On Negativity, Destruction, and Rebuilding

Do you want more blog readers? Here's one simple secret, one I've held close to my vest for a long time: rant.

The nastier you are, the more venomous opinion you espouse, the better your numbers will be. I hate to admit it, but after nearly five years of blogging about writing (and life), my most-read posts are those in which I threw a mini-hissy fit. Evidently, negative vibes attract blog readers.

And it's soooooo easy to be negative. The first thoughts in many tough circumstances are often negative. Ever heard the advice to wait a day before mailing a letter written in anger? Great advice.

Here's what I've learned about life from my home improvement project: destruction takes far less time than rebuilding. I demolished 2 1/2 bathrooms in 3 days. We are in week two of the rebuild, and just passing the midway point on 1 1/2 of those bathrooms. Sloooow going.

Here's the other thing I've learned: destruction is much harder on my body than rebuilding. I haven't sprained anything/shed large amounts of blood since the end of the demolition.

Is there a parallel to blogging? You bet. Negative vibes, attacks, and rants will garner attention quickly, but they come with a price. Sometimes, a writer just has to rant. I do from time to time and I try to be honest. But, if it's all I did, it wouldn't be right. Nobody wants to linger in negative land for too long--unless we're all drinking the same Kool-Aid.

Have a great week.

It's Always Been About the Readers

All right. I don't know where my "hackles" are, but they're raised.

I'm pissed. Vexed. Hot. Fuming.

A certain literary agent has suggested those "self-publishing" are doing it for selfish reasons and don't care about readers at all. You can read the whole ugly post here.

Sh*t.

You couldn't be more wrong, Ms. High and Mighty, AKA protector of the weak, innocent reader. My God, what would readers do without big, tough literary agents guarding their reading time (and dollars)?

Here's the best part:

"My conclusion: This trend toward self-publishing serves primarily the writer.

(Not readers and not the publishing industry as a whole.)"

Oh--that's right, because it's my f*cking job to serve the publishing industry. I forgot. *smacks head* I'm supposed to work for free for years to try and squeak through the needle's eye until the great gate-keeping elite think they can properly profit from my free labor.

Yes, do you see that little word: profit. Because publishers are in this business to make money. Not "protect" readers.

I'm sick of the hypocrisy of a system which would publish Snooki's trash and then pretend to be a protector of readers. Sick of it. Stop lying to me. Stop lying to the public. Stop lying to readers.

You know who cares more about readers than you, giant publishing machine? Writers do--all of them, whether "traditionally" published or indie or whatever. I like how we've decided the indentured servant model of publishing is "traditional". Back in Ben Franklin's day, anyone who owned a printing press was published. Don't play word games until you know a little history.

But wait--I'm not the one who has to prove I care about readers. I'm not the one readers are questioning, am I?

Every story I write is a love-letter to storytelling.

Go climb back in your stupid castle and shut the gate. We heathens will sit around our campfires and tell stories well into the night--as it should be.

Write hard!

The Good, the Bad, and the Very Ugly

The good:

An acceptance from Innsmouth Free Press. "Ngiri's Catch" will be in their forthcoming Historical Lovecraft anthology. The cover art is special. I hereby eat all my rejection-whine from earlier this week. Have patience, Aaron. Have patience.

The bad:

The song, "Crazy Bitch", from Buckcherry. Who can take this filth seriously? Oh yeah, I forgot...horny fifteen-year-olds. Silly me. And people wonder why this country is in trouble. I'm not all that worried about offending Buckcherry fans because, well, they evidently like to wallow in offensive shit. At least try to make it interesting and original offensive shit next time, 'kay?

The ugly:

The state of the publishing industry. No, this isn't sour grapes. I'll never be a publishing industry darling. I don't travel on that vibe. But does anyone wonder why book sales suffer when Snooki's A Shore Thing (Oh...it's a pun. Ha.) sells so well? What about NewSouth revision of Huckleberry Finn? I might just have to take my paintbrush to the Mona Lisa and give that coy sister a real smile.

Sometimes I can't stop the rant. Sure, Snooki and crew are just other kids on the playground. But so am I. So are we all. But every playground has bullies. I'm tired of having all this water poured down the spout and them telling us it's wine when it's not. And I have Ray Bradbury to thank for that beautiful image. You da man, Mr. Bradbury.

