Saturday, March 31, 2007

POD Critic Gets the Lulu Radio Treatment

So, tonight I got a chance to sit down and listen to the Lulu Radio program, #26, hosted by Jason Adams and Mur Lafferty. Turns out they mentioned the good old POD Critic blog—and, just for the record, Ms. Lafferty (and I know this isn’t obvious) the POD in my eponym is to be spelled out when spoken, like UPS, and not pronounced as a word. But anywho, I must say, I rather enjoyed the program. There was sort of a lengthy exposition—or what seemed like one—about my submission guidelines, and there even seemed to be some confusion on Mur’s part as to why I list speculative fiction as a genre in my guidelines along with sci-fi, fantasy, and horror. I mean, aren’t they one and the same? Well, yes, but speculative fiction is an umbrella term that also covers various subgenres within those genres. And rather than list those various subgenres individually, I prefer to blanket them with the umbrella term. It kind of simplified things for me; but, to avoid any confusion on the part of future readers, I have altered the language in the guidelines concerning this.

If you want to give the program a listen, you can access it here. They mention me about halfway through, following a discussion on the great POD-dy Mouth.

Thursday, March 29, 2007

iUniverse Book Reviews

Have you published a book through iUniverse? If so, then I direct your attention to the aficionado of iUniverse produced POD books. The review blog is called, quite fittingly, iUniverse Book Reviews, and its owner is a qualified and stalwart voice of reason, with a keen eye for quality to boot. The official submission guidelines was recently posted; but before you peruse that, devour this mandatory read, what is essentially an engaging treatise on the current state of blogs. This will give you a wide window into the mind of a gifted reviewer. Get your queries ready and have at it. Submissions are open.

The site doesn’t appear in my link list as mere happenstance.

Story Ideas and Their Unusual Origins

I got my hands on the recent issue of GQ magazine, the one with a scantily-clad Lindsay Lohan gracing the cover (hey, my wife brought it home from work and handed it to me. She works for a company that heavily advertises in GQ. Besides I, uh . . . I read it for the articles). I bring this up because of an interview they featured; one with Quentin Tarantino. In it, he reveals something about his past, back when he clocked time as a video store clerk and felt like his life was going nowhere. Occasionally, Tarantino—under the crushing force of the inescapable ebb of life—would engage in what he called, “Detest-Fests”—the magazine describes these moments as acts “of meticulous self-laceration, detail[ing] how short he was falling of his ambitions.”

These moments of deep despair would be a thing of the past, however, for success would come in the form of a thriving filmmaking career. What I found interesting is that, early on in that career, Tarantino admits to feeling like he wasn’t “going to die,” either “in an earthquake” or “a plane crash,” because he had “stuff to do”; and in his words: “God didn’t put me here to take me out.” This admission doesn’t mean that he rushed headlong into danger, no. He simply “wasn’t sweating earthquakes and airplanes.” Then he brings up the car he drove around for a while, before he hit it big. It was a Geo Metro, a subcompact little thing that was sold in North America between 1989 and 2001, and was noted for being one of the smallest conventional autos around. Small, however, doesn’t mean safe.

Following the success of Pulp Fiction, Tarantino says: “I start thinking, Maybe I’ve done what I’m supposed to do. . . . Meaning, it was possible that his Maker was done with him. With that in mind, Tarantino started feeling unsafe, especially driving around in a little Geo Metro. He eventually opted for a much more reliable Volvo. When he brought up the car during a conversation with someone working in the film industry, he told them his reason for buying the car in the first place. Tarantino recounts this person’s response: “Hell, just buy any car you want, give it to a stunt team, and give them $10,000, and have them deathproof it. They can do that with any car.” Tarantino says he never forgot this; and, in fact, the advice eventually sparked the idea for a screenplay, aptly titled, “Death Proof.” The movie, a slasher film of the same name, will feature a killer (Kurt Russell) who will use a “deathproof” car—rather than a power tool, knife, or gun—to do away with his victims. It is set to be released shortly, as part of a Grindhouse double feature that will include Robert Rodriguez’s Planet Terror. You can’t say these boys aren’t nostalgic.

It just goes to show: ideas for a story can come from anywhere. But you have to be open to them, even if their origin is unusual—no—especially if they are. Transferring those ideas onto paper is, however, another “story” altogether.

Wednesday, March 28, 2007

Site Stats From the “Big Day”

The POD Critic blog hasn’t been up two full months (that mark will be met in another couple of days) and already the site is bursting at the seams with visitors. Just yesterday, March 27, 2007, I had a total of 432 unique visitors to the site, all of whom gave me 970 clicks. A whopping 361 visitors were referred by the Miss Snark blog (I take my hat off to her). I don’t expect these numbers to be matched any time soon, mind you; yesterday was a singular event. The numbers are still big, thus far, but it’s like the second weekend after the release of a blockbuster movie—there is usually a slight or significant drop off thereafter.
_____________

BlogBurst

I contacted BlogBurst—as part of my publicity efforts for the blog—and I received a reply email from them today. Don’t know who they are? Well, in their own words:

BlogBurst, by social media leader Pluck, puts the web’s best blogs in the hands of top-tier publishers to bring you new traffic, new readers, and new revenue.

