NO QUILL REQUIRED

Not Dead, On Pause

Mon, 28 Dec 2009 21:47:25 +0100

Ach! There’s not enough hours in the day, and my time machine got repoed over the weekend.
It’s been a fun, testing and learning curved year or so of blogging but, due to constraints and new demands on my time, I’m bailing on the blog for a while.
Not dead, on pause.
Meanwhile, take a look over old posts, spot my mistakes and fuzzy logic, and let me know how I did.
Have a fab 2010. Don’t let the Mayans get you down.

Zero Sum Writing

Fri, 25 Dec 2009 09:59:42 +0100

Aside from religious and political fundamentalism* there's the dilution of literature to it's simplest principle.
Make money, not art.
The mainstream is flooded with monetarist muse and authors are only too keen to jump right in.
Just when there's a real need to address our world, writers are retreating into escapism, thoughtless reactionary fantasies, and throwing themselves obsequiously at the status quo.
Writers have so much potential to change the world for the better. Our work informs the media, education, debate, history and politics - and it drives the meme machine.
With great power comes great responsibility. No?
If you’re a writer, and you’re reading this - what are you doing?

* Increasingly intertwined in this kulturkampf

Fetishising Rejection

Thu, 24 Dec 2009 22:23:44 +0100

There's a whole world of rejection awaiting the aspiring writer. Agents gets tens of thousands of queries, make less than 0.5% MS full request - and of those only a tiny fraction lead to an agent deal. And after that, publishing.
That's the way it is. T.S.*
But banging on about how many rejections you're had is counterproductive in many ways.
Here's two:
1. You look crap. Complaining is not attractive. Be professional and bite it down. Crack on.
2. You're buying-in to rejection hysteria - "JK Rowling had x rejections, I've had x rejections, so I'm as good as Rowling."
That way madness lies. And shelling out for innumerable courses, competitions and how-to books.
There are only two ways to go after your set number of rejections:
1. Quit.
You might start another novel, you might realise you're not up to snuff.
2. Slap that query letter into the best shape it can be.
Is your book honestly good enough for others to spend their time on? Or is it something you're proud of finishing?
There's a great divide.
You don’t find yourself on one side of it - you put yourself there.

*Tough Shiitake.

Complexity

Wed, 23 Dec 2009 00:10:17 +0100

We’re living in an age of complexity and breadth of information.
Cold War certainties have crumbled, communication is instant and borderless. When a market shivers in the Orient, we feel it in the Occident.
Environmental challenges are finally political ones, affecting us whatever our place in the world. We have no choice but to engage in the debate.
Postmodernism has penetrated every aspect of life, political parties morph sides due to focus group policies. We closely inspect the food we eat and lifestyles we lead, and we expect probity on a scale unimaginable even twenty years ago.
So why do so many insist on reducing all this to simple building blocks? Chucking them round in infantile rage?
What drives the information counter-revolution?
Zero sum thinking.

Letter To Self

Tue, 22 Dec 2009 00:01:01 +0100

There's a book out in Blighty on writing a letter to your sixteen year old self.
And a Guardian podcast, where guests read some of their own letters and snippets form the published book.
A great exercise!
Disappointingly, the podcast people - and the book's contributors? - settle for the cliches of 'it'll all turn out alright', 'you should have kissed him', 'she wasn't worth falling in love with after all'.
So - don’t bullshiitake. A genuine effort to write that letter to yourself will be a fab focus puller on where you’ve come from, and maybe where you're heading.
This exercise benefits from being a more... mature ...vintage.

Seth Slaps Schuster

Mon, 21 Dec 2009 10:03:59 +0100

You’ve got to love Seth Godin’s almost fanatical commitment to innovation.
This week the chattersphere is abuzz with his retort to Carol Reidy, of publishing giant Simon & Schuster, when she states:
“We must do everything in our power to uphold the value of our content against the downward pressures exerted by the marketplace and the perception that 'digital' means 'cheap.'”*
As Seth says, however big a company is, it has no power over what its competitors do. Especially smaller, leaner and more innovative competitors. Especially especially in the digital age.
A comment on the link astutely points out that digital does not mean cheap, it means free. That’s what consumers expect, for right or wrong. If given a choice between free stuff and cheap stuff, the vast majority will opt for the former. And if that means waiting until a hacked version is available, that’s what they’ll do. Even little grandmas and latecomers to the internet party.
So far, nil poinx to Reidy.
Reidy also states:
“Because we have feet in two worlds, we must establish the right balance of attention and investment between traditional publishing, which still represents the vast majority of our revenues, and the digital publishing marketplace, which is clearly poised to take off and is essential for our future."
This shows how out of touch she and the publishing biz are with the digital zeitgeist.
There is no ‘two worlds’ dichotomy. Two markets, perhaps, but those who read print are as embedded in the digital age as those who only Kindle. One world.
She also seems blithely unaware of the pandora’s box ebooks are to publishing, and authors’ chances of turning a buck.
Lastly, a note on publishing giants ‘upholding the value of content’ - stop awarding mega-advances to arses, squeezing authors for minimum digital royalties, and dropping mid-list authors.

