Backstory Blog

Posted in Writing craft

Eight common delusions of unknown writers

stack of books

There are lots of little lies we all tell ourselves regardless of our art, craft or career.  Sometimes we even share these little lies with others.  Over the past quarter of a century in the trenches of writing books, teaching writing and publishing, I’ve told myself any number of little lies – lies such as “the editor is wrong,” or “I could design a better cover than this one,” or “this first draft is pretty good.”  Sometimes all I need is a swift mental slap up the side of the head by someone whose literary opinion I trust to know that these truly are lies.  These days I notice that the more people who think of themselves as writers, the more the list of those little lies grows.

I belong to a number of very interesting online writers’ and authors’ groups, mainly on LinkedIn and a few on Facebook.  I had the misfortune the other day to read an excerpt posted by a young woman (at least she looks to be a young woman from her photo) of her new self-published book.  To say that it was abysmal would be an understatement.  Where do I begin?  Should I describe her sentence structure mistakes, her appalling lack of any grasp of writing transitions, her continual use of dangling participles to the point that I had no idea what many of her sentences were trying to say – or should I jump directly to the preposterous situation in which the heroine finds herself?  A modicum of research would have led this young writer to a more realistic and therefore more compelling story.  And this is the point at which I sigh and worry about the lack of quality control in self-published writing.  As I’ve said before…

the problem that faces writers and would- be writers in the 21st century is that it is actually possible to publish every bit of genius and garbage that we produce.  And it needs to be said that we all produce some garbage, but only a few produce works of genius.  Most of us inhabit that place somewhere between those two extremes in our usual writing

Maybe we’re not really lying to ourselves: perhaps many unknown wannabe writers are actually living in a dream world where certain delusions govern their behavior.  So, based on 25 years of experience and anecdotal observation, I offer you my eight common delusions of unknown writers:

  1. Talent is over rated. Anyone can be a successful writer. The sad truth is that although talent is not enough, it is necessary for success. And this is true of any field. However, along with that talent, you need to work hard, develop your craft and practice before you’re ready for prime time.
  2. grammar copyNo one cares about grammar. I beg to differ. Everyone cares about grammar; it’s just that some of them don’t know about it. First there are the grammar police readers who will think you a complete idiot if you demonstrate a lack of command of the language. The second group is those who note that you are making grammatical errors and will tell everyone who might otherwise read your book to stay away. Then there are those who wouldn’t know a grammatical error if it came up and bit them, but they do know when they don’t understand the meaning of something. It seems to me that you want to be able to convey a particular message or story and to do that accurately, we all need a shared understanding of the use of our language. Period. Get out the grammar book.
  3. I write better than most people. Can you hear me laughing? This is so untrue as to be hilarious. I have spent almost a quarter of a century teaching and marking university students’ writing – and these are students whose writing will form a very large part of their careers. I’ve seen many good writers who need just a bit of sharpening; but more often I’ve seen honor students who don’t know that their writing is a problem. As American writing guru William Zinsser says, “Most people have no idea how badly they write.” And if you don’t know who he is, stop reading and go immediately to Amazon and order his book On Writing Well. Then read it.
  4. Thousands of Twitter followers guarantee success. Now I’m grinding my teeth. If would-be writers spent as much time practicing their writing and having it edited by someone who knows what he or she is doing rather than amassing thousands of Twitter followers, success would be more likely. Most of our followers are not potential readers; rather they are other writers who are using Twitter for exactly the same reason you are.
  5. I don’t need an editor. Au contraire. Everyone needs an editor. My arguments over the years with editors notwithstanding, I am singularly unable to completely free my own work of errors, typographical and otherwise. I have never met a writer who didn’t need an editor.
  6. If my friends think my idea is great, so will everyone else. I just have one question for you: how did you get friends with such deep knowledge (backed up by data) about how your target readers will think at any given time? The rest of us would love to know. Your friends are your friends for a reason and if you hope that your book will garner more readers than your circle of friends, you’ll have to open your mind beyond that circle.
  7. I don’t need to plan my writing, I just need to write. Well, you do need to write, but this kind of unplanned writing is called “writing practice” or “journaling” and it isn’t for public consumption. If, however, you plan to publish, you need to think about the writing, as well as ‘do’ the writing. The amount of planning you need, however, is very variable. It depends on genre, process and your own writing style. For example, if you write non-fiction, it needs considerable research and a complete outline (fleshed out into a complete proposal if you’re planning a traditional publishing route) before you even write word. Even fiction can benefit – and especially genres like historical fiction that follow a time-line and need extensively researched background. Plotting for mysteries and thrillers also helps the writing process. That said, once the writing begins, it need not stick to the outline!
  8. I don’t have time to read. If you don’t have time to read, then you don’t have time to write, and you shouldn’t. Writers are readers. They read in their own writing genre. They cross-read. They read to do research. They read to flesh out or even come up with ideas. They read to improve their own writing. They read to get to know the competition. They read to get to know what their target readers like. They read to see what sells. They read because they love language and books are important to them.