And from Pluck.com:

Pluck’s BlogBurst Syndication Network is a premium content sndication service that matches thousands of topical, editorially selected blogs with top media sites and web portals. BlogBurst helps publishers and media companies add relevant content and fresh perspectives that engage users and drive site traffic.

So, why am I sharing all of this? Well, like the rest of the media outlets concerned with trade publishing, it turns out BlogBurst doesn’t care too much for blogs dedicated to the print-on-demand industry. This form email arrived in my inbox today:

Thank you for requesting an invitation to BlogBurst. At this time your blog is not a good match for our current set of publisher partners. However, our network of publishers is quickly growing and we encourage you to check back with us occasionally. We expect for many of the blogs not invited in this early period to be a part of the BlogBurst network in the future.

Thank you for your interest in BlogBurst, and best wishes.

Best Regards,
The BlogBurst Team

“Check back with us occasionally”? What, do they think I’m pining for inclusion in their “esteemed” network? I’ve got a day job, and a life. Alas, I am still working hard for you POD folks, and I intend to continue doing so for the unforeseeable future. I expect that all of you will do the same. This, after all, is your industry. It is up to you to build it up, because “they” certainly won’t help you. In fact, I suspect that everyone is waiting for this whole thing to implode, hence all the recent attention.

*Pops champagne cork*

Here's to proving them wrong.

Tuesday, March 27, 2007

Print-On-Demand: Clearing Up a Few Things

I tell you, the more I try to get away from this subject, the more I find myself being pulled back to it. It’s a gravitational force of sorts. Why I’m even offering this post is due to a few misconceptions I’ve read on the blogs of others; blogs that make reference to several statements I made in a recent post.

First and foremost, when I say that POD technology is mainly in the hands of rank amateurs, I’m not blind to the fact that large publishing houses use the method for their backlists. Truth is, there are, proportionally speaking, far more individuals employing the method than there are publishers, large or small—meaning more titles are filed by individual authors; but of course the number of books sold by large publishers will exceed books sold by individual authors. Therefore, my reference to the technology being mainly in use by rank amateurs is not focusing on publishers, but authors, who, as individuals, far outnumber publishers. *Sigh*

Now, I refer to print-on-demand as a business model because that is essentially what it is. Printing methods are more than just technologies to publishers nowadays. Some publisher websites even have mission statements that highlight the environmental advantages of print-on-demand, while at the same time decrying all other printing methods. When you can build up a publishing company on a printing method, and rely solely on that method for your unique business operations, and can state that it is being employed for environmental reasons (and that no other method will do) you are in fact establishing a business model. A business model is a model, formal or otherwise, that represents a particular aspect of a business, and that includes an operational process (e.g., printing). To say that print-on-demand technology is not a business model is to be uninformed.

Also, if anyone thinks that because big publishing houses, having adopted print-on-demand methods for their backlists, means that the future of POD has already arrived, bear in mind that the method will first have to be used exclusively for their frontlist titles as well. What will determine the true economic advantage of POD technology will be the adoption of its use by large publishers for frontlist books. Right now, that is not the case. Big publishers are not sending frontlist titles produced via POD to reviewers, bookstores, or any place else for that matter. When that begins to be the case, then we can say that the future has arrived. By then, the warehousing of books will decrease, and the shift in publishing will be nearly complete.

Also, as to the misconceptions surrounding my reference to “small POD presses” (they are micro, in truth) take a look at this post. Half the time I’m not speaking of subsidy presses, such as Lulu, iUniverse, etc.

That said, I’ll let all of you continue to hash this out in the comments section, if you even choose to.
_____________

P.O.D.LINGS

My fellow POD book reviewer, P.O.D.LINGS, informs me that he has updated his submission guidelines to accommodate the electronic submission of PDF files—this in lieu of hard copy subs. This will save many of you time and money in acquiring a review from him. I also notice that he has addressed some of the things I’ve been complaining about lately, as regards review blogs that dole out nothing but positive reviews for all things POD, whether the books are high quality or not.

Check out the reviews he posted on March 20 and March 21, 2007; they’re very detailed and constructive, especially when compared to his past reviews.

Monday, March 26, 2007

The Future is Print-On-Demand (POD)

After exchanging a few emails with Jeremy Robinson on Friday, I have decided to posit a few more thoughts concerning print-on-demand and its increasing impact on the publishing industry. This post is not a reflection on Mr. Robinson, but rather, it is directed at authors and publishers who employ POD methods; I speak to you in general. Too often I hear complaints along these lines: “Since my book was published via POD, I can’t get this or that trade news magazine, newspaper, or literary journal to review it.”

Here’s my thinking: Why are you chasing them down? Leave them be. They don’t want to consider your work? Don’t rack your brain trying to figure out how to get your work in front of them. The time for that is not yet. First and foremost, things have to change on this side of the industry. Publisher’s Weekly, The New York Times Book Review, they have to have good reason to take a POD book in hand—knowing that it’s POD—and feel assured that their stalwart reputation will remain intact following the publication of a review of your work, even if that work is high quality. Right now, the words “print-on-demand” elicit nothing but negative reactions from just about everyone working within the library and book trade community. And given the quality of the majority of POD books out there, I have to ask: Can you blame them? Not at all!

