Ask the Author: Jeff Kalac
Answered Questions (6)
Jeff Kalac
The hospital bill did not clearly state which of the required services were not covered by insurance. The one thing it did make clear was that the bill was due immediately.
--A True American Horror Story, if ever there was one. Far too many are reading it now.
--A True American Horror Story, if ever there was one. Far too many are reading it now.
Jeff Kalac
Thank you for the question, Prakash.
In some respects, I think of self-publishing and traditional publishing in much the same light. Several authors form their own imprint, much like the major publishers do. Indies promote their titles, and a large amount of that is also found in being traditionally published. It's very possible to match the quality of product that traditional publishers offer, and it's also possible to match market availability... but, alas, see the next paragraph.
With self-publishing, it's all on the shoulders of the author. Everything from the novel's content to its appearance to its availability in the market. This can be wonderful and empowering... or humbling.
While it's true that traditional publishers often require authors to be active during promotional campaigns, there's a lot of help along the way--something that is not true at all in the case of the indie publisher. As an indie, you're the one making the phone calls. You're the one buying ads. You're the one setting up a social media presence (as well as managing said presence). You're the one fighting for reviews. That sword--however bloody--is in your hands, and it's up to you to swing it.
It's true that an indie can produce work which is equal in quality to whatever Random House is stamping their name upon. However, as an indie, it's your editor. It's your proofreader. Those are your beta readers. Very few gatekeepers exist, since it's also up to you what you accept from the feedback of others. An indie can publish trash just as easily as she can publish treasure. Most readers have seen examples of both, and are often very justified in their unwillingness to try an indie author; this is especially true if the reader has never heard of that particular author. For those willing to take the plunge into your pool, it's up to you to win them over. I hope the pool's clean and the water's the right temperature.
As an indie, you have the same reach as a traditional publisher. That is, depending on how much money and time you're willing (or able) to invest. Purchasing ISBNs, gaining LCCNs, choosing your distributors, and ensuring the quality of the finished product... that's all on you. A traditional publisher would have you covered in these areas.
Both self-pubbing and going through a traditional channel serve the same idea, and that is to get your work into the hands of readers. It's really all in the difference of approach, as well as the consequences of each decision. Traditional publishers tend to make more experienced decisions, hence suffer less fallout.
While it doesn't sound like I'm painting all that great of a picture of self-publishing, there are many good reasons why a person would choose to do it. Myself, I'm the type of person who likes control over what I create. My goals as an author are simple and direct: I want to write the material I wish to write, and I would like to add entertainment and enjoyment into the lives of my readers. I don't desire fame or best-seller status, and I also don't want to run myself into the ground with ceaseless marketing. So for me, self-publishing is perfect! As an indie, it is what you want it to be. You can certainly go for the throat... or you can enjoy the ride, smell some flowers, and enjoy the experience. There's no all-or-nothing about it. You get out what you put in, and can level off at any time. It's all up to you.
In some respects, I think of self-publishing and traditional publishing in much the same light. Several authors form their own imprint, much like the major publishers do. Indies promote their titles, and a large amount of that is also found in being traditionally published. It's very possible to match the quality of product that traditional publishers offer, and it's also possible to match market availability... but, alas, see the next paragraph.
With self-publishing, it's all on the shoulders of the author. Everything from the novel's content to its appearance to its availability in the market. This can be wonderful and empowering... or humbling.
While it's true that traditional publishers often require authors to be active during promotional campaigns, there's a lot of help along the way--something that is not true at all in the case of the indie publisher. As an indie, you're the one making the phone calls. You're the one buying ads. You're the one setting up a social media presence (as well as managing said presence). You're the one fighting for reviews. That sword--however bloody--is in your hands, and it's up to you to swing it.
It's true that an indie can produce work which is equal in quality to whatever Random House is stamping their name upon. However, as an indie, it's your editor. It's your proofreader. Those are your beta readers. Very few gatekeepers exist, since it's also up to you what you accept from the feedback of others. An indie can publish trash just as easily as she can publish treasure. Most readers have seen examples of both, and are often very justified in their unwillingness to try an indie author; this is especially true if the reader has never heard of that particular author. For those willing to take the plunge into your pool, it's up to you to win them over. I hope the pool's clean and the water's the right temperature.
As an indie, you have the same reach as a traditional publisher. That is, depending on how much money and time you're willing (or able) to invest. Purchasing ISBNs, gaining LCCNs, choosing your distributors, and ensuring the quality of the finished product... that's all on you. A traditional publisher would have you covered in these areas.
Both self-pubbing and going through a traditional channel serve the same idea, and that is to get your work into the hands of readers. It's really all in the difference of approach, as well as the consequences of each decision. Traditional publishers tend to make more experienced decisions, hence suffer less fallout.
While it doesn't sound like I'm painting all that great of a picture of self-publishing, there are many good reasons why a person would choose to do it. Myself, I'm the type of person who likes control over what I create. My goals as an author are simple and direct: I want to write the material I wish to write, and I would like to add entertainment and enjoyment into the lives of my readers. I don't desire fame or best-seller status, and I also don't want to run myself into the ground with ceaseless marketing. So for me, self-publishing is perfect! As an indie, it is what you want it to be. You can certainly go for the throat... or you can enjoy the ride, smell some flowers, and enjoy the experience. There's no all-or-nothing about it. You get out what you put in, and can level off at any time. It's all up to you.
