I am learning at last. I can link my blog to another. I think! I wish my IT expert son-in-law lived nearby. Why all this bother about tech skills? Well I've done it. I've finally stopped dithering and blethering and have struck out as an independent novelist publisher.
Oh, not on my own. Nor did I succumb to the wiles of a scam publisher. No Publish America stuff for me. No, I've found a few writer colleagues who feel like I do about the whole Traditional Publishing scene and are prepared to work with me as a cooperative group who will publish together under our group name.
It's a hard way to go. Attitudes are set. The Historical Writers Association will not allow me to join if I go this way and don't wait the 19 years is it Ms Morgan keeps quoting. In New Zealand I will be called a vanity publisher and my credit as a tutor of writers will fall! Some of my trad published writer friends will sneer. Others will cheer as they struggle with editors who ask for radical cuts or additions to make their novels 'easier to understand' or 'more marketable,'
But I am convinced that the almighty power of Trad publishing, with its pernickety editors and despotic agents, is broken. Indeed unless they adapt and change a lot more swiftly than they are doing, then they will fade away, moving sideways into conglomerate units producing mass information and nothing else.
I don't know how our group will manage all the details yet but we advance one step at a time, cheering each other on and regarding this as an experiment. It's an adventure but one we control. It's rather nice to have some say in cover design and pricing. And good to know that our novels go out to be read as we intended them to be.
Friday, 1 June 2012
Wednesday, 23 May 2012
Cooperation?
Steam has been pouring out of my ears all week. In one of those coincidences which seem to happen as a needed push or kick, tales from writer friends who have publishing contracts with the traditional big name publishers popped into my inbox or post box and all of them conspire to shove me towards self publishing.
I cannot believe what publishing companies can do. Apart from the one friend who been dumped because of lack of sales I have been steaming over the editing done to another writer pal's first novel.
This writer's editors chopped the really marvellous ending and insisted on a smaltzy, sloppy, not accurate historically ending be written instead. The novel is a great literary historical. The bloody fool editors keep trying to turn it into a Hollywood action adventure. Quite spoilt the story with their additions which are supposed to make the novel sell more! I seriously doubt they will help sales.
But from all this fury has come the determination to join with a couple of writer friends and make a self publishing cooperative. We aim to run an experiment and see if our novels, the ones agents and editors like but..., will sell as ebooks.
I cannot believe what publishing companies can do. Apart from the one friend who been dumped because of lack of sales I have been steaming over the editing done to another writer pal's first novel.
This writer's editors chopped the really marvellous ending and insisted on a smaltzy, sloppy, not accurate historically ending be written instead. The novel is a great literary historical. The bloody fool editors keep trying to turn it into a Hollywood action adventure. Quite spoilt the story with their additions which are supposed to make the novel sell more! I seriously doubt they will help sales.
But from all this fury has come the determination to join with a couple of writer friends and make a self publishing cooperative. We aim to run an experiment and see if our novels, the ones agents and editors like but..., will sell as ebooks.
Monday, 14 May 2012
Why?
Why is it that publishers are really pushing marketing novels by slotting them in to boxes?
I am tired of finding a novel which looks right, the blurb reads enticingly well, but when I read it I find it's not at all what the marketing promises.
I've thrown several novels back at the librarian with a snarl recently, because they promised to be historical novels, but turned out to be Romances. No, I don't mean a novel with a romantic relationship as a subplot. I mean the darned thing was a full blown Romance with a pretty historical setting. Yet it was marketed as a serious historical novel.
There's a trend to market literary historical novels as if they were genre romps. I'd have missed several excellent novels if I had studied the blurb and not listened to my friends.
Why do publishers think we all want candy floss reading? Why do they market well written, challenging novels as if they were easy reads? It puts readers off.
I am tired of finding a novel which looks right, the blurb reads enticingly well, but when I read it I find it's not at all what the marketing promises.