The truth is this: print-on-demand technology, as I’ve told others, has the capacity to revolutionize the publishing industry; to alter it almost entirely in fact. I’m not just talking about the way books are printed and distributed; I’m talking about an overhaul in business models as well, right down to the day-to-day operational processes and organizational structures of presses, both large and small. It will get to a point where a valuable network of partners, once out of reach to the POD micropress, will become accessible, in effect narrowing the divide between the conglomerates and those publishers operating below the visible horizon. In truth, this is already the case. Ingram Book Company acts like a veritable distribution partner for publishers signed with their subsidiary, Lightning Source, Inc. (LSI). However, they are not a distributor in actuality, but a wholesaler; there is a marked difference, but I won’t go into that here.

Access to the nation’s largest wholesaler is not all that a publisher is afforded by signing up with LSI; Baker & Taylor comes with the package, and the usual Amazon and Barnes & Noble online listings are inevitable. Like I said: a narrowing of the divide. The future is POD, folks; and like I told Jeremy Robinson, you're a part of a burgeoning industry, as authors and publishers, and everyone will soon have to adapt to it. This industry will go the way of the credit card, or the New York subway MetroCard that replaced the old tokens. The technology is extremely logical; it just has to be used effectively.

Right now, print-on-demand is an advanced printing technology and business model that is mainly in the hands of rank amateurs. Many authors, and even a few publishers, employing the method are, in essence, inexpert and unprofessional. That is what happens when there is no real (affordable) training program or adequate learning apparatus readily available to the masses. The entire POD system is, in effect, abused; hence the heavy criticism and standoffish positions from those on the other side.

In the words of a writer who recently mentioned me in a post on her blog over the weekend, one of the purposes of the POD Critic blog is to “foster[. . .] and promot[e] all aspects of quality work[—]writing, editing, and production.” I feel the word “foster” is exactly germane to what I am attempting to do here. One of three senses the word carries in its transitive verb form is as follows:

2. To promote the growth and development of; cultivate: detect and foster artistic talent. See Synonyms at advance.

The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition

While print-on-demand is the obvious next frontier in publishing—as everyone will soon settle there, like pilgrims migrating to the New World—the only question that remains is: When will it happen? I think what would help most is authors and publishers taking it upon themselves to, not only learn the ins and outs of this business, but to apply, fully, what they’ve learned; make sure it’s showing in each book.

The good news is I’m here to help. Now, as to what I said above—the thing about leaving the trade reviewers be—why not focus your attention and efforts on building up your own circle of renowned reviewers. Listen, The New York Times didn’t become The New York Times on its own; it was due in large part to the actions of the people; the masses. Sure the paper has earned more Pulitzers than any other news organization, mainly because of the quality of the subject matter poured into each issue, but it would be nothing without its readers; they are its support base, the gas that fuels its sterling reputation. A large audience is really only a huge collective voice . . . of the people; world public opinion is the largest voice there is. If you want to have your work seen by respected persons on the other side, you have to work to make that happen. First and foremost, make sure your work is produced at the highest level of quality possible. Second, promote your favorite POD review blogs (on forums, on your own blogs, in chat rooms) and build awareness. Some are already doing this, including the writer whose link appears above (and for another example, see here). Additionally, just this morning, I received an email from the ultra-popular, Miss Snark, who asked whether I'd mind if she added a link to this blog.

Getting back to my point, however, the more people added to your collective voice, the stronger that voice will become, until those on the other side of this industry will have no choice but to come when that voice beckons them.

Saturday, March 24, 2007

An Awards System

An anonymous visitor commented on a recent post as follows:

I'm glad someone has taken up the mantle of POD reviewing that was done so well by GirlOnDemand for 2 years. Now that she is calling it quits, maybe you can reinstate the Needle Awards, or someting equivalent.

Instead of typing a reply comment, I felt it best to respond in a formal post. Now, I know that in my very first post I mentioned something along the lines of eventually organizing an award system that would deliver some eminence to deserving authors, but with the stated departure of POD-dy Mouth, I almost feel it wrong to emulate her in any way; I would like nothing more than to honor her contributions to the POD cause by not attempting to repeat the things she did. That includes an award system. Even my reviewing methods are different, as is the range of books I choose to review; and this is purposeful on my part. The truth is, I want to contribute something unique, and I find that I’m doing just that.

Anyone is free to emulate what I do here; that is fine, and I even welcome it, but I will not repeat what POD-dy Mouth has done. So I’ll have to find a way to honor your suggestion without betraying my convictions.
_____________

Update

One writer weighed in with thoughts on this post, so I've added it here for your convenience. This is what he has to say:

I have to agree with you on this point. You are already doing us (POD authors) a great service by even reviewing our work. To basically clone another reviewers method of raising awareness of certain works to traditional publishing houses is not necessary on your part, you're already doing that.

The awards system limits worthwhile exposure to just a few books; every book that's worth reading should get exposure for a possible deal. It's tough to get any exposure, so I for one appreciate any that I get, and I know that I'm not alone in that regard.

Some POD authors say that they write for the love of it and that self-publishing is the only venue they will consider.

I say "Hogwash".

I'm not a hypocrite; of course I'd love to get a REAL publishing deal. All of us write because we love it, whether we are POD, self-published or established and traditionally published authors.

