Category Archives: Bloggery/Internetty Stuff

Insideadog on the fourth of July

Later this week me and Scott will start blogging together at insideadog. That’s right you’ll get a twofer—we will both be the writer in residence for the month of July. Though in Australia July starts on Friday the Sixth which in America is Thursday the Fifth. Got that? Not to worry, I’ll post here to let you know when we’ve started posting there.

Insideadog is the premier youth literature site in Australia—possibly the world! Past writers in residence have been such illuminati as Randa Abdel-Fattah, D. M. Cornish, Nick Earls, Simmone Howell, Margo Lanagan, Melina Marchetta, Garth Nix and Marcus Zusak. Not bad, eh? Pretty stellar company to keep. Do come over and say hi.

In other news it’s the fourth of July here in the US of A, which is their independence day. The celebration of telling the Poms to bugger off! (If only we Australians had done the same!)

Happy fourth of July, everyone! Be safe with the fireworks. Don’t drink too much. And eat only enough to make you happy.

Beauty

In the Romance discussion Sherwood Smith writes:

I absolutely loathe romances in which all one or the other brings to the relationship is beauty, and the reader is clearly expected to think that sufficient unto itself. Feh.

Oh, yes! Oh, yes, indeed!

I also hate the assumption that beauty=goodness, that beauty is something that everyone agrees about, and that beauty is something everyone aspires to.

Don’t get me wrong, finding someone aesthetically pleasing is kind of important if a romance is to happen. But I have never gone out with anyone (for more than a sec) who didn’t have something else going on as well. And, frankly, smarts and humour are vastly more important to me than anything else.

For a romance to work you have to engage with both of the lovers. If one of them only has beauty then that’s the end of my interest because the only people I’ve ever met who went out with people solely because of their hotness have been shallow and gross and not folks I want to spend any time with. Certainly not a whole novel’s worth of time. Erk.

I’m also irritated by books where everyone agrees that the hero or heroine or both is hot. I’ve never known anyone who was a universally acclaimed beauty. There’s always someone who looks at the so-called beauty and shrugs. For example, I don’t get the appeal of Gwyneth Paltrow, Paris Hilton, Matt Damon, or Leonardo diCaprio. They all look plain and boring to me. I also find it hard to see beauty in stick-thin men or women. I look at them and think, “Oh, honey. I know where we can get you some really good pasta followed by olive oil ice cream.”

So when in a book everyone is falling over themselves about the beauty of one character I don’t believe it. I’ve never seen that kind of over the top response to a person’s looks.1 Not unless they’ve swallowed a love potion of something. I know it’s a cliche but beauty really is in the eye of the beholder.

One of the many things I adore about Pride and Prejudice is that not everyone agrees that Elizabeth is beautiful or Darcy handsome. They don’t even think it of each other on first meeting. Their attraction slowly grows. And millions of readers over the last almost two hundred years have totally bought it.

  1. The only times I’ve seen everyone stop and stare is when a person is Bill Clinton or Halle Berry. Fame is the real head turner. []

I don’t normally do these

But how could I resist finding out what the American movie rating for my blog is?

Online Dating

Thanks, Gwenda, for allowing me to find out that my blog is evil.

Apparently my blog is R rated on account of the following words:

* hell (5x)
* pain (3x)
* knife (2x)
* bitches (1x)

So much for sweetness and light, eh?

Romantic conclusions

Judging from your comments here and those over at Cassie Clare’s lj the following are what you look for in a romance:

  • tension
  • conflict
  • verisimilitude
  • external obstacles
  • geek love
  • banter
  • painful misunderstandings
  • Gender-bending mistaken identity
  • super competence
  • baggage
  • equal partners
  • witty banter
  • wish fulfillment
  • restraint
  • chemistry
  • little things
  • vulnerability
  • choosing happiness
  • Character development
  • lots of witty banter
  • no internal thoughts
  • verbal sex
  • brooding
  • unrequited love
  • undying love
  • enemies in love
  • slow, lengthy build ups
  • humour
  • context
  • best friends falling for each other
  • lots and lots of witty banter

i just love this list! Makes me so happy. I agree with almost everything on it (especially gender-bending mistaken identity These Old Shades I go weak!). Thanks, everyone. Your comments were witty, thought provoking and wonderful.

So why was I asking?

Because I’ve never written a romance.

I’ve never started a book and known that one of the major plot arcs was going to be about people falling in love. But since so many of my favourite books are that way (Pride and Prejudice, too many Heyers and Kinsales to name, The Mountain is Young, Whalen Turner’s Attolia trilogy etc etc) I thought it might be fun to try my hand at it. But I soon realised that I’m really not sure how to do it on purpose. It also rapidly became clear that it’s much much much harder than it looks.

Also of that list above there are two that don’t work for me:

  • Brooding

and

  • wish fulfillment

Don’t get me wrong I was once very much into them. I loved Heathcliff! Bad boy love of any kind! But the Angel/’Buffy romance wound up just annoying me. Angel’s broodingness caused my eyes to roll. He was a WW. A whingeing wanker. Blerk.

I also used to adore heaps of books that were basically that ultimate wish fulfillment: the Mary Sue. But they don’t work for me anymore. Could be that I’m too grizzled and cynical to believe it now. The world is way more complicated than that and often when people get what they want it doesn’t make them happy.

Yet I know wish fulfillment books and brooding heroes work very powerfully for any number of readers.

So I’m struggling with the whole writing about people falling in love thing and was looking for some advice. And what you’ve given me is lots of ideas and a long list of books to check out as well as to reread (like The Master and Margarita which strangely I never thought of as a romance. When I think of that book I think of cats walking upright smoking cigars and demons floating in and out of windows. How dumb am I?) It was wonderful to see how many of your favourites are also my favourites.

It’s obvious, isn’t it? The way to learn how to do any new kind of writing is to figure out how other folks do it. Der!

So, Julia Quinn, you reckon? Or Jennifer Weiner? Or Jo Leigh? Which is the best of their books?

And again thank you so much, everyone, for all your responses. Vastly entertaining and useful. And extra thanks to Diana and Cassie (who are both pretty bloody good at the romance thing) for sending so many smart folk my way. I owe youse all one.

The F-bomb

USians sometimes talk about the “f-bomb”. A euphemism I heard for the very first time last year from a librarian whose full time job is to fight censorship. We were on a panel (at WisCon) discussing book banning and censorship in front of an audience of adults. I was the moderator and in my introduction I used quite a few of the words that are likely to cause a book aimed at teenagers to run into trouble. It didn’t occur to me not to given that the panel started at 10PM and was in front of an audience of adults.

For less than a second all the air went out of the room.

And then the librarian laughed and said as how she had been tiptoeing around those words for so long that she could no longer say them out loud. Everyone else laughed too.

You’ll notice I’m not using any of them in this post either. That’s because I happen to know that some of the readers of this blog would be offended and I do not wish to offend them.

Chris Crutcher in his keynote speech at the Humble Teen Literature Festival last February eloquently defended his use of “cuss words” (tee hee! Sorry, it just makes me giggle) in his books without using any, but making it clear which ones he was talking about. It made me wonder what the difference is between making it clear what the word you’re not saying is and simply saying that word. It’s obviously a huge one because I’m pretty certain that if Chris Crutcher deployed any of those words in his speeches he would not get as many speaking gigs as he gets and he would lessen his power in the fight against censorship.

Ironic, innit?

I happen to like swearing. Some of my favourite words are offensive to many people. And so are those of Chris Crutcher and Holly Black. The enjoyment comes not from the shock value. Frankly, none of my friends or family are offended by swearing. The pleasure is from—to borrow a term from the land of wine and food lovers—the mouth feel.

I love the way many rude words feel in my mouth. I love their explosiveness. I love to use them as punctuation, as intensifiers, as poetry, as song.

I love getting creative with my swearing. I love using old standards. I love the age of these words. The majority of the rudest words in English go back to the beginnings of the language. I love that feeling of longevity. Words like these have been exploding out of people’s mouths for centuries.

I would love to write a book for teens that used the kind of language that I hear them use every day. That I use every day. I would love to capture those rhythms and cadences. But such a book would probably not get published.

I’d also love to write a book that did everything I want it to: was exciting, dramatic, moving, fun, and populated with recognisably teen characters but also managed to not offend anyone. What would such a book look like?

There would be no swear words in it. Everyone would speak uncolloquially and without grammatical errors. Characters would only fall in love with people of the opposite sex and same race and religion, yet they would not have sex. They would not smoke or lie or cheat.

But I know people who are offended by books that create worlds in which the ten per cent of the population that isn’t heterosexual do not exist.

I’m not sure a book that offends no one is possible. After all, I’m deeply offended by unicorns and by books in which the heroine keeps falling over and has to be rescued by the big handsome hero. That’s right, passive heroines drive me spare. But lots of other people just gobble them up.

I do not wish to have those books banned. I just wish people wouldn’t gobble them up. I also wish never to be subjected to the foul smells of coffee, petrol and perfume ever again, but I don’t fancy my chances.

I don’t want to offend anyone but as long as I’m writing books I don’t see how I can avoid it.

Today’s interviews

It’s a heady batch today. Don’t miss Ysabeau Wilce over at Gwenda’s. Or Cecil at A Chair, A Fireplace and a Tea Cozy. And then there’s Bennett Madison and Holly Black. Not to mention another one with me. This time at HipWriterMama. Oh hell, you should read them all!

Congratulations, Colleen, for organising the best blog tour ever. The interviews were wonderful and inspiring. I feel all giddy from keeping up with it all week. There were a few blogs in there I’d never read before. I’ll be keeping up with them from now on. Thank you, Colleen!

