Political Entanglements

I recently came across a post about a new President for the SFWA.  Normally I give scant reading to stuff like this - after all, it doesn't really affect my writing - but after the news of the last few months regarding turmoil within various writing communities, this one got my attention.  The struggle seems to be over who is and who isn't included in the cool kids club when it comes to writing.

I've written about the woke-scolds before, and they appear to have grabbed most of the top spots in every writers' association that I can find.  Their main goal, best I can determine, isn't to promote the best writing, but rather to promote the right kind of writing.  Check off every box the woke-scolds can find and then pretend it's a good story that everyone must have.  Beyond that, the wrong writers must not only be shunned, but shut down.

The writers I know tend to focus on writing good stories, and, like me, aren't very interested in who runs SFWA or any other organization.  However, if we don't want to find ourselves out in the cold, we better start paying attention, for many of these people are gatekeepers of a sort.  They can increase or deny exposure, and that gives them some modicum of control over our writing careers.  Apathy is fine until you run into a true-believer whose power runs counter to your interests.  Whether we normally care about the bureaucracy is irrelevant - we will either be made to care or be cast aside.

As painful as it may be, writers everywhere need to get more involved so that loud shrieking small crowds who would shut out folks they don't like don't gain ascendance.  Yes, I'd rather focus solely on writing, but until I gain a large enough audience that likes my stuff and doesn't care what the woke-scolds think, then those who guard the gates are important.  It'd be nice to reach a point where they no longer matter, but that day is far, far away for most of us...assuming it ever arrives at all.  And if we don't take control back from the woke-scolds, like some courageous people have over at SFWA, then we have no place to bitch when we wonder why we can't break through.

Social Interactions

We hear so much about how writers, or any business really, needs to make good use of social media.  From Twitter to Facebook to Instagram and beyond, companies use social media to help get their brand in front of people, and, hopefully, draw more business.

I admit to being a novice at this game.  I have a Facebook account that is open to about 150 people(and where I usually give out my updated blog posts), but the site doesn't get a lot of circulation.  I also have a Twitter feed where I'm followed by six folks(at my last count).  Admittedly, this is partially my fault b/c I rarely post on it(mostly because I'm a forgetful bastard) and don't really understand its uses very well.

Even though this is the way the world interacts these days(I guess), it still seems to me that it requires some sort of viral event to generate traffic.  Going back to my post about being provocative on purpose, I'm sure I could get something viral by calling someone a name or taking a radically unpopular position on something, but that's not really my style.  As event after event proves, it's far harder to gain positive attention than it is negative attention, and negative attention can do far more than just hurt business - it can destroy lives.

That may be where my skittishness regarding social media comes in.  It seems way too easy to piss someone off and get engulfed by a media mob that will forget you five minutes after it has finished destroying your life than to gain good attention that gets people to fork over money.  In order to prevent the mob from forming, it seems we have to be as vanilla as possible, and that rarely draws the traffic necessary to make a living.

What does all of this mean?  Basically that I still know almost nothing about social media.  It's basically another form of advertising, but as with all advertising, its effect is measured by its exposure(that's why Super Bowl ads cost a lot more than an ad during an old rerun of I Love Lucy).  It doesn't help that I'm a Gen X'er who is caught in between the generations of nothing on social media to everything on social media.  I'm sure I'll figure it out about the time I'm being fitted for a diaper in the nursing home.

Provacative On Purpose?

Some bloggers I know are provocative on purpose.  They will pick divisive issues that play well to their hardcore fanbase but which piss off even more.  Sometimes they do this to shout about an issue that they feel really strongly about, but a lot of the time they do it to draw controversy and attention.  The controversy generates a lot of web traffic and may result in a few more sales.  However, I wonder at the wisdom of this.

It's one thing to sound off about an issue within the industry that you feel passionate about.  I have more than a few posts like that myself, so it's not like I hide who I am.  However, I don't go out looking to generate controversy.  It's easy to do - simply tackle a social issue of the day and watch people tear at each other - but is it really wise?  Genuine controversy on the subject of the industry or another book is one thing, but just getting people spun up to generate traffic seems risky to me.  In today's polarized climate, it's real easy to piss off half the audience, and those potential sales are usually forever lost, regardless of how talented you are or how good your work may be.