Jeff Kalac
I was a child at the time I first started writing creatively... maybe... eight or nine years old, I want to say. I was watching a movie on television, and even at that young age, a plot hole in that movie bothered me. I loved everything else about what I was watching, but could not get around that plot hole. It dug at me. I thought about it for days afterward.
Then I suddenly decided to do something about it. I grabbed a pad of paper and a pen. For hours, I agonized over how I would have written that pesky scene; how I would have done it differently. I don't remember if I ever fixed that plot hole (if only for myself), but I do remember that this one event is what started an avalanche of ideas, and I've been writing ever since.
While most authors I'm aware of started writing because of their love of reading, for me the opposite was true: I started reading because I loved to write. The problem with trying to write without also doing a lot of reading is, you don't have any idea what tools are available to you. How does one describe a scene without pulling the reader away from the action? How much description do you need of the action itself? How do you create characters who do not feel like they are all the same person? No, to write, you MUST read: all of these problems have already been faced and overcome--all one has to do is to look at it. What worked, and why? What didn't work, or just felt clumsy?
In no small way, reading was like an apprenticeship. It still is. It's like having the teacher of your choice show you how he or she handles a situation. A situation like, perhaps, a nasty plot hole.
Then I suddenly decided to do something about it. I grabbed a pad of paper and a pen. For hours, I agonized over how I would have written that pesky scene; how I would have done it differently. I don't remember if I ever fixed that plot hole (if only for myself), but I do remember that this one event is what started an avalanche of ideas, and I've been writing ever since.
While most authors I'm aware of started writing because of their love of reading, for me the opposite was true: I started reading because I loved to write. The problem with trying to write without also doing a lot of reading is, you don't have any idea what tools are available to you. How does one describe a scene without pulling the reader away from the action? How much description do you need of the action itself? How do you create characters who do not feel like they are all the same person? No, to write, you MUST read: all of these problems have already been faced and overcome--all one has to do is to look at it. What worked, and why? What didn't work, or just felt clumsy?
In no small way, reading was like an apprenticeship. It still is. It's like having the teacher of your choice show you how he or she handles a situation. A situation like, perhaps, a nasty plot hole.
Jeff Kalac
The case of the disappearing money!
Really, though, I try to keep a pretty low-key life. I have a close family, and some pretty wonderful friends. Drama and mystery are great things to put down on the pages of a novel, but I go out of my way to keep these things out of my life as much as possible. It's hard to write when your ulcers are bothering you, so why form them?
Really, though, I try to keep a pretty low-key life. I have a close family, and some pretty wonderful friends. Drama and mystery are great things to put down on the pages of a novel, but I go out of my way to keep these things out of my life as much as possible. It's hard to write when your ulcers are bothering you, so why form them?
Jeff Kalac
Embrace it! For the longest time, I'd set down to write something new... and it turned into a contest with myself over how long I would watch that blinking cursor, sitting on its blank field of white page, before I'd give up and watch re-runs of "Cheers."
One day, I got a little tired of that. I typed a random character name and gave him a single action. I then had to ask myself, "Why is he doing that?" That led to a second sentence, and a third, then a fourth. It became part of my writing style, even on those occasions when I happened to know what my character's full backstory was. Most of my chapters and sections, you'll notice, have the character do something in the first sentence.
One day, I got a little tired of that. I typed a random character name and gave him a single action. I then had to ask myself, "Why is he doing that?" That led to a second sentence, and a third, then a fourth. It became part of my writing style, even on those occasions when I happened to know what my character's full backstory was. Most of my chapters and sections, you'll notice, have the character do something in the first sentence.
Jeff Kalac
"Through the Eyes of Outcasts" was actually a sprawling body of work that I had done shortly after graduating high school (just never you mind how long ago that was). I'll be honest here: Even I didn't know what it was. I only knew that certain characters had taken on lives of their own, and that it felt very human to me. It's not so much that I got an idea and started writing--it's more accurate to say that I started writing and got an idea.
Years later, I decided to dust if off and turn the opening act into a screenplay. It was down and dirty, meant to be an action film. While my author's notes in the novel detail this more closely, I'll sum up by saying that it finally found its voice, and I returned to the novel format as a way to express it. It's not one book--it's several. Each has its own feel, even if they share characters.
It took many drafts and revisions to figure that out. It certainly wasn't laser-focused planning on my part. I will say that there's a lot more of this saga on the way, and I couldn't be happier with it.
Years later, I decided to dust if off and turn the opening act into a screenplay. It was down and dirty, meant to be an action film. While my author's notes in the novel detail this more closely, I'll sum up by saying that it finally found its voice, and I returned to the novel format as a way to express it. It's not one book--it's several. Each has its own feel, even if they share characters.
It took many drafts and revisions to figure that out. It certainly wasn't laser-focused planning on my part. I will say that there's a lot more of this saga on the way, and I couldn't be happier with it.
About Goodreads Q&A
Ask and answer questions about books!
You can pose questions to the Goodreads community with Reader Q&A, or ask your favorite author a question with Ask the Author.
See Featured Authors Answering Questions
Learn more