops!

8. Take some time to consider each criticism or question before you make changes in the manuscript. If you automatically make changes in response to every criticism or query you get, you may wind up changing things you don’t want to change, or creating inconsistencies within your manuscript. Keep a master list of recommendations, questions and issues your first readers bring up, and tackle your revisions as a whole, rather than piecemeal.

9. Don’t ask for feedback when what you want is praise. This is a tough one. If you ask for honest criticism, you’ll get it, and you need to be prepared for it. In fact, people asked for criticism will read with the goal of finding mistakes and elements that need improvement, because that’s what you’ve asked them to do. Don’t ask people to do this if you’re not prepared to hear their recommendations.

10. Pay as much attention to the praise as to the criticism. It’s so much easier to hear the criticism than it is to hear the praise, but the praise is just as important. In fact, I’d say the praise is even more important for the writer who’s already thinking about the next book. I need to know what readers especially like, so I can try to recreate that in future work. I still get emails from readers about how much they loved the character of Audrey, in COMPANY MAN. Audrey was a real stretch for me, and I was nervous about how she would be received – but kind readers have told me what they liked about her, and I’ve used that feedback to create other characters whom I hope are equally likeable.

And last, but most important:

11. Trust your own judgment most. Feedback’s important. Feedback’s necessary. But it’s your vision, your work, and your name on the book. No book pleases everyone. What ultimately matters is that you like it, that you’re happy with it, and that you’re proud to put it in readers’ hands.

     I’m proud of VANISHED, and sincerely thank all of the book’s early readers. I look forward to hearing what you think of it, and will thank everyone who writes to give me an opinion (joe@josephfinder.com), even if it’s criticism rather than praise.
 

Visit Joe Finder’s website for more of his monthly Writing Tips, which you can also receive in the form of a monthly newsletter when you sign up for a free subscription 

Brad vs. Pirates

This post, from screenwriter Brad Riddell (American Pie films, Road Trip, Slap Shot 3 and the upcoming Road Trip-Beer Pong) originally appeared on his The L.A. Dime on 7/30/09. If you’ve ever considered confronting pirates to call them on the theft of your work, read on to discover what happened when Mr. Riddell did it. 

I’m kind of a Twitter and Facebook fanatic. I like to see what people are doing, saying, and thinking  out in the world, and both of those applications cater to my need for people knowledge.  They are also great for market research, and to that end, I have a saved Twitter search for “Road Trip-Beer Pong,” which updates me when anyone says anything about the movie. On Tuesday, I awoke to discover dozens of tweets offering links to illegal downloads of the film, which apparently was  leaked overnight.

This is not a unique situation. Nearly every movie made is leaked to the internet, these days. And most pirates don’t bother to think about what they’re doing — it’s free, they want it now, and it’s easy.  Those who do think about what they’re doing believe they’re “sticking it to the man” atop the rich, powerful, corporate studios.

While the studios do lose a lot of money because of piracy, it’s  artists like me who really take a hit to the pocket book.  Each sold DVD equals a very small payment to many of the key creative people who made the movie.  These “residual payments” help artists pay the bills between jobs, because contrary to popular belief, the vast majority of writers and directors are not hopping from one seven figure contract to another.  Most film artists are middle class folks, living on a budget, doing the best they can in an expensive city to get buy week-to-week as they fight for their next gig.

So, for two days, using Twitter, I decided to send a personal message to each pirate who admitted to downloading and watching my movie. My message wasn’t about their opinions, good or bad. It was about their actions. And at first, most were astounded to hear from me. Then they got angry. “How dare you challenge my right to steal?” was the general attitude. Or, “your movie sucks, so who cares if I steal it?” They got really mad when they found out I was reporting their user info to Twitter and the Anti-Piracy folks at Paramount. I was threatened, black-listed (from future robbery, I guess, because they never actually BUY anything), called a tool, a twat, a cry-baby, and told to #$%& off.  One guy suggested I was an idiot for relying on residuals — that I should instead ask for more on the front end.  Sheer ignorance. The system doesn’t work that way at all. And that’s my point. People will always steal.  My goal was to put a face on who they were stealing from, and they didn’t like that one bit.

Read the rest of the post, and some comments from pirates, on Brad Riddell’s The L.A. Dime. 

