Mark Del Franco's Blog, page 2

So That's What We're Calling It Now

A few writers have been getting into a tangle about how writers should generate income in this new fluid world of publishing. It started with a quasi-gentlemanly spat between David Hewson and Cory Doctorow. Hewson launched with this blog post to which Doctorow took to Twitter here to respond. Others chimed in--most defending Doctorow. I have to admit, the conversations and comments first baffled me, occasionally irritated me and finally just saddened me when I realized what the conversation was really about: most writers get paid crap.

Hewson and Doctorow discussing what path to success works best is a bit like Bruce Springsteen and Lady Gaga arguing over the way to run a music career. One cultivated his audience over time. The other made a nice big splash. They both ended up behind desks with enough to live off their writing. Lost in their discussion is that both their positions beg the question of publishing success: "I am successful because I am successful." That's not a luxury 90% of writers can argue from.

Let me address this whole "multi-stream income" issue. It sounds hip and sexy and new. It speaks to innovation and bold ventures. It's none of those things. It is, quite frankly, a tarted-up way of saying you freelance or have a day job and write on the side. That's it. Nothing new. It's new economy jargon applied to the same old realities.

Some will say I'm missing the point of the discussion, that juggling multiple jobs is a necessity if you want to write. But, I would posit that isn't the real point. The point is writing isn't a live-on career for most people--not because they don't want it to be, but because it simply doesn't pay enough. It hasn't since its inception as a career choice and all this "multi-stream" talk is not about a writing career at all. It's about paying the bills any way you can. If, in fact, you have to work other jobs and those other jobs make up more than half your income, you do not have a writing career. You have a vocation that occasionally pays you some money to redo your kitchen.

Calling it "multi-stream income" may sound sophisticated, but I can't help but feel it's snake-oil talk. You're not struggling to make ends meet because you work in an exploitative industry that doesn't value its main source of material--you're multi-streaming your income! Please, spare me the smoke and mirrors.

So That's What We're Calling It Now

A few writers have been getting into a tangle about how writers should generate income in this new fluid world of publishing. It started with a quasi-gentlemanly spat between David Hewson and Cory Doctorow. Hewson launched with this blog post to which Doctorow took to Twitter here to respond. Others chimed in--most defending Doctorow. I have to admit, the conversations and comments first baffled me, occasionally irritated me and finally just saddened me when I realized what the conversation was really about: most writers get paid crap.

Hewson and Doctorow discussing what path to success works best is a bit like Bruce Springsteen and Lady Gaga arguing over the way to run a music career. One cultivated his audience over time. The other made a nice big splash. They both ended up behind desks with enough to live off their writing. Lost in their discussion is that both their positions beg the question of publishing success: "I am successful because I am successful." That's not a luxury 90% of writers can argue from.

Let me address this whole "multi-stream income" issue. It sounds hip and sexy and new. It speaks to innovation and bold ventures. It's none of those things. It is, quite frankly, a tarted-up way of saying you freelance or have a day job and write on the side. That's it. Nothing new. It's new economy jargon applied to the same old realities.

Some will say I’m missing the point of the discussion, that juggling multiple jobs is a necessity if you want to write. But, I would posit that isn’t the real point. The point is writing isn’t a live-on career for most people--not because they don't want it to be, but because it simply doesn't pay enough. It hasn’t since its inception as a career choice and all this “multi-stream” talk is not about a writing career at all. It’s about paying the bills any way you can. If, in fact, you have to work other jobs and those other jobs make up more than half your income, you do not have a writing career. You have a vocation that occasionally pays you some money to redo your kitchen.

Calling it "multi-stream income" may sound sophisticated, but I can't help but feel it's snake-oil talk. You're not struggling to make ends meet because you work in an exploitative industry that doesn't value its main source of material--you're multi-streaming your income! Please, spare me the smoke and mirrors.

Book Giveaways!

Hi Everyone,

In anticipation of the publication of UNCERTAIN ALLIES on April 28, I am running book giveaways via a newsletter.

This week's giveaway is for two separate drawings: I will be giving away two copies each of UNSHAPELY THINGS and UNQUIET DREAMS, the first two books in the Connor Grey series! Signing up for the newsletter automatically enters you in the drawing and I will notify people here of the winners.

Here's the link to the newsletter email form. That link will bring you to my website, so check out the First Chapter samples while you are there!

Also, I would appreciate those with Facebook accounts to Like my Fan Page. I post notice there when the blog is updated, as well as any current news.

More drawings will be happening in the next couple of weeks! Sign up now and you are automatically entered in those, too!

See  you....

Mark

[Mark Del Franco] My Mind or My Money

So, in case I haven't mentioned it (yeah, right), the next Connor Grey book, UNCERTAIN ALLIES, is coming out on April 28. Here's what happens to me when a book is about to be published.

