C h a z z W r i t e s . c o m

See all my books at AllThatChazz.com.

03/11/2011 • 4:58 AM 0

Publishing: How important is nationality anyway?

I can’t say I’m proud to be Canadian. Proud suggests I’ve achieved something by accident of birth. Pride of nationality is like being proud of being tall. I say instead that I’m lucky to be Canadian. It beats a lot of other possibilities. (I think George Carlin had a bit about that, I’ll have to look for it. Ah. Obviously I found it.)

Since Americans have more e-readers than Canadians, a Canadian author recently wondered aloud if Canadians had a chance of making any money in e-books.

It has always seemed strange to me how parochial many readers can be. Instead of seeing a story set in the Arctic as exotic and interesting, they tend to see it as too Other. In books, the wisdom has long been that people want “the same thing only different.” Americans want to read about Americans and Canadians are the only ones who will put up with sodbusters set in historic Saskatchewan.

This is true and it’s not. We generalize with confidence to familiar settings. New Yorkers enjoy reading about New Yorkers. But what’s true generally is not true in the particular. When Yann Martel wrote Life of Pi, how many people could relate to lion-taming on a raft in the Pacific? For that matter, how many people can really relate to foreign spy thrillers and the intrigue of the Pentagon and State Department? Instead, they read to escape into the unfamiliar.

Can Lit is somewhat fetishized by many Canadians, especially if they are part of the publishing establishment or Canadian media. It’s not that I’m saying it’s all bad, but I would say it’s not the only game in town. I mostly read American authors and personally, I don’t have much patience for a lot of Can Lit. It’s a matter of taste. You can argue I have none, but the heart wants what it wants and I don’t think Chuck Palahniuk‘s artistic sensibility would have been nurtured as a hoser. In college I steered away from Robertson Davies and opted fro Mailer.

But e-books cross all borders. Publish an e-book and you can have english-speaking fans downloading your work in Sweden. Borders don’t mean much anymore. What’s more, come up with a good story—a really good story—and I don’t think it matters much where it’s set. And it doesn’t have to be high art conquering us all, either. Think of all those plot-oriented books English Majors are programmed to hate: Angels and Demons, Da Vinci Code, The Girl Who Played with Fire etc.,… A bunch of unfamiliar names isn’t deterring anyone from enjoying the Stieg Larson books.

So write a good story. In my novel, the protagonist has identifiably American goals. He wants to be a movie star. He live in New York but wants to live in Hollywood. He idolizes movie stars you know. He has to be American.

I can’t take that story and artificially transplant it so he’s a kid from Moncton who wants to make it big in Toronto. Canadian stars typically head south anyway, make it big in the States and only then are they recognized as talents. We’re Canadian. It’s what we do. Canadian celebrities are the equivalent of D-list celebrities. We’re really proud of them once they prove themselves elsewhere. In fact, Canadians don’t have “celebrity” per se. We just say they are “known” or “recognizable” or “familiar but…” or “Who’s she?”

There are other issues for Canadian authors. If you write SF, chances are excellent you deal with an American publisher directly or have an agent based in the US. Yes, there are some SF Canadian agents and publishers, but relatively few. That’s unfortunate, especially since three major SF authors are Canadian: William Gibson, Robert J. Sawyer and Spider Robinson. (Of those three, Robinson, the man named heir-apparent to Heinlein, is under-appreciated these days because his work is funny SF.)

The main issue is about the numbers. The USA has a huge population and Canada has a small one. Focusing your work exclusively on the Canadian market while ignoring the potential south of the border takes a special kind of focus. To sell more of anything, you have to go where the people are. Bands and authors hit as many cities across the US as they can. For many, if they come to Canada at all, it’s Toronto and that’s it. That’s just how the math works. Canadian tour dates are an afterthought. Authors in the United States may think of Canada kindly, but they’re not getting rich off us.

Nationality isn’t important. Story and marketing is.

‘Life of Pi’ author Yann Martel makes Memphis stops (commercialappeal.com)
Writing Conferences: What we need (chazzwrites.wordpress.com)
Review: Yann Martel’s Life of Pi (fatbooks.org)
George Carlin – AutoTuned! (bigalblog.wordpress.com)
‘Fight Club’ – They Told Me Not To Talk About It… (nervymike.wordpress.com)

Filed under: Books, publishing, Writers, writing tips, Canada, Canadian, chuck palahniuk, List of Canadian writers, nationality and publishing, publishing, Robert J. Sawyer, Spider Robinson, United States, Yann Martel

03/10/2011 • 4:30 AM 9

Writers: TOP 10 Objections to Self-Publishing

Amazon Kindle e-book reader being held by my g...

Image via Wikipedia

As I read the growing number of success stories about self-published authors, I’ve seen some of the same worries and objections pop up again and again. Let’s deal with some.

Objection 1: As self-publishing grows, who will be the gatekeepers to keep out all the self-published books that are gonna suck?

