Mary Sisson's Blog, page 130
January 26, 2012
Progress report
Yes! There is progress to report!
Basically I'm adding a largish scene near the end, so chapter 24 became chapters 24 and 25, and the book is now 27 chapters plus an epilogue. There may be another chapter added, or I may stop there--we'll presumably find out tomorrow.
A couple of good links on marketing
Why yes, I do plan on working today. But first!
This is a neat post from Kristine Kathryn Rusch about why you should focus on writing instead of getting all caught up in marketing to the detriment of actually producing books.
And
This is a good post by Camille LaGuire (found via PV comments--seriously, read those things, they go off on the most interesting and useful tangents) about how Google ranks things and why you should really not run about spamming blogs.
I realize both these bits of advice happen to coincide with my own prejudices, but I still maintain that if someone's marketing advice makes you want to shoot yourself in the head, then don't follow it, because ultimately it will make you less eager to finish your book.
January 25, 2012
Reviewing reviewers
I didn't get enough sleep last night, so I went to work on a B project--soliciting more reviews for Trang from review blogs.
Oh my God. I mean, I realize that in this brave new world, review blogs are necessarily run by amateurs, doing this in their spare time. But seriously:
1. It is unethical to ask for payment in return for a review. I don't give a fuck if you think you are super-special and would never be swayed by money--that just proves what a deluded idiot you are. If you feel you need to be compensated for your time, sell your reviews to a reputable publication (you know, the kind that fires you if you take money from the people whose work you are reviewing) or run ads on your blog, OK?
2. It is pathetic to ask for an ass-licking in return for a review. I'm all in favor for a zero-tolerance policy regarding abusive and pestering e-mails, but I would hope that your review of my work would depend on the quality of that work, not on the fact that (per your suggestion!) I told you in my e-mail soliciting a review that I thought you were super-duper and I loved you and followed you everywhere because you are just! so! awesome! and now we are best friends!!! Honestly, what are you thinking? Why not be even more open about what you're actually reviewing, and title your blog "How Well Do You Lie and Suck Up?" Instead of stars, you could use [redacted for obscene imagery].
Also, it's nice if people actually write, you know, reviews. I really don't get it when people post the publishing information and something vague like, "Writing: Used words." You do realize you can get books for free from the library, right? There's no need to go through this "I'm a book reviewer!" charade.
Not that they're all like that, of course, but I'm amazed to see people openly doing what I would have gotten fired and blacklisted for back when I was a reporter (and, yes, I did occasionally write book reviews).
Taking a deep breath (I am calm, I am calm) and looking at this from the perspective of a writer: Just having the publishing information (you know--the book length, the description, a picture of the cover) posted on a Web site was of no use to me. And I have to question the credibility of a review site where your money or your ability to [redacted for obscene imagery] is of paramount importance. People may fool themselves that they aren't affected by payment or a good [redacted for obscene imagery], but I doubt they fool a lot of readers.
Which brings me to the larger point of why I don't see the point of gaming the system. I've written a niche book. It appeals to a certain audience. Positioning it as something else was a mistake.
I can't see how doing something like paying/performing [redacted for obscene imagery] in exchange for a "totally unbiased, really!!!" review would help me reach my target audience. I feel the same way about gaming Amazon by having all your friends buy your book on a particular day--one of the reasons that site sells so many self-published books is because of its suggest-to-sell features (you know, "People who bought THIS also bought THAT" and the like). If, say, my sister, who does not like sci-fi and prefers a cozy mystery, bought Trang off Amazon because I asked her to, that would simply trick the algorithm into suggesting the book to lovers of cozy mysteries. I have no idea what they would do with it, but I doubt it would fall in the category of "bought it/loved it/told all my friends."
What are publishers bringing to the party?
The Passive Voice has a bunch of stuff about the Digital Book World Conference today. (Apparently the conference motto is, "Learn Why You Aren't Profiting from Digital Ebook Publishing." Very up, guys, very up.) And it's all about how traditional publishers need to be more like self-publishers, what with getting books to market faster and building communities around books and lowering prices and selling short stories individually and not having crappy formatting.