*Anyone reading her letter will be astounded that someone so close to writing has such corporate, windy prose. Hmm, maybe not.

Podcasts For Book Lovers

Fri, 18 Dec 2009 23:41:41 +0100

On a lighter note, here’s an inexhaustive list of podcast on lit, the biz and writing.
These podcasts are a fantastic resource for developing our critical faculties, thus our writing, and to introduce us to authors we'd otherwise never meet.
Find them all on iTunes.
BBC Radio 3 - Arts & ideas - lots of lit coverage.
BBC Radio 4 - Books and authors.
BBC Radio 5 live: Book reviews with Simon Mayo - often gushing praise for guest authors, but pleasant enough.
BBC World Service - World book club - English lit and translated lit. Well-interviewed, and at times very revealing of the author.  B&N Meet the Writers Audio interviews - very North American focus, plenty of plugs for Christianity.
Also, from book review amateurs, the sf-inflected - Books You Should Read.
The Guardian books podcast - World lit in English.
NYT Book review - so very archly New Yoirk.
New Yorker: Fiction - quality!
New Yorker: Out Loud - often has better lit cover than New Yorker fiction.
Slate's audio book club - knowledgeable and intelligent discussion of English literature, NOT audio books.
Washington Post book world podcast. Now defunct, but plenty of back ‘casts.

Well, Hello Mary Sue!

Thu, 17 Dec 2009 23:49:50 +0100

Came across this phenomenon from a Litopia podcast last week.
Definition
A Mary Sue is an idealised character based on a female writer's wish fulfilment.  E.g. Charlaine Harris' Sookie Stackhouse. Meyer's Bella?*
A Gary Sue** is the male version. Interestingly, these seem to attract less flak than Mary Sue's, as their perceived idealism is more culturally accepted.  E.g. Any macho character. Villains: Lee Child, for his Jack Reacher. RE Howard's Conan. Any miserable macho racist by Andy McNab.
Resources
Here' some reading:
http://firefox.org/news/articles/6/2/Mary-Sue-Who-Are-You/Page2.html - quite funny, and the best explanation of what a Mary Sue is. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Sue - poorly worded overview.
The test!
http://firefox.org/news/articles/651/1/The-Original-Mary-Sue-Litmus-Test/Page1.html  and  http://www.onlyfiction.net/marysue2.html - a really funny test but dead useful.
What It Means to Writing
Quite clearly, a fat chunk of aspiring writer lard fails on this point. Bad characterisation, motivated by wish-fulfilment, romanticism, a narrow reading range and penchant for cliche.
Cue - commercialist narcoleptics saying 'Well, they sold a lot of books... bleh'.
If commercial success is your only ambition, enjoy the fruits of that perspective. However, commercial success is not a trump card for literary ambition - Mein Kampf has always been popular in some parts.
As writers, we have a duty to develop the form and contribute to culture. Wide as that remit is, sole commercial success is the antithesis of it.
But for the more aware writer, taking the test below is a fun and useful exercise. It includes anti-Sue, angsty-Sue and a few more revelations of how you're writing your protagonists.
Measure, evaluate and proceed!

* Meyer may also be Mary Sueing her violent sexual fantasies in this series.
** That would be a boy named Sue?

Escapism - From What, Exactly?

Wed, 16 Dec 2009 23:40:51 +0100

Art is always framed by culture and society. There's no escape from that.
We've never been so privileged compared to our ancestors and the third world, and we need 'escape'?
There's never been so little literacy in the developed world, or so much ignorance, and we need 'escape'?
Regardless of how we'd like to tag art as escapist, as art's made by people, and we're part of communities and society, it will always have a political element, and say something about our times.
An overabundance of escapist art floods culture with cliched, reactionary, dumbed down drekk. The mainstream becomes utterly boring, as the fringe can't liven it up.  While other media have their problems with escapism - to varying degrees - the world of literature seriously suffers. To wit: a boom in hacks looking to score with 'the next something' - Twilight, Potter**, whatever.
Penny dreadfuls and cheap hack work have been round since Gutenberg, heck - even before, with Medieval romances. And from that manure some fragrant flowers have grown amongst the weeds.
But when I hear the word 'escapism' I reach for my Browning.
Or my Black & Decker strimmer.