My answer: Who keeps all the awful books off your bookshelf now? You do. The people you trust help you curate your book collection. This is really a question of taste and quantity. Your taste is still yours. The variable is going to be quantity as we’re crushed under the weight of so much bad prose. Sure, as an indie author, it will be hard to be heard above the promotional din. It’s hard to stand out anyway. However, through social media, word about good books spreads faster. Readers curate. Sounds more democratic than a small faceless editorial and sales cabal determining your destiny from an office you’ll never see, doesn’t it?

Objection 2: Without traditional publishers, authors will have to promote their own books.

My answer: Most of them do that themselves now. In fact, Margaret Atwood recently suggested that, since authors are their own publicity department, they should get a cut. For instance, one solution would be: If you, the author, spends $10,000 on promotion, you don’t have to earn that $10,000 again before you start getting royalties. (Many savvy authors—if they can afford it—plow their advance right back into promotion.)

Objection 3: E-readers are selling much faster in the United States than they are in Canada. Can Canadian authors make any money from e-books?

My answer: When you upload to Amazon, or any other platform, there aren’t any flags on your book that say “This one’s from Canada and this one’s from Tunisia so ignore this shit.” The web makes us citizens of the world so you can sell to the vast US market. The British and Australian markets are pretty big, too. We live in an Age of Wonders. Borders? We don’t need no stinkin’ borders!

There’s a deeper and much more serious answer to Objection 3, but I’ll save that for tomorrow’s post because it will sound unpatriotic.

Objection 4: But self-publishing is expensive.

My answer: It used to be but that’s old data. You can start selling e-books for just about nothing down. And many e-publishers are now looking at the paper version of their product as a nice add-on, not a necessity. Also, beware of companies that call themselves indie, but they’re really working on the vanity press business model and are out to bleed you dry.

Objection 5: Self-publishing sucks because it’s not professionally edited.

My answer: That one’s mostly true (though you could argue a lot of traditionally published books also suffer this malady as agents edit more and big houses edit less.)

I’ll take the middle road: Unedited work gets savaged in the marketplace. Few people will buy, word will get around and even fewer will buy the next book. It’s such a losing strategy that it won’t survive. A lack of editing is really the main complaint I hear about self-publishing. I think people who are serious about it will get it. I’m optimistic that as we hammer away at that complaint, writers will see they need some professional objective input.

(And yes, I’m an editor, too, so take that into consideration as you weigh the validity of my uncharacteristic optimism on this point.)

Objection 6: You can only be a financial success with the Big Six behind you.

My answer: Anyone, even if they have a steady-paying job, dreams of winning the lottery. (Me, too!) But getting recognized by an editor or agent and getting the full JK Rowling billion-dollar deal is like winning the lottery, but with lousier odds.

If you’re good at math, you see through this objection quickly. Most books—indie or trad—don’t sell. Most authors don’t live off their writing income. There are people who are making good passive income from selling books, short stories and novellas. They aren’t in the billionaire’s club though Amanda Hocking’s now a millionaire.

As a self-published author, you’re selling your books for prices which are the equivalent of couch cushion change, but you do get a much larger percentage of each sale. JA Konrath has done the math and proved you can hold on to your rights, work for yourself and make much more money than a traditionally published author. With time, the fallacy of this objection will sink into the consciousness.

Just like my daddy said, “You don’t get rich working for somebody else.” Just like my ma said, “The Man is out to get you. The only way to control your life is to seize the means of production.” Good old Black Panther Marxist Ma.

Objection 7: Self-publishing is for losers who wouldn’t get published traditionally.

My answer: Has been true. Less true as time passes. As more traditionally published authors jump to e-books (already happening) this impression will fade. (This ties into the curation worry in #1.) It also has to do with ego. As someone with a huge ego, I’ve struggled with this, too.

Objection 8: If I self-publish and wear all the hats, when will I have time to write?

My answer: When you find or make time, I guess. My rule is, I don’t indulge in social media when it interferes with writing time. Twitter is for winding down, breaks and commercials and when I feel like it. It’s not an obligation that cuts into otherwise productive time. I’m not unsympathetic to the problem, but it’s not a new one. As I said, most traditionally published authors are hustling their books on their own anyway, without assistance or input from their publishing house.

At least we have more leisure time than we’ve ever had in all of human history. You probably don’t have to chop wood, skin your own cow and make your own clothes and rope in addition to feeding yourself.

Maybe you need to stop making excuses and sit down to write. If you missed Tuesday’s kick-ass, light-your-hair-on-fire, no-excuses, take-no-prisoners, no-apologies self-evaluation rant, you better read it here. You don’t like me now? Ha! You are going to hate me when you read that!

Objection 9: If I go out into the world without an agent, who will plan my career?

My answer: Okay, I’ve phrased that objection facetiously and unfairly. A lot of agents do talk about planning their authors’ careers, though. Aside from encouraging you to write more books faster and write the best books you can, I’m dubious about advice that comes after those no-surprise generalities. (For more on that lunacy, read Dean Wesley Smith’s take on agents here.)