Hell, it's not even water most of the time. Haters just gotta hate, I guess.

Attention Spans My Arse

In the U.K., they're celebrating "National Short Story Week". I wish we'd adopt the holiday across the pond.

One blogger posted: "It's a week to celebrate short attention spans!" (I've happily lost the link...sorry.)

Loving short stories has nothing to do with a short attention span. I'm sick of hearing it.

Here's what short stories can do (which you rarely find in "successful" longer fiction): they can push boundaries, take chances, and experiment. Each word becomes more important, every sentence a movement in the symphony, each paragraph a fist to the jaw. Yes, there are novels which do as much, but they seldom sell well. Novels are the commercial medium. That's their anchor, their curse.

It is my contention (based on several years of experience as a writer and reader) professional short fiction markets seek stories with grit, voice, and originality while the best selling novels are formulaic, trite, and easy on the brain.

Maybe it's the novels which cater to short attention spans...or, at least, simple minds?

Disagree? I'm glad you do. Let's hear it.

Edited to add: Read the wonderful "Principles of a Story" by Raymond Carver, one of my short story heroes.

On Injustice, Freedom of Speech, and Real Anger

Pretend for a moment I'm not a writer. It isn't hard to do.

I don't want anything in this post to come across as sour grapes (which I find a rather weak argument, anyway). I'm writing as a father and public school teacher.

[rant]

1. I'm disappointed Chelsea Handler is a cultural gatekeeper. If you hadn't heard, she now has a publishing imprint. Not just another book deal, but an imprint. I can't say it any better than the comment by PLG (at the bottom of the article). As a parent and teacher in this "culture," I'm saddened we've decided, as a society, the Chelsea Handlers of the world are fit to choose for the rest of us. Yes, she's funny. Sort of, in an awkward "I shouldn't be laughing at this" way. She's also vulgar and repugnant.

2. Does anybody realize how much press Philip Greaves received, for free, last week? Yes, it was negative. But don't fool yourself into thinking everyone disagreed with the sicko, though. This kind of publicity fuels the "world is against us" battle cry championed by these kind of folks, no matter how small and misguided their numbers are.

3. How about the teacher in Michigan who was suspended after ejecting a hate-spewing high school student from his classroom? Freedom of speech? Really?

Here are the lessons I've learned:

1. Sex sells. Rudeness sells. Drunken amorality sells. Making money does not mean what you do has lasting value.

"If you would not be forgotten, as soon as you are rotten, either write things worth reading, or do things worth the writing." - Benjamin Franklin

I won't mention Handler again.

2. People, in general, flock to negative stories like flies to shit. Why can't we be more like bees and find the flowers?

3. Being hurtful is never okay. Freedom of speech is powerful, and like all power, requires responsibility.

I couldn't say it better myself:



[/rant]

Don't Let Rainbows End, 'kay?

PARSEC Ink has put together another magnificent collection of short, speculative fiction, and I'm beyond honored to have a story included in its august pages.

I received my contributor's copy of Triangulation: End of the Rainbow yesterday and skimmed a bit. Read a few stories. Read my story, "The World in Rubber, Soft and Malleable" again...and damn it, my own story made me get all choked up. Coupled with the afterword by editor Bill Moran, I was almost in tears.

Why?

"...fiction writing is dying..." (from the afterword)

By Zeus, I hope not. But Mr. Moran lays out a pretty powerful argument for why it is. (Let's just say Transformers 2 was not his favorite movie...) Me? I blame the internet. For all it's wonder and fantasy, it has made fiction cheap and easy. Cheaper than pulp stories. Hell, authors writing for pulp mags back in the Golden Age were paid near living wages for their words. Now, that kind of pay just isn't feasible (without massive debts) even for the best mags. I'd be shocked if any of them are turning profit. I'd be thrilled if they were.

Yes, YA novels are selling like crazy. And yes, some of them are wonderful. Okay, a few of them are wonderful. There's a ton of shite out there, though. Trust me. I work with teenagers. I see the kind of crap they grab at the library. I try to cultivate a love for good fiction, but it's a grueling, uphill battle. They have a million and one distractions: mindless movies, Youtube, text-messaging, Facebook...