An Unfunny Thing Happened In The Forum

Tue, 15 Dec 2009 22:46:09 +0100

"One of the amusements of idleness is reading without the fatigue of close attention; and the world therefore swarms with writers whose wish is not to be studied, but to be read."
Samuel Johnson: Idler #30 (November 11, 1758)
I’ve previously spoken in favour of writers’ forums. While they might still retain the utility mentioned in previous posts, it’s sad to report that the forum mentioned is no home to the enquiring mind, or the aspiring writer with bigger game in his sights than churning out readymade genre fare.
The Dictatorship of the Masses
The consensus of the contributors at this North American forum is that popularity is the main criterion a work should be judged by.
That writing quality, innovation, risk taking and panache have no merit.
That failing to be a bestseller author means your work is crap.
Not only is this explicitly stated by members in threads, it is implicit in endorsements of the latest fad hacks, and a distinct antipathy to ideas that literature* is more than pounds, pence and profits.
While literature covers everything from romantic pap to unintelligible genius, the notion that anything that is not part of the rump should be thrown to the dogs is - plainly - fascist.
It attacks intellectuals and marginalised writers, serving only to uphold the status quo.
In this dim vision of writing, we are here to entertain and distract, we are not here to question, challenge or explore.
Geeks Bearing Greek
In an inclusive world, and one would expect that of the West in our era, there ought to be space for all manner of writer and writing.
That writers, of all people, would understand that the mind needs the oxygen of new ideas from the fringe.
That those attempting to make the mainstream more interesting should not be censured, but should be cheered on for their Sisyphusian contribution. After all, the pay’s lousy.
But no.
Opiates For the Masses
The vicissitudes of market economics and the prevailing orthodoxy of the publishing industry do force writers into increasingly commercial ambitions as they write. Anyone without any awareness of writing as a business has no business writing.
Though common sense has seemingly turned to dogma.
Commercial fiction is now meansq a novel is transubstantiated from a work of literature, to a product for consumption, something to be read. At times, it is understandable the casual reader wants a tonic from their labours. Some days, only bread and jam will do, though it’s hardly a staple for a diet.
But see, in so generously applying Godfrey’s Cordial to the infant writer, it will be no accident that literature dies out. Talented writers who are not nurtured within the publishing bosom will do something better with their time.
Leaving all those populist hacks squealing for the teat, when there’s so little teat to go round.**

*That means any printed fiction. Yes, a generous definition.
** Mixing metaphors is fast becoming a pleasure unto itself.

The Pursuit of Excellence, The Flight From Mediocrity

Mon, 14 Dec 2009 22:34:18 +0100

"I do not associate with anything that is not good".
Thus spake the truculent Field Marshall Montgomery.
What is the alternative? To associate with mediocrity? Worse?*
Making the Grade
Lots of people play sports for leisure, with no hope of going pro. The line between pro and am sportsters is very definitely drawn - you either make the team or cross the finish line, or you don't. There's little room for self-delusion.
So why should amateur artists be indulged with fantasies of being up to snuff?
Plenty of people turn up for their game - read: finish a book, picture or song. That doesn't make them Nabokov, Visconti or Cobain.
Turning up is important, but it's not the only criterion to meet. Being good - performing well - is just as important.

Ambition, Second-to-Last Refuge of the Scoundrel
Unlike sports, yes, mediocrity is less important than ambition. Naked, avaricious, material ambition for fame and gelt. The art is not important, it's the means to the end of ambition. Madonna's career a case in point.
All too often, amateur artists lack the art to know where they stand and the wit to reach an ambition. Their fantasies shouldn't be indulged, their weak work taken as what it is - personal expression, narcissistic, lacking in self-awareness, uninformed, in a cul-de-sac.
This doesn't mean you should be dissing the artist, as they're free to do as they please, but by no means should the mediocrity of their work be credible as serious art. Handle those eggshells with care.

CIV!
Sounds tough? Over critical? Elitist, even?
Our civilisation recognises and is nurtured by the great in art. Stripped of personal opinion, there are core values and meaning we all share which draw from it.
The dross is history's deadwood, forgotten, a fly in amber - a moment of time, curious to us even, but only meaningful as an object of scrutiny, lacking art's resonance.
Sitting at your desk, this is where it begins. Literature is the gate between us and barbarism, far more powerful and longer lasting than pictorial art or even music. You, the aspiring writer, are responsible for writing history. Defending civilisation.
Face it - your options are:
To pursue excellence
To bed down with mediocrity.
Put this way, if you want off the bench and into the team, there’s no option at all.

*Buy records by artistes from the X-Factor? Bring on Gottendammerung!

On Idolatry

Fri, 11 Dec 2009 22:18:22 +0100

We can be fond of writers, we can detest them, trust them, want to slap them about a bit.
But we shouldn't idolise them.
Greatness
Great Art is not the same for everyone, it's not science - there's no objective benchmark to label what is great and what is glurge. Ask a teenager what he thinks of Shakespeare or Milton. Ask a feminist what she makes of Twilight, or an imam what he makes of Salman Rushdie.
What is considered canonical today may have been overlooked in the past - or neglected in the future. If that art was so Great, how could it happen?
Great Art is defined as such by people and, as with everything to do with people, that means Great Art is a currency of culture, rather than a universal law.