My people

So I just noticed that of the 25 authors being interviewed this week as part of the summer blog tour only 3 are Australian (me, Sonya Hartnett and Shaun Tan).

Excuse me? That’s only 12%. It’s an outrage, I tell you!

On behalf of my compatriots I am now sulking until I get a firm promise of fair representation of Aussies next year. I reckon 50% would do it . . .

And there are many more interviews today, including this one with Cecil Castellucci and, um, one with me. (Eek! Enough already!)

Comment error nuked

Just so as you know: that erky error you were getting when you tried to make a comment? It wasn’t just you. Twas everyone who attempted to comment here in the last couple of days. But now it is fixed.

Thank you so much, Malcolm Tredinnick! You are my new hero. Without you and Chris McLaren I would be carving my thoughts on lumps of coal and mailing them to people.

Beginning Writers

John Scalzi told teenagers that their writing sucks. A few (but by no means all) were offended. Mr Scalzi has now responded in detail to teens who do not believe that their writing sucks.

I got a similar response from a small number of teens to a piece I wrote called “Too Young to Publish“. Those offended seemed to think that I wrote the piece to mock aspiring teenage writers. Not true!

Neither Scalzi nor I have any interest in stopping teenagers from writing. Au contraire. We both wrote then and got a hell of a lot out of it, including reasonably successful careers now. I wrote the piece in the spirit of passing good advice along. (As well as to mock the younger me.) When I was a beginning writer lots of people went out of their way to help and encourage me.

Still, were I to write that piece now I would call it “Too Early to Publish” rather than “Too Young”, because the crux of the matter is not age but experience.

I started writing stories very young, but I didn’t start writing seriously until I was 20. By seriously I mean writing regularly with the aim of publishing short stories and novels with a reputable publisher. When I first tried to get published in adult markets I was fifteen.

My work was rejected. This made me sulk (for ages) and then (eventually) write something new. I did not sit down and try to figure out why my stories were being rejected. I didn’t try to improve my work because I didn’t know how. I didn’t know how because I didn’t think my writing needed to be improved. Back then I believed the problem was not with my work, but with the foolish blind mean editors who were rejecting it.

Which is why, as Mr Scalzi would say, my writing sucked.

I have come across writers in their twenties, thirties, forties, fifties, and sixties who have a similar attitude to their writing. They think it’s wonderful and when told it’s not, even if they’re shown ways to improve it, they are bewildered, hurt or sometimes even angry.

I once critiqued a novel by a long-way-past-teenage acquaintance. I spent a long time on it because the novel showed a vast amount of potential. The writer had bucketloads of talent. But they had been in their novel for so long, and knew the characters and world so well, they’d forgotten to include vital pieces of information, leaving the reader at first intrigued, then bewildered, and ultimately frustrated and annoyed.

It was like reading a novel in thousands of haiku. My edits were pointers to where the confusion lay and to where things could be teased out, and expanded.1 They were really good edits! (Yeah, yeah, self praise is no praise. Whatever.)

The writer, black affronted, yelled at me. Then sent me dozens of emails refuting Every. Single. Point. It was astonishing. I found out later that others who’d helped had met with the same response. This writer would not make a single change. And years later they still won’t.

So despite all that talent—and they were positively corruscating with it—and many completed novels, the writer has not found a publisher. And if they ever do I can’t imagine any editor wanting to work with them more than once.

Technically that writer was not a beginner—they’d been writing for years—and yet they were. Because they weren’t learning. Their writing wasn’t getting any better and they weren’t getting any closer to being published.

I said I became serious about my writing when I was twenty. I did. But that seriousness manifested itself in volume. And it’s true the more I wrote the better I got, but only very very slowly. I didn’t make my next big leap forward until I learned to rewrite. That thing about which most writers bitch incessantly.

Back in my twenties I thought I had mastered rewriting. But what I was really doing was shifting deck chairs on the Titanic. I’d delete a bit, add a bit, push a few words around, polish bits. To say my “rewrites” were merely cosmetic would be too kind. Make up can totally change the way a person looks; I wasn’t changing nothing.

I’m still learning how to rewrite. How to go in and tear things apart and then rebuild from the ground up. It’s dirty, effortful, messy, time consuming work. What I used to call rewriting I now call a quick once over of the final draft.

I think of myself as a beginning writer, but I’m probably more like a journeyman because I actually have some idea of what it is that I don’t know and how very vast that is. Like commas! Stupid bloody commas.

Many beginning writers are clueless about the depths of their writing ignorance. And the beginningest of them squall and rage when it’s pointed out to them. But that has nothing to do with how old they are. I know a few teenage (or just post-teenage) writers who are well into their journeyman writing years. And I’ve come across all too many older writers who are no where near them.

Too many people try to rush their babies into print before they’ve learned how to tell a story, before they’ve learned how to structure a sentence, or even a clause, or, Elvis help us all, how to pick the words they want (I do not think that word means what you think it means).

Whether you’re sixteen or sixty, if you want to be published then you have to learn how to write.

  1. This is really unusual for a beginner novelist, by the way. Normally they err on the side of too much. I certainly did. []

Interviews

My first interview for Colleen Mondor’s summer blog tour went up this morning. Twas conducted by the lovely Liz B of A Chair, A Fireplace & A Tea Cozy.

Bored with reading about me? (Elvis knows, I am!) Then check out all these other interviews with folks like Gene Yang who won the Printz for American Born Chinese.

This whole week will be awash with interviewy goodness.

PS This is the post I was trying to put up when everything went down (again) this morning. It’s post number? 666.

isp woes

Yes, my site has been down on and off since Friday. Ditto my email. Yes, it has driven me insane.

My apologies to anyone who’s been sending me urgent emails. I now have close to a thousand unread emails waiting for me.

Brave new world of faster and better technology, eh?

Bah, humbug.

Starting out

Diana Peterfreund must have a looming deadline or something because she’s written two wonderfully helpful posts for writers who are brand new to the publishing industry. They include a glossary explaining what exactly, for instance, an agent does. Check ’em out!

One of the things she glancingly touches on is the idea that the already published are actively resentful of up-and-coming writers and go out of our way to lessen their chances. If that’s true why then do so many authors’ spend huge chunks of time offering advice and help the way Diana is right now? (I mean other than procrastination reasons.)

Publishing is very competitive. That’s true. Most professions are. But not in the way that most people think. One book being hugely successful can increase the chances of other books. J. K. Rowling’s Harry Potter books created a boom in children’s and YA publishing. Garth Nix says that before Rowling he was happily paddling along and then he got caught up in a tidal wave. He’s not the only one. I don’t know a single YA or children’s author who isn’t profoundly grateful to Rowling. She made our careers.

If a person really likes a particular book they don’t (usually) just read that one book over and over and over again; they try to find other books they like as much. Many kids who loved Harry Potter have gone onto read Nix and Diana Wynne-Jones and Eoin Colfer and Jonathan Stroud and so on. It’s not the end of the road; it’s the beginning.

Reading Dorothy Dunnett led me to Geraldine McCaughrean’s historicals and so on. Every time I hear there’s a new historical that’s approaching the genius of Dunnett I check it out as fast as poss. Jane Austen led me to Georgette Heyer. You develop a particular kind of reading thirst then you have to find the books to quench it.

Multitasking

I hate that word. Multitasking. So very blerky. I prolly feel that way because I’m really crap at it. Really crap.

Like this weekend I’m trying to work on two different essays, the lodger novel, and also on a short story. Not to mention all the admin (correspondence, shopping, cooking, cleaning, organising, blah blah blah).

I’m trying to get as much stuff out of the way before I get The Ultimate Fairy ed letter, which will come in the next week or so. That way I’ll have oodles of time (due date’s the middle of September) for the rewrite. I want to make it shiny shiny shiny!

Most especially I want to have a solid chunk of the new novel so that coming back to it won’t break my brain. I don’t know about other writers but I much prefer to write one complete draft of a novel before beginning the next. I hate leaving things unfinished. Not to mention that it’s really hard to keep two big novel worlds in your head at the same time. It is for me anyways.

Right now I’m nowhere near a complete draft of the Lodger (hmmm, the working title needs work, doesn’t it?) so that when I return it’ll only to take a few days (if I’m lucky) to figure out what I was thinking way back then and who the hell all the characters are. If I’ve barely got a few thousand words then there’s not a lot for me to get back into.

I cannot write more than one novel at the same time.

I’m discovering that I can’t write a short story and a novel at the same time. I can barely work on a short story and figure out what to make for dinner. The best writing multi-tasking I can manage is one essay and one novel. On account of essays are not much like stories or novels thus they require different parts of the brain. (It’s like your dessert stomach being different from the rest of your stomach.) But two essays at once? Too hard.

My other multi-tasking impairments are laziness and being very easily distractable.

Thus this weekend I’ve managed to partly re-write a (very short) essay, write half of a new (and equally short) one, make dinner, re-organise my sock drawer (truly—it was a mess!), blog three times (this will be the third), take a stab at catching up on email (then stopped after a while depressed at the impossibility of ever doing so) and update my website (a tiny bit). I also opened the short story and Lodger documents and perused them. No new words were added to either.

But I’ve read many books, much manga, watched several episodes of The Wire and a fair few articles on and off line. (None of them related to either of the essays I’m writing.)

I feel discombobulated and disjointed and feel that I’ve lost my way.

I am now closing all documents other than the essay due Monday. I am even turning the intramanets off. When I have finished and sent off the essay—and only then—I will turn to the next pressing document. I will then work on nothing but it for a bit before turning to the next one. Otherwise nothing will get done.

