Category: On Writing

Something Violent This Way Comes

Okay, here goes. We can all agree that senseless gun violence is atrocious and that mental health needs to be addressed in our country. Don’t worry, this is not a rant about the Second Amendment. It is, however, a rant about the revitalized call to ban violence in movies, television, video games, and other forms of entertainment.

Since some of my writing leans toward the violent, I take exception to this argument. Full disclosure: one of my stories involves a mass shooting. Yet it’s obviously  a parable about white collar helplessness, not a story encouraging senseless gun violence.

Maybe that’s why “violent books” get a pass in this proposed boycott. Maybe it’s understood that books are meant to teach us something, whereas videogames put your finger behind the trigger.

Yeah, well so does INFECTED, my survive-your-own zombie apocalypse book. It puts you at the heart of adrenaline fueled deplorable choices. But it’s adult entertainment, and I think that should be the point. How about instead of banning adult entertainment, we call for parents to take an active role in screening their children’s entertainment?

“I think you know there’s violence in the world, tragedies happen, blame the playmakers. It’s a Western. Give me a break.” –Quentin Tarantino, on the violence in Django Unchained. According to BBC, he’s tired of defending his films each time the US is shocked by gun violence.

Violent entertainment has never once made me fear for my life. Nor has it made me consider taking the life of another. Just as playing tug-o-war with your dog won’t make him want to rip out your jugular. Riding a roller coaster shouldn’t make you want to jump off a cliff. In fact, it should do the opposite. The itch should be scratched.

I think I missed this episode when I was a kid.

So here’s the point: If you don’t like it, don’t buy it. And if you don’t think your kids should watch it, don’t let them. But don’t try to ban any forms of expression or entertainment. Please. We have rating systems for a reason.

 

by Categories: Musings, On WritingTags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 2 Comments

Are ebooks second-class citizens?

I am a self-published author, an indie author, DIY writer; call it what you will. And as such, I know the power of reviews. So when I received this email from a major reviewer — The Midwest Book Review — through my PR rep, I was delighted.

Thank you for your information. Please send two copies of the published book for review, accompanied by a cover letter and some form of publicity or press release, to the attention of:
.
James A. Cox
Editor-in-Chief
Midwest Book Review
As my book has no hard-copies, I quickly replied:
.

Good afternoon! Abby forwarded your request to me so I could handle it personally.

The book is published only as an ebook, due to the unique storytelling where you click embedded hyperlinks to make your choice and progress through the narrative. I can send you the book as an Amazon gift or in whatever format is convenient for you.

Thank you for your interest in INFECTED: Click Your Poison #1.   I look forward to hearing from you.

Best,
James Schannep

This is where the delight ended. In the interest of transparency, I’ll post the response I received in full:
.
Thank you for your information and offer.
.
There is a charge of a $50 “Reader Fee” for reviewing ebooks, pre-publication manuscripts, galleys, uncorrected proofs, ARCs, and pdf files. If you wish to purse (SIC) this then let me know and I’ll send you the name and email address of the assigned reviewer. The check would be made out to the reviewer who would also tell you what information would be needed along with a copy of the title to be reviewed.
.
The reviewer would provide you with a copy of the review and you would have automatic permission to utilize the review in any manner you deem useful to promote and market the book. I will also be provided a copy of the review and it will run in our book review publication “MBR Bookwatch”, be posted on the Midwest Book Review web site for five years, and published in “Book Review Index” which is distributed to thousands of academic and community libraries throughout the United States and Canada.
.
Published books in a traditional print edition (paperback or hardcover) are reviewed free of charge.
.
Please let me know if you’d like to proceed further.
.
James A. Cox
Editor-in-Chief
Midwest Book Review
Here’s what stuck out to me: “ebooks” was listed right next to “pre-publication manuscripts” and “uncorrected proofs,” and they didn’t want to charge for a “traditional” book. This was my response:
.

I’m sorry, but I don’t believe in paying for reviews. Furthermore, I challenge you to reconsider your stance on ebooks. Lumping them in with other “incomplete” publications is insulting to authors, and ultimately short sighted. Ebooks are the future. Many authors (myself included) put considerable time, effort, and money into making their ebook a professional product. I believe your organization legitimately wants to help authors, but this policy flies in the face of that goal.

.Thank you for your time.

.Regards,
James Schannep

As of this post, I haven’t seen a response. This is not meant to be an attack on Mr. Cox or his group of reviewers, though it is an attack on his policy.
.
What do you think? Should I have paid the $50, happy to get whatever press I can, or am I right to be outraged? What would you have done?
by Categories: On WritingTags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 4 Comments

And now, a little fun

I’ve been prepping non-stop for the release of my new book, so I figured I could use a little diversion. Somebody posted a link on facebook to I Write Like, a site where you can see what famous writer you compare most to. In their words, “Check which famous writer you write like with this statistical analysis tool, which analyzes your word choice and writing style and compares them with those of the famous writers.“

For me, I’m sure my style varies project to project, but I decided to give it a whirl for INFECTED, my imminent book. Choosing five different sections, I got four:

I write like
Chuck Palahniuk

I Write Like by Mémoires, journal software. Analyze your writing!

And one:

I Write Like by Mémoires, journal software. Analyze your writing!

Obviously, I’m flattered. And it’s tempting to agree. Palahniuk’s writing  is visceral, raw, darkly comedic, and a hell of a lot of fun to read–all qualifiers I aimed for on this project.

And DFW? Well, here’s what NPR said about him:

To read David Foster Wallace was to feel your eyelids pulled open. Some writers specialize in the away-from-home experience — they’ve safaried, eaten across Italy, covered a war. Wallace offered his alive self cutting through our sleepy aquarium — our standard TV, stores, political campaigns.

