The Writing Life

I'm reading James Scott Bell's The Art of War for Writers. I highly recommend the book. In Part 1: Reconnaissance - Section 5, Mr. Bell addresses the reality of a career in writing with this point:

Career Fiction Writers Must Be Aware of What a Successful Writing Life is Like.

We've all heard of "overnight" successes in the writing world. Brandon Sanders, and J.K. Rowling are often cited as examples of "overnight" success. J.K. Rowling has spoken about the numerous rejections she received before she sold the first Harry Potter book. Brandon Sanderson's "first" novel was the fourth he'd written. Brandon's post-college job was as a night clerk in a hotel, specifically so he could write. Both of these writers worked for years before they became "overnight" successes.

The average advance for a first novel from a traditional publisher is about $8,000. E-publishers often don't pay advances but give you a greater percentage of sale revenues. I'm going to use $6,000 for the advance because it makes my math easy. You don't get that $6,000 in a lump sum. You'll get $2,000 when you sign, another $2,000 when you turn in the finished manuscript, and the final $2,000 "on publication." It's likely to take 2-3 years before you get the full $6,000. But wait, you forgot someone. You probably didn't get the book contract without an agent. Your agent's going to take a percentage of the advance. After all, that's how she gets paid.

"Okay," you say. "The advance isn't great. An extra $2,00 a year over three years isn't enough to let me quit my day job. So, I'll retire on the royalties."

There's a few hitches here too. If you know the writing market, you know it takes time for a book to "earn out," meaning generate enough revenues of offset the advance and allow for the payment of royalties. Even when you "earn out" the house will keep your payment for up to 6 months against any returns.

I think in some ways it the realization that I'm still going to work at a day job for a long time while working on a writing career was easier for me since my base salary at the day job is significant. Even assuming an $6,000 advance from a traditional publisher, it would take a lot of new books under contracts to replace my day job's income. The numbers work a little better with an e-publisher since I'll get a percentage on each sale. But, keep in mind that on a $5.99 e-book, it takes a lot of sales to reach the $8,000 mark.

So, what's that mean?

Write more.

The best way to make a reasonable living off royalties, other than the break away novel, is to have a lot of books in print. Many successful writers have their names on over 100 books. Sometimes they wrote them, some were collaborations, and some were anthologies they edited. The only secret to "overnight success" is to work, and work hard, for years.

If you think this is bad news, sorry, but someone had to say it. For me, it gives me hope that I too can be an "overnight success."

I have a cover for Paths Less Traveled

Over the weekend, my cover for Paths Less Traveled, which releases on May 11, 2012, was finalized. Thank you Kelly Shorten and Musa Publishing - http://musapublishing.com - for the amazing job.

So, how did we get here?

Musa writers are involved in all aspects of the publishing procees. We fill out a questionairre on cover design issues, including time period, setting, architectural details, mood of the story, elements I wanted for the cover, elements I didn't want, and any other suggestions I had for the cover art. I suspect the only way I could have had more input into the process would be to self-publish.

In my response I attached a photograph of the mountain I'd been using as the base template for the castle in the Lightning Strikes story. This photo --------------->.

The castle in the top right corner of my cover is the same shape as my mountain. Kelly then stylized it to fill in the details. The end result was a distinctive castle, and therefore, cover.

Because Paths is a short story collection my cover suggestion was "a pathway leading from field and castle setting into glass and metal city. The pathway changes over the route from dirt, to stone, to pavement to quicksilver sheets." My idea probably would have been too cluttered for a cover, but that's why I'm not the artist.

Anyway, Kelly then took my input and came up with a draft for the cover. I had the opportunity to comment on it and request changes. I loved the design and approved it as soon as I saw it.

So, I think the cover is pretty darned wonderful. What do you think? Please comment and let me know.

Guest Post - Celina Summers - Different Publishing Routes

As few as five years ago there was only one route to fiction novel publication- traditional publishing. Now writers are presented a host of publishing options. I've been lucky enough to have stories under contract with Musa Publishing http://www.musapublishing.com. I asked Celina Summers, one of Musa's founders and chief editor (i.e. all around Musa Goddess) what she thought the differences, and pros and cons between traditional publishing, e-publishing and self-publishing Here's what she said:

It's a great thing to be able to tell your family and friends that you're published. After all, you've achieved a lifetime goal. Millions of people have written stories or novels without any of them seeing the light of day. But in the last couple of decades, the publishing industry has changed significantly. With the onset of digital publishing, self-publishing—once an outlet only the financially well-endowed could consider—took off. According to The Bookseller (http://www.thebookseller.com/news/publishing-proliferates-thanks-pod-and-digital.html): Nielsen 2010 book output figures show that 151,969 new titles were published in 2010, a leap of 14% on the output number given this time last year. The figure is derived from the number of ISBNs Nielsen issues over the year. However, the 2009 figure, of 133,000, has since been increased to 157,039 because of the late addition of digital titles in that year, a factor that may also further increase the 2010 figure. It means that year-on-year book production fell 3.2%, though the trend shows that output has soared: since 2008 it is up 13%, and since 2001, the market has risen by close to 40%.