Too many other choices for how to spend their copious leisure time to demand quality fiction. If the readers don't demand it, don't vote with their dollars, who is going to care?

This is the next generation, folks. This is the future.

If fiction dies, is the art of storytelling far behind? Is there anything more human than storytelling?

Man, I'll rage against the dying of that particular light. Rage hard, even if it kills me. I'm going to write, and write hard. Yeah, I'm back from the strange doorway in my basement.

"The colors through that door shamed anything the Krylon people could imagine. Shattered the rainbow, too."

But it was all a lie. A bigger lie than anything fictional. A bigger lie than "...fiction writing is dying..."

I hope.

Buy a copy of Triangulation: End of the Rainbow. Help fight the good fight. Win one for stories and good fiction in an era of paste-pudding and drivel.

Commission vs. Submission

No school today (yippee!). More below.

I'm a geek for word origins (etymology). In follow up to yesterday's post, I started thinking about the words commission and submission. As a writer, I've had exactly one commission. It was nice, my highest per word rate to date (a whopping 2 cents a word). Granted, as a piece of flash, it was only 1000 words (so I earned 20 bucks). Whoot.

Everything else has been via submission. Different world...and more competition.

Basically, the difference lies in the those two words: commission and submission. A commission is an assignment (from words meaning commit and mission); an editor/publisher comes to the writer and requests something. The writer writes to specifications. Hit it big enough, the door will open for a writer to receive more commissions. The pay rate is generally higher (from what I've learned) because the editor is trying to sell the idea to the writer. Supply (the work from that particular writer) is limited.

In the more typical submission model, the writer is trying to sell to the editor. Submission traces its history through Late Middle English and Latin, once upon a time carrying the denotation a letting down. When a writer submits, they take a lesser role. They join the horde trying to squeeze through the door. Understandably, the pay rates are going to be less. (Um, remember supply and demand...more stories=less pay for stories)

Ironically, submission requires an author to be on their 'A' game. There is a horde at the door, and even the worst FTL markets reject work occasionally, regardless of what other POVs may suggest. (You can't bank on Duotrope for accurate numbers, that's for sure...I'm not accepting 50+% of subs to 52 Stitches...no where near that, in fact) Competition brings out the best (and worst). Competition makes those at the top better. It does. (there are downsides to competition, but I'll reserve those for a later discussion)

Maybe, when a writer becomes good enough to garner commissions on a regular basis, it's because all those submissions did their job. Maybe a writer gets better through competition, first at the little mags, growing stronger and making better sales. It doesn't have to be every writers' journey, but it's a legitimate path...every bit as legit as landing a bestseller and then writing sub-par work on commission (as some "pros" invariably do). Pro writing isn't a clear line on the playground; if it was, as I said yesterday, everyone would eventually cross that line. Writing, like all art, will always be subjective.

...so, rant over. Like a said, snow day today. I should say "ice" day because there just isn't much snow. (see the picture from my front door)

But...the ice continues to fall. Ice is dangerous, I 'spose, and I do teach in a rural district. So I'm off to write our family Christmas letter. My wife, luv ya, thinks this should be easy because "I'm a writer". Har. I don't think any of my weird, dark magical realism, horror-fantasy will work in the letter.

If you're still reading, and I salute you if you are, you can roll over to Flashes in the Dark and read "Bleeding the Trees". I wrote it for Northern Haunts (talk about competition...didn't I know other people would write about maple trees?), and then sold it to another market which subsequently folded. As I've said before, I don't really mind giving away flash. Sorry.

It's the story, not me.

The Power of the Interweb

Every time something like the brouhaha over the pay rate at Black Matrix Publishing rears its ugly mug, I'm reminded of the power of the Interweb^TM. (for a nice POV on said brouhaha, check out L.R. Bonehill's blog)

John Scalzi brought the fight to Black Matrix on his Whatever blog, claiming, in part, to be a watchdog for the little guy, pointing out publishers that are taking advantage of them...er, me. I've been paid less than Black Matrix's stated rate...hell, I've given my work away in the past. I don't have a name that's going to sell anything, so nobody's knocking down my door with 5 cents+ a word. (Scalzi writes about his own rates here) It just ain't going to happen. If I want to earn that kind of money, I'll have to fight for it.