So what will you do when you’re looking for support? You’ll talk with your friends. You’ll reach out to your network of mentors and followers. You’ll get feedback from your beta readers. You’ll learn many of the things you need to know from fellow travelers, Google and YouTube.

Objection 10: But I hate reading on an e-reader!

My answer: You aren’t alone. Not everything is for everyone. But young consumers will take it for granted. That’s one of the reasons Young Adult e-reading is exploding. YA is also extremely popular because it’s the one genre where traditional publishing is open to cross-genre books; lots of adults read YA, too. Older people were the surprise e-reader buyers early on. As the price drops, more kids getting e-readers and the age ratio is shifting.

There is resistance to change. It’s not all bad and it’s not all good. Consider that, if you’re older, you remember someone who hated mandatory seat belts. Not an objection you hear much anymore. The New Normal is a dangerous concept, though I don’t think all the paranoia applies in this case.

Also, let’s get real: Many people who hate e-readers haven’t actually tried them yet. As I was reading mine, my 11-year-old stopped and touched the screen. “Oh!” she said. “I thought that was paper at first. I thought you had a piece of paper on top of your e-reader screen! Wow, that looks so real!”

Yup. I smiled.

These are my answers to objections to self-publishing.

Do you have some, too?

Publishing numbers & Atwood on us (chazzwrites.wordpress.com)
Writers : How “hands-on” do you want your agent to be? (chazzwrites.wordpress.com)
Who Wants To Be A (Kindle) Millionaire? (blogs.forbes.com)
Writers: DIY vs traditional publishing (chazzwrites.wordpress.com)
Writers: The Secret to Writing a Bestseller (chazzwrites.wordpress.com)
Writers: Why self-publishing sucks (and what you can do about it) (chazzwrites.wordpress.com)
The book is dead – long live the ebook (windsorstar.com)
E-Book Millionaire Gives Hope to Aspiring Writers (pacejmiller.wordpress.com)
Self Made Millionaire Authors (benpeek.livejournal.com)
Writers: Self-publishing resources (chazzwrites.wordpress.com)
Writers: Two mavericks to follow (plus a surprising original) (chazzwrites.wordpress.com)
Writers: Are you skeptical about self-publishing? (chazzwrites.wordpress.com)
Is There A Price For Self-Publishing? (advancedfictionwriting.com)

Filed under: authors, Books, DIY, Editing, publishing, Top Ten, Useful writing links, Writers, writing tips, E-book, Publish, self-publishing

03/08/2011 • 1:05 AM 10

George Carlin VIDEOS (plus Kick-ass Wake-up Call Questions for Writers on Getting It Done)

Giving up things that hurt you. Hm.

Pause for thought.

What are you keeping, as a writer, that’s hurting you? Are you addicted to distractions (Farmville, mindless surfing, TV, Sheen gossip, vegetating etc.,…)? Are you getting on with what you don’t want to do so you can accomplish what you do want? Are there people in your life who stand in the way of your dreams? I’ve been thinking about what to give up on. When I talk to that agent, is that really my ego and insecurity asking for validation? Do I need to be traditionally published anymore? Should I give up the magazine work and focus on books exclusively? What am I willing to give and give up to get what I want?

If you don’t have time to write, are you making time to write?

But you know it goes deeper than simple time management issues.

To get to edit your manuscript, you have to edit your life.

There are always things or people who stand in the way of you getting where you want to be. Do you surround yourself with cool people who support you and your writing efforts? Are there people in your life you can do without? Are there energy and time vampires who drain you? The uncool people subtract from your time with the cool ones. And too much distraction is leaking time away from your productivity. Are you your last priority?

Are you calling your martyrdom selflessness or are you just being lazy in the You department? If you allowed yourself to look a little more selfish, could you be the person your loved ones would love and respect more? If your friends don’t like you if you say no, are they your friends? If you take care of everyone else first, who takes care of you? If you became the person you want to be, the one who gets the big things done, couldn’t you take care of others better? Can’t the laundry wait? Can’t you teach the kids to do it?

If you say, “But everyone needs me all the time!” your martyrdom is empty narcissism. If they can’t do without you long enough for you to write, you aren’t letting them grow up. You’re hurting their potential for independence by insisting you’re so important. You’re not being imaginative enough in the How to Deal Department. You’re injecting yourself into the center of their lives, living through them instead of living your life. You aren’t just the sun of your roles. When you became Mommy, Daddy, Wife or Husband, you didn’t give away the right to be you. If someone else is always your focus, you’re dressing up your procrastination in noble rags. And that’s pathetic and needy. You’re a person, not a role. You’re a human, not a god or a robot.

You’re drowning in busywork and busy-ness, not your business. Writing was supposed to be your business. Remember?

What are you doing to yourself? Do you really need more information? Is more research really required or is that procrastination masquerading as productivity? They say time is money. Time is much more important than that. Time is life. But time is spent like money and once it’s gone, it’s gone.

But it’s not too late if you ask yourself the right questions and listen for the real answer.

Not the reflexive answer. I mean the real answer you don’t want to hear.

