Should Unpublished Writers Blog (or Social Network)
It seems somewhat strange that I am writing about and answering this question when I myself am an unpublished author (although, technically I have been published, but I refuse to count it because the editors cut the last four pages off of my story without asking, which is unacceptable to me). Published and unpublished authors differ in opinion on this issue, and perhaps for good reasons. The way we do publishing as writers is far different from the way it was done a decade ago. Social media has played a particularly crucial role in promoting authors and ideas. While it’s likely that social media will take control of all aspects of marketing and promotion in the near future, currently we live in a time where it is just as possible to succeed without an active Internet presence as it is to succeed with an active Internet presence. But should unpublished authors blog or network? Sure, why not? There’s no reason not to. Blogging is a fairly personal thing, even if you’re talking about subjects that aren’t necessarily “personal” in nature (such as this blog, which, for the most part, steers clear of my personal life and focuses, more or less, on external subjects; having a passionate interest in these subjects makes them somewhat personal). There’s no reason not to blog if you want to do it. If you have something to say, say it; it shouldn’t matter whether you’re an unpublished author or not–if you want to do it, do it. Social networking is somewhat of a different beast, though. While blogging can be done as an unintentional way of promoting yourself (since you can blog about taking care of hamsters and never mention your writing and still develop and audience), social networking tends to have a separate purpose. How you use social networks is a delicate process. I would argue that unpublished writers should be careful what they do with social networking; it’s fairly easy to damage your reputation by being annoying with promoting your writing. Editors and publishers do notice when someone has flooded the market with amateur nonsense, and while most of them won’t admit to carrying a “blacklist,” they do remember names and the experiences attached to them. Unpublished writers should use social networking less as a promotional tool and more as a way to legitimately meet new people. Don’t treat it as a “foot in the door” type service, because that’s a surefire way of getting yourself into trouble. The arguments against unpublished authors blogging and social networking seem to revolve around issues of time: you should be spending that time writing. While I agree, I also understand that assuming that all writers write the same–both in quality and quantity–is an unfortunately faulty way of thinking. No two writers are the same. Some writers are capable of writing for hours and hours, and others are not. For those that find themselves in a non-fiction-writing mood, or at least a non-writing mood, blogging or communicating with people online can be a welcome reprieve. And, of course, never do something if you don’t want to. If blogging or social networking isn’t your thing, then don’t do it. While some publishers place importance on these elements, they are far from absolutely necessary. Now I open the discussion to all of you. Do you think unpublished writers should blog or social network? Why or why not?
Thoughts On Taking Criticism
These last few days have put a lot of interesting thoughts into my head, particularly on the issue of how to take criticism. I consider this to be a writer’s best skill aside from talent, because how you react to what others say about you or your writing will have an influence on how you are perceived by others, and will say a lot about who you are as a writer. Take my recent discussion and criticism of self-publishing and the dozens of responses there (some of which have been removed by one of the authors, which I have saved primarily because they were interesting, particularly in this discussion here). What is interesting about that particular post are the kinds of reactions taken against what I wrote: some were relatively calm and collected and were more interested in debating the issue, some were vehemently opposed, so much so as to make personal attacks, and then there were some who seemed to be unclear on how they wanted to react, deleting posts or generally making rude comments and then attempting more rational discussions elsewhere (and these are general observations, not hints at particular individuals) There is only one individual who has had any useful impact on me in this discussion. This person has acted in a way that I think should be a model for people in that particular industry (with some minor exceptions, which are mostly irrelevant). Instead of attacking me personally for my criticisms of an industry s/he ardently supports, s/he debated me on it, seemingly attempting to get at the crux of the issue. To be fair, I find myself agreeing very much with this individual on many points, and disagreeing with her/him on others, and s/he seems more like the kind of person that could change my mind on the issue of self-publishing than many of the others that have been a part of the discussion. Why? The mostly level-headed approach and the ability to tackle the issue without resorting to reducing discussions to the I’m-high-and-mighty form, or feeling the need to make unsubstantiated claims of validation, etc. And this is interesting, because it says a lot about how this individual was able to take the criticism, and how writers should take criticism in general. The reality is that no matter what kind of writer you are, you are going to get criticized. Even great writers get hit with negative comments. They either shrug them off, get irritated and blast the critic, or let it consume them from the inside out. And published, successful writers have exhibited all of those reactions; some of them get away with the more nasty comments, and others don’t. Those that react negatively, who attack or let criticism consume them, are those who probably shouldn’t be attempting to write publicly in the first place. It hints at an insecurity, a deep fissure within the self that suggests how mutable an individual can be in the face of a negative comment. And reactions do have weight on how one is perceived. I think, here, of the Cole A. Adams story, in which an author got so upset about being criticized that he basically goaded the critic into committing suicide. Obviously that hasn’t happened here, but there certainly have been some bitter, angry individuals who have seen fit to make personal attacks instead of either ignoring the criticism or tackling it in a more level-headed manner. And like Mr. Adams, these aren’t people I could see myself ever working with, even if I were more interested in the industry they support. But I don’t suspect most of them care about that, much like Mr. Adams probably doesn’t care that a lot of people no longer want to work with him (or maybe he does). The point is that criticism doesn’t go away because you get upset about it; it remains, always. But if you can’t take the criticism, why be in a particular industry at all, whether it be music, acting, or writing? You can’t avoid it unless you keep yourself private and never let your work be viewed by people who may potentially criticize you for it. But maybe it’s just me. Maybe it’s okay to react in the way that some authors have in the past. What do you all think? Where do you draw the line between acceptable behavior and acting childishly?