Some claim you should only publish in pro mags, regardless of how long it takes you to get there. Some claim publishing in lesser arenas will smear your name and make it harder to go pro later. I call bullshit for a whole variety of reasons. 1. I would have quit writing before I'd "honed my skills" at all if that were the case (still desperately seeking that 1st pro sale), 2. the amount of space open to unknown writers is pretty damn small...last time I checked, there wasn't a shortage of folks vying for that space, 3. Being published in a pro venue isn't a simple matter of writing well enough--no, it involves having your work in the right place at the right time and a whole pile of external factors (like editorial preferences, etc.). If it were as easy as writing pro-level material, everyone who writes long enough and works hard enough would go "pro".

Sorry, I'm not buying that argument.

In steps the power of the Interweb^TM. David Daley of Five Chapters has a nice interview here. Listen to it. If you don't want to, let me summarize: the internet has made "everything" free. Remember all that blather about cost-benefits analysis last week? It goes for readers, too. Read something of slightly less quality for free online? Sure. Sales have dropped for all printed (dead tree) fiction and nonfiction. Newspapers are dying. Sales are drying up for classic magazine venues for genre fiction. Bestselling authors working awfully damn hard to keep their heads above water. I salute all of them for making it work as long as they have.

One comment on Black Matrix's blog (singed simply "Pittsburgh journalist") carried the angst all professional writers must feel at this point in history:

"Well, as a professional writer who struggles every month to pay the bills, I frankly resent the fact that you are forcing down the price for the rest of us."

Sorry Pittsburgh, it's not Black Matrix that's driving down the price...it's free that's doing it. It's the market. Yeah, some fiction markets make it online and pay decent rates. How Strange Horizons does it, and has done it for so long, amazes me. Awesome, really. But by and large, the money isn't there...not enough to feed the hordes of people, like me, who want to tell stories more than cash checks.

Call me all the nasty names you want. Insult my writing. Throw stones. I have nothing to hide, and I won't comment anonymously on your site 'cause you know, the Interweb^TM has freed my speech a little, too.

Let me "out" with a little snippet from Maya Angelou:

"There is no greater agony than bearing an untold story inside you."

A Little Light in a Dark Room

This is what I've learned:

1. Most of my "readers" are also writers. The situation will likely remain this way until "big commercial success".

2. "Big commercial success" isn't what I thought it was. Like the proverbial kid who dreams of NBA millions, I fell for the illusion of the Kings, Grishams, and Pattersons of the world.

3. The publishing industry is designed to "discover" the best sales representatives for their work. This may or may not coincide with transcendent (or at least thought-provoking) fiction.

On item 1.

Face it, when most of what you've published is short fiction (and I'd argue genre doesn't matter), most of your readers will be other writers (or writer-hopefuls), especially when you publish in semi-pro mags (and below). This is how it works. Taking another step, the small genre press (even the good publishers) aren't read all that broadly. Sorry, but I'd never heard of Nick Mamatas, Jeff Vandermeer, Laird Barron, or other fine genre authors before I started to write. All write well. All are well reviewed. Maybe the market isn't there. Maybe their writing isn't all that accessible to the masses (not necessarily a bad thing). Maybe it's something else. (see item 3)

Item 2: So you wanna write full time?

Writing and making a living is a hard effing job. Read JA Konrath's "A Newbie's Guide to Publishing" to see how hard one writer works. A single NY Times bestseller would not allow me to quit my job, even though NY Times bestseller level of sales would require a whole butt-load of greasing palms on my part. (again, see item 3) Super agent Nathan Bransford addresses this issue on his blog a few days ago.

So I won't be buying that cabin in the mountains any time soon.

Which brings me to item 3.

There's a good deal of discussion out on the 'net about the "unfairness" inherent in the publishing "system". Stop whining already, will you?

1. Publishers are in business to make money.

2. Agents are in business to make money.

3. Writers are not always in business to make money.

(screech of brakes...what?)