There you have them.  My eight delusions.  Now I’m going to go back to my incomplete manuscript and convince myself that indeed, I do need and editor.  And soon.

Posted in Social Media

Independent or co-dependent? Writers & other strangers

network 2The indie music scene?  Now that’s an image most of us can get our heads around.  As Catherine Andrews wrote for CNN online a few years ago, “If it’s cool, creative, and different, it’s indie…”[1] I don’t know about you, but when I think about indie publishing, I don’t really get the same vibe – but I’d really like to. Let’s start with the word itself: What, precisely, does the word independent mean?

I like to start with a dictionary.  According to the Oxford English Dictionary online, independent means the following:  “Free from outside control; not subject to another’s authority.”[2]  That sounds just about right.  The dictionary also suggests that the word means “…not depending on another for livelihood or subsistence,” and my personal favorite, “…capable of thinking or acting for oneself.”

So indie writers should be self-sufficient, self-supporting and autonomous.  They should also be unconstrained by the thinking of others.  They do their own thing.  So, is that really true?

I’ve spend a bit more time than usual lately on my social networks – more than I should because that cuts into writing time (and I plan to stop that immediately), but I have noticed an important phenomenon as I connect with so-called writers’ communities online.  Writers are by and large more connected with other writers than they are with mentors or readers.  And it has puzzled me quite a bit that I am sometimes followed on Twitter by tweeters who have thousands of followers.  An illustration…

Just the other day I one of my Twitter notifications indicated that I had several new followers.  I don’t know what other people do, but I usually click on them to see who they are.  My suspicion is that others either (a) automatically follow those who follow them – a questionable exercise depending on your objective for being on Twitter at all; or (b) try to figure out if the new follower could be useful to them.  In any case, this particular new follower boasts some 81,000 followers!  Wow!  This individual must have a lot to offer.  Well, not so much, I found by reading his tweets.  And to make matters worse, he follows 75,000 people or organizations! Why in the world is he following me?  Even if I had something useful that he might be interested in, he would never, NEVER see it among his thousands of tweets that would come to him on a daily basis.  I might be ridiculously naïve when it comes to the power of social media – but I don’t think so.

I’m as aware as the next person that there is a lot of power in the viral tweet, but the truth is that only a miniscule number of tweets garner the kind of publicity that most writers are looking for.

I took some time today to explore the research on what makes social media message go viral.  It appears that no one has yet published a good, well-constructed study on the reasons for why a tweet goes viral, but there have been some studies on the attributes of videos that go viral, although the results are vague to say the least.  One American study I read suggested that there are two distinct factors that might affect the ‘virality’ of a video message: the emotional content of the video and the source. This study provided some evidence that videos that were disgusting, angry or funny might garner more sharing, but the results are a bit fuzzy in my view.[3]  So does that mean that if your tweets are angry, funny or disgusting they are more likely to be retweeted and go viral.  Maybe, but unless these are genuine characteristics of what you really want others to know about you and your work, the results are not likely to be what you want to achieve.