Blogging on a Busy Schedule
The argument some people have about not blogging is basically the same argument made for not writing: I just don’t have the time. Bullsh*t. Everyone has the time to write or blog, it’s just a matter of actually setting aside that time to do so. You can devote a few hours a week easily to blogging and get a lot done, depending on the kind of blog you’re running and what sort of content you want to use. Whether you want to post daily, a few times a week, or once a week, you have the time and all it takes is setting it aside for the express purpose of blogging. One important thing you should do before blogging, and something I didn’t do, unfortunately, is consider what you want to blog about. Take a moment to lay out what topics you want to cover, consider developing a handful of “features,” and then get started. You can learn everything else as you go. But you should ask yourself first and foremost: is this what I want to do? If you really don’t want to blog, then don’t. There’s no reason you should have to do it, just as there’s no reason that you have to write. You write because you want to and like it, not because it’s a demand on your person. The same is true of blogging: you do it because you want to. Don’t treat blogging as an obligation, but as something fun. If you can’t do that, then it will show. Blogging is, in some ways, an art, and to force yourself to perform in something you really aren’t interested in is not a great way to develop that art. But, if this is what you want to do, then don’t use pointless arguments to get out of doing it. Do you have 10 minutes to spare? If you do, then you can blog. If you don’t, find a way to create those ten minutes. Understandably, blogging can take up a lot of time, particularly if you want an exceptionally active blog. Thankfully the blogging community is incredibly supportive and it’s not hard to find people willing to offer free advice or to give you a helping hand. But you’re not going to get anywhere at all by saying you don’t have the time or the resources, whether you’re an independent bookstore like I discussed here or just someone wanting to blog about whatever; everyone has time, just some of us want to use it for other things. But there are always a few minutes here, or a few minutes there. How you use them is up to you. Here are some situations and options: On the Road Bring a tape or digital recorder and writer your content verbally while in your car. You can transcribe it in a matter of minutes when you get home, or ask a friend or significant other to do it. Public Transportation Bring a laptop or a pad of paper. No reason why you can’t write on the bus or the train. And it takes only a matter of minutes to type something up that’s already been written. Work Two Jobs Use your breaks at work or find a few minutes elsewhere to spend each day blogging. No Internet Use a public library. See? It’s not that hard to find the time. This applies equally as well to writing in general, but I’m using it here to illustrate a point. There’s no such thing as not having the time when it comes to writing or blogging. Usually that is an argument used to prevent oneself from acknowledging that he or she doesn’t want to do it. But if you do want to do it, well, what’s stopping you? Takes no more than ten minutes to set up a blog with free hosting. You could be started in no time! What do you all think about this? Any thoughts on blogging on a busy schedule? Advice? Feel free to leave a comment.