Is it really encouragement and more education you need? Or is a kick in the ass needed? A wake-up call? A reminder that you are acting like you are immortal? You’re not. A reminder that not only do actions have consequences, inaction has dire consequences, too. (The kind you regret most when you’re lying on coarse white sheets watching another faceless nurse change your IV bag through a fog.)

What did you want to do with your life? Why isn’t it done by now? What can you change today to move you in the right direction? Are you even pointed in the right direction? Is the day ahead going to be filled with joy and potential and stimulation and writing? Is it just another Tuesday on a treadmill to nowhere?

Are you taking care of yourself and pushing your goals forward?

If not, why not?

When did you decide to settle for less?

What made you think that was okay?

What will you do now that you’ve read this?

Your mind can be a sharp tool. Use it now, because your heart is a bomb.

The clock is ticking.

EXERCISE:

READ THE RANT AGAIN. THIS TIME MAKE IT PERSONAL. WHERE YOU SEE YOU, READ I.

EXAMPLE: IF I DON’T HAVE TIME TO WRITE, AM I MAKING TIME TO WRITE?

NOW READ IT ALOUD. AGAIN. YOU’LL GET YOUR ANSWERS.

YOU WON’T LIKE ALL OF THEM.

THE ANSWERS YOU LIKE LEAST ARE MOST TRUE.

Deconstructing Cynicism (celebs.icanhascheezburger.com)
The Democracy Delusion with George Carlin: Go Back to Bed America (iflizwerequeen.com)
George Carlin “Get off Your Ass And Change Things!” (vfxinsider.wordpress.com)
George Carlin – It’s a big club and you ain’t in it (tomhuff.wordpress.com)
George Carlin – AutoTuned! (bigalblog.wordpress.com)

Filed under: authors, Books, DIY, ebooks, getting it done, links, publishing, Rant, Writers, writing tips, accomplish, DIY. finding tiime to write, George Carlin, how do I find time to write?, Publish, self-publishing, Time Tracking, writer, writers write

03/04/2011 • 4:30 AM 4

Editing Part V: The Dead Grammar Rules Freedom Manifesto

William Shatner photographed by Jerry Avenaim

Image via Wikipedia

Certain grammar guidelines have changed. The classic one everyone knows is the death of the split infinitive rule. When I was a kid, some teachers were still strict grammarians on this point. I call that generational inertia (wherein one espouses the rules of the previous generation even though old rules no longer apply. Generational inertia shows up everywhere but has been particularly egregious in the publishing industry on the subject of digital books. (Chazz now dismounts from the usual hobby-horse and goes on with dead grammar rules. Ahem.)

William Shatner singlehandedly killed the split infinitive rule in the late 60s. At the opening of the original Star Trek, it was he who spoke the immortal split infinitive: “To boldly go where no man has gone before!” Patrick Stewart updated the phrase over the opening credits of Star Trek: The Next Generation with “To boldly go where no one has gone before!” The captains of the Enterprise changed things up from the proper, traditional (and stiff): “To go boldly.” After Star Trek, everyone eased up and some grammarians will still tell you that was an early sign of the decline of civilization.

Heavy-handed grammarians amuse me. Sometimes it seems like they fetishize the rules without respecting the point: effective communication. Usually traditional rules serve us well. However, rules shouldn’t get in the way of creativity just as expression shouldn’t get in the way of communication.

When expression doesn’t respect the reader’s right to clarity, it better be doing so intentionally for a particular effect. For instance, Michael Ondaatje or Maya Angelou write in complex skeins that require double espresso and a very quiet room to appreciate. Chuck Palahniuk wrote Pygmy in a distinctly ungrammatical style so you see America through the odd mind of a tiny immigrant assassin who speaks English as a second language. (That worked great for me though, usually, if something isn’t clear it’s probably because it sucks.)

I once heard an ancient grammarian with a very plummy British accent (it was as if Central Casting sent over The Stereotypical English Professor) complain about how fast and loose modern teenagers were with language. (He brought to mind Socrates whining about “these rotten kids today!”) Plummy Accent Guy spoke as if he wanted to freeze the language at about 1901. But languages are organic. (Look! I just started a sentence with a conjunction! My eighth-grade teacher would rap my knuckles with a ruler right about now.) Conventions change and grow and a mid-eighteenth century grammarian would be appalled at Plummy Accent Guy’s use of language. (They’d also cringe at my overuse of the parenthetical in this paragraph but to make a stale subject even vaguely entertaining, I think it works. So there.)

Just last summer I watched an author wring his hands over texting. “Text abbreviations dumb kids down,” he said. Yeah? I don’t think there’s any real scientific support for that view and he came off sounding stuffy and quaint. Kids are reading more than they ever did, they’re just doing so on screens. It’s not that they are losing the English language. It’s that they are learning another text-based language.