First, I've been fortunate to get multibook contracts, which means that I have books scheduled to be delivered to the publisher. As it happens, I am given a year to produce a book, and they tend to be due about the time the last book is about  to be published generally around February or March. Sounds nice and orderly, doesn't it? Well, if you are me, order produces chaos.


I don't write a lot in the beginning, preferring to tinker with ideas, maybe make a few notes and generally relax from writing everyday. This catches up to me eventually. The next thing I know, I have half the amount of time I thought I did.  Some disaster hits. Every Time. But the book gets done (and my every-patient editor has granted me extensions on more than one occasion).

At that point, I am behind with my marketing stuff, which first entails website updates. This is when I start making the same decision: is it worth it to spend money on a web designer or should I do it myself. One costs me money. The other costs me my sanity.

I choose to save the money. I like playing with my website. I don't like screwing it up. I always screw it up. But I like that I know I screwed it up and where it needs fixing. Using a designer would mean I have no idea why something is broken, even less on how to fix it and it would probably cost me more money to fix. I know enough html to put together an okay site. But it takes time and, yes, a bit of my sanity.


This year, I went for a cleaner, simpler design. Few pages but with more info. No fancy dhtml gizmos that makes things flip up and down or flash or talk. Which meant I had to do the entire site over from scratch. It wasn't that bad until I started thinking about Facebook.


When I started publishing in 2007, no one really talked about social media as "social media." Now, it's a given. How do I integrate social media with my marketing efforts? Again, I wanted to keep it simple. I'm a writer, not a web designer. It's not simple.


Fortunately, lots of things have plug-and-play features. For years, I've kept a blog on Livejournal. I thought I'd integrate that. Alas, Livejournal doesn't like to be integrated without gymnastics (or a paid acocunt). It also does not customize well without learning a bunch of Livejournal-specific cockamammy. I turned to blogger. Yay! It does stuff I need. It's customizable enough that it looks like my website without a design consultation. Boo, it doesn't embed the way I want. I worked around it.


Then I decided to save time by cross-posting Blogger to Livejournal. Saving time meant two days of work that ended with, yeah, not so much. Livejournal won't accept Blogger format easily and the result looked like crap. Blogger doesn't have an option to send plain text. Back to the old cut-and-paste method.


Then I put up a Facebook Fan page. Yay, Marketing! Oh, wait, I can't do anything interactive without third party apps. I don't like third party apps so much because I don't like granting third parties access to people's info (I, unlike Facebook, do not assume that just because someone hasn't grokked the byzantine privacy features that those friends do not, in fact, want their information private). I worked around it--and ran into Facebook promotional guideline tangles (you do not want to read them).


So, I went the newsletter route. Which means I needed to produce an email form on the website, which means I had to re-teach myself mysql and php (programming type stuff). AGAIN. I don't use them everyday. I forget. Finally, I got the process to work.

After two weeks of this, my mind is mush and I have a nagging suspicion that I'm forgetting something. And then I remember.

Oh, right! I should be writing a book!


I can't wait to try self-publishing. ;)

My Mind or My Money

So, in case I haven't mentioned it (yeah, right), the next Connor Grey book, UNCERTAIN ALLIES, is coming out on April 28. Here's what happens to me when a book is about to be published.

First, I've been fortunate to get multibook contracts, which means that I have books scheduled to be delivered to the publisher. As it happens, I am given a year to produce a book, and they tend to be due about the time the last book is about  to be published generally around February or March. Sounds nice and orderly, doesn't it? Well, if you are me, order produces chaos.


I don't write a lot in the beginning, preferring to tinker with ideas, maybe make a few notes and generally relax from writing everyday. This catches up to me eventually. The next thing I know, I have half the amount of time I thought I did.  Some disaster hits. Every Time. But the book gets done (and my every-patient editor has granted me extensions on more than one occasion).

At that point, I am behind with my marketing stuff, which first entails website updates. This is when I start making the same decision: is it worth it to spend money on a web designer or should I do it myself. One costs me money. The other costs me my sanity.

I choose to save the money. I like playing with my website. I don't like screwing it up. I always screw it up. But I like that I know I screwed it up and where it needs fixing. Using a designer would mean I have no idea why something is broken, even less on how to fix it and it would probably cost me more money to fix. I know enough html to put together an okay site. But it takes time and, yes, a bit of my sanity.


This year, I went for a cleaner, simpler design. Few pages but with more info. No fancy dhtml gizmos that makes things flip up and down or flash or talk. Which meant I had to do the entire site over from scratch. It wasn't that bad until I started thinking about Facebook.


When I started publishing in 2007, no one really talked about social media as "social media." Now, it's a given. How do I integrate social media with my marketing efforts? Again, I wanted to keep it simple. I'm a writer, not a web designer. It's not simple.