Sometimes Your Writing Just Sucks
And sometimes there’s nothing you can do to fix it. Mur Lafferty had a post some time ago about tough love and there was one thing she said that I have to disagree with: My point is that if you write a book, and you can’t get it published, it doesn’t mean the dream is over. It doesn’t mean that you as a writer suck. It means that book wasn’t attractive to agents/editors. It means that perhaps you need to improve as a writer, see your first book as an exercise to make yourself a better writer. Or it means that you actually suck. I have no problem with encouraging people to continue, to push on and never give up on their dreams, but sometimes some people really should give up on their dreams. This isn’t just to save all of us out there from having to deal with them; it’s also to save them from the humiliation of constant failure and ridicule. While writing this, I’m thinking about all those examples on American Idol where someone with a vision, with an immense dream comes up against Simon (and sometimes Paula and Randy) and has to face the reality that they are not good enough. Sometimes these failed people throw a fit, proclaiming that they are the greatest thing since sliced bread, and other times they break down entirely, feeling the immense pain of not rejection, but absolute and total internal destruction. And I’m also thinking of those folks in the writing world that you meet from time to time that truly believe their self-published novel is really amazing, when in actuality it’s one of the worst things ever put into print. These are the folks who cannot take constructive advice, who won’t change or get better either because they can’t or because they won’t. These are the folks that don’t need encouraging, because they get enough of it from friends and family that don’t have the heart to tell them that they are horrible. But how do writers know if they really do suck? How do we know when it’s time to throw in the towel and stop, because writing really isn’t our thing? I don’t know. I don’t think anyone can really know, but I still take issue with this idea that one shouldn’t re-evaluate themselves if they meet complete failure at the hands of publishers. I still feel like we should be careful to encourage people to self-publish, because often times the folks who do so don’t realize what they are getting themselves into. Sometimes your novel just isn’t good enough to get published. And that’s okay. Really. It’s okay for your novel to not be good enough. We call those trunk novels (or stories, for that matter). Sometimes your dream project can be let go. I’ve let projects go. I’ve had to. I got to a point where I had moved so far from something that it wasn’t worth keeping it alive just to feed that part of me that wanted it to succeed. I could find new things that could fill that void. Not everything you write will get published. That’s the honest truth. Sometimes your stories or novels can be put in the trunk and left there, maybe forever, or maybe long enough for you to get enough distance to see what was wrong with it in the first place. The reality is that sometimes your writing does suck. Sometimes your novel, story, etc. sucks beyond measure. In fact, this is true almost every time. If you get rejected from every editor and agent in the business, maybe you should really think twice before self-publishing, or podcasting, or whatever. Maybe your novel actually is horrible. It happens. A lot. And it’s okay. Write something else. Try again. When people talk about persistence being the key to success, this is what they mean. Don’t throw up your hands and say, “Well, I couldn’t get X, Y, and Z to take it, so I’ll just have to self-publish!” Write something else, submit, and keep trying if you honestly believe you have the talent. How many writers in history have trunked a novel only to have it published later after selling something else? Quite a few. If you really do have the talent, you can get published. You just have to keep going. This is why I have such a problem with self-publishing (podcasting included). It’s easy. Really easy. All one has to do is waltz on over to Lulu, format a document, and submit. Maybe that ease of access is a bad thing. And it’s not helping self-publishing gain any respect in the world when folks who didn’t give up when they should pay for a publishing package or go through Lulu. Sometimes you just suck. And nothing you do can fix that. Never assume that you will get lucky like the handful of self-pubbed people that have made it “big” (and not even that big, to be honest, since I have yet to hear of any self-pubbed author who has shattered records). There’s no such thing as luck in the writing world. There is only talent and persistence (and a few other things that I can’t remember right now). What does anyone else think about this? P.S.: Yes, I am fully aware that technically I have self-published WISB. The only difference is that I never intended to sell WISB. Not really. It was an experiment that I truly enjoyed and want to keep going not because I want it to make me famous or for it to get into print format, but because it brings me joy. It wasn’t rejected from publishers, nor would I send it to them. I have other work that I submit and I’m not giving up on that stuff so long as there is somewhere to send it!
Life Without the Interwebs
I’m addicted to the Interwebs. It’s probably pretty obvious for those of you who have any idea how much time I spend on the net and how much time I waste with net things—or don’t waste, for that matter. It didn’t really hit me until I flew in to London last week and spent the better part of a week gallivanting across the English countryside with my fiancé, net not included. Now, I’m not saying that I was having withdrawals. This post is more about the things involved in my writing that have become dependent on Internet access. Research, for example, is almost always done with Google. I can’t remember the last time I did research via another method, to be honest. While on vacation, I started writing a new short story (tentatively titled “Waking Odin”) and got to a point where I had to literally make things up because I had no way of getting access to mythological information (it’s somewhat difficult to drag around a collection of encyclopedias, after all). It put a block on my writing, because the information I needed was integral to the story, and without access to it, well, it was somewhat difficult to do anything with the characters. It forced me to re-evaluate not only how I write, but how I research for my writing. We’ve become a culture attached at the hip to the net, in more ways than one. So much of what we used to do manually (the old “dig it up in a book” method) has largely been replaced by a more “automated” method (the new “dig it up on the net” thing). Most of us do this, strangely enough, and it has to do with the fact that information has become so readily accessible via the net. We don’t really need encyclopedias anymore and most of us stopped using software-based informational programs a long time ago. But what would happen to us if the net were suddenly wrenched out from under us? Would we as a society (speaking primarily of western culture here) fall apart at the seams? I obviously found that my inability to access the information I needed for a character an impossible thing to work around. It drastically influenced my writing, because the character had to be vague, rather than fleshed out, something I’ll have to go back and change later. The result of all this is that I am resolved to find myself a software-based, thorough encyclopedia and mythological reference (something that auto-updates entries when you are online would be nice). We’ll see what I can find. Now I’ll point this to you: Look at your own writing. How has the Interwebs changed the way you write? Do you see an “addiction” too? Will thinking about this change how you write from this point on?