True, our literacy rates are awful. But that doesn’t mean drumming old grammatical rules into kids is the cure. Things change. School programs used to spend a lot of time teaching beautiful handwriting. If you’ve ever seen letters from before mid-last century, much of the handwriting looks so precise in its swoops and curls you’d be forgiven for thinking it was produced by a machine. However, elegant calligraphy is out. I loved it and my calligraphic pens made note-taking on intolerable subjects more interesting but it’s gone with the art of letter writing. Even simple handwriting isn’t a high priority in the educational system, either. The way the world has gone, teachers want to move on quickly to teaching kids how to type and cursive writing is a low priority. Your kids will be able to write with a pen but they’ll probably write by hand in block letters.

Lots of old assumptions are out. In fact, studies show that, despite what your momma told you, spelling isn’t all that important. Try this: Can you raed tihs snetnce? You can probalbly raed tihs amlst as fsat as you wold nromally raed. Studeis sohw taht as lnog as teh fisrt letr and teh lsat letr are corect, yuo wll unerdstnd my maening prefctly.

And people mistype ‘teh’ for ‘the’ so often,

it’s been suggested ‘teh’ should be an accepted alternative to ‘the.’

Remember, for a very long time there was no universal standard for spelling so Old English spelling was all over the map. There were no dictionaries so our greatest philosophers spelled idiosyncratically and phonetically. I’m not proposing we spell poorly. I’m saying ease up on rules whose basis is somewhat arbitrary.

The key for grammar rules now is: Respect the writer’s voice and the reader’s mind. And time. That’s right. Time. Serial commas are out (unless you need to keep them in particular sentences for clarity.) Serial commas often introduce pauses and separation where none are needed. If I write “apples, oranges, and plums,” I’m not letting the conjunction ‘and’ do its work. The reader doesn’t need the comma before the ‘and’ because the reader gets it.

Same with the conjunction ‘but’: “He chose the oranges and apples, but not the plums,” contains a pause after apples that you don’t need. You can do it if you want, but that’s a different point I’ll slap down five paragraphs hence. (Also, unless you’re trying to strike a particularly arch tone, stop using hence, boon and behooves. Old words die and new ones are born every day. Stop keeping outmoded words on life support as if they’re a regular part of the lexicon. It annoys your reader if it’s apparent you’re using a thesaurus or if you expect them to run to a dictionary every few paragraphs.)

Stop throwing fits over verbed nouns. I’ve heard stick-up-the-butt English majors grouse about ‘Google’ as a verb (still! Really!) And some still haven’t gotten over impact as a verb. Let this impact you: Nouns become verbs because books shouldn’t use humans. It’s supposed to be the other way around as long as we’re at the top of the food chain and until our robot overlords rise to sentience.

Also, lose the double space after the period. That’s a holdover from typing class when people used typewriters. There are far fewer typing teachers now. Instead computer programs like Mavis Beacon Teaches Typing do that job. (And now they call it keyboarding class, by the way, presumably because it’s not just about the letter and number keys anymore. It’s about keyboarding shortcuts and formatting.) From a design perspective, the double space after the period leads to what are called rivers in the text, distracting routes of white space that pull the eye down instead of across the text. (Okay, Elmore Leonard still uses a typewriter. If you’re Elmore Leonard, do what you want. If you’re Elmore Leonard, you can strangle a hobo on live TV and just about everyone would forgive you.)

Design questions sometimes factor into grammatical decisions. For instance, at Five Rivers — the publishing company for whom I’m Editor-at-large — we put spaces around em dashes (like I just did.) Lorina Stephens, the publisher, likes that look. It gives an airy look to the text on the page. For ’emphasis’ of a word, single quotes are used where I might otherwise switch to italic. As long as it’s consistent, makes sense and makes Lorina and her authors happy, it’s right. Internal consistency rules.

Have you read a book without quotation marks yet? I read Suckerpunch last year (a mostly excellent YA novel, nothing to do with the coming movie.) No quotation marks. I didn’t miss them a bit.

With the wave of more self-published books, you’re going to see more rules loosened. Grammar is supposed to be the servant, not the master. As the self-published author, you’ll set the rules you prefer for your book (hopefully with respect for the reader’s mind and time.) The Chicago Manual of Style is an excellent standard to fall back upon, as is AP Style. For language quirks and questions, you can’t go wrong with Eats, Shoots and Leaves and the Grammar Girl book and podcast.

Just remember that grammar rules are made by humans. They can and will change.

As long as your preferences are logical and consistent, you can get creative with your book in ways that would outrage strict grammarians.

BONUS:

Please don’t ask me to edit your book if all the dialogue is dialect. This is my personal preference and it has been done effectively, of course. However, it’s such a slow read, I have to say it just annoys the shit out of me and I am not up to that task!

Please do write a book in the second person. I loved Bright Lights, Big City and, with that notable exception (from the 80s!), traditional publishers have pretty much bricked ‘You’ away behind their arrogant Wall of Acceptability. If you’re indie, you can do it without asking for a gatekeeper’s permission.

Please do put your novellas and short stories up for sale. E-books are a perfect venue to do what paper can’t: bring back the power of short form fiction!