I've thrown several novels back at the librarian with a snarl recently, because they promised to be historical novels, but turned out to be Romances. No, I don't mean a novel with a romantic relationship as a subplot. I mean the darned thing was a full blown Romance with a pretty historical setting. Yet it was marketed as a serious historical novel.
There's a trend to market literary historical novels as if they were genre romps. I'd have missed several excellent novels if I had studied the blurb and not listened to my friends.
Why do publishers think we all want candy floss reading? Why do they market well written, challenging novels as if they were easy reads? It puts readers off.
Saturday, 5 May 2012
More Emperor's New Clothes
The more I think and discuss the state of publishing right now, the more I am growing to believe that writers have been brainwashed.
Right now traditional publishers require us to go through agents. Agents have read it all and seen it all. They are bored. Titillate them with something like Jane Austen and the Zombies and they jump. Give them a literary novel by an unknown and they might well yawn.
I didn't realise exactly how too much reading can spoil your appreciation of a story. I have suddenly found myself 'read out'. I have been reading a book a day for years and there really is very little new in the way of plots. What wakes me up is a well written 3D character, an unusual setting and the writer's unique voice. This means I judge writing more harshly than a reader who is not 'read out'.
If I do this how much more will an agent or publisher's editor do so?
Readers don't mind another thriller about a serial killer. I've had to review too many. Readers don't worry about head hopping POV changes. Writers and agents frown upon them. Readers don't mind all sorts of things which agents do care about and tell us about how dreadful they are on their websites, in their tweets and blogs.
Perhaps we writers should call the agents' bluff. Perhaps, if we are desperate to be published traditionally, we should produce pastiches of famous, out of copyright novels with something weird tacked on. 'Christmas Carol with Aliens' or 'David Copperfield, Robot'?
Or perhaps it makes sense to go the self publishing route? Readers are out there reading some appallingly written, self published novels with relish. They just like a good story.
Right now traditional publishers require us to go through agents. Agents have read it all and seen it all. They are bored. Titillate them with something like Jane Austen and the Zombies and they jump. Give them a literary novel by an unknown and they might well yawn.
I didn't realise exactly how too much reading can spoil your appreciation of a story. I have suddenly found myself 'read out'. I have been reading a book a day for years and there really is very little new in the way of plots. What wakes me up is a well written 3D character, an unusual setting and the writer's unique voice. This means I judge writing more harshly than a reader who is not 'read out'.
If I do this how much more will an agent or publisher's editor do so?
Readers don't mind another thriller about a serial killer. I've had to review too many. Readers don't worry about head hopping POV changes. Writers and agents frown upon them. Readers don't mind all sorts of things which agents do care about and tell us about how dreadful they are on their websites, in their tweets and blogs.
Perhaps we writers should call the agents' bluff. Perhaps, if we are desperate to be published traditionally, we should produce pastiches of famous, out of copyright novels with something weird tacked on. 'Christmas Carol with Aliens' or 'David Copperfield, Robot'?
Or perhaps it makes sense to go the self publishing route? Readers are out there reading some appallingly written, self published novels with relish. They just like a good story.
Friday, 27 April 2012
Should writers or shouldn't writers?
If you can get writers to ignore the stigma attached to self publishing fiction and discuss it seriously it seems that the biggest stumbling block is knowing if the novel is actually good enough to publish.
There's the rub indeed. How do you know your novel is publishable? If you haven't got a support group of published writers who can help you decide, what can you do? Who will tell you? And where do you get the courage to do it?
There is so much badly written work being self published and any writer who has a C.V. of published works does not want to add to that pool.
So how can a writer find out if the novel is publishable? Sending it to an agent or publisher in the traditional way very rarely brings any helpful comments.
There are manuscript assessors. The U.K. assessors often are or were publishers, editors or even retired agents. My American friends think it is dreadful to spend money on a critique. "Do it yourself," they holler. But how many writers have the confidence to weigh up their own novel? We often think it's ready to publish but is it truly?
