Malcolm's comments (member since Jul 05, 2008)

Malcolm's comments from the Writerpedia group.

Genres draw readers and make books easier to sell. They also impose limitations on the writer, especially if s/he is writing for a publisher with very strict rules for what belongs within their version of the genre and what doesn't.

My mountain adventure story "The Sun Singer" lost readers because the publisher labeled it "fantasy." This meant that readers who disliked fantasy would't look at it, and those who loved traditional fantasy didn't find in it what they expected.

So desperate are publishers for the comfortable prison of the genre, that they are now calling literary fiction a genre. If one loves gallows humor, calling literary fiction a genre is an amusing paradox for it is the very absence of genre.

I read very few genre books because I dislike rules and labels and limitations definitions always bring to what they define. I'm more comfortable with a book that can be anything. But then, I always sail against the wind.

William Young comes to mind, and since The Shack has been sitting on stop of the bestseller list for some time, presumably he qualifies as a successfuly debut author.

Basically, though, when an author sends a query to an agent or publisher, s/he doesn't include a photo, so I'm wondering how NY knows somebody's too old to be a pretty face on the book tour circuit.

Malcolm

Gosh, Mari, you paint a grim picture, one similar to what a lot of reviewers said when Marisha Pessl came out with SPECIAL TOPICS IN CALAMITY PHYSICS; the sexist claim was that if she weren't so darned attractive she wouldn't be making the big bucks.

Thing is, if we were to ponder this subject for a while, we could come up with a lengthy list of authors being published by the major NY publishers who are, in fact, quite old and/or quite ugly. Not that I'm going to start naming names.

On the other hand, if one does believe that sexy and young are the primary criteria in NYC, there are a lot of options, one being, don't submit to them. An author can carve out a money making list with a smaller publisher. Then, if the world really thinks s/he is writing salable material, the big boys in NYC will call him/her and offer a better deal.

Malcolm

Many of the great writers learned their trade as journalists, and that includes starting out on a small newspaper.

Look at some of the collected works of great reporting, and you'll find words that sing with the same delicacy or power as the best novelists.

Malcolm

Kevin,

You might take a look at C. Hope Clark's Funds for Writers website. (www.fundsforwriters.com) She sends out a variety of e-mail newsletters about markets, grants, etc., and I think one of them includes upcoming contests.

It's to late for this year, but Foreword Magazine sponsors a books of the year contest with the awards given out around June. Those selected as finalists get Eligibility is based on the publication date, probably the previous calendar year.

Malcolm

You might consider a MySpace page. This takes work, though. There are a lot of writers out there, and I think the ones who do the best (other than the big names) are those who take time to comment on each other's posts and upload posts about a variety of things. That is, people won't stop by very often if 100% of what you talk about is your book. But, there's a lot of exposure to be had here.

Malcolm

I would be on Kindle, but that choice is under the publisher's control. So far, iUniverse isn't going that route.

Malcolm

Candace,

With your trade paperback selling at $17.95, were you able to sell many on Amazon?

With new hardbacks by big name authors (an extensive buzz)so deeply discounted, I'm finding it a challenge selling a trade paperback there for more than hardbacks with double and triple the page counts. It's very hard to compete with that.

Malcolm