Take a risk. I recently edited a novel coming out from Five Rivers that combined a novel with a screenplay format. It works.

Suck on that, Mrs. Wilson!

And don’t be comin’ round heah wid no ruler or

Ah’ll rap y’knuckles so hard y’eyes’ll bleed.

Grammar Snobs Are Great Big Meanies – A Guide to Language for Fun and Spite (freeenglishmaterials.wordpress.com)
Eats, Shoots and Leaves by Lynne Truss: Book Review (condofire.com)
Grammar as a political act (collaborativewriter.wordpress.com)
Questions: On Information, Language and Talking Drums (waarisderadio.wordpress.com)
Semi-Literacy and the Century of Murder; Grammar, Grammarians and the Decline in Thought (j22r.wordpress.com)
Writers: How I edit (chazzwrites.wordpress.com)
Grammar schools do not improve social mobility for working-class (guardian.co.uk)

Filed under: authors, Books, DIY, ebooks, Editing, Editors, getting it done, grammar, publishing, Rant, rules of writing, Writers, writing tips, chuck palahniuk, English language, grammar, Grammar Girl, grammar rules, grammarians, Michael Ondaatje, Patrick Stewart, Star Trek: The Next Generation, William Shatner

03/02/2011 • 3:18 PM 3

Check out Sue Kenney’s My Camino

In case you missed this morning’s nice comment from the post below, here it is again! Woo-hoo, Sue! That sure made me feel good.
Chazz. Glad you got your very own copy of My Camino. Hiring you to do an edit/polish, I felt confident and relieved to have another chance to clean up the grammar, tenses and spelling mistakes before the next printing. Your expertise and attitude made this editing process exciting for me. My Camino came out in 2004 with a small publishing house and I was told it had ‘long legs’ (just like me) and might survive 3 years on the shelf . Who would have thought that 7 years later the book is a national best seller, there is a feature film adaptation in development (I co-wrote the script with Bruce Pirrie) and in the next couple of weeks it will be available on Podiobooks as an audio book. What a journey and now you are a part of it. Thank you so much. It was truly an honour to work with you. See you at the movie première in 2013! (fingers crossed)
Sue

Go to her website here: Sue Kenney

Author Profile: Sue Kenney & My Camino (chazzwrites.wordpress.com)
Writers Top Ten: Why blogging about publishing is important (chazzwrites.wordpress.com)
Writers: The Secret to Writing a Bestseller (chazzwrites.wordpress.com)
Writers: Top 10 of the 2010 Top 10 Chazz Writes posts (chazzwrites.wordpress.com)
It’s official: Despite my weight loss, I’m an Editor-at-large (chazzwrites.wordpress.com)

Filed under: Author profiles, authors, Books, Editing, Editors, publishing, Useful writing links, Audiobook, Camino, editing, My Camino, Publish, Sue Kenney, writer

03/02/2011 • 4:23 AM 2

Editing Part III: The joy of editing

The Chicago Manual of Style, 16th edition, 3rd...

I just received the gift of a book in the mail. I had already read this book but I was very pleased to receive it. In fact, I’d gone through this particular book in meticulous detail. The author signed the title page for me and graciously thanked me for my advice. The book in hand was a bonus for editing the work.

Editing is such picky work. I zip into and out of the on-line Chicago Manual of Style a lot. I tweak here and economize there. No matter the level of the edit, the key to good editing is asking the right questions.

Here’s a sample of the sorts of questions that run through my mind as I work:

Should that be 18th Century or Eighteenth century? Should I leave a quirky passage alone to keep the author’s voice or is the joke too much of a reach? Should I suggest new elements? Does the material make more sense if it is reorganized? Does this follow logically from that? Is that assertion a fact? Is that translation correct? What design elements could I suggest to make the book pop? What elements could I suggest that would convert a browser into a buyer? Is there an opportunity missed here? What marketing strategy could I suggest to make this a book with real long-tail potential? What’s missing? (That last one can take the work to a new level.)

In short, a good editor or proofreader will question everything.

An experienced editor will pick up on what’s on the page and what’s not there that’s hurting the book.

In the end, I let it go back to the author to decide which of my suggestions to act upon. When it’s done, the author’s name is on the front cover. I always say some variation of: “She’s still your baby. She’s healthy and you’ll recognize her. She wasn’t sick but she’s feeling even better now.” The reader will never know how much or how little I did. The job is to make the author look good. (And sell more books.)

And you know what? It’s fun. I’m not gleeful about it in the way I know some editors are. When I was in journalism school and when I worked for a daily newspaper, I ran into editors who were looking for stuff so they could catch you out. It was a game for them and they acted like it was the only way they could find to feel good about themselves. When they caught something—anything—writers got snarky remarks and not just a little passive aggressive indignation. Editors like that are sad and make me tired.

I find editing fun because it’s an intellectual challenge and the collaborative process makes the book better than it otherwise would have been. Higher quality editorial work translates to more authority to the author, more sales for the current book and more sales for the author’s next book. A helpful edit can morph an experiment that didn’t quite come together into a legacy book that will delight, distract, elevate, educate, provoke, redeem and earn for years to come.