Why Hasn't Story Itself Changed With The Web?

This post, from Jeremiah Tolbert, originally appeared on his blog on 5/19/09.

The structure and nature of short stories haven’t really changed in the digital age, as far as I can tell.  They’re still told the same way mostly, same perspectives, in roughly the same amount of time ( around 3-7000 words). 

E-zines are for the most part  straight forward adaptations of the print magazine format, to varying degrees.  PDF magazines are identical to print magazines, except they’re read on a screen instead of on paper, or even printed off by some. E-zines like Strange Horizons make use of basic hypertext features, but the stories themselves do not take advantage of of any of those features except in rare occasions.

Flash fiction, or stories under 500 words, has seen a boom online, with electronic magazines such as Brain Harvestspecializing in them exclusively.   Personally, I don’t find such short stories very satisfying very often, despite my involvement with the Daily Cabal, (which you should check out if you do like flash fiction).  I don’t think I’ve ever written a really successful flash fiction story.   I would argue that flash fiction is even less popular than regular short fiction, which is pretty unpopular in the first place.

 

You might think that the internet would lend itself to shorter stories, on the assumption that the internet has shortened our attention spans.  I don’t really believe that. I think we have mostly the same attention spans we did before the web began to dominate our entertainment time, but we’re a lot better about evaluating content quickly to determine if it’s worth our attention.  Scanning is the new reading of the 21st Century.

Early on in the web days, there was a lot more experimentation with the idea of hypertext fiction, which in my experience is basically a glorified “Choose Your Own Adventure” (CYOA) made with links rather than “turn to page X” instructions.   I’d argue that for “choose your own adventure” stories, the web is a better format than print, but– choose your own adventure stories were just a relatively crude form of interactive storytelling, and video games are a more evolved form of the same thing.  CYOA  books are not printed in nearly the same quantities as they were when I was a kid in the 80s.  I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the rise of video games has corresponded with the fall of CYOA books. Wikipedia’s article on CYOA references a company called Chooseco that purchased the rights to the original CYOA books, but when I tried to visit the site for said company, all I found was a GoDaddy redirect. I think it’s fairly safe to say that the Choose Your Own Adventure format is effectively played out.

Stories told in an e-mail-like format are really no different from the epistolary format, which has been around since the letter itself.   Wikipedia puts the first epistolary novel appearing in 1485 or so.   Over 500 years old.  So the e-mail format nothing much new, just a slightly different take.  The language might be a bit different, but that same back-and-forth exists, generally written in alternating or single-thread first person present or past-tense.

Some have experimented with Twitter and its 140 character limit.  “Twitter zines” like Thaumatrope publish these stories regularly.  I wrote a serialized story in the twitter format, using the nature of Twitter itself as an aspect of the story, called #futurejer, to what I think was probably varying degrees of success.  Ultimately was the form of story changed by this?  Not very much, I suspect.  It’s just an extremely serialized tale, probably.

Read the rest of the post on Jeremiah Tolbert’s blog.

Writing A Book For Self Publication

This post, from Morris Rosenthal, originally appeared on his Self Publishing 2.0 blog on 7/26/09.

There’s a big difference between self publishing a book because you can’t land a contract from a trade publisher and writing a book for self publication. A book that no acquisitions editor is willing to pay you an advance for is probably a bad gamble from a commercial standpoint, no matter how well written and polished it may be. But the business of writing for self publication doesn’t stop with choosing a subject for which there’s an audience, be it weight loss or teenage vampire romance. It’s just as important to match your writing and production capabilities to the business model you choose.

A simple example would be my collection of computer titles. Since I use Lightning Source to do my printing on demand, and since color POD is still too expensive for producing books with reasonable cover prices, I chose from the inception to write books that didn’t require photographic illustrations. That may sound simple, but I can assure you that books related to computer hardware have always been published with heavy photo illustration. In some instances, like a step-by-step book for building PCs, those photographs are very useful, but more often than not they are filler to bulk up the page count for a higher cover price. So back in 2003, I developed an approach for troubleshooting computer hardware based on black and white flowcharts, and I even turned the lack of photographs into a selling point in the promotional book video I wrote about a few months ago.