Fortunately, lots of things have plug-and-play features. For years, I've kept a blog on Livejournal. I thought I'd integrate that. Alas, Livejournal doesn't like to be integrated without gymnastics (or a paid acocunt). It also does not customize well without learning a bunch of Livejournal-specific cockamammy. I turned to blogger. Yay! It does stuff I need. It's customizable enough that it looks like my website without a design consultation. Boo, it doesn't embed the way I want. I worked around it.


Then I decided to save time by cross-posting Blogger to Livejournal. Saving time meant two days of work that ended with, yeah, not so much. Livejournal won't accept Blogger format easily and the result looked like crap. Blogger doesn't have an option to send plain text. Back to the old cut-and-paste method.


Then I put up a Facebook Fan page. Yay, Marketing! Oh, wait, I can't do anything interactive without third party apps. I don't like third party apps so much because I don't like granting third parties access to people's info (I, unlike Facebook, do not assume that just because someone hasn't grokked the byzantine privacy features that those friends do not, in fact, want their information private). I worked around it--and ran into Facebook promotional guideline tangles (you do not want to read them).


So, I went the newsletter route. Which means I needed to produce an email form on the website, which means I had to re-teach myself mysql and php (programming type stuff). AGAIN. I don't use them everyday. I forget. Finally, I got the process to work.

After two weeks of this, my mind is mush and I have a nagging suspicion that I'm forgetting something. And then I remember.

Oh, right! I should be writing a book!


I can't wait to try self-publishing. ;)


Edited to add: I just realized I wrote this entire post on the wrong blog. Now I have to unpublish there and cut and paste it here. Sigh.

[Mark Del Franco] Romancing Teh Gay

I’ve been struggling with my thoughts on the recent Running Press/Trisha Telep debacle with Jessica Verday. In a nutshell, Telep asked Verday to change her gay romance short story to a heterosexual one. Verday refused and pulled the story--as did half the other contributors when they heard about it. Details here and here.

In lots of ways, this situation is not unique to the LGBT community. All minority groups suffer at the hands of the majority in one way or another, particularly in publishing and movies. Stereotypes abound, as do the justifications. What I think makes the romance anthology situation unique is sex. Not orientation. Not gender. Not sexuality. Sex. Gay sex.

I haven’t read the story, but Verday reports it contains three kisses, one use of the word ‘f*ck’ and is sexually ‘g-rated.’ Did Telep ask her to remove any of those things? No. She asked her to change the gender of the characters in order to make it “light on alternative sexuality.” That’s a reaction that LGBT people know pretty well.

Straight couples have romance. Gay couples have sex.

That’s what the underlying issue is here. No sex is pretty light on the sexuality. Why, then, the gender change if no actual sex occurs in Verday’s story? Because in mainstream publishing—and other forms of entertainment—“light on alternative sexuality” means you can have a gay or lesbian character but 1) he or she cannot be the main character 2) cannot be in a romantic relationship (unless it’s for cheap laughs) and 3) cannot express any physical affection of any kind to someone of the same sex (unless it’s for cheap laughs). You know, the sassy gay pal. Extra points if they’re single but not lonely since they’re not interested in dating. In other words, sexless. This, btw, is actually progress. Gays and lesbian used to be depicted solely as psycho, sad and suicidal.

Telep has claimed that she’s not anti-gay, and, to a certain extent, she probably isn’t. But that’s just it—to a certain extent. While Verday apparently wrote a romance, Telep’s imagination, like many others do, leaped to the bedroom. LGBT people are always viewed through a sexual lens. A gay romance inevitably leads to gay sex, even if it isn’t explicitly depicted. Someone might not want to have gay sex. Someone might not care if other people do. But a lot of someone’s draw the line at having their imaginations take them somewhere they don’t want to go. Yet, LGBT folks somehow manage to read straight romance all the time without getting all swick about it.

Ask yourself, when was the last time you saw a gay kiss in a movie that wasn’t accompanied by at least one hiss or groan from someone in the audience? Now try and recall that happening with a straight kiss. The idea that a kiss might merely express affection applies to straight folks. Gay kisses are not affection. They are sex.

Three kisses are porn, I guess.