A good edit will pay for itself.

And generally? No, an unedited book doesn’t stand a chance.

Writers: How I edit (chazzwrites.wordpress.com)
Edit Point: One another versus each other (chazzwrites.wordpress.com)
Editing Tips Part 1: Story bible (chazzwrites.wordpress.com)
The Chicago Manual of Style Online: Chicago-Style Citation Quick Guide (chicagomanualofstyle.org)
Editing Web Sites for Success: What Are the Rules and Where Are the Resources? (community.microsoftadvertising.com)
Writers: Finding an editor & should you be a joiner? (chazzwrites.wordpress.com)
Publishers have to weigh the value of clean copy (stevebuttry.wordpress.com)
Writers: Use a spill file as you edit (chazzwrites.wordpress.com)
Writers: Five editing tricks and tips (plus editing marks) (chazzwrites.wordpress.com)
What happened to that beautiful novel I wrote? (lindacassidylewis.com)

Filed under: authors, Books, ebooks, Editing, Editors, grammar, publishing, self-publishing, Writers, writing tips, Author, bad editing, book, Business, Chicago Manual of Style, Copy editing, developmental edit, edit, editing tips, editor, editorial help, writer, Writing & Editing, writing tips

03/01/2011 • 10:28 PM 1

Amanda Hocking VIDEO

Good for her.

Good for all of us.

Filed under: Author profiles, authors, Books, self-publishing, Writers

02/28/2011 • 4:16 AM 5

Editing Tips Part 1: Story bible

Image via Wikipedia

Since I’m in heavy edit mode this week, it’s going to be all about editing all week. You asked. I give. And so:

A story bible is a document beside your manuscript where you keep track of characters’ names, ages and details. It will keep you from screwing up too much and make your revision process go faster. It’s very frustrating, for instance, to go through a 450-page manuscript looking for the hero’s little sister’s eye color page by page. It’s the equivalent of losing a productive hour to search the house for a misplaced checkbook.

Keep your story bible close so you can add to it without interrupting your writing flow. I use a yellow legal pad though if you have the document on-screen you could search it, I suppose. (A bible that is too long goes unread but is an excellent device to keep you procrastinating instead of writing and revising.)

Even if you’re less of a planner (the seat-of-the-pants writer) it helps to have some minimal plan or a story bible so you can keep track of characters and key details. It’s better than losing a character along the way. It is embarrassing to write an entire novel and think you’re done only to have one of your beta readers ask, “What happened to Mrs. Haversham? Did she survive the fall to the bottom of the stairs on page 139? And what happened to the alien prostitute who got locked in the truck?”

It’s a huge problem in self-publishing because there aren’t teams of editors and proofreaders combing manuscripts. It happens with traditional publishers, too (and will increase becaus of cutbacks.) For instance, in Lucifer’s Hammer, an astronaut is described as short, but by the end of the book he’s standing tall and commanding in the bow of a boat. In Under the Dome, Stephen King introduces a supernatural element on the good guy’s side that is never explained and seems forgotten, as if the angels whispered in the hero’s ear and then got distracted and wandered away. (When you write a book that big, it’s easy to lose threads and drop stitches.)

As you edit, things will crop up and it will help you to add edit points to your bible. Edit points are policy issues. It saves you a lot of time, and money, to have a clean manuscript. Decide up front, are you basically going with the Chicago Manual of Style? AP Style? Canadian or American spelling? Serial commas or no?

By keeping a list, you’ll discover some idiosyncrasies will crop up and it may grow to a long list. For one instance, you might type gray when you mean to write grey. In your bible under a heading that reads Editing Points, write in bold GReY NOT GRaY!

When you think you’re done your manuscript, drag out your list of troublesome words.

Use the Search and Replace tool.

You thought you got them all.

You didn’t.

Nobody does.

Related Articles

Writers: How I edit (chazzwrites.wordpress.com)
Edit Point: One another versus each other (chazzwrites.wordpress.com)
Writers: Use a spill file as you edit (chazzwrites.wordpress.com)
Writers: How to tell when your manuscript is ready (chazzwrites.wordpress.com)
Writers: Five editing tricks and tips (plus editing marks) (chazzwrites.wordpress.com)

Filed under: Books, Editing, Editors, getting it done, publishing, Writers, writing tips, American English, Chicago Manual of Style, editing points, editing tips, editor, keeping characters straight, Manuscript, Stephen King, story bible

02/25/2011 • 7:49 AM 3

Writers: How to find an editor & should you be a joiner?

There isn’t much of a trick to finding an editor to help you prepare your book for marketing or publication. Ask around. Ask your friends and acquaintances and colleagues. The way to find a good editor is the same way you find a good plumber or chiropractor.

Ask your friends who they use. Then ask why they like them.