In addition to controversy, it gets easy to spot a phony.  Those who throw red meat into the lion's cage just to see how many people will watch can be found out.  Yes, I'm sure there is tangential conviction to whatever the position is, but if that's all you do, people will grow exhausted, and they'll figure out you're just trying to play them.

Remember what your goal is.  Is it to piss people off and/or get them talking smack to each other, or is it to get them to eventually fork over their hard earned cash so you can be a full-time writer.  The issues you present are your choice, but whether people buy your stuff is theirs.

Pass It On

I've been getting a lot of compliments recently.  A few readers have emailed me and told me that they really liked my writing and can't wait to see what's coming next.  This is great to hear, but it's not what I want to hear.  What I'd really like to hear is, "Russ, your work is great and I just got one(or two or three or four...) of my friends to buy/read your book too."

I keep having to remind folks that I'm not Stephen King or JK Rowling.  I don't have an audience cache that I can rely on to sustain me.  As shameless as this sounds, I need for readers who like my stuff to recommend me to a friend or ten(those of you who hate my stuff can please remain silent).

That's what we who want to eventually do nothing but this writing thing need - more widespread readership.  I need folks to give my or to others, preferably with the missive, "You will love this book."  As much as I adore my few fans, I'd kind of like to have more friends, so I'd appreciate it if you could pass my work on.

Now enough with the shameless pandering - we will soon return to our regularly scheduled programming.

TL;DR

The second part of my last post is about those walls of text that we all encounter in some books that fill us with despair.  I have to read all that? we think.  Geez, that'll take forever.

TL;DR stands for Too Long; Didn't Read, and it's a common phenomenon when readers encounter the wall of text.  Most people will not read the whole thing.  They'll read the first and last sentences, and maybe glance over the wall to see if anything stands out, but most will skip on by and figure they can catch up down the road if they missed anything.

TL;DR occurs when writers are overly excited about what they have to say and forget to take a breath.  Those text walls come off as breathless rapidity.  Since one of our goals is to get people to read what we wrote(we wouldn't have written it if it wasn't important, after all), we need to sometimes slow down.  The easiest way to do so is with simple paragraph breaks.  Take the following examples:

He knew several bones in his hand were broken, but he still tried to fight.  He had no idea where Chris was, but as he got to his knees, he felt a sharp blow to the back of his head and the trickle of flowing blood.  One of the attackers reached for him, and Seth managed to flip the gun in his hand and squeeze off three rounds.  He heard a loud screech and his hand broke free.  He scrambled to his feet and took off running.  His heart beat faster and he became vaguely aware of the throbbing in his left hand, but his adrenaline was flowing too freely to let that stop him.  He squeezed through several cars and sprinted to the chain link fence by the ballpark across the way.  He could feel them behind him, like a pack of wolves chasing a deer.  He scrambled over the fence, ignoring the single strand of barbed wire across the top that pierced his already damaged hand.  When he hit the ground on the other side, he felt a new source of blood running down his wrist.  He looked back to see the enemy jumping the gate in one fluid motion.  It was disconcerting to see the grace with which they flew.  Belatedly, he thought about Chris and Simon.  Simon, he reasoned, should be safe, but he wondered if Chris escaped.  He sprinted past several darkened trailers proclaiming their treasures – cotton candy, peanuts, beer, etc.  Seth came to an abrupt halt and tried to bring up his gun as his original target floated down in front of him.  The vampire easily knocked the gun aside.  Seth turned and tried to run in the opposite direction.  However, several more – he didn’t know if it was three or four – were rapidly approaching from that direction.  He took a step backwards and turned again, looking wildly for another escape route.  But there wasn’t one.  No one was running anymore.  Footsteps echoing off of the walls in the ballpark were the only sounds left.  One of the vampires grabbed him from behind in a massive bear hug.  He’d been nervous during fights before, but facing down four vampires generated something he hadn’t since the night his brother was attacked.  Fear.