A more general example is simply writing lean books. Trade publishers love bulking up books to achieve wider spines for shelf visibility (thicker paper stock is also common for low page count books) and the perception of higher value which allows higher cover prices. More subtle reasons include the perception of higher value for competitive purposes, and the belief that bulk equates with quality, especially in nonfiction and reference type titles. After all, if the reader is simply overwhelmed by the amount of material in the book, they are more likely to blame themselves for failing to understand the subject than to blame to author for failing to explain it. For trade publishers ordering large offset runs, the incremental page count has limited impact on the final cost of the book, the more important cost is performing the editorial and production process on the larger number of pages. When you’re writing for self publication, especially if you are using print on demand, the printing cost rises far more rapidly than your ability to raise the cover price while keeping the book competitive with similar titles.

As a self publisher, you have 100% control over what you write, and that includes the ability to make changes during the editorial process. I can’t tell you how many self publishers I’ve corresponded with who were planning to follow my print on demand model, but who changed to short run offset at the last minute because they couldn’t leave out a beautiful color photograph that they referred to in the text or an accompanying DVD of photographs, audio or video. My advice to make a minor edit in the text and leave out the spoiler falls on deaf ears. Authors who have never written or published a book become married to the notion that the "something extra", the color, the DVD, the odd shaped book, adds value that will make their book sell. In my experience, the "something extra" wouldn’t help sales even at the same price point, much less when it doubles the cost to the customer.
 

Read the rest of the post on Morris Rosenthal’s Self Publishing 2.0 blog.

We Are All Writers Now

This article, from Anne Trubek, originally appeared on The Economist’s More Intelligent Life site on 6/26/09.

Blogs, Twitter, Facebook: these outlets are supposedly cheapening language and tarnishing our time. But the fact is we are all reading and writing much more than we used to, writes Anne Trubek …

The chattering classes have become silent, tapping their views on increasingly smaller devices. And tapping they are: the screeds are everywhere, decrying the decline of smart writing, intelligent thought and proper grammar. Critics bemoan blogging as the province of the amateurism. Journalists rue the loose ethics and shoddy fact-checking of citizen journalists. Many save their most profound scorn for the newest forms of social media. Facebook and Twitter are heaped with derision for being insipid, time-sucking, sad testaments to our literary degradation. This view is often summed up with a disdainful question: “Do we really care about what you ate for lunch?”

Forget that most of the pundits lambasting Facebook and Twitter are familiar with these devices because they use them regularly. Forget that no one is being manacled to computers and forced to read stupid prose (instead of, say, reading Proust in bed). What many professional writers are overlooking in these laments is that the rise of amateur writers means more people are writing and reading. We are commenting on blog posts, forwarding links and composing status updates. We are seeking out communities based on written words.

Go back 20, 30 years and you will find all of us doing more talking than writing. We rued literacy levels and worried over whether all this phone-yakking and television-watching spelled the end of writing.

Few make that claim today. I would hazard that, with more than 200m people on Facebook and even more with home internet access, we are all writing more than we would have ten years ago. Those who would never write letters (too slow and anachronistic) or postcards (too twee) now send missives with abandon, from long thoughtful memos to brief and clever quips about evening plans. And if we subscribe to the theory that the most effective way to improve one’s writing is by practicing—by writing more, and ideally for an audience—then our writing skills must be getting better.

Take the “25 Things About Me” meme that raged around Facebook a few months
ago. This time-waster, as many saw it, is precisely the kind of brainstorming exercise I used to assign to my freshman writing students decades ago. I asked undergraduates to do free-writing, as we called it, because most entered my classroom with little writing experience beyond formal, assigned essays. They only wrote when they were instructed to, and the results were often arch and unclear, with ideas kept at arms length. Students saw writing as alien and intimidating–a source of anxiety. Few had experience with writing as a form of self-expression. So when I stood in front of a classroom and told students to write quickly about themselves, without worrying about grammar or punctuation or evaluation—”just to loosen up,” I would say—I was asking them to do something new. Most found the experience refreshing, and their papers improved.

Today those freewriting exercises are redundant. After all, hundreds of thousands of people wrote “25 Things About Me” for fun. My students compose e-mails, texts, status updates and tweets "about seven hours a day," one sophomore told me. (She also says no one really talks to each other anymore). They enter my classroom more comfortable with writing–better writers, that is–and we can skip those first steps.

Read the rest of the article on More Intelligent Life.