So successful multitaskers do you have any tips for me? I have no children, no day job, no excuses for being this crap. I know people with children and day jobs and many other responsibilities who are vastly more productive (to the tune of two or more books a year) than I am. How do they do it? Help!

Seven billion dollar post

Because that’s how much it’s costing me to be online.

I may need to do hotel-hatred management classes fairly soon.

In short:

Adelaide still gorgeous, still full of churches.

The wedding was awesome. I’m a sucker for weddings at the best of times. But this was more excellent than most. The bride’s speech rocked.

Despite the insane hotel gouging not allowing me to function in the 21st century, I’m more relaxed and happy than I’ve been in ages. Amazing how wonderful not working (and possibly not going online) and getting to hang out with my friends without feeling guilty is. More please!

Melbourne next. Where there will be much work and fun at Reading Matters. I’d link but that would lose me my second and third born children.

I leave you with a few questions:

Why is it not socially acceptable to say no to having your photo taken?

Have you ever bought books on account of reading blogs by their authors? Do you do it a lot?

Purple dress or red shoes? Can they be worn together?


PS Sorry for not responding to emails or comments. Blame the gouging hotels. Normal service will resume at the beginning of June.

I am remiss

I forgot to mention that Marcus Zusak was blogging on insideadog (I accidentally typed insideadag—Lili, I think we need a name change! Inside-a-dag is a much more accurate name for the writer-in-residence blog!) last month. Oops. You can still go over and read the archive.

This month it’s the fabulous Simmone Howell, whose debut novel, Notes from the Teenage Underground I gobbled up some time ago. Wonderful! You should all go over and say hi.

I’ve also been asked by a couple of folks to blog about the Paris-Hilton-in-gaol thing. I have no idea why anyone would want my opinion on that. I try as much as possible not to think about the Paris Hiltons of the world when there are far more interesting and talented people out there like Lindsay Lohan.

Do I think she should go to gaol?

That’s kind of complicated. I’m not convinced that gaols are the best places for rehabilitation of wrongdoers. But I certainly don’t want rich people to be treated any differently to anyone else. So, yes, she should disappear from view for 45 days. But mostly I kind of don’t care.

What I really want is for her to disappear from view for a lot longer than 45 days. For no one to have heard of her. I know we don’t live in a meritocracy, but I really really wish we did. I’m sick of vast amounts of press being given over to people who don’t actually do anything like Paris Hilton or the British royals. Who cares what Diana’s little boys are up to? And why? What a waste of words, pixels and space. Gah.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not against gossip. I loves it. I just wish we confined ourselves to gossiping about the people we know and people who do stuff not people who happen to be famous solely because they managed the tremendously difficult task of being born.

Thus endeth the rant.

Top 10 Reasons Banning Books is a Bad Idea

10. It upsets the writers what wrote the books.

9. It upsets the readers what want to read the books.

8. It makes the books cry and books are very sensitive.

7. If you really want people not to read a book, banning it will have the opposite effect.

6. If the content of a book offends you there are more effective ways to deal with your offendedness. Like, you know, engaging with it. Maureen Dowd’s columns frequently drive me spare, but I don’t try to get them banned, I argue against them.

5. Besides banning books does not make them go away. Just ask Chris Crutcher.

4. Banning books might make you feel like you’re in control, but it actually screams of lack of control. You think you can control input but you can’t. Banned books have a way of being passed around mightily and promoted during banned book week and gaining a whole other life they might not otherwise have had.

3. Banning books, you know, it kind of doesn’t encourage literacy. Last time I looked literacy was a good thing that goes hand in hand with increased life expectancy, education, living standards. Little stuff like that.

2. It’s a short step from banning books to wanting to burn ’em. People who burn books, well that is not company you want to keep.

1. Book banning clashes with everything in your wardrobe. Every. Single. Thing.

Yes, we are in Paris

But I want to update you on the Bermudez Triangle liberation efforts. As I mentioned it was banned. Maureen Johnson, its wonderful author, has just posted about the campaign to get it put back on the library shelves with some truly excellent suggestions of what we can do to help.

And John Green has posted his letter protesting the banning. If you felt like doing the same thing, the email addresses are over here.

One of the librarians from Bartlesville’s public library, Beth Degeer, has also written a wonderful letter to the local newspaper.

I must dash—I’m about to have lunch with Scott and one of our wonderful French publishers.

My quick verdict on Paris thus far: Gorgeous! Yummy! Mmmmmm!

Paris, noon, 2 May 2007

Spreadsheets revisited

Off to Paris today. I’m not sure what my intramanet access will be like while there, plus I’ll be busy, so I figured I’d best leave you with a slightly meaty post given as I’m not sure when I’ll be posting again.

For your delectation some thoughts on the efficacy of spreadsheets for novel writing:

A while back I posted a tongue-in-cheek guide on how to write a novel in which I suggested using a spreadsheet. I’m still getting letters from folks telling me what a revelation that was, how it’s transformed the way they write, solved all their plotting problems, and made their teeth whiter.

And I’m still coming across comments from those who are appalled and outraged by the very idea. A spreadsheet! For creative work! The utter utter horror! Spreadsheets are for accountants! The muse is allergic to spreadsheets. What kind of philistine is this Justine Larbalestier? (If that is her real name.)

I don’t get the outrage.

A novel is a large document containing a whole world with a population that can range from one (boring navel-gazing novel about a man trapped inside a unicycle) to billions or more (space opera where the Empress of the universe destroys a whole planet and the reader follows the last day of each inhabitant of said planet). Keeping track of all of that is tricky. The longer or more complicated the novel the harder it is to keep all of it in your head.

I’m sure some writers can do it. Some writers can also write entires novels in their head and produce but one perfect draft.

But pretty much every writer I know has some method of tracking their novel. It might be a set of notes, a wall chart, a spreadsheet, a ouija board, an outline they annotate as they go, index cards, pigeon entrails, their ghostwriter, whatever. They have some kind of a thing that is not their novel that tells them stuff they need to know about their novel.

My first novel is an epic, 145 thousand words long,1 spanning many years, with a cast of gazillions, and multiple point-of-view characters. I wrote the first draft using another word document to note down who was related to who, what the countries were, the different language groups, the seasons, things I needed to change, and etc. By the time I finished the first draft, my notes about the novel was almost longer than the actual novel. I needed another document to keep track of it. And then I needed another one to keep track of the one keeping track of the notes keeping track of the novel. Spot the problem?

My boyfriend of the time (thank you, Geoff!) suggested I use Microsoft Project. I fell in love. It was the first (and only time) I’ve been smitten by any of Microsoft’s software.2 Project was exactly what I needed: I could chart each character in relationship to the other characters over a period of days, months, years, whatever I needed. At a glance, I could see characters who disappeared with no explanation, who remained pregnant for two years, babies who stayed at the baby stage even though five years had passed since their birth.

It made rewriting much easier.

My second novel was much more straightforward, shorter, and told from only one point of view. A very short file was all I needed to keep track. And to be honest I didn’t use it much, which might be why it’s so very bad, and will never ever see the light of day.

My third novel was Magic or Madness, which while not as complicated as my first, had its own challenges, such as being set in Sydney and New York City. Towards the end of the first draft, Scott introduced me to his spreadsheet method, which made it much much much easier to track what time it was in the two different locations as well as the shifts in points-of-view.

I used the same spreadsheet for all three books of the trilogy. It made me happy.

For the Great Australian Mangosteen Monkey Knife-Fighting Elvis Cricket Fairy Young Adult book I also used a spreadsheet, but it served mostly procrastinatory purposes. The book is told from one point of view and is pretty much beginning, middle, end. It woulda been just as easy to write it without one.

So there you have it: spreadsheets neither write your novel for you, nor do they stab the grand muse of writerising through the heart. They’re just this sometimes-for-some-people useful thing, ya know?

And now I believe I have a plane to catch.

  1. For contrast all the Magic or Madness books are around 65 thousand words. []
  2. And, of course, Microsoft instantly stopped producing a Mac version. So I never got to use it again, which is a shame because it is the most excellent instrument of procrastination novel tracking I have ever used. []

Video blogging

I have a confession to make: I was mean to John Green.

I was scathing about his whole Brotherhood video blogging thing. This was mostly because I am a fan of his ye olde written blog. I missed it. I resented that he’d stopped proper posting to make stupid videos. In my defence at the time I was staying somewhere with less than fabbie bandwidth so even if I’d wanted to watch his videos, I couldn’t.

But the fact remains that I didn’t want to watch them. I even intimated to John as how his video blog was not nearly as interesting as his written blog when I had not watched a single one. How mean was that?

I also think part of my reaction was on account of the idea of video blogging fills my heart with horror. Me, I don’t even like having my photo taken. But that’s become a bit of an unavoidable occupational hazard. (Worse luck.) The thought of having to be videoed as well? Gah! Clearly John and his brother are made of sterner stuff than me.

At the urging of a certain person, I finally got past all my resistance and took a wee squizz at the Brotherhood thing. I was only going to look at one, but somehow—wham!—my whole afternoon disappeared.

So, um, John, I apologise. Unreservedly. You and your brother Hank are—along with Cecil and Maureen1—the most entertaining video bloggers I’ve seen. And the Brotherhood ones are getting better and better as you guys learn the medium and get kickarse at the whole editing thing.

Colour me, dead impressed and the latest convert to the Brotherhood bandwagon.

Mea culpa.

I take back every mean thing I ever said about you, John. I was wrong.