Now compare that with this:

            He knew several bones in his hand were broken, but he still tried to fight.  He had no idea where Chris was, but as he got to his knees, he felt a sharp blow to the back of his head and the trickle of flowing blood.

            One of the attackers reached for him, and Seth managed to flip the gun in his hand and squeeze off three rounds.  He heard a loud screech and his hand broke free.

            He scrambled to his feet and took off running.  His heart beat faster and he became vaguely aware of the throbbing in his left hand, but his adrenaline was flowing too freely to let that stop him.  He squeezed through several cars and sprinted to the chain link fence by the ballpark across the way.  He could feel them behind him, like a pack of wolves chasing a deer.

            He scrambled over the fence, ignoring the single strand of barbed wire across the top that pierced his already damaged hand.  When he hit the ground on the other side, he felt a new source of blood running down his wrist.

            He looked back to see the enemy jumping the gate in one fluid motion.  It was disconcerting to see the grace with which they flew.

            Belatedly, he thought about Chris and Simon.  Simon, he reasoned, should be safe, but he wondered if Chris escaped.

            He sprinted past several darkened trailers proclaiming their treasures – cotton candy, peanuts, beer, etc.  Seth came to an abrupt halt and tried to bring up his gun as his original target floated down in front of him.  The vampire easily knocked the gun aside.  Seth turned and tried to run in the opposite direction.

            However, several more – he didn’t know if it was three or four – were rapidly approaching from that direction.  He took a step backwards and turned again, looking wildly for another escape route.

            But there wasn’t one.  No one was running anymore.  Footsteps echoing off of the walls in the ballpark were the only sounds left.

             One of the vampires grabbed him from behind in a massive bear hug.  He’d been nervous during fights before, but facing down four vampires generated something he hadn’t since the night his brother was attacked.

            Fear.

The paragraph breaks alone make the second example much easier to read. If I encountered the first example, I'd sigh and try to plow through, but I think I'd make it about halfway(at most) before I gave up and moved on. The second example, however, flowed better and didn't make me wince when I saw it.

Yes, there's more to getting around TL;DR, such as shortening what you have to say, but the paragraph break is the quickest and makes the most sense, especially if you feel you absolutely must say something.  Once you've gotten past that, then you can go back with that chainsaw mentioned in the last post and cut.  The two have to work in tandem or readers will cut you out.

Writing Quantity Versus Writing Quality

My next couple of posts are going to discuss how writers cover ground.  I think there's a push/pull in the writing community that says that we need to write enough depth to adequately convey a story, but we need to make sure that what we write is quality and not just pages upon pages of fluff.

The first novel I ever wrote, On Freedom's Wings, was the first place I encountered this problem.  Since it was an awful book, On Freedom's Wings has never seen the light of day beyond the few folks I let read it nearly 20 years ago, but as I wrote it, I found myself struggling to give it enough heft to call it a "book."  Some of it, especially in the beginning, was filler material that didn't contribute to the story at all.  Such fluff made it a plodding read that would've made people skip over large sections just to return to the plot.

However, just as too much stuff in your story that contributes little is a bad thing, you can also make your plot so shallow that no one understands it because you've taken too much for granted.  There needs to be sufficient depth for the reader to become invested.  Otherwise, you may as well have told a nice campfire story that no one will remember in the morning.

To me, the way to solve this is to first write everything you want about your story.  Put in the details and plodding stuff that you think you need to give your book "heft."  After all, no one is likely going to see this part anyway.  Once that's done, put it away for at least a month.  Don't pick it up, don't read it, don't think about it.  Then, when sufficient time has passed, go back in with a chainsaw.  Read what you wrote and see how you can re-word it all so you can cut it at least in half.  Afterwards, give it to a friend or beta-reader and ask them how you can shorten/condense it further.  Don't take their critiques personally, and don't let them give plot critiques at this point - this is the time to give your heft depth.  Turn quantity into quality.

Of course, all of this presupposes that you've got a story that has sufficient depth in the first place(going back to the campfire example).  If your story can fit into three pages yet you wrote 200, ask yourself why your tale was unsupportable over time.  But if you can expand while adding, rather than sacrificing, quality, you've got a true novel.