And all that may be a good idea. But as traditional publishing becomes more and more like self-publishing, authors really, really need to ask themselves, Is it worth paying a premium to have a publishing house do what I can do myself for far less money? Because, hey, if the arrows in their quiver are labeled "sell short stories individually" or "toy with pricing" or "don't mess up the formatting," you have the exact same arrows in your quiver, and you don't have to pay for them.
It's not really any different than when some digital publisher asks your for half your royalties or $3,000 to do something that just isn't that complicated.
The problem isn't only that you're getting robbed blind (although that is definitely a problem), the larger problem is that you're getting locked into a business model where your books cost people an arm and a leg. Occasionally bringing the price down to 99 cents (and you really take the shaft) isn't going to help that much when the rest of the time, your book is $10 more than everyone else's.
One of the reasons why even writers who self-publish will take traditional-publishing contracts is because they perceive a value in the distribution networks and marketing programs traditional publishers have. But the vanishing of Borders and the downward spiral of Barnes & Noble means that that network is becoming less valuable (and apparently publishers are cutting sales forces, meaning they're not going to be in a good position to uncover new brick-and-mortar markets). Marketing of course costs money--the question is, can you do it yourself (or even hire someone to do it for you) for less than what a traditional publishing contract will cost you in royalties and lost sales? If you really, really think a particular publisher has excellent marketing, then you might want to go for it. But I think it would be wrong to assume a publisher has such excellent marketing that they can get people to buy $13 e-books, especially one written by someone who isn't a huge name, because evidence indicates otherwise.
January 23, 2012
Social media, blah-blah-blah
I'm not anywhere near focused enough today to edit. It's a rebound issue from being trapped in the house for a week--you want popcorn kittens, I got 'em big time. I went out to lunch today! Because I could! And I went for a walk! Because I could! (And saw two otters--wow, I wasn't expecting to be able to do that.) I'm going to go buy a pizza for dinner! Because I can! Maybe I'll invent an errand and run it later! Because I can!
Yeah, it's B project time, and Lindsay Buroker's many, many posts on using social media convinced me--well, they didn't convince me that I wasn't using social media to its full potential, because I already knew that, but they did convince me that I could better utilize social media without having it be this huge, time-consuming pain in the butt that distracts me from actually writing books.
One thing she recommended with Twitter was to use TweetDeck, because that way you can follow a gazillion people and still have a vague handle on the resulting flood of tweets. So I downloaded it, and promptly discovered that someone had put some of my blog posts in a newsletter--the person had very considerately notified me of this fact via Twitter, and Twitter never told me because I wasn't following them already! Oy, vey. I'm sure following them now!
What's also funny is that one reason Buroker thinks it's worthwhile to become something of a Twitter ho is that if someone with a lot more followers than you likes one of your tweets, they'll retweet it to all their followers. And I decided to follow Buroker, and she liked one of my tweets, and...let's just say she puts her money where her mouth is, and I'm getting more followers and retweets as a result. So that was nice--I don't think it's necessarily going to get me a ton of new fans of Trang or anything, but I do think it is important to get the word out about how self-publishing works and what to avoid.
I also set up a Facebook fan page (for myself. That's not egocentric or anything) and linked it to Twitter, so when I tweet my blog posts, the links should also show up there, too. (ETA: Argh. I thought it went from Twitter to the Facebook page, but it actually goes the other way. OK, I can make that work, too.) It's just another way that people can follow what's going on here (with, you know, the all-important minimal effort on my part).
OK--gotta go get some pizza! Because I can! (And I've got the kid tomorrow--this may shock you, but we're probably going to go out--so don't expect meaningful output until Wednesday....)
My point about the economics of self-publishing, made for me
This is a story in The Wall Street Journal about how traditional publishers are looking at the kind of sales self-publishers are having by selling low-priced books, and deciding to do that themselves.
How nice for them. But how does it affect the writer? George Pelecanos spills the beans (thank you, George):
"It's a gamble, but I want to be read," said Mr. Pelecanos, who stands to earn all of 17 cents on each 99-cent sale. By comparison, the digital edition of Mr. Pelecanos's most recent novel, "The Cut," a new series featuring a former Iraq war veteran turned investigator, retailed for $12.99. Mr. Pelecanos's cut was $2.27 on each sale.