There are novel competitions, some are free, others cost a lot, but if the novel is short listed, or merits a critique then surely it has publishable value? Or does it?
There are now publishers' schemes like the Macmillan New Writers scheme or the Harper Collins authonomy: http://www.authonomy.com/faq.aspx website which depends on reader popularity. Problem there is that there is always someone somewhere who hates your novel and someone who loves it and it might be possible to rig support!
So where do writers go with their novels, the novels which agents say "it's good but I don't where to publish it."? Where do writers go with those novels which get good critiques but no agent or publisher takes on? Where do writers go with short listed or competition winning novels which still don't get a traditional publisher?
What do we do? I'm thinking we need a writers' publishing collective for self publishing, with editors to guard against the hopeful new writers who have a way to go yet before publishing standards are reached. Oh, and excellent PR people to blow away the 'vanity' or 'not good enough for real publishing' comments.
There's the rub indeed. How do you know your novel is publishable? If you haven't got a support group of published writers who can help you decide, what can you do? Who will tell you? And where do you get the courage to do it?
There is so much badly written work being self published and any writer who has a C.V. of published works does not want to add to that pool.
So how can a writer find out if the novel is publishable? Sending it to an agent or publisher in the traditional way very rarely brings any helpful comments.
There are manuscript assessors. The U.K. assessors often are or were publishers, editors or even retired agents. My American friends think it is dreadful to spend money on a critique. "Do it yourself," they holler. But how many writers have the confidence to weigh up their own novel? We often think it's ready to publish but is it truly?
There are novel competitions, some are free, others cost a lot, but if the novel is short listed, or merits a critique then surely it has publishable value? Or does it?
There are now publishers' schemes like the Macmillan New Writers scheme or the Harper Collins authonomy: http://www.authonomy.com/faq.aspx website which depends on reader popularity. Problem there is that there is always someone somewhere who hates your novel and someone who loves it and it might be possible to rig support!
So where do writers go with their novels, the novels which agents say "it's good but I don't where to publish it."? Where do writers go with those novels which get good critiques but no agent or publisher takes on? Where do writers go with short listed or competition winning novels which still don't get a traditional publisher?
What do we do? I'm thinking we need a writers' publishing collective for self publishing, with editors to guard against the hopeful new writers who have a way to go yet before publishing standards are reached. Oh, and excellent PR people to blow away the 'vanity' or 'not good enough for real publishing' comments.
Thursday, 19 April 2012
A case of the Emperor's New Clothes?
Right now I'm mulling over a serious problem. What do I tell my two new online students, or any writing students, who work with me at perfecting their novels ready for a publisher? Do I stick with the traditional advice or do I give in to my now serious doubts and discuss them, giving the students that publishing information?
There is no doubt, I repeat this, no doubt, that the basic information handed out in books, on websites, and in writers' magazines or online writers' groups on how to get published with traditional publishers is correct. And this information is a must for new writers to follow. I have no problems with presenting it to my students at all. I know that often a first novel is not publishable even if many of the new writers don't yet accept that. All writers need to believe in themselves, to be arrogant enough to keep writing in the face of rejections. As they struggle with editing, query letters, synopsis and researching agents they are learning and you hope that one day, if they have sufficient of a writers' 3Ds or 3Ps, they will get there, write a publishable novel. Probably with their fourth or fifth attempt.
But what happens when you have more experienced writers, writers who have been publishing short stories, plays, articles, poems for a few years, and who have now written several novels? These writers really have the skills to follow the How to Get Published instructions. They have an original, well written, perfectly edited and presented manuscript. They have an attention grabbing but fully detailed synopsis, and their query letters are a work of art. They have researched their agents and publishers carefully. They have done everything necessary and yet cannot rouse the interest of an agent or publisher.
Current traditional thinking is that their novel simply isn't good enough or it would be published. All writers learn this very quickly and accept it as gospel. But is it?