Profitability Mediums

It's no secret that I love books.  Every writer I know loves them, but it goes beyond what's inside for me.  I love the feel of holding a physical book in my hand, the smell of the paper, and the sight of the words on a page.  However, being the dinosaur that I am, I wonder if it has held me back.

What I mean is that I'm seriously considering giving up doing print hardcover books and going mostly to ebooks.  The reasoning is cost and distributor willingness to stock.  The cost in hardcover books is about pre-production work, mostly in conversion and proof copies.  Unfortunately, there are distributor issues that also have to be considered.  You see, distributors rarely buy books and stock them for long periods on their shelves, hoping that some doe-eyed customer will eventually wander in and praise it as their fantasy novel that they simply must buy.  Instead, distributors buy a set amount, sell what they can, and then return the rest to the wholesaler for a refund.

For indie authors like myself, that could be financially disastrous.  I can't afford to absorb the cost of so many books being printed and then returned.  There's a box in my hardcover printing account that makes it so that if I check it, distributors can't return what they buy.  It shields me from having to worry whether or not I'll suddenly face a $10,000 bill for loads of books no one is buying.  However, it also means that most distributors won't buy it because they too don't want to face the risk of lots of books that generate no revenue for them.

Of course, I'd love it if they just bought a few books, found out they sold well, and dipped back into the well to buy more, but that's not realistic.  Let's face it - I'm not a very well known author and can't rely on name recognition to spur sales.  Readers tend to gravitate towards those already established, and I ain't yet one of them, so distributors have no reason to think that even buying small quantities would be worth the price.

Therefore, I'm truly considering not doing hardcovers in the near future.  From a business perspective, it makes financial sense.  What's holding me back is the emotional aspect - it's hard for me to think of myself as an author if I can't physically pull out my book and hold it in my hands.  It's completely illogical, but it's the way I feel...a way I'm working desperately to get over.  And I'm sure I will get over it one day, but that day isn't yet.

Copyright Or Copywrong?

This should be a fairly short post.  I have a question I could really use some help from fellow writers on - what are your thoughts on officially copyrighting your work?  I did a full copyright for Akeldama, but I haven't done it for either Salvation Day or Wrongful Death.  The main reason, honestly, was the cost involved.  No, getting a full copyright isn't very expensive, but it's still a business expense, and I wonder if that expense is necessary.  Isn't our work protected the moment we put it on paper or publish it?  At this point, I really don't know, so anyone with some insight could provide great clarity.

Rushed Writing

Writing on a deadline sucks.  Some people thrive under that kind of pressure, but most of the creative arts don't respond well to it.  Creativity can be fragile, and most attempts to force it come up empty.  That doesn't mean, however, that writers are immune to it, whether it's an actual deadline or a perceived one.

This leads to what I call rushed writing.  Writers start to leave out parts of the story and take much for granted.  While we should try to show rather than tell the reader what's going on, we can't take everything for granted, and that tends to happen when we rush our work.  Characters around for the entire book drop off, and endings that should take a couple of chapters to develop get reduced to a few pages.

Readers notice this stuff.  If a story is flowing at a certain pace, they'll pick up on it instantly when it changes pace.  Usually that change goes from a slow trot to a panicked sprint, and it leaves many questions for the reader.  It can also be unsatisfying for most and piss people off.  Some get so mad that they won't read another book from that author out of fear of being so let down again.

This is where outlining and finding time is important.  As I've said in the past, writing is the fun part, but outlining/brainstorming is just as important, for it sets the direction and makes sure that you aren't out there grasping for straws.  If you can't outline or brainstorm, I don't think you can write well(yes, I'm sure there are exceptions, but those are exceptions, not most people).  Every time I've tried to write without an outline, the writing comes off as rushed and directionless.

You also have to be willing, painful as it might be, to scrap material you've already written.  Some first drafts are great; many stink.  Bill Watterson of Calvin and Hobbes fame said that he goes over material lots of times, and he points out some of his work that he had to get in under the deadline that wasn't ready.  Trust me - it's easy to tell.