So, if you are seeking a large following on a social media platform like Twitter, are you truly independent and unconstrained by the thinking of others?  Or do others’ perspectives and actions make you a lemming?

There is a big difference between independent and co-dependent which is how I see many of the relationships between and among writers on social networking platforms like Twitter and Facebook (to a lesser extent on LinkedIn but it’s only a matter of time there.  Co-dependency means being controlled or manipulated by another – and in the usual sense of the word that other person has some kind of pathological condition including narcissism.  Hmm…not at all like indie, isn’t it?  But does seem to define many of the online relationships in writers’ communities in my view.

Is it the case that most of us only use certain social networking sites because of what we think we can get from them?  What would happen if we took a different view?  Ask not what a social network can do for me, but what I can do for this social network?  Wouldn’t that change a lot of those me-tweets?  Then maybe we’d all actually get something out of it anyway!

Perhaps being a cool, indie writer means that you have to be the one asking what you can do for your social networks, rather than the other way around.  I’m actually going to try this myself – from now on.

twitter clip

 

[1] http://www.cnn.com/2006/SHOWBIZ/Music/09/19/indie.overview/

[2] http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/independent?q=independent

[3] Guadagno, R. E., Rempala, D. M., Murphy, S., & Okdie, B. M. (2013). What makes a video go viral? An analysis of emotional contagion and Internet memes. Computers In Human Behavior, 29(6), 2312-2319. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2013.04.016

Posted in Book publishers, Writing books

What writers need to know about literary piracy and copyright infringement in the digital age

pirateI was surfing the net the other day and happened upon one of my books – I mean that in the truest sense.  I actually happened upon one of my books – in its entirety, cover scan included, every page in a PDF file posted for all to access.  I immediately copied the URL and emailed my publisher in London.  The rights editor got back to me very quickly indicating that this “piracy” would be uploaded to their “infringement portal” and that a take-down notice would be sent immediately.

Unbeknownst to me, my publisher (and presumably others) has this portal that identifies sites like this that pirate copyrighted material, and they are proliferating as we speak.  This one was a new one to them, not already identified (BTW it was www.gendocs.ru – if you have a book out there, you might want to check it).   So I started to do a little research about the current state of online piracy.

Remember when the music industry clamped down and put Napster out of business?  It seems that some of the same activities have been happening in the literary world, but these sites continue to proliferate.  Here are the things that I learned from doing a bit of research.

  1. Your book may well be pirated.
  2. Even if your book is available only in hard copy, it may still be pirated. Literary pirates can procure book-scanning software easily. The book that I stumbled on is available also as an eBook, but this looked like a scan of the hard copy.
  3. There has been an exponential growth in online literary piracy since 2009.
  4. Although there is now a well-established anti-literary-piracy movement on the part of publishers, as fast as one site is shut down, another one pops up.
  5. Piracy sites may have no ethical concerns about ‘stealing’ your book, but evidently they are very concerned about being sued. This means that when approached to cease and desist, they usually do, taking down the identified book.
  6. If you are published by a traditional publisher, they will have an on-going anti-piracy effort (something you should probably ask them about – I didn’t), although some new sites get by as in the case where I identified a previously unknown one for my publisher.
  7. If you are self-published, you can search for your book regularly or better yet set up an on-going Google search for it. If it pops up on a pirate site, you can prepare and send your own take-down letter by identifying the site’s “copyright officer.”

It always saddens me that people think there is something different about stealing intellectual property – music, writing, choreography – than in stealing your cell phone, your car, your wallet.  But there is no difference.  I like to protect my work, and I hope you think enough of your own work to protect it too.