Once upon a time, there was one way to get published. You wrote your novel, typed it up, sent it to an agent, the agent loved it and submitted it to a traditional print publisher, who bought it and then published it. But now, things are a lot more complicated. E-publishing has taken off, with thousands of young publishing houses releasing digital-only content. At the same time, self-publishing has exploded, with authors publishing their own books directly to the reader. And of course, lurking around the sewers of the industry, vanity presses are always eager to prey upon the uninformed author.

But these four terms are not synonymous. There's a lot of difference between traditional publishing, electronic publishing, and self-publishing. (And vanity publishing is, at its heart, a scam) Where this becomes a problem is when the writer announces "I'm published!" but doesn't distinguish between the different types of publishing. Because unless your self-published book sells millions of copies, chances are that an agent or book industry exec isn't going to be interested in that publishing credit—or a bookstore. Regardless of what folks might think, there is a big difference between landing a multiple book deal with Random House and self-publishing a book through Lulu. So in order to avoid trouble down the line, it's important for an author to self-represent correctly—and, more importantly, to use the different avenues in publishing wisely, to build a foundation for a writing career.

So, let's take a look at each term separately.

Traditional Publishing—Print. To most writers, this means New York. These are books that are represented by agents (most likely) and subsequently published by a major house—known as the Big Six—and any of their imprints. These books are released in paperback. Some come out in hardback. These books (usually) are where the legitimate bestseller lists originate. The author receives an advance for her book(s), and her titles are found in brick and mortar bookstores. In the past couple of years, the Big Six have jumped on board and begun to digitally publish their titles—at much higher prices and a much smaller royalty rate.

Let me interject that there are hundreds of legitimate, reputable, outstanding small presses out there—independent publishers that have nothing to do with New York or the Big Six. Indie presses are a fantastic place for a young writer to start out, especially genre writers. I'm going to put indie publishers under the traditional publisher title because they, too, publish primarily in print.

E-publishing—These publishing houses are digital first. They publish e-books primarily, although some are moving into POD(print on demand) availability for their books. An e-publisher is a genuine small house, following the same submissions, acquisitions, and editing processes as traditional publishing. Five years ago, e-publishing wasn't considered a legitimate publishing credit by agents and New York publishers. That mindset is changing as the popularity of digital books increases.

Self-publishing—This is when a writer circumvents the publishing industry and releases his work himself. That also means the writer is completely responsible for making sure the book goes through all the proper processes—editing, typesetting, cover art, formatting, uploading, publicity and marketing. Unfortunately many self-published authors don't do this. They release the book and then wait for the millions of dollars to roll in, which, unfortunately, rarely happens. For every self-published author like Amanda Hocking, there are tens of thousands of authors who never sell more than ten copies of their book.

Vanity publishing—Where an author pays to be published. Any time a publisher (or agent) asks for money up front, run away. Run fast. Yog's law: money flows TO the author.

In the past six months, I can't tell you how many people have told me their book was e-published, attempting to hoodwink me into thinking that another publisher had signed their book, put it through the processes, and released the book—only to find out later that in fact, the writer had self-published. (And no, making up a publishing company that only publishes one author's work really doesn't fool a publisher. If you're self-published, just admit it.) Some come to me only when their book didn't make money and they want to try again. Usually, those writers don't know why. I do know why.

You see—there's a reason for the 'gatekeepers' in publishing. The agents, the slushpile readers, the acquisitions assistants all have the same goal in mind: they are looking for publishable books. Books that are strong technically, that are engaging and entertaining. In other words, books that people want to read. When I am reading through submissions, I might ask to see one manuscript out of fifty. That's not because the stories are bad, but because the story is not publishable in its current condition. Occasionally, however, I will be tempted to put more work into a manuscript because of the writer's publishing history—her resume. And this is where the correct publishing types really makes a difference.