Rush if you like, but be prepared for your audience to tell.  Then don't be mad when they find someone who doesn't rush.  As the old saying goes, it's hard to find someone that can make a quiche and not decide to turn it into scrambled eggs.

Running On Empty

Last time I wrote about when folks change source material for another medium, but what happens when that source material runs out?  This was one of the issues with Game of Thrones, and it is more prevalent than one thinks.  Although lots of TV shows and movies are based around certain source material, relatively few sequels are, and TV has a nasty tendency to outrun what a writer can come up with.

Things can get real dicey when that book we love becomes a movie or TV show and the material it's based on runs dry.  From World War Z(and its thankfully abandoned sequel) to The Walking Dead, many writers simply have difficulty keeping up with demand.  Voracious fans and unrelenting production schedules insist that new material be constantly forthcoming.  Not only do writers just not write that fast, but as anyone who has written anything knows, the creative process is sometimes a fickle creature who doesn't respond well to folks screaming that they want more.

I know this is a writing blog, but with so many popular books becoming shows or movies, it's only fair to ask what happens and how can things be kept fresh.  For one thing, I don't think it's enough to have a fan-boy be the vehicle for freshness if the original author is still alive and kicking.  The author's vision is what drove interest in the first place, so keeping the author heavily involved is paramount.  Further, a great deal of "new direction" must be kept out, no matter how much the studio or producers wail.  It seems like studios forget what made something popular in the first place, and they change things to fit what they would've written.  Well, harsh as this is, there's a reason the folks adapting a piece of work don't have much original success to their names.

As fans, we have to be willing to be patient.  I know, I know...I may as well wish for world peace while I'm at it since fans will gobble up what they can as fast as they can.  But listening to fans bitch and moan about the degraded quality of stories as source material runs dry and new material must be created grates on me.  You can't have it both ways - either you get lots of new stuff of questionable quality, or you get great stuff that has been painstakingly crafted.  Which would you prefer?

Changing Source Material

A large number of movies and TV shows nowadays are based on something other than an original idea inside the writers' room.  Even shows thought of as novel, like Bird Box, are based off of obscure books that few knew of until they hit the big screen.  Basically, Hollywood isn't coming up with much new on its own and is relying on source material to make money.

However, how much should they deviate from that source material?  Some source material is so popular that changing too much threatens the very fan base the studios need to make their venture profitable.  Some is obscure(like the aforementioned Bird Box), but once it comes out that a lot has changed, which one, film or novel, do fans consider the true story?

The biggest one that comes to mind is World War Z.  This is one of my favorite books and an extraordinary tale.  However, it was always going to be difficult to adapt because of how the story is told.  Max Brooks told the story in a series of interviews for a historical book recounting The Zombie War, so while there was a logical progression of the story, there really was no main character to follow.  That said, the movie of the same name is terrible, one of the worst movies ever made, especially to fans of the book(which number in the millions).  Not only did it insert a main character, which I can kind of understand, but it changed so many parts of the book that it became unwatchable to me.  Remember that whole pissing-the-fans-off thing from above?  They did that here, which is why I think they aren't making a sequel, despite it making tons of money at the box office.

In reverse, I wonder how many writers would dare to challenge a movie they adapted or continued for a book.  A prime example is Game of Thrones.  The books were popular long before HBO made the TV series, but the series eventually outpaced the books.  There was a general feeling that the show felt rushed by the end, and the ending itself left a great deal to be desired.  So what would happen if George RR Martin decided to change his last two novels in the series - The Winds of Winter and A Dream of Spring - to make them better?  Would fans flock to them, grateful for the fix, or would they be mad that either the books didn't match the show or that the new ending, even if better, couldn't have made it into the show to begin with?

Changing source material is dicey, even if it happens all the time.  One wonders why people think dicking around with already successful material is a good idea.  Yes, some things have to be adjusted to fit the screen, most notably length and depth, but a great deal more seems to be changed just because some writer or director thinks he or she has a better way to do it.  That kind of conceit can sometimes pay off, but rarely.  That doesn't appear to stop the conceited from doing so anyway.

Publishing With Errors

No one is perfect.  Not even me.