Ten Things That Make Me Stop Reading
Hinging off Matt Staggs’ recent post on the same subject, I thought I would talk about what elements in a novel make me stop reading.I’m a notoriously picky reader, especially when it comes to novels. Some of my TAs at school have learned this, and others are probably oblivious, but when I’m not entertained by a book, it instantly becomes a chore and, thus, difficult for me to actually get through (sometimes I stop reading entirely, even though they are school books). Since I already have to read so many novels, I find myself largely becoming uninterested in books that don’t immediately grab me and, thus, I develop a more sophisticated (not necessarily better) taste in literature.Here are ten things that will almost always make me toss a book across the room: Unrealistic Sex ScenesI realize that the uber dork meeting an attractive woman and then having an all-night-romp of passionate, intense love making is appealing, but it’s also incredibly unrealistic and somewhat pathetic. What about nerves? What about guys who aren’t reincarnated sex machines? Most men aren’t super lovers who can go seven times in half a day (I’m looking at you, Greg Bear; that scene in Blood Music was absolutely absurd and seemed too much like a personal fantasy). Of course, most men won’t admit this, but that’s not the point. The point is that sex isn’t perfect. Not everyone who is inexperienced will magically be good at it. Most will suck. Let’s put some of that into our novels, please. The unrealistic inexperienced lanky guy who gives his partner five O-moments in one night is a bit, well, overused and easy to see as poorly disguised personal fantasy. Rape (Used Poorly)Any time when rape is used for shock value, I’m out. The same can be said for scenes following a rape in which the victim seems relatively un-phased. I don’t find rape entertaining; most people don’t. Rape should be put into a story to serve a purpose. This is why I couldn’t stand The Hills Have Eyes 2: the rape scene was there only to be shocking, not to develop a character in a certain way or drive the plot or anything (it was an opportunity to do something disgusting in order to make our skin crawl). I will drop books that do not address rape as an important and emotionally devastating thing. It’s no walk in the park and I want to see that in the writing. Violence For the Sake of Being ViolentI don’t mind blood and gore. But just as with rape, it has to have a purpose. If you’re just showing me limbs being chopped off because you like it, then I’m likely to drop the book. I want violence that takes itself seriously, that tries to convey a scene realistically and with logical consequences. If a character is involved in a war and manages to survive relatively unscathed after seeing all his friends get chopped to bits, how does he respond to that? If your answer is anything like “he goes off and dances to lively elven music while remarking how awesome the battle was,” then I’m out. Being Artistic For the Sake of Being ArtisticConsider this literary snobbery, if you like. I absolutely despise novels that try to do new things with language or story for the purpose of being artistic. The problem I have with a lot of literary fiction is that most of the people who write that stuff are so focused on the art form that they have forgotten how to tell a story. Literature is here to tell and show us stories. Novels that don’t give any attention to the story and all the attention to language and style are ones that eventually get dropped by me. Entertain me with your pretty language; don’t bore me to death. Laggy BeginningsIf it takes more than fifty pages for something to happen that is interesting, then I’m not likely to finish the book. In a 300-page novel, it’s not much to ask for a bit of action or something in the beginning, even if it’s something small. Set up a question or show me something crazy. Do something. You’ve got more space to get me interested in the rest of the book than you had with your editor. The ending shouldn’t be boring, period. Crappy WritingThis one is pretty obvious, right? I’m going to lob all forms of crappy writing in there: bad style, lots of spelling/grammar errors, poor plotting, etc. I don’t think I need to go beyond this except to say that how you tell a story is extremely important. If reading a work is like trying to decipher ancient hieroglyphics, then clearly whatever it is I’m reading doesn’t deserve to be published. Poor Science Played Off Like Legit ScienceI’m perfectly fine with letting slide things like faster-than-light travel, aliens that look human-ish, etc. What I don’t like is when a science fiction author writes a story filled with explanation about some “new” science that, in reality, is actually a load of absolute nonsense. If you want to write fantasy, then write fantasy. If you want to write hard SF, then stick with sciences we know. The one thing that non-hard SF writers do successfully is represent their “fantasy” tropes as just that: tropes. FTL for them is simply there, thus allowing them to focus on the story rather than trying to explain how their FTL works without violating the laws of the universe. Don’t explain to me how FTL works, just tell me it does and move on. Confusing Names and Other Bad Worldbuilding CrapNames need vowels. Fjfjcbvyx is not a name; it’s what happens when your cat runs over your keyboard. The thing that bothers me about some fantasy novels is the endless repetition of the unpronounceable name. This alone isn’t enough, though. There have to be a collection of worldbuilding-related things working together to get me to drop a novel. These include, but