In publishing, as in any profession, people need to be accurate and honest about how they present themselves to others. If a writer's book was self-published, it does no good for that writer to claim they were e-published. Sure, the author electronically published his book, but the book never went through any kind of evaluation, most probably wasn't edited (because many self-published authors wish to retain all creative control over their book) and more than likely didn't sell more than a hundred copies. If that book was e-published, to me that means that the author is familiar with the publication process—namely editing. And that right there predisposes me to look upon that submission more favorably, because I know that I won't be having to drag an unwilling writer through the process that will make that particular book better.

And of course, once you start talking traditional publishing, unless your books have sold hundreds of thousands of copies, it doesn't matter very much if you're e-published or self-published or published-by-your-Uncle-Vinnie-in-Des Moines published. To a traditional publisher, it might as well be your first book. However, among the gatekeepers to traditional publishing, e-publishing is no longer considered the red-headed stepchild of publishing. I
asked an agents' panel three years ago if they considered e-publishing a legitimate publishing credit. About 70% said yes.

Since we opened Musa Publishing, agents are now submitting to us.

It makes sense, after all. With e-publishing's higher royalties, lower overhead and international availability thanks to e-tailers like Amazon, authors and agents are intrigued by the possible financial rewards of a popular e-published success. Publishers like Musa Publishing are able to create a high quality product that readers enjoy, at a price readers appreciate. A lot of writers are making the same decision I made too—to begin my writing career in e-publishing. I could make better, immediate money while learning my craft and improving my work.

And the readers are reaping the benefits, as anyone with a fully stocked Nook or Kindle will tell you.

So there are sizable differences in the different types of publishing currently available, and it behooves the author to self-identify correctly. As a writer, it's important to understand the differences—and to use those differences wisely as you plot out your career.

We've Come A Long Way, Baby.

I was looking through my basement bookcase for a research book I knew was there. I didn't find it, but I did find Writing in General and the Short Story in Particular by Rust Hills ("WIGSSIP"), which book was one of my husband's college textbooks (although he denies it).

Mr. Hills was the fiction editor at Esquire for many years and wrote The Memoirs of a Fussy Man. Mr. Hills died in 2008 at the age of 82. The original copyright for WIGSSIP is 1977, and the revised edition I have was copyrighted in 1987. Amazon reports a 2000 revision as well.

Mr. Hill didn't write short stories, but he edited them for Esquire for 20 years before WIGSSIP was first published. A lot of what he says in it still holds true. But what I found particularly interesting was his take on genre fiction or "slick fiction." He spends almost 4 pages comparing "slick fiction" with "quality fiction."

In comparing the two forms, Mr. Hill states:

"Slick fiction or "magazine" or "formula" fiction was always distinguished from "quality" fiction or "serious" fiction - that is, literary fiction. The distinction to be made between them is that slick fiction - whether of the "romance" sort or of the "hard-boiled" sort - always partakes of the daydream, while quality fiction - as Jung said of Art - always partakes of the night dream. "

Mr. Rust points to the rise of television as the fall of genre fiction since they both serve as "entertainment." He states that "slick fiction is now not much written, at least in short story form," and applauds its downfall. While that statement may have been true in the late 1970s or even late 1980s, it's not true today.

Duotrope http://duotrope.com lists over 4,100 publishers in its searchable database. For those who haven't searched it Duotrope allows a writer to search the market for publishers who handle the same type of stories. You search by first entering a "genre". "Literary" isn't a genre. Instead it's "style" or sub-classification. When I search "general" genre and "literary" style, I get approximately 1,300 hits - approximately 1/3 of the possible publishers. Why?

Genre fiction accounts for the majority of the market. When I see I a story labeled "literary" come over the transom at Flash Fiction, I groan a little. Literary, these days, is often synonymous with purple prose and overwrought stories. Good literary works are becoming harder to find. Romance, the genre most maligned by Mr. Hill, seems to be the leader in sales.

What's this all mean?

As a genre writer, I have to admit I cheer a little that genre fiction has such a strangle hold on the market. It could be that Mr. Hill was right and television has fundamentally altered the American perception of "good" writing. It might be that he was wrong too. Whether the story is "literary", "genre" or "slick", most readers report they read for entertainment.

Writing has changed since the rise of Amazon. Well, not so much the writing, but our ability to market our work. Genre labeling doesn't consign you to fame or obscurity. I can tag my work with as many genres as apply, and more readers than every can find it. Genre stories, not literary ones, are the norm.

There's no doubt, writers and readers have come a long way, and that evolution isn't likely to stop any time soon.