3. Writers are not always in business to make money.

Think about it. A writer-hopeful writes a book. What do they want? Go on, ask them. I'll wager most would answer "to have my book published" before "make money". Doesn't the continued success of vanity presses (um, Publish America isn't exactly bankrupt yet) provide enough evidence? Regardless of how you may feel about Harlequin's move to create a vanity publishing arm, they are a publisher, and publishers are in business to make money. Seems like they see the potential to make money, eh?

So there's a huge amount of folks wanting to be published. All are reaching for the brass ring. The dream. Agents sort and sift through the best pitches, request fulls on only the best books, offer to represent even less. Not every represented book is sold to a publisher. Talk about the camel through the eye of a needle.

And some books flop after being published. I've read something like 1 in 5 actually makes money. (yeah, I'd love to cite a source, but it's the 'net...could you trust it?) There's a glut of "the same book" on the shelves all over the place. (um, paranormal teen romance featuring vampires, anyone?)

Why?

The "unfair system" (again, suck it up folks) is designed to find the writers who can sell. All those authors of "unnamed paranormal teen romances" can scrap it out on the bookstore shelves and signing tables. Need I remind my dear readers that publishers and agents are in business to make money? Who cares if Slash's memoir is a piece of dog crap. It's going to sell.

I can't say it better than The Publishometer at Editorial Anonymous. So what if you've written a transcendent book that no one wants to read? Go on and complain about Dan Brown's crappy writing; he won't care, being too busy counting his money.

Sometimes the audience is too small for "Big Commercial Success". See the authors I mentioned above...all good, but they aren't going to bring in Dan Brown numbers because of what they write. Hell, maybe it's partially because of how well they write. (now that's a double-edged sword if I ever saw one)

To sell well, a book must be accessible to the masses. There is a paste-pudding blandness to pop culture. Transcendence doesn't sell well.

But I'll take it.

I've Been Violated (and so have many others)

So there's a plagiarist afoot who calls himself Richard Ridyard. It seems Tricky Dick tried to pull the proverbial wool over some eyes at Shock Totem by subbing a little changed version of Stephen King's "The Boogeyman".

Um, Dick? Here's a clue: the editors at a pro-paying horror mag have probably read everything by Mr. King.

Stoooopid.

But wait...there's more: Check out Angel Zapata's blog for all the gory details. It seems Tricky Dick Ridyard has been up to a lot of "tricks". And guess what?

Tricky Dick took my work, too. I guess "Communion" from Flashes in the Dark was too tasty a morsel. Check out Dick's take from this month's Infinite Windows: "Satanic Mantra". (I know, WTF?)

My initial response...hidden cameras, right? Then I sort of went "Incredible Hulk" (geeky horror writer/teacher style). I didn't make a dime on "Communion". I basically gave it away with one little bit of payment: (it's called a "byline") I WROTE THE EFFING THING, ALRIGHT?

Sorry. Hulk mad.

See Dick Plagiarize. Bad Dick, bad.

Richard Ridyard, whatever your "real" name is, get a life, okay?

I'm gearing up for year two over at Fifty-Two Stitches. (We just received our shiny new ISSN, too) I'll be on the watch for dirty tricks and the Richard Ridyards of the world. Too bad I can't just spend my energy on the 'zine without worrying about dishonest charlatans.

Sheesh.

The Sacking of the Public Domain

I've not read Pride and Prejudice and Zombies; I barely read the book without zombies. I laughed at the trailer for Sense and Sensibility and Sea Monsters (Carrie Harris posted a link on her blog today). Other titles from the public domain that have received a recent mash up:

The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn...War of the Worlds...The Wizard of Oz...

But I'm done.

Really.

Write something new, okay?

Or, at the least, take an idea and make it new instead of inserting bits into a time-worn classic. I'm looking forward to Kim Paffenroth's zombified treatment of Dante in Valley of the Dead. I enjoy a good nod to the canon without cheapening the original text. War of the Worlds Plus Blood, Guts, and Zombies? Pleeeeaaase. H.G. Wells's version was pretty damn scary all by itself.

Of course my latest work in progress is Bram Stoker's Dracula and Zombies: Now with Undead on Undead Action!