OK, so on a 99-cent book, he's making 17 cents--which is half of what he'd make putting that sucker onto Amazon himself at that price, but that's not the scary bit.
The scary bit is that he gets $2.27 on a $13 e-book! !! !!!! !!!!! He could get that kind of money for a book he self-published on Amazon and priced at...wait for it...$3.25.
That's almost a TEN DOLLAR DIFFERENCE to the buyer! And a ZERO DOLLAR DIFFERENCE in profits to the author!
See, this gamble Pelecanos is making is unnecessary. He wants people to discover him, to realize that they are his fans--and obviously the much-vaunted marketing and distribution to bookstores provided by his publishers haven't really helped with that. So he's cutting prices and taking a hit. But by self-publishing he could drastically slash his prices and find new readers and all that good stuff without losing a dime.
January 22, 2012
There's a mini-hiatus going on
If you've noticed that I've gotten a lot less productive over the past couple of days, that's because it has thawed (yay!) and my time has been spent purchasing toilet paper, reuniting with long-lost relatives, washing the blood out of the carpet in front of the elevator doors, and the like. I should be back on track tomorrow...probably. I have power and not everybody does, so there may be some unanticipated demands on my time.
January 21, 2012
Is self-publishing like playing the lottery?
It's probably not going to shock you to hear that I think the answer to that question is no.
Traditional publishing, I would argue, is at this point very much like playing the lottery. I do not play the lottery, or roulette, or any game of chance that requires my money--or my time and effort, which also cost money--where the odds are stacked against me. (I like fire, so if I want to throw my money away to no purpose, I can always take it out back and light it up--I know I'll enjoy that.) My attitude towards lotteries is why I avoided creative writing for a long time and why I gave up on traditional publishing--any field where someone can write "I look forward to reading this as a published book.... It will be a welcome addition to the literature on slavery" in a rejection letter and not be hauled off to an insane asylum is a field I want to avoid.
Traditional publishing is not a meritocracy. It is a lottery.
Self-publishing--well, that, I feel is much less driven by luck. It seems like there really is a formula: Produce a large number of decent titles, actually put them on sale (crucial step!), and market them appropriately; see a payoff. You don't have to sell a ton of copies (because relying on writing a blockbuster is even dumber than relying on buying a winning lottery ticket).
You might notice that that is not at all what I'm doing--I'm slowly cranking out these loooong novels one at a time and not really marketing at all (although I'll market more once Trust is out. Probably). And I have the puny sales to prove it! It's all kind of academic to me, since my income comes from elsewhere--and yes, I used to hate people like me when I wrote for a living! God, they were all, blah-blah-blah never mind the market, don't you have a trust fund/fuck buddy who works on Wall Street to support you? I wanted to punch them in the face so bad!!!
Ahem. Anyway, I haven't lost an appreciation for being able to actually make a living just from your writing. So just because I'm not doing the things that would help you make a decent living self-publishing, that doesn't mean they aren't things you should be doing, if you want or need to make a decent living self-publishing.
Who is actually doing these things? Well, let's take a(nother) look at Lindsay Buroker's blog! She'd never been traditionally published. She did write for a living, but she wasn't writing fantasy fiction, so it's not like she had this built-in audience. She started in December 2010 with a novel and has been adding titles ever since. And hey, as she puts up new titles, the sales of her old titles grow, and while she's not a gazillionaire, she's doing pretty well. It helps that she's a savvy marketer, but she's more than happy to share her ideas, and they don't look like things that are impossible to replicate.
Under the old system, you could write a great book, and it just didn't matter. It would never see the light of day, and you wouldn't make a dime. Now it's definitely going to see the light of day, and while your sales might not be enough to interest traditional publishers, they may be plenty enough to satisfy you.
January 19, 2012
Progress report
Finished editing up to chapter 24, which is another problem chapter, so I figured I'd start fresh on it tomorrow. There are 26 chapters plus an epilogue, so I'm getting close to done with this editing pass, yay.