So what do you lot think of video blogging? Who are your favourites?

PS Sorry I’ve not been responding to as many comments as I’d like and that I’m so far behind with email. It’s crazy busy around here right now and I don’t see it easing up till June. Sigh.

  1. If only Maureen and Cecil would do the video thing even half as frequently as John and Hank! What heaven it would be! Of course, I’d never have time to write another word . . . []

Back in NYC (briefly)

The last ten days were bloody AWESOME. I don’t have words. I met so many wonderful librarians, writers, students, teachers, booksellers, readers, and other peoples. All the appearances went splendidly. Texas rocks! I loves it! More details soon.

I plan to blog ever day for the next ten because after that we bugger off to Paris, Singapore and then three weeks back home in Australia and blogging opportunities are probably going to be thin on the ground. I read some wonderful books that I want to tell you about. I also have some writing theories I want to share. Not to mention all the appearances I’m doing this week.

There’s been a micro kerfuffle while I was away because some commenters have strayed far off topic in some of the comment threads. While this doesn’t bother me in the slightest, it led to some folks being deluged with comment notifications. I’ve now put up an open post for those who want to chat about whatever. Enjoy! If folks enjoy it, I’ll put up more open posts in the future.

While I was in Texas, my good friend Cassandra Clare hit The New York Times bestseller list with her wonderful and completely unputdownable novel, City of Bones—it’s right next to Scott’s Specials! She’s now been on the list for two weeks! Woo hoo!!!! Go Cassie! Go Cassie! Go Cassie!

Me, I’m going to sleep in my very own bed. Joy!

Chat at will

This comment thread is your comment thread. Chat amongst yourselves about whatever you want. Potato, Ally, Calliope, whoever. You’re all welcome! Natter away!

Happy, happy

Australia just thrashed England in their Super Eight match. They barely broke a sweat doing it. Ha ha!

I discovered this lovely review of the Magic or Madness trilogy by a future librarian. It’s pretty spoiler free if you want a squizz. I really liked this bit:

The magical abilities are also not what one expects—Reason has an amazing aptitude for math and patterns. Her friend Tom can create magical clothing, and Jay-Tee’s magic is in movement—like running and dancing. (None of this, ooh-look-at-me-I can-fly-or-read-minds . . . etc.)

I did that on purpose! And someone noticed! Woo hoo!

Also Scott just read me the almost last bit of Extras and it is good! So. Very. Good.

And on Tuesday we fly to San Antonio where it is much much warmer than NYC and there are many cool librarians and young adult writers for us to hang with. Happiness!

Doobalackie

Apparently “doobalackie” is not a universal word for “thingamybob”—you know, that thing for which you do not have a name, that “doohickie”. I had no idea it was just us Australians who reach for doobalackies.

Is it just us? Any South Africans or New Zealanders or Jamaicans or English or Welsh or Irish or Scottish people care to weigh in? What do you call the thingie for which you do not at that moment have a name?

I learned the non-Americanness of doobalackie from the the livejournal devoted to Megan Whalen Turner’s fabulous Attolia trilogy which recently discussed my worship of said trilogy1 and wound up discussing a bunch of different Aussieisms.

The whole thing got me curious so I looked up “dooberlackie” in the Macquarie Dictionary and discovered it’s supposed to be spelled “dooverlackie” or “doovahlackie”. To be honest I’ve never seen it written down before, only heard it. That aside, spelling is not my strong point. Dunno if I’m gunna budge from dooberlackie, but. That’s how it sounds in me head. You should never mess with your own head.

It’s amazing how many words I thought were universal turn out to be Aussiesm or, at least, not much known in the US. Usians don’t do the whole brekkie, pressie, chrissie, journo, muso thing. They have no mates called Dazza or Shazza. They don’t squiz at stuff or chuck a right. They’re never lizard flat-out. They don’t know what bitumen is. And the way they pronounce “condom” is deeply strange.

How many of you English speakers have discovered that some of the words and expression you thought were global English turn out to be just from your part of the world? What words were they? Share!

In other news: it stopped snowing but it’s still too bloody cold. Also I am reading the second Buddha and I am in heaven. I heart Osamu Tezuka. Thanks, Anne!

Oh, crap, now it’s snowing again. Aaargh!!!

  1. Are there still any of you who haven’t read Megan Whalen Turner’s Attolia trilogy (The Thief, Queen of Attolia and King of Attolia)? If not, why not? On your bikes! []

It’s snowing

What is wrong with this benighted country? It’s snowing! It’s April. Spring in this poxy hemisphere. It’s warmer back home in Sydney where it’s Autumn. I hates it! Snow!!! Aaaargghh!!!!!!

In other news John Green is silly with his friends over here. I knew they didn’t get any actual writing done when they got together. Now there’s proof.

I’m interviewed by E. Lockhart and reveal that I cannot write song lyrics.

And, um, it’s still snowing. I’m going back to bed. Wake me when the snow’s gone.

Quick Note

A bunch of youse have been asking why I’m suddenly using capital letters for some of my posts. Blame, Scott.1 He claims that he can’t cope with no caps on long posts. He whinged and pouted and generally carried on until he prevailed.

So there you have it: For longer posts I’m bringing back the caps, unless, of course, I don’t actually want any of the crumblies to read that particular post . . .

  1. Oh, okay, and some other aged friends who also whinged mighty loud []

Of fans and geeks

El and Rachel Brown correctly surmised that the fan half of my question was inspired by the bruhaha about whether John Scalzi should be nominated for a fan writing Hugo or not.

For the record: yes, Scalzi should, and I hope he wins for all the reasons that have been described in great detail here, here and here. I’m also not comfortable with people telling other people that they are or aren’t “fans” or “geeks” or anything else. Those are the kind of labels you get to choose for yourself.

The geek half was inspired by my being asked to contribute a story to an anthology about geeks and geekery. My instant response was to say, “No.” Not just because I can’t write short stories, but because I couldn’t begin to think of a geeky story. (Plus no way am I biting the head off a chicken. Ewww.)

Also I was just curious about how you lot define those words. Part of what’s interesting in the great Is-Scalzi-a-Fan debate is that there were so many different definitions of what a “fan” is, which led to much talking at cross purposes. Seems thesame is true of “geek”. Veronica defined it the way I would, but Cecil defined it the way I would define “fan”.

A number of people take “fan” to mean someone who loves something uncritically. I can’t help but laugh at that when I think of the number of letters I’ve had from self-proclaimed Magic or Madness fans who tell me in minute detail the stuff they don’t like about the trilogy, just as much as the stuff they do. Clearly, these are slippery, slippery terms.

Thanks everyone for such fascinating responses.

So why do I call myself a fan but not a geek?

Let’s take the word “fan” first. I’m not a fan of science fiction, which may sound odd for someone who did a Phd on it, which became a book. To be honest the whole PhD thing was never a passion. All I’ve ever wanted to do is be a writer, but as everyone knows there’s no money in that, so I went for an academic career to support my writing habit. The subject of my PhD was an accident. I’d read sf as a kid but I’d read lots of other things too and, honestly, I think the vast majority of sf (film, television or film) is on the nose. Many of the so-called classics of the genre like the work of Isaac Asimov or Arthur C. Clarke or Star Trek or Blade Runner leave me cold.

It’s the world building that does it for me with science fiction, being transported to somewhere that is not like the world I know. I get that just as readily from books about places I’m unfamiliar with: Japanese crime books fascinate me; Australian ones not so much. I also get that button pressed by books from the past (Jane Austen, Tale of Genji,1 Elizabeth Gaskell, Miles Franklin et al) historicals, fantasy, westerns and so on. Raymond Chandler, Patricia Highsmith and Jim Thompson create worlds that are almost completely alien to me. I adore their work.

I love the writings of Samuel R. Delany and Maureen McHugh and Ursula K. Le Guin. But I’m not convinced that it’s the science fictioness of their work that does it for me. I’m just as happy when they’re writing fantasy or memoirs or criticism or blogging or whatever else they choose to write. I love the way they string their words and sentences and paragraphs together. Yum.

If I were to be banned from reading one genre it would be less of a hardship for me if that genre were sf rather than fantasy or historicals. (Naturally, I exempt manga from all these categories.)

I’m also not a fan in the sense that Ulrika is talking about. That is I’m not a member of a community that came together around a love of science fiction in the late 1930s and is still going strong today. Or am I? I definitely feel like I’m a part of the WisCon community. For years I helped with the running of that particular science fiction convention. I was on the ConCom. Can you get much more fannish than that? And, like John Scalzi, I feel very much at home with many members of the science fiction community who definitely consider themselves to be fans.

However, I’ve never written fanfiction. So I’m not part of that thriving aspect of fandom. Nor do I read it. Though there are definitely books and stories I love, like The Wide Sargasso Sea, that are a kind of fanfiction—but the kind that plays around with out of copyright texts and thus gets to be published.

I’m happy to call myself a fan not just because of the WisCon thing, but because there are a lots of things I love. Elvis Presley’s voice. Cricket. Madeleine Vionnet and Hussein Chalayan’s clothes. The writing of way too many people to list here. I love Bring It On and Deadwood and Blue Murder and My Brilliant Career and ES and Nana and Osamu Tezuka and mangosteens and the food of countries like Spain and Mexico and Thailand and Japan and Italy and Ethiopia and the great wines of Australia and New Zealand and Argentina and South Africa and Italy and France and Spain and many other places.

I don’t think the word “fan” implies uncritical love. There are clothes of Vionnet and Chalayan’s that I think are naff, Cricket matches that bore me, Angela Carter books ditto, and Spanish food and French wine I’ve had to spit out.