In Praise of the Gatekeepers

Ah, the Gatekeepers, those individuals that by talent, luck, money, or some other mystical power are the arbiters of what the public reads, sees, or listens to. They keep the standards high enough, and artists (writers, dramatists, actors, musicians) must hone their craft to a fine edge. The Gatekeepers cut through slush like, well, slush. They find the jewels glittering amongst the garbage.

I know editors have sent some of my garbage hurtling back my way. Thanks.

After hundreds (really hundreds...am I approaching 1,000?) rejections, I'm not so bitter anymore. Really. Rejections don't sting so much. Of course, the "tail side" of that coin means acceptances don't come with as much of a rush. Not until The New Yorker calls, anyway. Acceptance and rejection is part of the business, right?

My wife and I went to a play on Saturday. It was a free performance, sure...a local thing with no checks and balances. No Gatekeepers. We didn't pay (donations only). We left at intermission.

The play was awful.

Horrid.

Dreadful.

From the acting to the script to the direction and even the lighting. Awful.

I used to direct our school plays. Yeah, school plays can be pretty bad, but at least the script is usually written by a professional...(thank you Gatekeepers). This thing we attended on Saturday was drivel. Muck. Slush of the worst kind. I'm not being nice. I know, but look: I rarely have a night out with my wife sans kids, and I feel like the play stole my precious time.

Gatekeepers...despite their human foibles (nepotism being my least favorite), help keep the standards high so poor schumcks like me don't waste their date night on dreck.

So, to all those editors and agents that have been wise enough to reject my work when it wasn't good enough, thanks. Rejections aren't fun for you or me, but I want to improve, to become a better writer. I don't want to waste anyone's time.

On Jealousy and Other Dirty Things

Cate Gardner inspired another post.

Actually, I’d been thinking about this one for some time.

In my travels around the interweb as a fledgling writer, I’ve stumbled into some nastiness. Snarkiness, some call it. Bad vibes. Writing is a personal endeavor, and all too often emotions muddle reality.

Writers attack writers. Writers attack editors. Editors attack writers.

Let me tackle the last two together:

Most writers follow guidelines. They read what a magazine/anthology is interested in publishing, read how that publication wants to see their work, and follow those guidelines. Um…this is why they are called guidelines, right?

A writer should never attack an editor. I think that would be somewhat akin to being in the middle of the ocean and shooting the only person who knows how to drive the boat. Receive a rejection? Good for you; you're playing the game.

Editors, on the other hand, sometimes have legitimate gripes. Why post guidelines if you want writers to just send their stuff however they please? Most editors are quite professional about airing their frustrations. Read their rants; learn what not to do.

The burden is on the writer to make the editor happy, not the other way around. Don’t like an editor/editorial policy? Don’t submit to that publication.

This brings us to the dirty little topic of writers preying on each other.

A little confession: I’m a human being—a real, live, thinking and feeling person. I try to be as honest as possible, even in the semi-anonymous world of the interweb. Do I want to land a story with Cemetery Dance, Chizine, Fantasy & Science Fiction...etc. Heck yeah.

Do I feel a twinge of envy when someone else lands a sweet acceptance? Of course I do. I’m human, remember? If I didn’t care about publishing my stuff, I wouldn’t work as hard as I do at writing it. And like J.C. Tabler said on Cate’s recent post, there are limited slots out there, folks.

But I have a choice when it comes to dealing with that little tweak of jealousy.

Writing is a personal endeavor, but acceptance/rejection of a particular story is not personal. Someone else’s acceptance, whether it is in a contest, publication, etc., has nothing to do with me, you, or my Uncle Gary. (he's a salesman, but not that good)

For me, that twinge of envy lasts as long as I let it. Here’s a good jealousy killer: send someone a “congrats” when they announce an acceptance. “Whoot” jealousy to death. Crush all the juice out of the little green monster, get back to work, and write.

Some choose the other path…anonymous attacks, snarkiness, stupidity...general bad vibes. I’m always a little bummed when I see how far this can go, whether on a message board, a blog, a forum…there are entire websites dedicated to nastiness.

What I enjoy is the writing…and I want to write as well as I can. At the end of the day, the negative crap just gets in the way.