So, I say, review on. You're doing fine.

Thank you for that, Mr. Emery. Good, solid points; and, again, I'm thankful for them.

Friday, March 23, 2007

What I’m Currently Reading

I'm at the beginning of a sci-fi book that I received from Chris Gerrib, The Mars Run, the review for which will be posted soon. I’ll be diving into Olga Swan’s Schadenfreude right after, and that promises to be an unpronounceable title. I'll eventually get to all of the submissions following my review of Schadenfreude, but I ask that you please show a little patience, as I put a good deal of time and effort into reading submitted material and writing exhaustive reviews for same.
_____________

Comments

The comments feature is now open to everyone, not just registered bloggers. If you feel you have something to say, say it. In fact, I encourage comments from readers; but please, try to be considerate. This is a PG site.

If you don’t hear from me before the weekend is out, have a great one.

Raising the Past - A Review


Author: Jeremy Robinson
Publisher: Breakneck Books
ISBN: 978-0-97865-511-2
Pages: 308

The discovery of the frozen remains of a fully intact woolly mammoth touches off a daring scientific expedition in the remote frozen tundra of the Canadian Shield. The author describes this Northern region as “the top of the world, where everything nature had to offer meant death to a man: the unforgiving ice, the frigid sea, even the wildlife.” Backed by a zealous financier named Brian Norwood, a ragtag team of experts is tasked with unearthing the mammoth—hence the title of the book—and Norwood’s hope is that this dig will lead to one of the greatest scientific achievements to date—a mammoth clone, made possible by the retrieval of viable DNA.

Once the mammoth is raised, however, the team discovers more than they bargained for, as an ancient women is found frozen inside, clutching a pill-shaped metallic object—what appears to be a modern device. Danger follows this momentous event, and a strange new enemy emerges—an enemy bent on recovering the device in question, which sets off the obligatory chase. What’s more, this enemy holds a secret that casts a sinister shadow over both human history and widely held spiritual beliefs.

The pacing in Raising the Past is something to marvel at, as it is near pitch-perfect. Robinson doesn’t linger long in areas that slow the action, nor is the action too profuse. Moreover, there are smooth transitions in the succession of events—events that, need I say, maintain a nice ebb and flow over the course of the novel. And aside from the solid narrative, what really makes the story move and adds an extra dimension of realism is something a lot of new authors take for granted or often flub on: the dialogue. Robinson writes it as though it was snatched from life and filtered just enough to suit his whims. But not only are the conversations lively, many of them are also integral to the plot.

Are there errors in the book? Does one really need to ask? The usual misspellings crop up on certain pages (the word “check” appears in place of “cheek,” for instance—eh hem—twice); closing quotation marks are facing the wrong way, particularly when they follow an em dash; there are errors in tense, and a few grammar issues and phrasing choices could use a little smoothing out—dialogue as well; and there are poor word choices, such as the one found on page 38. There we read:

Across the aisle, Nicole peeked at Eddy, looking past the latest addition of Documentary Maker. She put the magazine down and motioned to Mark Vincent, her camera man. [Emphasis added]

I believe the operative word Robinson was going for is “edition,” not “addition,” but a more appropriate word—since we’re talking about a magazine—would be “issue.” On another note, the characters in Raising the Past are not exactly three-dimensional, multi-layered specimens, but you hardly expect that in a book like this. After all, this isn’t a work that strives to be literary in any sense, therefore it isn’t judged in that respect; it just wants to knock you on your keister, and it does.

The reality is this: Raising the Past works on so many levels because the author managed to craft a solid story, contain it within a broad set of parameters (plotting, pacing, structure, etc.) and deliver what is, at the end of the day, a true contemporary thrill ride. The book is brimming with action, suspense, and intrigue, but it is the way Robinson delivers these story elements that leads me to believe he is a writer that deserves to be taken seriously.

Robinson also receives credit for the book’s cover, which is both striking and appropriate; but it should also be noted that he is responsible for the layout, which looks equally professional in my view (even the ellipsis points are spaced correctly). Also, his expert use of hyphens along the right margins eliminates the unusually wide spaces between words that would otherwise stretch out certain sentences. These comments aside, there are errors in this department as well, as certain words have apostrophes in them that bear a different font from that of the main text; in addition to that, single and double quotes, when coming directly behind each other, lack a hair space between. But, overall, the book has a beautiful looking interior.

Some might think parts of the story are clichéd; granted. But what I care about is whether the elements Robinson chose to employ—borrowed or not—are delivered with deftness. After all, no story is completely loaded with originality anymore, and if something works, why not recycle it; bend it to your symmetry. Robinson does just that, with a clear eye toward entertaining his readers. It is also quite obvious that he is an avid reader himself, because he has taken a few lessons and applied them here. The book held my attention from prologue to epilogue, and that says something about the story itself; it is taut and engaging, but it doesn’t take itself too seriously, so it doesn’t elicit the kind of speculation and criticism other works might—nor should it. Does this mean one has to read the book with his or her mind switched off? Certainly not; there are times the book delves into profound territory, but it usually concerns science and technology; two subjects that add an interesting layer to this story, which is a credit to Robinson’s careful research.