It may be a good fit or it may not, but when you ask, you have a place to start. Some editors belong to associations. That can lend credibility, but it’s not the only criterion. The editor you choose should also have experience with your type of project and you should get some sense of how they work so the relationship can work. For instance I use free edit samples so both author and editor get a sense of what needs to be done and how much it may cost.

Personally, I was a member of EAC (the Editor’s Association of Canada) way back when it was FEAC (the Freelance Editors Association of Canada.) I’m not currently a member. I don’t have anything against them, but I don’t feel they are active enough in my city to justify the membership fee. I had a lovely experience and I’m very proud of representing FEAC to the joint Freedom of Expression Committee. If I still lived in Toronto, I would definitely still be a member of EAC.

Here’s the thing about playing with others: I’ve been a member on the executive or on committees in various capacities in a couple of associations over the years. They say membership has its privileges. I’ve found that the more responsibility I took on, the less privileged I felt.

What I felt was the weight of obligation, time pressure and ultimately harangued by members. (For instance, as a chapter exec for the Ontario Massage Therapist Association, it was like trying to herd cats. When a few members were rude to me (after I did a lot of work on their behalf for free) that did it for me. As a volunteer, I wasn’t even being paid for the hassles that accrued. So I opted out.

I haven’t been much of a joiner ever since. So, the point of today’s post is, there are all kinds of associations for writers and editors out there. They are often run by a small board of volunteers who are a harried, unappreciated bunch. If you want to join, great. If you want to help, fantastic. But make sure you’re getting benefits and not just giving.

If you join a critique group, a writers’ union, an authors’ union, are you getting good information and useful connections and most important, is participation cutting into your writing time?

Book Information Centre Blues (chazzwrites.wordpress.com)
Opportunity knocks? Self-published writers could unionize (plus association links for writers) (chazzwrites.wordpress.com)
Here’s a good one on editors, authors & the dance we do (chazzwrites.wordpress.com)

Filed under: authors, Books, Editing, Editors, publishing, Writers, writing tips, Arts, Editors Association of Canada, Publish, writers, writers associations, Writers Resources

02/24/2011 • 11:17 PM 4

Bookstores: How sick are they?

Cover of Glass Houses

Recently I’ve seen what I call “backlash” articles* about the health of bookstores. You’ve probably seen them, too. In the wake of the Borders chain closings, some media are hitting back with counter-programming (either out of nostalgia or as a way to stand out.)

Their message is simple:

“We love bookstores and they aren’t all dying. Look at this tiny independent where the defiant owners are making a brave stand.”

I love brave stands. I’m also fond of truth and this is an obvious case where the part is not the whole. It reminds me of all the people who object to the digital revolution with, “Look at all those e-books with all their different platforms. It’s a mess so it won’t survive.” I dislike stupid stands.

Perhaps the problem is confirmation bias. They’re looking for reasons why what will happen, is happening, won’t happen. Whatever bump in the road they find they take gleefully to be an insurmountable obstacle. Actually, multiple platforms for e-books are a sign of health (assuming competition is good in that it keeps prices down and choices up) and of growth (as in growing pains due to rapid, unexpected expansion.) The technology to make us all publishers is developing.

“Developing” implies transition from stupid to primitive to flawed to workable to better to a higher state (and eventually to a new tech.) Instant/indie publishing is not going to be perfect all at once. Nothing is, though not long ago I heard a Luddite say he wasn’t going to buy a computer until the tech wasn’t “perfected.” Hahahaha! He was calling from the corner of Unreasonable Expectations Boulevard and Are You High? Avenue.)

There is a reductionist view with a subtext that categorizes anyone who predicts the demise of bookstores as a gloating goblin. I’m not gloating. I love bookstores. As (I’ve often pointed out, having milk delivered to the house was convenient, too.)

But I’m not saying bookstores will disappear completely. You’ll just pay more if you want the premium paper product. Heck, you already do that, but the price of old media will rise more. You can still buy turntables, for instance, but if you want to hear the scratches on Billy Joel‘s Glass Houses, you’re paying a very high price for a new needle to make that old pig spin.

Paper books are going to co-exist with e-books for some time…at least until consumers really get kicked in the teeth by manufacturing costs. Books get cheaper when produced in volume, but as digital sourcing rises, e-books don’t have to replace all paper books to make paper book production go from unattractive to cost-prohibitive.

There are too many variables and my brain is too small to say precisely when it will happen. I’m simply confident it will occur and one day, maybe even you will say, “Oh, look, darling! A bookstore! There isn’t a bookstore within 2 days’ drive of our house! Let’s go in and buy coffee and look at their tiny collection. How quaint!”

Yes, Virginia, 100 years from now there will still be paper books.

But you’ll be sewing and gluing the binding yourself.

*Chazz definition: A backlash article is an article written to assure the reader that the writer is the sane voice of wisdom when in fact they’re really just knee-jerk contrarians railing against all evidence. Like how the writers at Slate work from the premise, “We’ll hate on what everyone loves and make snide remarks at what everyone thought unassailable because we’re the sophisticated cool kids! Anything goes as long as it doesn’t agree with Salon.”