So why aren’t I geek?

First up, the word is American and doesn’t have much resonance for me. I never heard it as a kid nor “nerd” neither. Not outside of a John Hughes movie. (That’s not true of younger Aussies.)

The people I know who are self-described nerds or geeks have passions for stuff that bores me. Video games, role-playing games, board games and the insides of computers. I have many friends who are into these things and, well, I am not like them in this regard. I do not know what “chaotic good” is, even though Scott’s explained it to me like a hundred times.

I’ve had flirtations with various computer games over the years, but my attention span for them is microscopic, and ulimately I’d much rather be reading a book.

Once I got into Go for about a year, to the extent that I was playing it with a bunch of Go fanatics on servers in Korea, and reading books on it. But it was largely research for a novel I was writing. When I finished writing the book my interest in playing Go lapsed. It’s still by far the best game I’ve ever played, but I doubt I’d even remember how anymore. I haven’t played since 1999.

Many of my geeky friends are also collectors.

I hate stuff. I spend a large chunk of my life recycling and throwing stuff out. I hate things that sit on the mantlepiece and serve no purpose other than to collect dust. I see no point in them. Nor in stuffed animals, or dolls, or collectable cards, or any of that. I love cricket but I have no desire for cricket stuff cluttering up my house and am endlessly giving away the cricket tat people give me (clothes excluded).

If I collect anything, it’s books, but I cull them ruthlessly and often. If I’m not going to reread it, or I’ve had it for more than a year without even cracking the spine and there seems little likelihood that I will, then out the book goes.

Also I have a terrible memory. Always have had. I can’t tell you what year Bring it On came out, or who directed it, or who all the actors are without looking it up. I have to read a book a billion times before I can remember any details about it and even then I’m pretty crap. I just did a test on Pride and Prejudice I don’t think I’ve read any book more times than that one. I got 5 out of 10. I would not be able to tell an original Vionnet gown from a knock off. I do not have the trainspotting gene.

So, yes to “fan” and to “enthusiast” (thanks, Bennett), no to “geek” or “nerd”. I’m also quite happy to be called a “dag”. Yes, I am also a “spaz”. (Though, Christopher, I say to you: Know thyself!) And “dilettante”? Oh, yes, that’s me. I have the attention span of a gnat.2

  1. I confess I have never finished The Tale of Genji despite repeated attempts. The bits I’ve read have been fabulous. It’s just that the book is so damned heavy and hard to read in bed. I know, I know . . . dilettante. []
  2. Except for blogging, apparently. Bugger but this was a long post . . . Sorry! []

Fans & Geeks

A question for you all:

Would you describe yourself as a fan, or a geek, or both? And if you do describe yourself in that way what do you mean by it? What’s your idea of a “fan”? Or of a “geek”?

For the record I’m a fan but not a geek.

My very first online ad & other matters

For the next month, there’s an ad for Magic’s Child up on Locus online. Tis my very first one and I’m dead excited. Ordinarily, I can’t stand ads but somehow it’s different when it’s an ad for one of my books. That makes me want to pat it and sing it songs. Lovely, lovely ad. Designed by the fabulous Courtney Wood who also made those beautiful screensavers which you can now download from the links in the sidebar.

There is now a cover for the Science Fiction Book Club’s 3-in-1 version of my trilogy. It’s called The Magic or of Reason.

In other vainglorious news, the Hathor Legacy likes Daughters of Earth, describing it as the “perfect marriage of fantastic stories and excellent critical analysis”. Yay! That’s what I was going for.

And to stop skiting for a second, wouldn’t it be great if this happened? An ODI series between India and Australia right here in NYC? I could bring all my USian friends what want to learn about the noble game and convert them to the glories of cricket in their own country. Bliss!

Also this could be the day Magic’s Child is released into the wild. i await reports. Remember there is a prize for the first person to send me photographic evidence that my latest book exists and it may not be as crappy as I said.

Amazon meanness (updated)

Further to Maureen’s wittiness on the topic, I thought I’d add some (sadly) serious thoughts.

First, I’ve heard from pretty much everyone that reviews by punters on Amazon have zero effect on book sales. Let me repeat that for the amazon-review obsessed writers: Amazon reviews have zero effect on book sales. We writers are tieing ourselves in knots over nothing. Do not worry your pretty little head about your amazon reviews—it will not hurt your sales or your career—just your feelings.1

Update: I was referring to nasty Amazon reviews having no effect. Should have made that clearer. Also I have since heard from folks who have worked at or with Amazon that Amazon’s own research shows that punters’ reviews on Amazon has no stastistically significant impact on sales. They may sway you, but that puts you in the minority (according to that research). The vast majority of people going to buy books on Amazon already know what they want. They do not browse. (On the other hand punters’ reviews seem to have an impact on the sale of appliances etc.)

It’s also important for writers to remember that book sales on Amazon are not a very signifcant chunk of the overall book market. I’ve heard estimates that range from 3% to 7% as to what that share is. You can sell badly on Amazon and still be selling very nicely indeed elsewhere. /end update

The reviews on Amazon that make me crankiest are the toxic attacks on writers which almost always say little about the book they’re purportedly reviewing:

I went to tihs riter’s websight and they are bigheads and narcarsitac adn this book sux and they smell bad and there girlfrend is a ho.2

I have taken to pressing the “report this” button cause “reviews” like that really are inappropriate. Review the book, not the person. We all know some writers are jerks, but that’s got nothing to do with the books they write. Some of my favourite books were written by people I’d rather not ever have a beer with. Or, you know, be on the same continent as. Doesn’t stop them being fabulous writers.

What is it with Amazon reviews that brings this viciousness out in certain people? Would they say stuff like that to the writer’s face? What is it about the internet that makes some people feel free to be mean in a way they never would if the person were standing in front of them?

As it happens this syndrome has a name: “online disinhibition effect” and a bunch of research is being done on it.

So next time you’re starting to add something cranky to a comment thread or on amazon or wherever perhaps you should ask yourself if you would say what you’re about to share with the greater online universe to the person’s face. If you wouldn’t then don’t post it.

I wish someone had given me that advice a long time ago. Sadly I’ve been online since 1993 and, um, I have sent many an email and comment that I really really wish I hadn’t. The worse thing, of course, is that stuff will come back to haunt you. I guess that’s why so much online viciousness is posted anonymously. Wish I’d thought of that!

So, anyone want to share (anonymously if you prefer) some of your online misdemeanours? Anything you regret? Am I the only one who’s succumbed to “online disinhibition effect”?

  1. No laughing matter, of course. I believe I’ve mentioned the horrible condition that most writers suffer from: thin-skinitis. []
  2. In case you were wondering: No, I’ve had no such nasty reviews written about me. I mean I’ve had reviews from folks who didn’t like my books but no attacks on me personally. []

Why?

Why do I keep writing novels that involve numbers? I am spending today going through the Great Australian Cricket Mangosteen Fairy Monkey Knife Fight Elvis YA novel and counting things, many different things, because sadly it is a vital part of my plot.

Why?

Why do I keep doing this to myself? I am borderline inumerate (and deeply ashamed of it). Hmmm . . . Maybe that’s why? My shame keeps prodding me towards numeracy. Stupid shame. Stupid numbers.

Let this be a warning to anyone still in school and inclined to slack off in maths class. It will bite you in the bum later. Study hard! Pay attention! This stuff is important.

In other news Maureen is handing out the best advice ever on dealing with a crappy Amazon review. It’s official: Maureen is my favourite comic writer of all time.

One of my favourite Amazon activities is to go to my fave books and order the reviews from lowest stars to highest. I then go through hitting the “no” button. “No, your stupid review is not remotely useful! No! I say, No!” It’s remarkably cathartic.

Speaking of comic, scary brilliance. You should all go see The Host. It’s so fabulous that even the New York Times noticed. Best monster movie ever.

Also Diana seems to agree that the relaxation poses in yoga are excellent for solving plot holes and other problems with your novel. Meditation? What’s that?

Okay, I have procrastinated enough. I must return to counting. (Stupid novel!)

Day jobs

Rebecca asks:

Got any suggestions for day jobs? What were yours?

Good question.

My jobs were: babysitter, sales assistant, receptionist, cleaner, waitress (very briefly), admin worker, IT support, academic.

Being an academic was my main day job and the one I held when I finished my first novel and countless short stories. I found that the research I did often fed into my fiction, but at the same time I found it very difficult to switch between scholarly and non-scholarly writing.

But I’ve heard many say that being an academic is perfect for a writer because you can get a lot of writing done during the long summer vacations. I’m not convinced. All the academics I know work their arses off over summer, teaching summer school, revising courses, and doing loads of other admin, not to mention writing all the scholarly articles and books they need to secure tenure and promotion.

I met this guy once who claimed that being a builder was perfect for a writer because there was nothing you took home from your job. At the end of the day when you were finiished you were finished and could throw yourself into writing your novel.

I open the question to all you writers:

What are (were) your day jobs to support your writing habit? What jobs do you think are the best for a writer to have? Rebecca needs your guidance.

Getting paid, or, don’t quit your day job

I promised some friends that I wouldn’t blog about the business of writing for a while and I haven’t in ages so, um, you two? Avert your eyes.

Recently some dear friends of mine sold books for the very first time. A small round of applause for their hard work and good fortune! Yay, them!

And as you do (and as I did) they’ve started planning how to spend their advance money (such that it is). They were suffering from the missaprehension that they would be seeing the money sometime soon. I disabused them.

Now I would like to disabuse you.