Are there better writers out there than Jeremy Robinson? Of course—too many to be named, I’m sure—but there aren’t very many better storytellers. And considering the genre he chose to write in, he’s fortunate to be stronger in the latter. That’s what sells books; and that’s what any writer really wants anyway, despite their most sincere assertions to the contrary.

Wednesday, March 21, 2007

Cost-Effective Advertising

Effective advertising, or the lack of it, will, in some cases, make or break a large company. Many companies have sizable advertising budgets that account for a major portion of their annual spending. Publishing companies are no different. New authors who land big contracts with big publishing houses are often surprised to learn just how much is spent on the advertising for their books; we’re talking astronomical figures when compared to smaller presses—counting everything from radio spots to newspaper and magazine ads, and even public placement, such as in subway stations, on trains, on billboards, and wherever else. Small POD presses, and even self-published authors, can’t be expected to go in for such exorbitant costs.

So, what’s a fair solution? Cost-effective advertising, that’s what. The internet is ideal for this kind of thing. Do you have a website? No? Are you nuts? Get one—a professional one at that. The more professional the site, the more clout you’ll earn. Do you blog? No? Start a blog, but make certain you’ll be able to dedicate time to composing informative and entertaining posts that will keep your readers coming back for more (oh, and you’re also supposed to be selling books, so write with that goal in mind). Bear in mind that you’ll have to somehow get people to actually visit your website and/or blog. Link exchanges are an effective way to begin the process of doing just that. Find similar author websites—authors who probably write in your genre—and kindly ask them if they’d be interested in exchanging links. (Link exchanges to blogs are the easiest to obtain.) If you have a killer site, how could they refuse you? Also bear in mind that killer content = killer site, and not just a fancy header and glowing gradients. My word, some of the sites I’ve stumbled upon! Who would think to read them, much less buy a book from the author?

Beyond all of that, you’ll also want to try getting reviews for your book and point your readers to those reviews from your blog or website. The more reputable the review source, the more willing your readers will be to go out and grab a copy of your masterpiece. So don’t just settle for any old reviewer; make certain they have a readership large enough to engender sales, or, at the very least, determine whether they will lend some weight and credibility to your writing abilities with a sterling review.

Google your review source, or do a link popularity check; see how popular they are on the Web. Peruse their site and evaluate for yourself how effective their reviews are. Be wary of a review site that does nothing but dole out praise. That may be appealing at first glance, but think like a prospective reader. Say they went to this particular site, bought one of the books that received a glowing review (your book) read it, and were sorely disappointed. Highly miffed, not only do they immediately remove said site from their favorites list, but they advise their friends and every member of their family, even those in the remote jungles of “deepest, darkest Africa” (hey, I didn’t coin the phrase) against buying a copy of your book. You’ve just lost 113 sales, roughly speaking.

Here at POD Critic, we (don’t you just love when one person—and you know it’s just one person—refers to himself, or herself, as “we”? Makes whatever they have to say sound more official)—Here at POD Critic, as I was saying, we strive for reviewer excellence, so your book only makes the grade when it deserves to; and if it deserves to, your readers will be satisfied—at least they should be. But not only that, we are also hard at work promoting this site to those in respectable circles, and to those who sit in a place of authority in POD, self- and general publishing, hence POD-dy Mouth’s generous comments and additional link to this site, as well as those from the Grumpy Old Bookman himself, Michael Allen; not least, Preditors & Editors, who found us somehow, gave us, as it would appear, the thumbs up (click here).

We at POD Critic provide reviewing services at no expense (with the exception of the time it takes you to compose an email in accordance with the submission guidelines) and we find it a joy to do so. But getting back to the subject at hand, advertising is an important factor in the publishing industry, be it on the POD side, or the “traditional” side. Do not neglect to take advantage of the internet when dishing out money from your overall book budget. Give Google AdWords a try also—at least in the beginning. Try not to exceed $5.00 a day, and see what kind of traffic the ad(s) generate for your website.

Monday, March 19, 2007

Advancing the POD Cause

While going through my current queue of books to be reviewed, I noticed that I have a few good eggs, and a few bad eggs, but that is exactly what I intended for this blog. Stringing my reviews together on a scale should leave a line of achievement that resembles the line on an EKG machine. Some books will get bad to fair reviews based on their overall presentation, and some will receive good to glowing reviews, but I will never have this blog fill up with any one kind of review, like I see some other review blogs have done. I don’t view that as a true reflection of the POD industry. Even books on the other side of this industry—not to mention films and CD releases—receive a full range of reviews by various critics.

Now I understand the need for some POD reviewers to highlight nothing but quality POD books on their blogs, while leaving books that would be considered lower quality by the wayside, as they feel the lower quality books tend to give this industry a bad rep. My aim is a little different, however. I intentionally welcome a mixed bag, though not all of my choices are intentional, as a couple of books that I thought would read well simply didn’t. For the books that don’t read well, I intend to dole out a good deal of constructive criticism that will focus on areas that need improvement or strengthening. In doing this, I’m hoping that writers and publishers will take greater steps to put out better products—a good start at addressing this would be to tackle the weaknesses pointed out in titles that have been reviewed.