I say this to emphasize the importance of proper editing/proofreading.  Anyone who has picked up an indie published books has likely found errors while reading.  Such errors intrupt the flo of the story and genrally make me wence.  They ned to be avoided if at al possible.

Each of us thinks we have a great command of the language and can find our own errors, and that's true to some extent.  I can read over a first draft and find approximately 95% of my mistakes...but 95% isn't 100%, and that's where the rub lies.  Missing mistakes causes us to publish books with errors, and these errors not only interrupt the story's flow, but they hurt our reputation as authors.

To my shame, I've published with errors.  Akeldama in particular was beset by a number of errors, one of which was so egregious that I still haven't come to terms with it.  I got the permission of a pretty famous restaurant in LA to use their name in my novel, and I misspelled it!  Not only that, but I sent them a copy of it before I realized my mistake.  They never called me on it, but I also doubt they displayed the book like I'd hoped.  I've long since corrected it, but I have yet to work up the courage to send them an updated copy.

This isn't only a newbie problem.  One Second After by William Fortschen constantly uses "would of" in place of "would've."  I don't know if this is because Fortschen didn't know the difference, or if he figured it out and never fixed it, but it stands out to me whenever I read this otherwise good novel.

So what do we do?  There's the obvious first step - don't publish work with errors.  Hire someone to proofread/edit your book so these errors don't make it to publication.  However, if they slip through, how do we handle them?  Do we quietly correct them and issue a new edition?  Do we trumpet that new edition?  Do we let it go and pretend it never happened in the first place?

Publishing with errors is embarrassing.  Overcoming it is a challenge, no matter what direction we go in.  What direction do you choose?

Business Functions

Some folks have asked why I haven't published more frequently.  That's fair, but it also shows an incomplete understanding of the business of writing.  When one becomes a writer, one begins to understand that the fun part is the writing, but the rest of it is what helps make someone a professional versus a hack.

To start with, I can't just poop out a novel.  Some can; I can't.  Sure, I suppose I could write a bunch of gobbledygook that might pass as a story and then just get it out as quick as I can, but a) people would rightly point out that what I wrote was shit, and b) I'd be ashamed of just putting something out there for the hell of it.  Writing - good writing - takes time.  There's a storyline to flesh out, characters to develop, and depth to create.  Anyone can write a shallow story, but creating something that folks might actually like takes time.

The first draft of writing is only part of that time, and it's by far the most fun.  However, the first draft is not what makes a great story.  There's editing, redrafting, discarding what doesn't work, and rewriting.  This is time consuming, especially if done right(for example, you can't properly edit immediately after writing or you'll overlook a lot).  It takes a solid year after writing the first draft of a novel to get everything right.  Yes, I could publish anyway and roll the dice, but I truly feel that would create something of lesser quality.  Some folks are fine with that and even make money off of that, but it's simply not me.

Plus, not to put too fine a point on it, but doing things right costs money.  Any idiot can  write a book, upload it to CreateSpace, slap a blank cover on it, and voila - a published novel.  I just can't/won't do that.  I need a good cover(Extended Imagery on the links on the side of this page does awesome work), for a good cover draws in readers and captures the spirit of the story.  And it ain't cheap.  Extended Imagery does great work and is reasonably priced, but some cover artists go for more than $1500 a pop.  I haven't made enough yet to cover that cost, so I have to find my financing where I can.  Then there's also getting your book edited/proofread by someone who isn't you(never final proofread your own work), as well as getting the book formatted so it doesn't look like someone vomited on paper.  If you want anyone to find it, you need an ISBN, and those cost money, especially since every format(print, Kindle, Apple ebooks, etc) needs a separate ISBN.

I've got enough now to bring out Schism, but I don't have enough to publish everything all at once.  Moreover, some of what I've written needs major overhauling to be ready.  I remember once thinking that Bill Watterson was pretentious for saying that his work required multiple rework sessions, but since becoming an author, I understand what he meant.  I have another novel, Homecoming, ready for publication, and I'm trying to figure out that timeline, but several others need work.  A lot of work.  Bringing them out before they're even close to ready would show less than my best, and no matter how much I want to sell, I can't do that.