 

 

 

 

Romancing Teh Gay

I’ve been struggling with my thoughts on the recent Running Press/Trisha Telep debacle with Jessica Verday. In a nutshell, Telep asked Verday to change her gay romance short story to a heterosexual one. Verday refused and pulled the story--as did half the other contributors when they heard about it. Details here and here.
In lots of ways, this situation is not unique to the LGBT community. All minority groups suffer at the hands of the majority in one way or another, particularly in publishing and movies. Stereotypes abound, as do the justifications. What I think makes the romance anthology situation unique is sex. Not orientation. Not gender. Not sexuality. Sex. Gay sex.
I haven’t read the story, but Verday reports it contains three kisses, one use of the word ‘f*ck’ and is sexually ‘g-rated.’ Did Telep ask her to remove any of those things? No. She asked her to change the gender of the characters in order to make it “light on alternative sexuality.” That’s a reaction that LGBT people know pretty well.
Straight couples have romance. Gay couples have sex.
That’s what the underlying issue is here. No sex is pretty light on the sexuality. Why, then, the gender change if no actual sex occurs in Verday’s story? Because in mainstream publishing—and other forms of entertainment—“light on alternative sexuality” means you can have a gay or lesbian character but 1) he or she cannot be the main character 2) cannot be in a romantic relationship (unless it’s for cheap laughs) and 3) cannot express any physical affection of any kind to someone of the same sex (unless it’s for cheap laughs). You know, the sassy gay pal. Extra points if they’re single but not lonely since they’re not interested in dating. In other words, sexless. This, btw, is actually progress. Gays and lesbian used to be depicted solely as psycho, sad and suicidal.
Telep has claimed that she’s not anti-gay, and, to a certain extent, she probably isn’t. But that’s just it—to a certain extent. While Verday apparently wrote a romance, Telep’s imagination, like many others do, leaped to the bedroom. LGBT people are always viewed through a sexual lens. A gay romance inevitably leads to gay sex, even if it isn’t explicitly depicted. Someone might not want to have gay sex. Someone might not care if other people do. But a lot of someone’s draw the line at having their imaginations take them somewhere they don’t want to go. Yet, LGBT folks somehow manage to read straight romance all the time without getting all swick about it.
Ask yourself, when was the last time you saw a gay kiss in a movie that wasn’t accompanied by at least one hiss or groan from someone in the audience? Now try and recall that happening with a straight kiss. The idea that a kiss might merely express affection applies to straight folks. Gay kisses are not affection. They are sex.
Three kisses are porn, I guess.

[Mark Del Franco] Saving Time and Cross-Posting to Livejournal

As some of you might have noticed, I've been active online this past week--updating the website, creating a facebook fan page, etc. The intent has been to simplify my online presence while broadening it.

For years, I've had a livejournal account for blogging and like it, but being a cheapskate I use the free version of lj because a) I would only upgrade to match the lj design to my website and b) I have never grokked lj's design language and don't feel the need to learn it.

Enter Blogger. With almost no learning curve, I was able to create a blog page that mimics my website quite nicely. I also like the UI on Blogger better than lj. Now, having said that, I do like the lj community--it's one of the few places online that discussion proceeds in comments without always degenerating into snarkery and trolling (tho I do love me some snarkery) and there's lots of interesting book people there.

I figured out how to cross-post my Blogger to LJ so I don't have to manually do it. The only problem is that the post title is always going to start with [Mark Del Franco], which is the name of my blogger blog. In the short term, I'm not going to tinker with the html to fix because I need to focus on other things.

LJ users: what do you think? Is it intrusive to see my name in every single blog post? Or is it no big deal?

For non-LJ users, here's the link to my livejournal so you can see what I'm talking about.

Saving Time and Cross-Posting to Livejournal

As some of you might have noticed, I've been active online this past week--updating the website, creating a facebook fan page, etc. The intent has been to simplify my online presence while broadening it.

For years, I've had a livejournal account for blogging and like it, but being a cheapskate I use the free version of lj because a) I would only upgrade to match the lj design to my website and b) I have never grokked lj's design language and don't feel the need to learn it.

Enter Blogger. With almost no learning curve, I was able to create a blog page that mimics my website quite nicely. I also like the UI on Blogger better than lj. Now, having said that, I do like the lj community--it's one of the few places online that discussion proceeds in comments without always degenerating into snarkery and trolling (tho I do love me some snarkery) and there's lots of interesting book people there.

I figured out how to cross-post my Blogger to LJ so I don't have to manually do it. The only problem is that the post title is always going to start with [Mark Del Franco], which is the name of my blogger blog. In the short term, I'm not going to tinker with the html to fix because I need to focus on other things.

LJ users: what do you think? Is it intrusive to see my name in every single blog post? Or is it no big deal?

For non-LJ users, here's the link to my livejournal so you can see what I'm talking about.

Short Distractions...

I like short films. They clock in under 20 minutes, so they make a nice break. Here’s this weeks favorite, BLINKY. I love how the robot’s face doesn’t change but depending on context, it is cute, then sad, then scary:

Blinky™ from Ruairi Robinson on Vimeo.Also, for something sweeter, here’s Shaun Tan’s The Lost Thing if you haven’t seen it. Check out the website (slow loading but worth it):

The Lost Thing - Oscar Awards 2011 for best animated short film from carrotive on Vimeo.