Separating the Art from the Artist I
All too often we confuse the art with the artist. It's a natural consequence of our psychology - we identify the pleasure the art gives us, and paste it over the artist's personality.
This goes both ways. Yes, we can be disappointed in our heroes and they drop a notch or two, or are excommunicated. But we can also distance ourselves, enjoy the art and take it all a little less seriously.
But where to draw the line?

Separating the Art from the Artist II
We can dislike an artist's work but, upon learning more of their biography or character, develop sympathy or a regard for them.

You're Only as Good as the Last Thing You Did
Yes, an artist can build a good body of work, and then do drekk.
Complacency sets in, drug habits proliferate, key themes are overdone, mental decline or disinterest slur the work.
The body of work remains the same, what is it in itself, regardless of the artist's faculties.

Getting It Down

Thu, 10 Dec 2009 14:07:51 +0100

Another fab phrase, seemingly unattributable, versus procrastination:
Don’t get it right - get it written!
You can’t edit without a raw text to work on.
Ideas are great - but execution is all important.
Peter Drucker?

Yah-Boo! To Fantasy Fiction!

Wed, 9 Dec 2009 11:04:40 +0100

As we approach the season of religious co-option, let us turn our enquiring minds towards elves and talking trees, lions that ritually sacrifice themselves and youngsters marked by prophecy.
That’s right - Fantasy Fiction backdoor religion.
In spite of what intellectually-challenged fundamentalists believe, LOTR is one of the best examples of Christian literature outside of the bible. A classic deus ex machina example of the supremacy of middle class Christian forces over squabbling Luciferian evil proles.*
Even Harry Potter had his stab at the passion.
And let’s not waste pixels examining CS Lewis.
By These Signs Shall Ye Know Them
Any novel that has one or more of the following is irredeemably tainted with religion:
Death and rebirth of protagonist.
Goodness versus evil, goodness wins.
Exodus based on metaphysical value system.
Supernatural intervention in the Fantasy milieu.
Wiseguys with beards and funny syntax.
Now, the secular reader will have no problem identifying religious analogies, and must by now be comfortable separating the entertainment from the subtext. After all, in a religion-inflected world, it’s not like she has any choice, is it?
But, really, must Fantasy writers persist in drinking from the fountain of ignorance?
It’s simply bad writing:
Let’s face it, light vs darkness is not an original line.
Nor is the Chosen One.
Supernatural intervention is a suck out.
Haven’t we been here before?
Religious subtexts gloss real world religion and lend it credence in secular society, i.e. that supernatural forces governing our lives are a given that we needn’t examine and repudiate.
It’s worth bearing in mind that, were Fantasy authors living in a world directly ruled by religious belief, their work would be heresy.
With typically unoriginal results.

* If Tolkien can write bad prose, I can too.
^ As opposed to challenged.

Yay! For SF Atheists!

Tue, 8 Dec 2009 10:47:56 +0100

Even a cursory glance behind the paper-curtain reveals an atheist majority amongst Science-Fiction writers.
This may indicate that people with an interest in scientific thinking are drawn to SF.
Furthermore, SF writers envision a future clean of superstitious thought. The exception being Frank Herbert’s Machiavellian priestesses and crazed jihadi, and L Ron Hubbard’s SF pedestal as a god.
Oh - and the Book of Mormon, predating Hubbard by a century.
But back to SF.
SF gives a writer a lot of leeway to propose his ideas on how things should be done now.
Thanks to its ultra-fictive milieu, it can include taboo issues too strong for the mainstream when undiluted.
As much SF envisions new technologies, it embraces a secular, rationalistic worldview - where those technologies thrive.
Where SF is dystopian, it offers a warning for the serious flaws in contemporary life.
Where it is utopian, again, it offers a prospect of humanity shorn of harmful mumbo jumbo. Or one in which utopia are themselves a danger to humanity.
Lastly, but not leastly, SF can also bash the crap out of religio-superstition. Yay!
And, unlike Fantasy fiction, with which it is often lumped, SF’s backdoor religion is pretty locked down.
More on which tomorrow.

Starting Points

Mon, 7 Dec 2009 17:34:10 +0100

Here’s a quote from the fab Seth Godin blog.
Two things marketers do: 1. Do the work necessary to be sure that your perception of the world is similar to the world as it is. 2. Create the stories (and the experiences to back them up) that change the world as it is.
He then goes on to point out that lousy marketers fail to do this.
All too true of lousy writers.
Whatever your genre, you need to condiment it with reality. An appreciation of the realities of publishing is also appropriate.
If you truly want to change the world* with your writing, you need to find a way to articulate your vision in a way that appeals to real people, i.e. readers.
The wishful thinking of aspiring writers is no condiment. Even a non-brewed one.^
Leaven your work with the way the world is.

* For the better!
^ Thanks Allan Holdsworth!

BTW - Happy birthday, JJ Cale!