Before I begin two things:

    1. I’m only talking about publishing payment practices in the US of A and I’m only talking about mine and my friends’ experiences of them. I have never worked in publishing. I’d be grateful and interested to hear about varying experiences both here and in the rest of the world. And I’d love to hear from those who pay as well as those who receive.

    2. I suspect some of you are hazy on what exactly an advance is. (I was.) An advance is a sum of money that is paid (or advanced) to a writer by a publisher against the future earnings of a book. So when a writer is made an offer of money for their book that offer is an advance.

    I sold my first book (not a novel) to Wesleyan University Press for US$1,000. I got to keep that money no matter what happened, but I didn’t get any more dosh from Wesleyan until the royalties (a percentage of each book sold, can vary from 5% to 12% depending on format) on the book exceeded the $1,000 needed to pay Wesleyan back.

Here’s what happens when you sell a book:

A choir of angels sing and fairy dust descends from the air

Once you have accepted an offer on your book the nitty gritty of the contract must be negotiated. This is tricky to do and involves things like “escalation clauses” and “sub-rights” and is why it’s a stupendously excellent idea to have an agent do it for you. Believe me they earn their 15%.

How long that process takes depends on whether your agent already has a specific pre-negotiated contract with the publishing house or not. When I negotiated my contract with Penguin USA for the Magic or Madness books it didn’t take very long because I had no idea what I was doing and said yes to pretty much everything. Ah, the perils of negotiating a contract agent-less.

Once that’s done the contract has to be drawn up. How long that takes depends on the publishing house. Once it’s done your agent checks it. Believe it or not, sometimes there are things in the contract that shouldn’t be there, items that have specifically been negotiated out. This is another reason it’s such a great idea to have an agent.

One of the items specified in the contract is not just how much you will be paid, but how you will be paid. Typically (but definitely not always) your advance is split into thirds. The first third you get upon signing the contract, the second upon delivery and acceptance of your manuscript, and the third upon publication.

If you have a three-book deal of say $15,000 a book1 your total advance is $45,000. Thus you get $15,000 up front as the third on signing because you are signing for all three books. Then you get another $5,000 when the first book is delivered and accepted because that is a third of the $15,000 advance for that book. Then another $5,000 on the publication of the first book. And so on for the second and third book. Your $45,000 winds up being spread over at least three years, but sometimes more than four or five. This depends on how long before your first book is published.

Back to the contract:

Once your agent approves it, you sign it, and the contract is returned to the publishing house where the department that handles payments issues a cheque. I have seen the gap between signing the contract and receiving the cheque be anywhere between two weeks and a year. Any of you had a quicker turnaround? Slower?

The gap between accepting the offer and the contract being offered can also be many weeks. So it’s not only possible but usual for it to take at least six weeks between the intial offer and your cheque showing up. And, frankly, six weeks is fast.

And remember that’s just the first third. The other two thirds will come to you in third of a third parcels over the next few years. It means that your writing earnings could well look like this (minus your agent’s 15% which I haven’t taken out on account of my mathematical ability is not up to it):

2007: $20,000 (payment on signing, delivery & acceptance of 1st book)
2008: $10,000 (publication of 1st, delivery & acceptance of 2nd)
2009: $10,000 (publication of 2nd, delivery & acceptance of 3rd)
2010: $5,000 (publication of 3nd)

It will especially look like this if, like me, you didn’t know enough to make sure that your three-book deal wasn’t joint accounted. I sold my trilogy in 2003 and although the first two books have already earned out their advances I have not seen any royalties. Nor will I until the third book earns out as well. That’s what joint accounted means: The accounting for all three books is tied together.

It’s also increasingly unusual for a book to come out that quickly. I have several friends who sold books last year that aren’t scheduled for publication until 2009 (or in one case 2010). In which case their spread could look like this:

2006: $20,000 (payment on signing, delivery & acceptance of 1st book)
2007: $5,000 (delivery & acceptance of 2nd)
2008: $5,000 (delivery & acceptance of 3rd)
2009: $5,000 (publication of 1st)
2010: $5,000 (publication of 2nd)
2011: $5,000 (publication of 3rd)

Obviously living on $5,000 a year is tricky. Most full-time writers I know are getting bigger advances than that, or writing more than one book a year, or doing other kinds of writing, or all of the above. Scalzi did a recent breakdown of his fiction writing earnings over the past few years.

The more salient point: Most writers I know have a day job.

Each one of those payments comes less quickly than you think it will. I naively thought that my payment on delivery & acceptance of my first book would come automatically as soon as my editor had accepted the manuscript. It did not come until I asked for it. Or rather several weeks after asking.

This is not unique to publishing. It is, in fact, the lot of the freelancer: No matter who you work for, no matter what the industry, the gap between doing the work and getting paid is a LOT longer than we freelancers would like.

Hope this has been helpful.

Do please fill the comments thread with criticisms, questions and accounts of how it works in other places. I’m all ears. (Or, you know, eyes. Whatever!)

  1. That’s an above average advance for most genres I know about. I chose it because it’s easier to do the maths with an advance of $15,000. []

Bad Writing Day

Here are some of the things that guarantee a bad writing day:

  • laptop making loud and disturbingly ominous noises
  • no fingernails left to bite
  • person writing nearby typing too loudly
  • person writing nearby sighing too loudly
  • too many interesting blogs to read
  • not enough interesting blogs to read
  • the availability of the internet
  • the non-availability of the internet
  • the moon not being in the seventh house
  • the moon being in the seventh house
  • the long google search to figure out what the moon being in the seventh house actually means
  • the siren call of other more interesting novels that want to be written
  • the siren call of other more interesting novels that want to be read
  • not to mention the graphic novels and manga and pile of New Yorkers
  • it being the wrong time of the month
  • it being the wrong time of the year
  • it being the wrong hemisphere
  • a recently developed allergy to typing and pencils and pens and any known means of conveying words in head onto paper
  • helper monkeys being lazy
  • non-availability of replacement helper monkeys
  • novel failing to rewrite itself

Care to add some? I know I’m not alone.

And now I begin this writing day. May the internet not tempt me, the moon be where it’s supposed to be, and the helper monkeys well behaved!

Readings and 500th post

Next week there are three readings in Manhattan that you all need to get to:

Tuesday, 6 March, 7PM (Doors open 6:30 PM)
Andrea Kail and Lauren McLaughlin
will be reading as part of The New York Review of Science Fiction Readings
Admission is free but if you want to support the series a $5 donation would be lovely
South Street Seaport Museum’s Melville Gallery
213 Water Street (near Beekman)

I don’t know Andrea Kail’s work but she shares a background in film and TV with Lauren and sounds most interesting indeed. Lauren’s work I do know. She’s awesome and her book Cycler is hilarious. It’s about a girl who turns into a boy once a month. It comes out from Random House in 2008 so this is your chance to say you knew all about Lauren way back when. Cycler‘s going to be a hit.

Wednesday, 7 March, 6-8PM
Me and these other fabulous YA authors will be reading our little hearts out:
Eireann Corrigan (Ordinary Ghosts)
Erin Downing (Prom Crashers)
Leslie Margolis (Price of Admission)
Justine Larbalestier (Magic’s Child)
Maryrose Wood (Why I Let My Hair Grow Out)
Daniel Ehrenhaft and Adrienne Maria Vrettos (reading from the 21 Proms anthology)
Tompkins Square branch
New York Public Library
331 E. 10th Street (cnr of Ave B)

That is a mighty fabulous lineup. How could you not venure out into the cold to see us? Also I may be handing out Magic or Madness trilogy bookmarks. If I remember to bring them that is. Are you sure you can go through life without such a bookmark? I didn’t think so.

Thursday, 8 March, 7-8:30PM
A reading and discussion with Yvette Christiansë author of Unconfessed.
A book signing reception will follow.
Labyrinth Books
536 West 112th Street
between Broadway and Amsterdam

I’ve spoken about Yvette’s work before. So I will be brief: She’s a genius. You do not want to miss this!

So that’s what I’ll be doing this week. I hope I get to see some of you lot at one of these events. I’ll be the one complaining about the cold.

Also this is my 500th post on this blog. Not bad, eh? If only writing novels were as easy as blogging . . . Here’s to another 500 posts!


PS My friend says many thanks for all the audio book suggestions. Do keep them coming.

What I did over the weekend

The short version of the past three days:

  • The Humble Teen Lit Festival was unbelievably wonderful and run by the awesomest group of librarians and teachers ever. Thanks for taking such great care of me, Dawn!
  • The Humble students and the other folks who showed up were smart and receptive and asked lots of questions I hadn’t been asked before. Fabulous!
  • My old man is insanely popular. I mean I knew he was popular, but I didn’t realise he was that popular. I thought I was going to burst I was so proud of him. You shoulda seen his signing queue! Around the block! Mental!
  • Scott’s family are lovely. Catching up with Uncle Ronnie the principal (and wow do his students love him) and Jackie and Ken would have made the trip totally worthwhile without the added bonus of Teen Lit Festival.
  • All writers obsess about their character’s shrugging or smiling or raising eyebrows too much.
  • Apparently there are two airports in Houston. Ooops.
  • Getting from one to the other is a seventy dollar cab ride.
  • Way too many of you lot are deeply deluded about vampires. It saddens me.
  • None of you knows about Scott Pilgrim?! This causes me great pain. Go out and read the three volumes immediately! That’s an order.
  • Although I feared three days without my computer it turned out to be way more of a blessing than a curse. I may now take a couple of days off from its evil thrall once a week. Or monthly. Or possibly every six months . . .
  • It was still lovely to come home to all your mail and comments here. Bless!