To make way in traditional publishing a writer needs an agent. Agents are the guardians of the gateway to the traditional publishers. Some very helpful U.K. agents told me they take on one or two people a year and receive, according to the size of their agencies, 4,000 to 8,000 queries a year. Allowing for the slush pile rule that only 10% of the queries are worth reading that still means 400 to 800 query packages to be read. If each agent selects two that leaves anything from 398 to 798 manuscripts unpublished.
Are they unpublishable? How much does luck play a part in choices? How much does fashion play a part? How much does the agent's own preferences play a part? How much does 'we want more of the same', commercial candy floss play a part? How much do business considerations like the writer's age, where they live or how contract savvy they are play a part?
I'm beginning to think that this idea that these novels are not good enough is in fact a case of the Emperor's New Clothes and that giving the traditional advice to these more experienced writers, is keeping them locked into the traditional publishing world and its systems at a time when there are other opportunities. Of course the traditional publishing world is happy to keep these writers dangling, hoping that one day they too can have a Penguin or Oak tree, on their novel, because publishing is a business and the publishers want new writers. So if it's not this year, it might be next year or the year after that. Keep 'em hoping with the idea that their novel isn't publishable yet but the next one might be.
Cynical? Possibly, but I think I will be recommending that the experienced writers I know, with manuscripts which we have read, worked on and enjoyed, can try the traditional route of course, but that they will be better off with the Small Presses, those e-book and POD publishers who are open to submissions without an agent. And for those writers with energy and excellent PR ideas, who don't give a fig for the snooty put downs which self published fiction so often receives, I would even recommend that they can go that route and see how much they can earn!
There is no doubt, I repeat this, no doubt, that the basic information handed out in books, on websites, and in writers' magazines or online writers' groups on how to get published with traditional publishers is correct. And this information is a must for new writers to follow. I have no problems with presenting it to my students at all. I know that often a first novel is not publishable even if many of the new writers don't yet accept that. All writers need to believe in themselves, to be arrogant enough to keep writing in the face of rejections. As they struggle with editing, query letters, synopsis and researching agents they are learning and you hope that one day, if they have sufficient of a writers' 3Ds or 3Ps, they will get there, write a publishable novel. Probably with their fourth or fifth attempt.
But what happens when you have more experienced writers, writers who have been publishing short stories, plays, articles, poems for a few years, and who have now written several novels? These writers really have the skills to follow the How to Get Published instructions. They have an original, well written, perfectly edited and presented manuscript. They have an attention grabbing but fully detailed synopsis, and their query letters are a work of art. They have researched their agents and publishers carefully. They have done everything necessary and yet cannot rouse the interest of an agent or publisher.
Current traditional thinking is that their novel simply isn't good enough or it would be published. All writers learn this very quickly and accept it as gospel. But is it?
To make way in traditional publishing a writer needs an agent. Agents are the guardians of the gateway to the traditional publishers. Some very helpful U.K. agents told me they take on one or two people a year and receive, according to the size of their agencies, 4,000 to 8,000 queries a year. Allowing for the slush pile rule that only 10% of the queries are worth reading that still means 400 to 800 query packages to be read. If each agent selects two that leaves anything from 398 to 798 manuscripts unpublished.
Are they unpublishable? How much does luck play a part in choices? How much does fashion play a part? How much does the agent's own preferences play a part? How much does 'we want more of the same', commercial candy floss play a part? How much do business considerations like the writer's age, where they live or how contract savvy they are play a part?
I'm beginning to think that this idea that these novels are not good enough is in fact a case of the Emperor's New Clothes and that giving the traditional advice to these more experienced writers, is keeping them locked into the traditional publishing world and its systems at a time when there are other opportunities. Of course the traditional publishing world is happy to keep these writers dangling, hoping that one day they too can have a Penguin or Oak tree, on their novel, because publishing is a business and the publishers want new writers. So if it's not this year, it might be next year or the year after that. Keep 'em hoping with the idea that their novel isn't publishable yet but the next one might be.