“Traditional” publishing measures would have a book come out a full year after it’s been accepted for the frontlist. In fact, this is the norm. During this time, efforts are made to put the book through several rounds of meticulous editing and other prepress procedures, from typesetting to markup and page layout—not to mention a slew of other things. Marketing efforts are also made during this time. If small POD publishers and self-published authors would apply half—no—a quarter of those efforts to their books, it would help to lift the status of the POD industry several lengths.

Instead of rushing a book to Lulu or whatever subsidy publisher you have in mind, why not get a good working budget together, place the book in the hands of a good editor, get a professional cover put together, in addition to a decent interior layout, and set a release date six months in the future—or three months at the very least. During this time you’ll hand out a few ARCs to avid readers (librarians are ideal for this, and you can promise them a signed copy of your book in return for their criticisms). Be prepared to make any necessary changes to the book based on the feedback you get. You’ll also need to build anticipation for the book’s release by doing the rounds: sending out advance copies to review blogs, and other review sources (Midwest, etc.) and the best reviews will yield blurbs that will go on your front and back cover.

The idea here is to take your time. You can save up for this adventure like you would a vacation, or a new washing machine, or what have you. The good part about the associated book expenses, however, is this: if done right, it will promise a monetary return, but all you should really hope to do is break even. Therefore, anything above and beyond that will be all the sweeter. After all, you’re in this for the sheer love of it, not to strike it rich, right?

Friday, March 16, 2007

American Ambition - A Review


Author: John Hamilton Allen
Publisher: Lulu.com

ISBN:
978-1-84753-828-4
Pages: 320


American Ambition
tells the story of Ken Finlay, the nation’s current Secretary of Defense, who, after returning from a NATO summit, is offered a new position in Washington, that of Secretary of State, thanks to the auspicious and convenient events that took place during his absence. Landing the position itself is enough to whet Finlay’s appetite, and, like many overambitious politicians before him, he soon becomes a political conspirator, only he seeks, of all things, to upend the incumbent President of the United States. How and why he eventually wins the highest office in the land is a matter you’ll have to read about on your own, as it is accomplished, in part, via a plot twist that involves sidestepping a little item known to us as the Twenty-fifth Amendment—not to mention other bizarre efforts that have to be read to be believed.

The book is written in a simple, mainstream style identical to what you might find in a political thriller from one of the big publishers, only it isn’t presented with their level of quality—the editing is substandard, for one, and so is the layout, with pagination flaws appearing here and there and tabs being set too deep, among a list of other things. Now while the prose is neither flowery nor awe-inspiring, neither does the book attempt to be anything other than what it is: a fairly straightforward, engaging thriller. Yes, there is the underlying theme of Macbeth, updated to 21st century American politics—what is essentially an intriguing backdrop—but the theme itself isn’t thrust in your face. It is almost thinly veiled, which is a nice touch on the part of the author. We get the tragedy of Macbeth, in addition to the betrayal and the lust for power, but if a reader wasn’t entirely familiar with Shakespeare’s famous play that would matter very little, if at all, as the story never forces one to draw a correlation.

Now to the problems, as I have several issues with the book. I have to say, I really don’t look for flaws in a novel. I try to read novels mainly for the purpose of entertainment, and I base my judgments on how well that entertainment is packaged and presented; but when errors and flaws are as prominent as the ones I stumbled upon in this book, I can’t ignore them.

Some of the errors are very sloppy, such as this little slip up on page 22, where words are inverted:

The latter was a close friend to Malcolm and had been a member of King’s campaign team during previous the nomination and election campaign. [Emphasis added]

Other slip ups are a little more tolerable, like the one that appears on page 27, where the word “been” is omitted:

The man had removed his sunglasses but his face was impassive as if he had not listening to a single word that they had said.

In addition to those—and there are many others—Mr. Allen seems to dislike commas, seeing he uses them very sparingly. One has to imagine them during much of the reading. A case in point would be this sentence:

During the meal King had eaten a little too much and too richly but as always he had limited his consumption of alcohol to a couple of glasses of wine and a single postprandial port.

On another, equally somber note, Mr. Allen has included a lot of research in his book, and it comes to us in the form of little tidbits about this and that (presidential and miscellaneous political info mostly) and those details tend to go a bit overboard at times. The book comes to us from an author across the pond (Allen resides in the UK) hence, I suppose, the need to mention so many fixtures in political and general Americana.

Then there is a certain farfetched, if hokey, plot device that caused me to apply a higher level of suspension of disbelief than is normal, thus leaving me to view the entire use of the plot device in question as utterly absurd. It surrounds a software program that predicts future political patterns. The author expects us to suspend our disbelief to the point where we accept that a computer simulation, working on data involving the past 20 years of American political history, can predict the future careers of politicians, even if those positions are effective immediately. This, in my opinion, just throws a monkey wrench in the story, and works like an emergency break on a speeding train, which halts the story’s action, plot, and development, and causes one to question the validity of everything that led up to and follows this particular plot point.

Once you get past the issue of the plot device mentioned above, however, there is also the matter of Allen’s political savvy, especially as concerns American politics. The book would have benefited greatly from being written by someone who, at the very least, spent some actual time in Washington proper—and I mean in an official capacity—as there is an insufficiency in the political rhetoric. This lends further credence to the adage: “Write what you know.”