Perception Week - Value

Fri, 4 Dec 2009 17:57:16 +0100

There are two ways in which we interpret the word value. Each is a matter of perception.
The first is our near-immutable values. What we care about morally, philosophically, what we inherit form our parents or culture.
Our perception of the world and events in it is shaped by those values. Be they of religion and science, altruism and realpolitik, veracity and subjectivity, beauty and ugliness, whatever and it is so.
The second is the value used in the market.
The video below is an entertaining and thought-provoking look, enabling us to reevaluate what we have and how to bring or add value to that.
When watching it, bear in mind your role as a writer in perpetuating and instilling values in your readers.
It is inevitable you will reveal your values as a writer, but is it inevitable you will bring value to the reading experience?

Perception Week - Unconceptualising

Thu, 3 Dec 2009 14:52:08 +0100

Having a vision and making plans is all very well. This blogger is a big fan of both. But our brains provide other ways to get where we want to go.
This is where unconceptualising comes in.
Look at it this way.

The puzzle above looks tricky, right? How would you analyse then plan solving it?
The answer is - you don’t. You get hands-on and experiment with the bricks, seeing which direction they can move, and how they relate to the blue brick.
Eventually the aha! moment happens and you solves the puzzle.
Here’s one I did earlier. It looks crazy, but with a little unconceptualising, is pretty simple.

In the same way, we can solve the problems created by our novels by doing, not thinking. We write our way out of it.
But we can only do so once we’ve unburdened ourselves of pre-existing concepts.

Perception Week - Two Ears, One Pen, One Gob

Wed, 2 Dec 2009 17:05:03 +0100

It’s shocking how few writers appeal to the full range of senses, sticking exclusively to vision only.
Everybody, everything looks, watches, sees, appears - but rarely sounds.
Even dialogue - for the weak writer’s myopia stalls at the printed word. The characters speak less than they are spoken through.
Exercise
A set of simple, cost-free exercises to limber up your listening writing skills:
Put aside distractions and listen to your environment.
You could be at home in the city, or on the porch of a country house. On a tram, in a rickshaw, a plane, on a skateboard, swaying on a camel.
You might be in a hospital, a bailiff’s office, a foyer of a grand hotel.
What’s your aural environment? Takes notes!
Another task would be to find objects to listen to.
You might clatter kitchen cutlery.
Twang the heavy cable holding up a pole.
Crunch or suck things in your mouth.
Stand in the rain, with the rain on the hood of your parka or parked car.
Even truly listen to a piece of music, sans mind wanderings and interruptions.
So the next time you’re writing a scene - what’s the subliminal sound?
What colours to the ears are you painting?

Perception Week - The Question of Honesty

Tue, 1 Dec 2009 00:02:18 +0100

There's a great deal of soggy honesty amongst aspiring writers - that is, we share an endemic culture of dishonesty.
Like Ariely's student experiment in the video below - in a culture where others cheat a little, and do so without punishment, we cheat without remorse.

Writers are no different to investment bankers - our work is done in private, rarely being exposed to scrutiny.
Except in one instance* - writing groups.
Writing communities offer the opportunity to be judged by one's peers. This is altogether a Good Thing.
Forums and writing groups offer a cheap way to gain informed criticism, support and input.
There's also an invaluable pooling of publishing business know how, and resources for research. It's certainly possible for an honest writer to hone their craft here.
However, we cheat.
For the most part, we circumnavigate hurt feelings.
This feeds egregious prose, crass assumptions and redundant story lines.
The result?
The bad writer's delusions turn to mania, "I've been rejected 100 times and nothing's going to stop me!"
The delinquent lousy writer actually gets published,
further impoverishing our culture.
Naturally, this originates in the lousy writer's lack of self-honesty. Cheating oneself is no less a cheat.
This is double littericide - a lousy writer has neither the honesty to write anything other than unreflective pap, nor the guts to give up writing it.

*Okay, the other being published. But this is so unlikely for the majority of aspiring writers, it's negligible.

Perception Week - Vision On

Mon, 30 Nov 2009 23:57:04 +0100

"I'll believe it when I see it."
How redundant that expression is. Our eyes deceive us constantly, with the connivance of our brains.
From foveal vision, to saccades, to functional fixedness*, we believe what we ought not to, and disbelieve what we should.
This week is devoted to ways of engaging with our lack of perspective as writers. What might be wrong, and how we can use it to improve our writing.
And, hell yeah, maybe a little inspiration.

We also saw this in Dan Pink’s TED talk last week.
The title’s dedicated to a vibrophonic TV arts show for kids from waaay back in the day.

Man With Beast

Fri, 27 Nov 2009 12:33:56 +0100

The difference between man and the beasts is this - we derive pleasure from others’ performance.
We are the animal that needs to give and receive approval.
Remember that - the next time you’re reading and when writing your novel.