Cynical? Possibly, but I think I will be recommending that the experienced writers I know, with manuscripts which we have read, worked on and enjoyed, can try the traditional route of course, but that they will be better off with the Small Presses, those e-book and POD publishers who are open to submissions without an agent. And for those writers with energy and excellent PR ideas, who don't give a fig for the snooty put downs which self published fiction so often receives, I would even recommend that they can go that route and see how much they can earn!
Friday, 2 March 2012
Obsessions.
My neighbour from hell is obsessed. He, (and now his wife,) whose 12 acres border mine, is frantic that I should not plant trees. Their house is roughly 25 metres from our mutual boundary fence. They claim that my hazel, almond and fruit trees will damage their house. They claim that my windbreak of coppicing bushes and shrubs will damage their house, and prevent it being sold. Daily I endure abuse, am spied on, cannot walk down my drive without being stalked, yet when I complain they say they must protect their property and they are not doing anything wrong. Attempts to get a mediator in failed. They don't need one! A solicitor's letter warning them of the inevitable consequences of their actions is ignored and laughed at. They drag the local Council officials into their campaign of harassment and I have to waste more time reminding the Council that they have a large file about my neighbour and they should read it before threatening me. I am writing this with my neighbour's binoculars trained on me as I sit on my verandah about one kilometre away from his house and land. He is dangerously obsessed.
And as I wonder how high a fence I can build along that boundary to block out my neighbour I have to chuckle. One of the poets I studied for my O levels was Robert Frost. I can still quote 'Mending Wall' - 'Good fences make good neighbours' He will not go behind his father's saying and he likes to have thought of it so well.' Exactly!
Agents and Publishers' editors are obsessed too. With marketability and money. But I wonder if they really know what readers want. I have included a few mentions of book titles and quotes from poetry in my latest novel. There are school room scenes and the schoolmaster is an important character so I have not foisted these quotes and titles in isolation. However the expert advice I have received from agents and publishers' editors is to remove these as modern readers won't know what they are and don't like quotations. The readers and writers I work with, to test my writing by reading and critiquing, snort in indignation. They like quotes and titles. 'Tells me more about the character.' most of them have said. A quick check round the library, talking to the readers there, came up with the same answer. One person said they had found some interesting poems to read that way.
So who is right? Does an obsession with earning lots of money by getting a 'popular' marketable novel make these experts right? Or do the wide range of ebooks being downloaded by the new techy readers say something quite different. Something about reasonable prices allowing readers to try different types of books? Something about the fact that people cannot all be boxed into the same square?
And as I wonder how high a fence I can build along that boundary to block out my neighbour I have to chuckle. One of the poets I studied for my O levels was Robert Frost. I can still quote 'Mending Wall' - 'Good fences make good neighbours' He will not go behind his father's saying and he likes to have thought of it so well.' Exactly!
Agents and Publishers' editors are obsessed too. With marketability and money. But I wonder if they really know what readers want. I have included a few mentions of book titles and quotes from poetry in my latest novel. There are school room scenes and the schoolmaster is an important character so I have not foisted these quotes and titles in isolation. However the expert advice I have received from agents and publishers' editors is to remove these as modern readers won't know what they are and don't like quotations. The readers and writers I work with, to test my writing by reading and critiquing, snort in indignation. They like quotes and titles. 'Tells me more about the character.' most of them have said. A quick check round the library, talking to the readers there, came up with the same answer. One person said they had found some interesting poems to read that way.
So who is right? Does an obsession with earning lots of money by getting a 'popular' marketable novel make these experts right? Or do the wide range of ebooks being downloaded by the new techy readers say something quite different. Something about reasonable prices allowing readers to try different types of books? Something about the fact that people cannot all be boxed into the same square?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)