American Ambition gets two and a half golden eggs mainly because it held my interest, but the book definitely needs more work.

Monday, March 12, 2007

A “Novel” Source of Inspiration

Character development is something I tend to look for most in novels, especially when the material is character-driven, rather than plot-driven. If a story centers more on plot and action, then I will be inclined to lend greater consideration to the symmetry of the plot—whether there is a harmonious arrangement of the rudiments in the overall story; whether the story rises and falls with creative tension; and whether the author maintains a narrative and thematic balance. Be it character- or plot-driven, however, the story must be well-structured, being set inside a sturdy framework that includes a strong beginning, a captivating middle, and a satisfying end, with the usual character arcs and ebb and flow of events therein.

Martha Alderson, an author, teacher, and plot consultant, has this to say about writers who prefer to write either character-driven or plot-driven stories:

Broadly speaking, writers who prefer writing action-driven stories focus on logical thinking, rational analysis, and accuracy. Action-driven writers tend to rely more on the left side of their brain. These writers approach writing as a linear function and see the story in its parts. Action-driven writers like structure. They usually pre-plot or create an outline before writing. Action-driven writers have little trouble expressing themselves in words.

On the other hand, writers who write character-driven stories tend to focus on aesthetics and feelings, creativity and imagination. These writers access the right side of their brains and enjoy playing with the beauty of language. They are more intuitive, and like to work things out on the page.

Interestingly enough, I am drawn to both models; but, as you would expect, for different reasons. Despite what model you as a writer tend to lean toward, I realize that moments of inspiration come and go, and authors are sometimes left in a murky creative pool. This post will proffer a novel means of literary inspiration that I hope will not only aid in offsetting those moments, but also allow writers to take home a few creative lessons.

While it is a different creative medium altogether, I find that television—good television—can be an effective purveyor of important literary lessons. In fact, I’ll go as far as to say that drawing inspiring from a creative medium other than the one you are currently working in is probably best. I know of many writers who read books by authors they hope to somehow emulate, albeit in a small way, only to come away dissatisfied, because they couldn’t quite capture the essence of what their admired author seemed to convey so effortlessly. By watching a good television program, however, and gleaning insights into effective and forceful portrayals of human behavior, one can transfer those lessons onto paper without the undo pressure of trying to live up to the lofty standards of a literary predecessor.

This is not meant to contradict my advice to one writer, however, wherein I said: “If you want to write well, read as much as you can. Devour any and everything that inspires you. Learn from the greats.” By reading a good amount of quality literature—that is, books that are put together well, written well, edited thoroughly, and so on—a writer can learn how language is to flow on paper, where punctuations are supposed to fall; how sentences, dialogue, and narrative on a whole, is to be constructed.

The reason I suggest television as an alternate medium for inspiration, and not film, is this: a television show, particularly an hour-long drama, has roughly 22 episodes to a season, which is very similar to the makeup of a novel—each episode acting as a chapter of a book; the season being the book. It would take roughly 16.5 hours to devour a full season of a dramatic series (sans the commercials)—the rough equivalent of the time it would take a person, reading at a normal pace, to complete a full length novel. Over the course of that 22-episode season, characters would go through various changes—including ups and downs, and the inevitable arcs—and we would see character flaws develop in some, and virtues develop in others. I can’t think of a better source of inspiration than the medium of television for someone who is stuck in a creative slump.

As far as choices go, there is something out there for just about everyone. For those who are given to character-driven stories, I’d say, for instance, take a look at Six Feet Under. (It’s time to put that Netflix account to good use.) By watching a mere season of this show, one can learn a great deal about character interaction and development, and how to create personality nuances that will allow your readers to interpret subtle variations in your characters. And for those who are given to plot-driven stories, I’d say consider ABC’s Lost, which not only demonstrates the use of crucial plot devices, timing, and atmosphere, but it also serves as a good model in the department of character development, given its clever and carefully woven back-stories. But feel free to pick and choose what you will, as long as it inspires you, and gets your creative juices flowing.

Now bear in mind that one would, at the very least, have to rely heavily on intuition for what I’m proposing here, as many of these lessons won’t be apparent to the casual observer. A serious writer, however, will spot them for sure.

Wednesday, March 7, 2007

Fractured Veil - A Review


Author: Gregory Connors

Publisher: Lulu.com

ISBN: 978-1-8472-8748-9

Pages: 500

Fractured Veil, in my attempt to dissect it, caused me to work almost as hard as William Faulkner’s The Sound and the Fury did—and I’m still puzzling over the intended interpretation of certain narrative elements of the latter. For many of the book’s initial pages, the narrator of Veil seems trapped in a state of abstract musing, as he fires off a quasi-stream-of-consciousness that is at times cryptic; at times starkly revealing.

Part sci-fi, part literary exposition of the author’s own “struggles with identity, reality, and the human condition,” the book attempts to be a grand work of fiction—mainly in style and tone—but falls short simply because it lacks engaging components. Beautifully written though it is, the book rarely takes you into exciting territory, and when it does, the moments are few and far between. One reason the book fails to engage the reader for long is because most of the narrative involves a sort of sightseeing tour that is led by an amnesiac, or else there is too much explanatory narrative throughout.