Men With Women

Thu, 26 Nov 2009 12:19:51 +0100

A man likes to have his garage in order and know something is where he last left it, then he asks his woman where something is before looking.
A woman likes the toilet seat down, and forgets to clean the rim under it.
Without ascribing to the nonsense that is ‘men are from mars/ women form venus’, there are general unique tics the sexes have that no amount of reeducation will change.
Task
What are the tics of the men and women in your life?
Pair them - whether spouses, siblings, friends or coworkers
Set their tics against each other, dramatically
Can you use them for verisimilitude? Conflict? Character?
Now look at other cultures you might know - even those in your home town.
How do the sexes do things differently there?
Do the women keep shop while the men go to the cash and carry? Are the men sitting on the stoop, while the women go to church? Are the boys playing online games while the girls date older men?
Once again - if you can't generalise, you can't write. And if you can't be particular, you can't write.
Observe, learn, write.

Motivatin’

Wed, 25 Nov 2009 20:50:12 +0100

For us aspiring authors, motivation is the flipside of procrastination.
If only we could motivate ourselves to write, query, hobnob, then our careers would be assured.
Below is an entertaining and informative talk about what really floats our boat. How we go about floating them is the trick.
And a little proof that we’re not in it for the money.

Short Sharp Shock!

Tue, 24 Nov 2009 20:34:49 +0100

Those of us lucky enough to be teenagers in Thatcher’s Britain^ will be no strangers to the notion,
“Give ‘em a short, sharp, shock - that’ll sort ‘em out!”
Either that, or you’ve listened carefully to Pink Floyd’s Dark Side of the Moon.
Vis-a-vis writing, it’s shocking that there are still threads where aspiring authors express an interest in POD and vanity publishing.
Okay, they haven’t done their market research, have probably done little by way of hard agent querying, and their actual writing will rest on the merits that this is their dream and they’ve a right to be published, lauded, fêted, wined and dined.*
But here, here and here are my ‘three of the best on each hand’!+
Especially LOLworthy is Ed Anonymous’
“But there IS something wrong with self-publishing presses:
They're shitheads.”
There’s a vast difference between living the dream and selling the dream.
Aspiring writers ought to know by now.

*Yes, another stern post. This Injuctivitis thing’s catching.
And, yes, some of us are lucky enough to recognise that expression too.
^Teenagers, because this attitude, among other unpleasantries, was aimed at us.

One Word

Mon, 23 Nov 2009 18:22:05 +0100

One word. So little time.
A fab wee exercise to improve your writing.

The Writer Business

Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:07:36 +0100

Regardless of how few writers are published, there is no shortage of aspiring writers, eager to part with their money for a little more of The Dream.
Whether it’s writing classes, books and media, self-publishing and POD, ebooks, audio books; not to mention agents, publicists, editors and publishers, lawyers, flim-flam artists, booksellers and stores, printers, typesetters (or what passes for them these days), bloggers, journalists, event and competition organisers, and - gasp! - illustrators and jacket designers - all making a crust from the aspiring or successful author.
Meanwhile, authors are seeing less and less revenue, and are expected to put more money and effort into their remains of the pie.
Conclusions
1.
So, the next time you think about embarking on that Himalayan task of writing a novel - especially when you’re unrepresented - factor in the pounds, shilling and pence for what it will cost you, and calculate your ROI (Return On Investment) for your work.
Maybe you need to find ways to diversify your ‘product offering’, because books flying off the shelves is highly unlikely to do it for you.
2.
And think again about how much money you’re spending on ‘becoming a writer’, and how few good writing hours you’re putting in.
That’s right, this post was a bit of a strict one, wasn’t it?
;-P

Agent Query By The Numbers

Thu, 19 Nov 2009 10:50:00 +0100

Dear [AGENT]
As a representative of [INSERT GENRE AND/OR AGENTS' BIGGEST CLIENT], I would like you consider [YOUR NOVEL], and [NUMBER OF PAGES, AND GENRE]. Please find below my sample pages and synopsis.
[INTRODUCE PROTAGONIST] , [EVENT], [RESULT]. [DILEMMA/ OBSTACLE], [GOAL/ WHAT'S AT STAKE].
[YOUR INTENT WITH NOVEL AND ANY MARKET RESEARCH YOU HAVE DONE], [WHAT INSPIRED YOU TO WRITE THIS NOVEL]
[PERTINENT WRITING BIO] [SOMETHING SNAPPY AND BRANDED ABOUT YOURSELF]
[WHAT YOU WANT FROM AN AGENT]
I’d be delighted to forward a partial or completed manuscript on request. I have made multiple submissions to agents. Thank you for taking the time to consider my work.
Kind regards
[YOU]

