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

The Quill & Quire reports (at the link) that TWUC will vote in June whether they should allow self-published authors into the treehouse. I’ve attended one of these meetings and, based on what I saw, I doubt the old guard will go for it. Many traditionally published authors take great pride in being plucked from the slush pile or being among the chosen. Getting picked is an accomplishment and a testament to their patience. (I won’t say hard work because every self-published author I know works just as hard or harder. We’re all working hard and wearing all the hats is an accomplishment, too, so no whining.)

In the meeting I attended a few years ago, there was great resistance to…how shall I put this nicely? The future. (Arguments that an ebook isn’t a "real" book make me sleepy.) However, that was a few years ago and more traditionally published authors are going hybrid or opting for self-publishing exclusively. Maybe the membership of The Writers’ Union of Canada will vote to include the self-published. It would be in their interest to do so.

One thing the leadership recognized when I spoke to a leader or two was this: Some may not want to bend to history’s turns, but it’s math that makes the better choice. Accept self-published authors into your union and you have a much bigger union with more money and therefore more clout, more services and worth. 

If hubris and appeals to emotion and tradition carry the day, self-published authors won’t be welcomed into the union in June. If it’s a smart business decision, we’ll be welcomed in the club and TWUC will be more relevant to what’s happening in the industry. (Hint: But that’s not the way to bet.)

If TWUC doesn’t let self-published authors in, one of these days some firebrand will get the notion into his or her head that they could organize a union of writers who only accept the self-published. That would be a much bigger and more powerful union that could offer some peachy benefits (e.g.  insurance breaks, perks, discounts and exposure and making TWUC irrelevant.) Hm. That’s a whole quesadilla of thought to chew on, isn’t it? 

(Thanks to my friend Kim for the tip! Next time you’re here, the first round is on me. Bring the family for trampolining and barbeque.~ Chazz)

This is an interesting survey from Smashwords. For instance, shorter titles have a slight advantage and "the top bestselling Smashwords books averaged 115,000 words"? Cool to know. Learn at the link and see what you think.

~ Chazz

Have you noticed a decrease in blog traffic, too? When I read this post from Andra Watkins’ blog (“The Accidental Cootchie Mama”, possibly the best blog name ever), I thought: Oh. So that explains the dip in traffic I’ve noticed in the last while. If you’ve noticed a dip, too, Andra explains at the link why that is and what to do about it.

Good news: It’s not necessarily because you’re not awesome. Vast dark forces do battle and you are a casual casualty of their secret cyber-war. Check out Google’s plans for world domination and how it affects you at the link.

Also to do: Thank Ms. Watkins for the analysis and subscribe to The Accidental Cootchie Mama.

I think the most common problems with openings in any genre are false starts and a fascination with the weather worthy of a meteorologist with OCD. It’s that sort of throat clearing that appears in a lot of manuscripts and annual Christmas newsletters. I like to start much closer to the action than that, no matter the genre or from whom the Christmas newsletter is sent.

On the other hand, some people go from tepid to hostile about prologues. They just don’t like them. Personally, I don’t mind prologues and epilogues or flashbacks at all, as long as they’re well-written, of course. I find these devices only fail when they don’t propel the action and deepen our understanding of character. (Full disclosure: There are a few flashbacks in Bigger Than Jesus and Higher Than Jesus, but I got praise for them and no reviewers complained they threw up in their mouths.) So there’s that.

~ Chazz

ADDENDUM:  Hey, I just realized something. This post at Writer Unboxed (subscribe there!) has 469 comments on it (at press time here at Ex Parte Press). It’s nice that people are eating up all this awesome advice. However, more than one commenter said they were guilty of a few of the sins. Um…not to be a curmudgeon, but you can commit these “sins” and still succeed. It can be a handicap, yes, but what sinks one manuscript can soar in another. These issues are not merely textual. They’re also contextual. Look, I’ve written two books of advice about writing and publishing (so far), but I have to point out to new writers again: Please don’t take all writing advice as gospel. If you’re a writer, you’re a rebel. Don’t deny your nature.

Sometimes writers break rules. I know the gurus say you have to know the rules before you can break them, but if the result is good, why exactly does that matter? Take advice as a guideline, not as commandments that substitute someone else’s judgment for your own. If we wanted to follow rules, why be a writer at all? Trust your compass. Listen to your voice. Just because someone else made an obsession with plants and weather an egregious read doesn’t mean you can’t make it work. (Some of Annie Proulx’s work comes across as a botany lesson and she’s done mighty fine.) A kiss and a warning.