And now I go pass out. While being other places is wondrousness, getting to and from them is increasingly horrible. It took us fourteen hours to get from Houston to NYC. That’s how long it takes to get from LA to Sydney . . . That ain’t right.

Fan art and librarians

Writer and artist, Chris Howard, was so inspired by reading Magic or Madness he painted a portrait of Reason:

It amazes me that my books have inspired some folks to commit art. Makes me all teary!

I’m also made teary1 by the awesomeness of the vast majority of librarians. The recent kerfuffle over a dog’s scrotum has led many to think that librarians in the US of A are all for banning books over a single word. This is emphatically not the case. The American Library Association has a whole division that goes to battle to protect intellectual freedom in the US of A. They’re the ones who bring us banned books week. They fight the good fight! They are all godesses. (Even the boy librarians.)

Teariness also comes over me as I contemplate all the kids’ books that have the word “scrotum” in them. (Mostly because if I had one I would cry if these things were done to said body part. I mean, OW!) Via Read Alert.

  1. Best segue ever, eh? []

Zombies, unicorns, scrotum (updated)

What have I started? Arguments about the relative merits of zombies and unicorns rage across the intramanets. And on each thread someone suggests the zombie-unicorn hybrid. Great minds think alike? Or fools seldom differ?

I was greatly distressed that lovely friends of mine like Holly Black, Cecil Castellucci, Meg McCarron and Literaticat have fallen pray to the false glittery charms of unicorns despite the fact that being virgin fascists unicorns would have nothing to do with them. I guess it falls into the whole desiring-what-you-can’t-have camp. Perhaps to resolve our issues Holly and I should collaborate on a Zombies vesus Unicorns novel? I will write the zombies and she can have the unicorns. Though I’m not sure how well that will work given that she won’t read about zombies and I won’t read about unicorns.

Some school librarians are saying that they won’t have Susan Patron’s Newbery Award-winning novel, THE HIGHER POWER OF LUCKY, in their library because it contains the word “scrotum” (in reference to a dog). Apparently “scrotum” is an offensive word. I had no idea. I thought it was an anatomical term for a part of the male body. I’ve never heard anyone use it as a swear word and I come from a swearing people.

The New York Times also covers the story but seems to think that authors sneak words like “scrotum” into their novels solely to offend.1 Um, what now? Rosemary Graham responds eloquently to the extremely unbalanced Times coverage. The best reporting on the whole story can be found at Publishers Weekly which points out the role Jordan Sonnenblick and Asif! had in drawing attention to it.

I write novels to tell the best stories I can for teenagers. I try very hard to write characters who are believeable and I choose the language they use accordingly. I do not set out to offend anyone. I’m sorry when that happens, but I’m not going to write less believable stories in order not to offend people. That leads to the worst possible kind of censorship: When you start second-guessing yourself. Can I use the word “pom”? No, that will offend English people. Can I use the word “pink”? No, that will offend pink-haters (and possibly also pink-lovers). How about “jasmine”? No, Margo Lanagan will come gunning for me. When does it end?

Librarians and school librarians in particular have an incredibly hard job. I admire them tremendously. I just wish we were living in a world where people’s response to being offended was to talk about why, to explain the history and context of the word, and how that has made it offensive to them, rather than trying to wipe the books that contain the word off the face of the earth. I mean I am not advocating banning books about unicorns. I just won’t blurb them.

As soon as it is warm enough to go outside I’m off to buy a copy of The Higher Power of Lucky from my local children’s bookshop.

Update: Scott adds his two cents’ worth.

  1. For the record, if concerned adults can find the naughty words we wicked authors sneak into our books then we clearly haven’t been sneaky enough. []

More on blurbs, plus zombies

I am so proud that my serious, soul-baring post about the trials and tribulations of blurbs wound up turning into a debate about whether unicorns or zombies are better. Sometimes I just love my genre people.

This response to Scalzi and me on blurbing also made me smile. I am, indeed, very proud of this sentence:

“How do you tell someone you shot their dog cause you really hate unicorns?”

The writer of that post suggests that it would be amusing to just blurb everything and if you don’t like a book give it an ambiguous blurb of the “I cannot praise this book too highly” variety. Clearly they meant it in jest, but it reminded me that there are writers out there who do exactly that.

Writers of this ilk let you know that they don’t like your book via their blurb:

Justine Larbalestier’s Zombie Dancing is the worst kind of commericial romantic filth. My eyes they bleed! I would rather eat my own entrails than be in the same room with this “book”. Run away as fast as you can!
—Discerning Genius Writer, author of genius books that sell very well thank you very much

It’s only happened to me once (very early on in my career) but, wow, did it hurt. Basically in four sentences this famous (in Australia) writer said they thought my writing sucked and I had no future.

Ouch.

Frankly, I think writing ambiguous, indifferent, or bad blurbs in the real world is passive aggressive nastiness. If you don’t like a book, don’t blurb it. Writers are delicate fragile creatures. Don’t be pouring acid on them!

To sum up, zombies are a zillion, bazllion, katrillion times better than smelly old unicorns, and blurbs are a tricky business.

Blurbs

John Scalzi has a post up explaining his blurb policy. He even kindly explains what blurbs are.

I think his policy is so spot on that I’ve adopted it (slightly amended) as my own:

1. Yes, I am happy to look at books and if I love them I will blurb them.

I adore reading my peers’ work and getting to read them ahead of publication is particularly exciting. It makes me feel like I’m really part of the Young Adult publishing world with my little ole finger right on the pulse. Not to mention that being asked for a blurb is an honour.1 It says that someone somewhere thinks my say so might be good enough to sell a book. That’s flattering as hell. I mean, Wow.

So far I’ve been lucky: None of the books I’ve been asked to blurb have been bad. And yet I’ve blurbed only one novel. I’ve not blurbed books I thought were pretty darn good because I didn’t think they’d be a good fit with my audience. Or because they touch on certain taboos or bugbears of mine. (You know, like unicorns or negative portrayals of Australians.)

I have now read and not blurbed several books by people I know and like and who’ve written other books I would have blurbed in a heartbeat. It sucks, but not as much as having my name on the back of a book that I feel uncomfortable about. I can’t have my readership thinking I endorse unicorns.

I have to really love a book or think it’s doing something important or new to have my name on the back extolling its virtues. I don’t have the largest readership in the world, but I want my readers to know that if I’m talking up someone else’s book I’m really into it. That way if they read it, hate it, and call me on it, I can in good conscience say, “I blurbed it because I loved it. I’m sorry you don’t agree.”

2. Requests for blurbs should come from the book’s editor or publisher, not from the writer.

That’s the ideal, but sometimes your editor is too busy, or your press too small to do it, and it falls on your shoulders. I understand. I’ve been there.

Scalzi gives lots of excellent reasons why it’s better for the blurb request to come from the publishing house than from the writer. I’ll add another one: it’s really embarrassing for a writer to have to ask another writer to publically praise them.

I’ve had to ask writers to sing the glories of me. Even if I know they like my work, and are likely to be willing, it makes me feel like I’m going to throw up. I really really really hate having to ask. I’d much rather have someone else do that. I’d much rather not know if a writer chooses not to blurb me. I’d much rather not even know who was asked.

And I’d really much rather have writers not know I’ve been asked to blurb their books so it never comes up that I haven’t done so. Having to explain to a friend why you won’t blurb their book is one of the world’s least fun things to do. Me, I don’t even like hurting the feelings of authors I’ve never met! Scalzi’s right, it’s just like shooting their dog. And how do you tell someone you shot their dog cause you really hate unicorns?

I have several writer friends who have a no-blurb policy. I’m starting to think that’s a really good idea. The reason I can’t adopt it is that so many people have blurbed me. It would feel churlish not to blurb other people. I know from fan mail that people have picked up my books because of blurbs from Holly Black, Samuel R. Delany, Cory Doctorow and Karen Joy Fowler. While I don’t have anywhere near their audience, if a blurb from me will help someone new whose work I love, than of course I will blurb them.

The other scary thing about blurbs—and let’s face it they’re a whole lot of terror for a writer—is that they’re really really hard to write. Seriously it’s easier to write a whole new novel than it is to write a good blurb:

“You should read this book. It is really good. I liked it. Heaps.”
—Justine Larbalestier, author of books that must really suck if that’s her idea of a good blurb.

Gah!

  1. Though who gets asked is a mystery to me, seeing as how I get asked to do it so much more often than Scott “New York Times Bestselling Author” Westerfeld does. What’s up with that?
    []

Important matters

1. I have been accused in certain circles (okay, in certain emails) of deliberately not mentioning the English win in the recent ODIs against Australia in New Zealand. So here you go, you whingeing poms:

    Yay, England for finally stringing together three wins in a row! Way to peak at the right time. Yes, you are now contenders for the World Cup next month. Go forth and be happy!

    It’s still only One-day cricket, but.

2. I’ve also been meaning to remonstrate with one Maureen Johnson who has let down her fellow pro writers by revealing one of the most closely guarded secrets of our trade. First it was Matthew Cheney, and now Maureen. When is this going to stop, people? Are you going to start selling your secret decoder rings to the punters? I hope you remember the sacred oathes you swore. Don’t forget that there will be repercussions!

3. I’ve also been asked why I think it’s okay to hurt Maureen Dowd’s feelings when I’m so precious about novelists’ feelings. To which I can only respond: Well, der. I am a novelist. Of course I’m more worried about our feelings. Besides it’s well known that columnists are made of much sterner stuff than thin-skinned novelists. They are mocked all the time and are well used to it. But every time a novelist is mocked a little piece of the world’s communal imagination disappears in a tiny puff of smoke. It’s on your own heads if you mock us.