The Rumpelstiltskin Effect

Wed, 18 Nov 2009 09:36:26 +0100

There seems to be a substantive difference between labouring with existing materials, e.g. physical labour or paper pushing, and pulling stuff sticky and bleeding from your brain.
Naturally, this leading opener suggests which is the more difficult.
At times, non-creatives have a sly little laugh behind their hands about creatives, while shuffled together around the office coffee pot. The issue being that we’re one - or all - of the items below:
Moody
Flaky
Pretentious
Add your own pejorative adjective here.
Well, anyone can be moody. Flakes come in many shapes. Pretension is no preserve of the creative practitioner.
What they fail to appreciate - until it’s served them on a warm plate with a cute garnish and a free bar tab - is that dredging up and shaping original material is bloody hard work.
Bringing something into this universe that didn’t exist before is as close to god as we get. And don’t try arguing that reproduction is even on a weak par with it, q.v. the existing materials argument.
This thread is no polemic against non-creatives - after all, where would our audience be without them? - but it’s posted here on the digital wall for those of us who do struggle from time to time with the metaphysical creative process in a physical world.
Hey, and maybe it even offers a little insight to non-creatives.
Thankfully, creatives do not expect the same payment as that infamous goblin.

Ira Glass on Storytelling

Tue, 17 Nov 2009 17:29:34 +0100

Happy birthday blog!
A lazy one today, but this video has some fab essentials. Enjoy.

What Wikipedia Taught Me

Mon, 16 Nov 2009 16:36:44 +0100

Wikipedia cropped up time and again when this blogger was writing his first novel, back in the day. And it doggam helped with exhaustive research.
But what Wikipedia taught me was this - verify your information.
Are the source links dead?
Are the quotes and facts accurate to the source?
What verity does the source have? A professional or governmental site? A hack or conspiracy theorist, with untrue facts?
Chase down the data to a deeper level. You might never use that information, but knowing it enriches the way you write on tat topic.
Cross reference the wiki, the links and data googled or got from print books. How do the pieces fit together - into a coherent picture?
Research Wikipedia as an authority, too. Don't forget - all encyclopaedia have a perspective, and all can succumb to erroneous entries.
As we know - there can be stories behind each entry. A thorough relevant investigation of them reveals a seam of rich material.
Those who reject Wikipedia out of hand are exactly those people who aren't doing their research, and will be duped by other information sources on a daily basis.

Writing Challenge

Fri, 13 Nov 2009 10:42:44 +0100

How would you describe this?

Look Again!

Wed, 11 Nov 2009 16:06:23 +0100

One of the worst things a writer can do is throw down what they think on a page.*
When a writer tells, rather than shows, he does his readers a disservice.
There’s no room for the reader’s ‘authorship’.
All too often, telling uses leaden language and cliches.
Here in the second bullet is the nub - the writer is meant to be a craftsperson at least, an artist at best. But neither is served by bad writing.
The secret is to - look again!
If you must, take a familiar painting or movie and take a step back from your assumptions and so-called ‘knowledge’ of what you’re viewing, and focus on the detail.

That stroke of green in Rembrandt’s self portrait. The glow of satisfaction as Eli Wallach puffs on Clint’s discarded cigar in The Good The Bad and The Ugly.
You needn’t get purple with it, but looking again leads to the best in what writing is about - and refreshes our experience of the world.

* Well, there’s worse things a writer can do, but that’s another post.

Story Is A Song

Tue, 10 Nov 2009 10:55:45 +0100

All the greatest songs tell a story with the utmost economy. Four lines a verse, a phrase for the chorus, another verse and - if you’re lucky - a fab middle section taking the tune to another place.
If the Three Act Structure is too much for you, and you’re buried under copious notes cribbed from how-to-write books, why not make life simple - and write yourself a song?

Start With The Chorus
What is your novel’s hook?*
“... born to run...”
Scribble it down.
Then whittle away at it until it’s a simple short sentence.
You start with the chorus because without a payoff, the reader won’t ever touch one of your doggam books again.
Verse One
Here you introduce the dilemma, the challenge, the milieu.
The first ‘line’ has to grab our attention.
“In the day we sweat it out in the streets of a runaway american dream...”
The second develops the theme.
“At night we ride through mansions of glory in suicide machines...”
Further lines ratchet the tension higher - till it pops just before the Chorus.
Verse Two
Bring in another character, problem, another strong idea if the song’s an ‘internal dialogue’.
“Wendy let me in I wanna be your friend...”
Balance it thematically with the first verse - either through contrast or comparison, or maybe you’ve a motif to harp upon.
“Well run till we drop, baby well never go back...”
Mid Section
This is where the real masters kick serious butt - in music, novels and movies.
“Beyond the palace hemi-powered drones scream down the boulevard...”
Most writers are terrified of the great white wastelands that are the pages of the middle section, but a true writer relishes the journey, and brings more to the song-story, inspiring us to take up our quills and have a go.
“The amusement park rises bold and stark
Kids are huddled on the beach in a mist ...”
Here, you need a blend of inspiration and bloody hard work - to experiment with ideas, see how they fit together, reorder them, play them alongside your verse and chorus.
Coda
Your coda has wrap up all the elements you drew into the song-story. This is where you have a lot of fun, and a lot of nightmares. But the end of the road is in sight - and you’re not quitting now.
A whole lot of love, some blood sweat and tears, but a labour of love all the same.
“Tramps like us - Maybe we were born to run.”