In this world that may or may not exist (this is speculative fiction after all) we are given a lot of description of what this character sees as he navigates through a disaster setting. Other characters that are central to the story come to us in the form of trancelike memories that fill various chapters themselves, but to go into that aspect of the book in detail would cause me to unload a few spoilers, so I won’t.

The first chapter of this book reads quite differently from the second, inasmuch as one book by one author reads differently from that of a book written by another. The reason for this: they are presumably narrated by two disparate individuals. This is evidence of Mr. Connors’s ability to subtly shift his syntax to form various narrative styles that fulfill the need for variations in the thought patterns of his protagonist(s). To his credit, he maintains this linguistic structure for the entire length of the book.

What is more, Connors expertly weaves many descriptive passages that are free from the extraneous elements often present in the work of new authors. His analogies, too, come with a refreshing touch of originality:

The accounts of their last days could be locked forever in the digital code of these inert devices, as reachable as a fossilized jellyfish within a mountain of granite.

While it is obvious that a great deal of thought and effort went into Fractured Veil, the book does not come without its share of flaws, but many of those flaws are easily fixable. Some of the flaws in question are trivial—a misspelling here, a typographical error there, “then” used in place of “than,” and things of that nature. Another case in point would be this longwinded sentence, which carries a bit of awkwardness and redundancy:

As I drove my vehicle through the barriers that marked the entrance of the grand mall toward the building, I could see that the whole area was illuminated with either natural-seeming light supplied by high and dramatic avant-garde lamps or lit from below the stairs and walkways eerily, several of which ‘crunched’ as I drove over them.

Other flaws, beyond the ones cited above, are more pronounced. This is not to say that the original editor didn’t do his or her job, the book just needs another kind of editor at this stage; one that will focus on content and structure. What wouldn’t hurt either is another round of proofreading and copyediting to smooth out the few grammar and word usage issues that slipped by the first time.

One of the problems with the book is that almost too much is going on, and this accounts for the book’s exaggerated length—that being some 500 pages. In attempting to tie all of the characters to the main protagonist—through similar motivations or memories—the book becomes a beast that loses its focus at times. To help offset this, there is a lot of explanatory narrative from just about everyone. I can almost go as far as to say that there are several separate and distinct novellas within this one book.

It is a little surprising to find that Gregory Connors loaded himself with this assignment so early in his writing career. Usually writers don’t tackle heavy subjects or deliver such dense material in a debut work. When they do, as an affront to the status quo, they open themselves up to intense scrutiny, as many critics feel these writers are lacking in authority, in the sense that they haven’t written anything in the past to prove that they can be relied upon to deliver complex material with clear deftness and confidence.

On this particular point, I’ll let you decide whether Connors proves the “windbags” wrong.

Friday, March 2, 2007

“Are You Not Entertained!”

One might ask, “What is the purpose of a novel, or a non-fiction title for that matter? Why do we pluck them from the shelves of bookstores or libraries?” In many cases—aside from the occasional school assignment, religious study, or other like purpose—the attraction we hold for these books is based, foremost, on the fact that we view them as a source of enjoyment. In addition to the usual reasons offered by some—you know, the pursuit of intellectual stimulation or growth; spiritual enlightenment, what have you—people mainly read to be entertained.

We want to be swept into a story—be absorbed by it, if you will—by the sheer elements involved. We want to be drawn in by compelling characters, be they rogues or savants; jaded spinsters or ruthless businessmen. And if it’s a self-help book or lengthy exposition of nanotechnology, the information has to be presented in a manner that is conducive to holding our interest—meaning it has to entertain in some way.

These are facts that authors need to bear in mind, including (and perhaps especially) authors who employ POD technology. So you love to write. No, you LIVE to write! I grant you that. You’ve just completed a grand literary exercise in ethereality; an exercise that you know in your heart will not cause the lowliest literary agent to bat an eye—much less the acquisitions editor of a small press. Simon & Schuster, as far as you’re concerned, is on the other side of a wormhole, since it would be virtually impossible to get them to consider your book—it is, after all, a little out-of-left-field, what with its experimental didacticism and philosophical profundity. What options are you left with then? Well, there is the technologically convenient and cost-effective method of print-on-demand. BINGO!

So, hopped up on a free flow of adrenaline, you rush your baby into print, a slew of typographical and other errors therewith—hey, you yourself couldn’t stand to read your experimental opus more than two times, and your friends, bless their hearts, won’t give you an honest opinion either, seeing they only read the thing from cover to Table of Contents. Irrespective of that, your book goes forward. It gets the treatment—an Amazon listing, B&N.com—so you start Googling for POD reviewers to score some needed publicity. “Ah!” you say, when you stumble on a blog called POD Critic, and you think to yourself, I’m sure he won’t be as bored to tears reading this thing as I was when I wrote it.

Then comes the review. Aghast, you fire off an email to this . . . this, uninformed buffoon, who, for the sake of his literary nearsightedness, can’t spot your genius. So you give him what for! You get your fury off your chest and, perhaps, feel better about yourself, knowing how wrong these critics are. Thus begins your downward spiral into the dank, dark tunnel of denial, from which will spring another dismal POD title in the near future; a title you can’t wait to send POD Critic’s way.