The one exception is John Scalzi who has managed to maintain the thick hide of a columnist despite becoming a novelist. You can mock him as much as you want. He loves it!

4. Over in the magical land of livejournal, there’s some really fascinating discussions going on about urban fantasy and the demonisation of “normal”. I have much to say on this subject and am struggling to get them together in a way that makes sense to anyone but me. But they involve lots of thoughts about Pan’s Labyrinth and fairy tales.

5. I have discovered a good thing about the cold. When you fall over in the street, you’re so padded with gloves and coats and scarves and etc etc, that it doesn’t hurt!

6. Feel free to share some matters you consider important.

Reviews

The ethics of accepting free things for review is being debated amongst comic reviewers. Can you give an unbiased opinion about a book or comic or DVD or whatever if it’s a freebie? Etc etc blah blah blah.

Please! Of course, you can.

I have to admit I find this debate a bit yawn-worthy. Reviewers and critics have been getting stuff for free and then completely slamming the stuff they don’t like since the dawn of the printed word. If someone out there is giving only good reviews to the free stuff then they’re not worthy of the name “reviewer” or “critic”. They’re poorly paid advertising. Readers can tell the difference.

Colleen Mondor agrees the debate is pretty silly. She also makes a really excellent point over at Comics Worth Reading:

I am sure it is frustrating for creators to know their books (or comics) are being sent out there and then not hear anything from reviewers, but it is just one more step in the long frustrating game of publication. Honestly, I think writers should be glad that there are so many more venues for their books to be reviewed now then in the past —at least with the web you can get your work reviewed by literally hundreds of places, rather than relying on a very few the way it was twenty years ago. At least you have a decent shot to get some publicity.

This is so very true. In the last six months or so I’ve been finding accidentally stumbling across roughly a review a week of one of my books somewhere on the intramanets. Some are just a line or two, others are much longer. That’s a lot of talk about my books that would not have existed ten years ago. Or even five. Not all are positive, not all sites have a tonne of traffic. So they’re not generating oodles of sales. Doesn’t matter. It’s absolutely delicious to be able to read what my audience thinks. To have tangible proof that I have an audience. No matter how small.

I remember way back in 1993, at my very first science fiction convention, meeting a published writer who had already published five or six books. She told me one of the things she liked best about cons was getting to meet people who’d read her books. “Otherwise, I’d just be writing in a vacuum. Most of my books haven’t been reviewed anywhere.”

My eyes bugged out. It had never occurred to me that you could be a published author and not be reviewed. (It had never occurred to me that you could be a published writer and not be living on champagne, mangosteens, and caviar with rainbows of happiness cascading all around you.) Now, of course, I know better.

I’ve just finished a trilogy. The first book was widely reviewed in the offline press, the second book—not so much. I’ll be interested to see what happens with the third. I’ve heard that the longer a series goes on, the less you get reviewed. (You know, unless you’re J. K. Rowling.)

But I do know that even if I get no “official” reviews at all. There’ll still be online ones. There have already been a few. I came across the lastest one today. It’s from one of the regular commenters here, Rebecca, and it’s her very first book review. I think it’s excellent, but I’m incredibly biased. She says

Magic’s Child does everything I could have hoped for and more. If you aren’t already reading it, or on the waiting list to borrow my copy of Magic or Madness (hehe, I have a waiting list), then you should go out and get the books RIGHT NOW. Plus, Magic Lessons just came out in paperback. And so I must conclude that Magic’s Child is awesome and was an excellent, surprising, and exciting end to the trilogy (which, incidentally, I pulled an all-nighter to read. Yes–it’s that good 😀 ). Read it. Everyone. Now. 🙂

So, yeah, what Colleen said. This writer is very glad indeed that the intramawebbies has produced so many more venues for reviewing and talking about the things we love. Yay intramanets!

Calling all Melbournites

A friend from the frozen north, Chris McLaren, is choofing off to Melbourne soon and will have a whole day to spare for sightseeing. What should he see? And will he be able to see anything given the bushfires?

I recommended the Croft Institute because it has test tubes in it and they make me happy.

He would welcome any advice, recommendations and warnings about the fair city of Melbourne from actual Melbournites.

An interview and some questions

Adrienne Martini interviewed me for Bookslut about Daughters of Earth and Battle of the Sexes. Go have a squiz. Co-incidentally Martini was just interviewed by Scalzi and it made me want to read her book.

The questions:

If Stephen Colbert shook your hand today would you ever wash it again? Just wondering.1

Is Diana Wynne Jones’s latest book, The Pinhoe Egg, her best in years?2 Oh, you know it is. That book made me so happy!

  1. Not that I have any plans of washing while it’s still winter. What if the hot water cuts out while I’m all soaped up? I’ll wash again in June when I leave the flat again. []
  2. Not that the last few books were bad in any way, shape or form—I don’t believe that she could write a bad book—they were just less genius-y than my faves of hers. []

Shiny, shiny, new!

There’s a lot of unwisdom about publishing (and pretty much everything else) out there on the mighty intramanets. Fortunately wise folks like Holly Black are battling the unwisdom with wisdom:

I’ve noticed there is a trend to believe that a writer should get their first book out by any means necessary—that even paying to be published is establishing a “track record” that will impress future publishers. Scam publishers claim it all the time, but the claim has been made so many times that it’s trickled down into being part of aspiring novelist folklore.

Don’t believe it. A track record tells the publisher what to expect from that author, which is why a poor track record is worse than none at all. Publishers are—like all entertainment—looking for the next big thing. Unpublished first novels are potential bestsellers just as much as they are potential anything else. That’s why “debut novel” sounds exciting and “sophmore novel” sounds, well, less exciting. Publishers aren’t looking for a track record. They are looking for a great book that they can sell like crazy.

Publishing is a greedy, greedy machine that is always looking for shiny, shiny new authors! I know that’s hard to believe when you’re struggling to be published, but agents want to find new clients, editors want to find new authors, and publishers are desperate for the next Harry Potter, or Da Vinci Code, or whatever. And they don’t necessarily want it to be exactly like those books, they just want it to sell like those books.

Published writers sometimes complain about up-and-coming writers getting all the attention. “I’ve published six books now! But do I get the advances of that shiny new author? No, I do not! Where’s the justice?”

Those complaints are just as silly as the unpublished writers who are convinced the big New York houses are uninterested in new talent. You might have puny advances now, but you don’t know what’s ahead. Lots of authors who’ve had a bunch of not particularly successful books go on to have hits. Dan Brown is a good example. So is my old man. Scott’s first New York Times bestseller was his thirteenth book (under his own name). And Robin Hobb is a fabulous example of how to resuscitate a failing career.1 Sales taking a nose dive? Then publish under a different name.

Obviously, not every published author is going to have the career of a Brown or a Hobb or a Westerfeld. The thing is though that you never know who’s going to have that break out book. It could happen to you. And if it doesn’t happen with the first book, it could with the thirteenth. Or when you change your name, or switch genres.

You can find examples of every kind of publishing success story if you look hard enough. First time young novelist makes it big. First time old novelist who ditto. Overnight success story. Writer who has been plugging away forever is finally published with a huge advance, a big Hollywood deal, as well as graphic novel adaptation, and a Broadway musical. Many are the paths to publishing success.2 It’s good to keep that in mind while you struggle.

Twenty years passed between my first submission to a pro adult market and my first sale. I aimed to be published by the time I was 18, then by the time I was 20, then by the time I was 25, then 30. All those ages zoomed by without publication. My first pro sale came when I was 35. By then I had long since stopped aiming to be an S. E. Hinton or Thomas Chatterton and switched to modelling myself on writers who didn’t sell until later in life, like Elizabeth Jolly and James Tiptree, Jr.

That’s the beauty of publishing, unlike dance or any sport, there is a role model for you no matter how old or young you are, no matter what circumstances you’re writing in. And you don’t even have to give up hope on your deathbed cause there are plenty of posthumous publishing successes as well.

See? In the world of publishing there can even be a bright side to death.

  1. Failing in terms of sales, not artistically—I’m a fan of the Lindholm books. []
  2. And, yes, many are the paths to publishing failure. But let’s not go there, eh? This is me in Pollyanna the glad girl mode. []

Love of writing

Doris Egan has a lovely essay about writing from the heart that explains that it does not mean writing drippy and sentimental (unless, you know, that’s your heart’s desire), but allowing yourself to write what you want to write without second guessing yourself.

I have heard people object to the idea that you should write what you love on the grounds that some people have no talent and no taste and what they love is too hideous for words.

Leaving aside how subjective the idea of talent and taste are, why can’t people without either write if they want to? Who are they harming? (Other than the eyes and brains of those who read the slush pile, but they knew the dangers when they took on the job.)

Lots of people write who have no intention of ever being published or becoming a pro writer. Why shouldn’t they? I like to dance, but I’m not ever going to make a living at it.

Sure there are lots of people who try to become pro writers and don’t succeed. There are lots of actors, singers, musicians and dancers who are unable to support themselves doing it. So they find other ways to make a living, but keep on doing what it is that they love.

I know I talk here a lot about writing as a profession. That’s because I’m a pro writer and the realities of that concern me greatly. But if I stop being able to make a living at it, I will not stop writing. This isn’t just how I earn my money, it’s a huge part of who I am. Most of my writing life has been spent unpublished and without an audience. It never stopped me.

I love writing. If you love it, no matter how talentless others might consider you, then write.