*Thanks to Bruce for some of the songs of a lifetime.

Use Amazon To Snare Your Agent

Mon, 9 Nov 2009 15:38:15 +0100

Now you got your basic query chops together, time for advanced kata - how to use Amazon to save you money and aim your query with marksperson-like precision.
The Problem
Agents see a whole lot of queries throughout the week but by now, dear reader, you’ve learnt enough to know how to knock out a competent query and can rise above the drekk, but still fail to hit the ball out the park and make her hit that ‘reply’ button on her email.
The Solution
You’ll need a good supply of coffee and nibbles for this, as it is time consuming - but reaps reward. The easy bit? Open up your web browser and look up Amazon.
Then:
1. Search for your target writers, based on the genre you’re writing in - or from the list you harvested doing this.
2. Now read through the reviews, and note the expressions that best describe the author’s work (naturally, all positive of course!). These are going to be your buzzwords.
3. Craft each query to your agents matching buzzwords to author. Get this into your second sentence. Don’t be shy.
Now, even if you haven’t read that author, you can identify your novel with them in your query.
The Benefits?
1. Tailors your query to the agent,
2. So makes their life easier, and your query more attractive.
3. Shows your professionalism.
4. Saves you $$$$ and time in having to buy the hundred or so books that your agent list represents.
...One More Thing!
Another thing you might like to do with Amazon - even before you write one word of your next novel - is root through their database to see if your concept has been done before.
Imagine the grief that will save you!

5 Pillars of A Killer Query Strategy

Fri, 6 Nov 2009 11:30:36 +0100

When priming your query for specific agents, here’s five fab tips.
1. Brainstorm then list your criteria for the ideal agent.
2. Use Litmatch and Agent Query to create your long list*, based on your criteria.
3. Start with your B-list agents, as you’re going to make mistakes and fine tune your query through experience. Once you get your A-game together, query your A-agents.
By now you should have a folder full of agents to query, and a folder with your query template, bio and sample pages - 5 and 30 each.
4. Now surf those agent leads, check out their genre, criteria and query process - which is all best kept track of using a spreadsheet (see Monday’s post) - and find which agent at that agency handles your genre.
5. Then, and it can be no small job but it’s gotta be done, pick out all that agent’s clients that match your genre. Litmatch and the agent’s website seem most useful for cross-referencing here.
Next up - tips on tracking your queries and how to use Amazon to kick serious ass.

*It’s an industry standard that you should have 100+ agents to draw from this list. After which, quit querying and write a better book.

Splitting Verbs

Thu, 5 Nov 2009 20:49:17 +0100

Eachother.
Inbetween.
Everyday.
Which of the above needs splitting?
All together?
Altogether?
Sometimes, or some times, it’s worth pitying the poor foreigner who has to get their pen around our language.

What the 00’s Taught Me

Wed, 4 Nov 2009 20:33:45 +0100

Every decade has it’s themes.
Now we’re beyond the fin de siècle, the looking glass of Y2K, we get to live with our shadow, a dark continent indeed.
This decade* has two themes in the ascendant:
A paralysing dystopian promise for the future
A childish desire to snuggle into notions of supernatural parental benign
The dystopian camp is well attended by eco-bores, SF movie makers and novelists, conspiracy theorists, virologists and anyone with religion.
Baby recidivists number ‘alternative medicine’ disciples, Paul Coelho and Dan Brown fans, Reaganite reactionaries, people who sing the lyric ‘Everything’s gonna be alright’, sex addicts and anyone with religion.
There seems little in between.

* Which ends this New Year, for us pedants!

What’s My Line?

Tue, 3 Nov 2009 20:26:54 +0100

He’s a sliver tongued seducer.
A tall walking, besuited behemoth with an uncanny eye for our weaknesses, dextrously applying all the frightening tools that science has made available* at his fingertips.
He is a liar, a cheat, death to be around.
Wherever he goes, he is trailed by disaster, loss and the curious fragrance of hopes withered in bloom.
I’m talking about the Devil.
I’m talking about Don Draper.

*Frank Zappa’s impeccable Gregory Peccary

Kindle - Nei!

Mon, 2 Nov 2009 13:05:53 +0100

Amazon slams into trouble again, this time in shivery Norway, where its Vader-like grip over the Kindle and library.
And deservedly so. We’re entering an era of digi-domination from Amazon, Google and piracy, and it really is looking like being an aspiring writer is a mug’s game.
Much like the US’ Big Three, or Hollywood, an oligopoly of book distributors will kill innovation, crippling our culture. Why the storng words? Well - without fresh writing (and writers!) the TV and movie industries suffer too, as they have less cream to crop for adaptations, and a small herd of Friesians (writers!) to milk.
Let’s hope the Norwegians, if not the EU, curb Amazon’s rip through on the ebook.
We need an open platform reader, and the Kindle suffices, but not at a cost to writers and consumers.