Learn Writing with Uncle Jim, Volume 2

[James D. Macdonald]

I just posted this in another thread, but I think I'll repost it here:

Check out any best-seller list. Look at the top five or ten names.

Where did they publish their first books? Same place, right?

Now look at those publishing houses. They have lots of best-sellers, right?

So: If you want to be a best-seller, make sure your first book comes out from a house that regularly publishes best-sellers.

----------

Why five or ten names? Because doing the research on a hundred won't change the results but will take quite a bit of time.

---------

Meanwhile, over at CNN: Sarah Palin's publishing and political worlds in collision

We read, from Mary Matalin:

Full disclosure: Threshold Editions, an imprint of Simon and Schuster, (for which I serve as editor-in-chief, a misnomer of a title, since my editing is confined to reading; for you political types, think, "operative/organizer") would have loved to acquire Sarah Palin's book.

And ...

We are now all watching very closely how it plays out (and more precisely, "earns-out") in a book market that's unpredictable and fickle always, but in major transition today. The pre-orders immediately kicked it onto the best-seller lists, but a dirty little secret of publishing (where spin is as prevalent as in politics) is not all best-sellers earn out (i.e., the publisher sells enough books to cover an author's advance, which is the threshold for making a profit).

At which point I pinch the bridge of my nose and shake my head. I think "for which I serve as figurehead" would have been more accurate than "for which I serve as editor-in-chief." It's clear that she hasn't a clue about the business side of the house, and didn't check with any of the day-to-day editors, or the publisher.

In sober fact, the publisher makes a profit long before the book earns out. (Exception: when the advance is some ludicrous amount that is offered for something other than book-selling business reasons. When they start playing that game, all I can say is, "Don't gamble with money you can't afford to lose.")

Still, any number of people are going to see that codswallop, and think that an Editor Said So, So It Must Be True.

[BigWords]

Originally Posted by euclid

BigWords: Are you saying that Neil Gaiman has some of Keeler's work in his library?

Gaiman answers this himself through his journal. Alan Moore is also mentioned as having Keeler's books by Gaiman, and in the article (which prompted the answer in the jounal) it's mentioned that Matt Groening (yes, the Simpsons creator) is also a fan.

[HConn]

Originally Posted by Amb the Creative

But doesn't getting feedback help you with that? How do you judge the quality of your own work? I often end up trying to fix something that should be scrapped and redone until someone pointed it out and/or read some piece of information on how to fix it. Isn't it this process that teaches you how to judge yourself?

Yes, feedback will help identify how readers react to text. It's important to also judge your own reactions to text written by others; basically, you pick apart stories, paragraphs and sentences to figure out why they work on you the way they do.

That's vital, and several of UJ's exercises in this long two-part thread focus on that.

[maestrowork]

That's why reading widely and the ability to do critical analysis on what you read are so important. A) you know what you like and you tend to write what you like and know. B) By understanding why you like them, you have a better chance of getting it right (but not necessarily "imitating") because you'd have internalized everything already.

To me, "reading widely" and "critical analysis" go hand in hand. Some writers believe as long as they read, they will become good writers. That's not really true, or else everyone who reads a lot would be best-selling authors already. I firmly believe that we must learn to analyze and internalize what we read if we want to learn to write well.

[Izz]

Originally Posted by James D. Macdonald

Meanwhile, over at CNN: Sarah Palin's publishing and political worlds in collision

We read, from Mary Matalin:



And ...



At which point I pinch the bridge of my nose and shake my head. I think "for which I serve as figurehead" would have been more accurate than "for which I serve as editor-in-chief." It's clear that she hasn't a clue about the business side of the house, and didn't check with any of the day-to-day editors, or the publisher.

In sober fact, the publisher makes a profit long before the book earns out. (Exception: when the advance is some ludicrous amount that is offered for something other than book-selling business reasons. When they start playing that game, all I can say is, "Don't gamble with money you can't afford to lose.")

Still, any number of people are going to see that codswallop, and think that an Editor Said So, So It Must Be True.

What's with all the misinformation and disingenuousness we're getting from major publishers right now? Harlequin's new 'self-publishing' arm (outright lie, that one) and this, and there's a couple other examples on the tip of my tongue. What gives?

[Calliopenjo]

Hi Uncle Jim,

While hunting character interview questions I happened upon a page that said character traits can help tell the reader what the character looks like. Help them to imagine what they look like.

Words like thoughtful, sly, slovenly, caring, etc. are listed on the page. If I say that the character is a caring and intelligent human being wouldn't that be telling leading the reader in my direction rather than letting them interpret the story on their own?

[eqb]

Originally Posted by Calliopenjo

If I say that the character is a caring and intelligent human being wouldn't that be telling leading the reader in my direction rather than letting them interpret the story on their own?

Yes, you know your character is caring (or whatever). But you don't *say* that. Instead you *show* that through various scenes.

[Albannach]

Oh, I know this is late, but thanks for posting the index to the first one. I wanted to read it but the length is so intimidating.

[James D. Macdonald]

Originally Posted by Calliopenjo

If I say that the character is a caring and intelligent human being wouldn't that be telling leading the reader in my direction rather than letting them interpret the story on their own?

Well, leading the readers in the direction we want them to go is pretty much what this whole art is about. The trick is doing it so they don't know they're being led (or if they do know, so they enjoy it).


In other news: Yesterday brought the first two author's pre-release copies of the paperback The Apocalypse Door. It's getting real.

Today brought a new computer (that I must set up). If I vanish, that's why.

Also today, news of the release date for Lincoln's Sword. Be the first Cool Kid on your block to preorder!

[Calliopenjo]

Thanks guys. Sometimes it's the simple things that I forget.

[SoloArtist]

On the topic of books earning out, here is a blog post I found on the subject. It mentions one other possibility for books not being profitable once they're earned out.

[Calliopenjo]

On another website, somebody posted this link. It's Tom's Glossary of Book Publishing Terms.

It's a hilarious look at the terms we hear.