Writers who can do this, like Salinger and Fitzgerald, forge an unbreakable bond with readers. You didn’t slip into the books looking for story, information, but for a particular experience. The sensation, for a certain number of pages, of being David Foster Wallace.

Of course, it kind of feels like a horoscope reading, where everyone is fated to lead an awesome life. I mean, honestly, who’s going to balk at being compared to a pair of geniuses? Something tells me you won’t ever input your writing and see the result:

I write like
a hack

I Write Like by Mémoires, journal software. Analyze your writing!

So, just for fun (and because I really needed a diversion), I dug up some old writing I worked on in middle and high school. Here was the result of the analyzed opening text:

I write like
James Joyce

I Write Like by Mémoires, journal software. Analyze your writing!

Which more or less proves, in my opinion, that there’s no “bad answer” to the program. Either that, or I was a genius on the level of Joyce in grade-school. Ha.

Still, it’s a fun diversion. Give it a try, what results do you get?

by Categories: INFECTED, Musings, On WritingTags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , 1 Comment

Scripts vs Novels

Disclaimer: I am not a legal professional, and nothing found on this site should be taken as legal advice.  Always consult an attorney.

I’ve already written about the differences of Screenwriting vs Prose from a writer’s perspective.  Now I’d like to touch a little on the differences between the finished products: Scripts (screenplays) and Novels (books).  Physically, here you go:

The Script: Three-hole-punched 8 1/2″ x 11″ computer printed paper, bound with two brads.
A Book: Bound pages, professionally printed, in a variety of shapes and sizes.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

As for the format?  There’s plenty of nuts and bolts books written on formatting screenplays and you can google manuscript specifications for agents or publishers (or ebook format), so if you’re looking for that, keep looking.

What I’d really like to talk about in this post is what the rights a writer keeps if they sell a script versus selling a novel.

Here’s what it boils down to: when you sell a screenplay, you are (generally) selling the whole thing.  It’s no longer yours.  Other writers can (and probably will) make changes to your story without your permission.  When you sell a novel, you’re still the copyright holder and it’s still your writing, you’ve just given the publishing house the rights to print and sell it.

As a writer in the US, you have far more rights as a novelist than as a screenwriter.  In Europe, screenwriters have more rights, but for this purpose–I’m talking only about American writers making deals with American production companies.

There are ways to keep certain rights to a screenplay, such as the extremely complicated Theatrical Separated Rights.  On the flipside, there’s also terrifying loopholes like Hollywood Accounting, where you might never even get paid.  For the most part, though, screenwriters aren’t even allowed to distribute the very scripts they wrote once they’re sold.

But as a novelist, you keep your copyright.  Even if your book is getting adapted to film–in which case you only license the material to the studio, allowing them to make the film, much like you allowed a publisher to print the book.

Really, we can chase this rabbit down the hole as far as we want, but I think if we go much further we’ll need a pack of lawyers to read the map.  So… that’s it for now.

Lesson learned: write the book first.  Sell it twice, keep the rights!

by Categories: Fiction, On Writing, ScreenwritingTags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Leave a comment

The Power of Editing

This post serves as the official announcement that I’ll be self-publishing an ebook later this year (hopefully this summer).  It’s the new Wild West in publishing, and anything is possible in this exciting time.  I’m proud to be part of  this neo-Gutenbergian movement bringing far greater reach for the written word and empowerment to writers.

I’m still finishing my manuscript, but I’m getting close to completion, so I’ve begun researching ebook self-publishing already.  As such, expect updates chronicling what I learn along the way.

For this entry, I want to highlight editing.  A professional editor is perhaps the single most valuable resource a publishing house deal could provide.  But the indie writer is not without hope thanks to the internet.  Many excellent editors freelance, and I’m searching for one to work with now (so feel free to contact me with any leads!).

All the short stories on this site are, hitherto, unedited by a professional; peer-review only.  As a part of my learning process, I’ll be taking these stories down in the next upcoming weeks, sending them to editors, and then publishing them as ebooks.

I was perusing David Gaughran’s excellent website on the subject and came across a link to a Raymond Carver story, showing the markups by his editor.  It’s originally from the New Yorker, and can be found here: Primary Sources: : The New Yorker.

It’s worth checking out!

by Categories: On WritingTags: , , , , , , , , 1 Comment

Book trailers

I have a friend who can’t seem to get behind the idea of a book trailer, so figured I’d put my thoughts out there and explain a bit about why I support them.

The easy answer — We live in an increasingly visual society, and a book trailer is a quick way to get people excited about books.  Take this trailer for Stephen King’s Under The Dome for example:

I don’t own the rights to this, it’s merely an illustration.

Thirty seconds, and you’ve been good and teased on the book’s premise.  What’s wrong with that?  Well, as my friend would say, we’re trying to make books more like movies, and in doing so, robbing the reader of their own imagination.  To put it bluntly: we’re catering to the illiteracy of our society.

Here’s why I disagree: I don’t see this clip as a “trailer” (as it’s billed), but as a commercial.  Why shouldn’t books get advertisements?  We can see “trailers” about housewives using laundry detergent without spoiling our own experience with the product.  Otherwise books are advertised without actually telling us anything about the book.  “Hey, a new thriller book is out.”  If you don’t know the author, how do you know you’ll be interested?

I think book reviews are an excellent tool, but only insofar as you’re relying on someone’s opinion.  With a commercial, you get a chance to see what the book is intended to be.  It’s sort of like saying, “Here’s what I want to make you feel when you read this book.  Does something like that interest you?”

So as I see it, book trailers are raising awareness.  It’s up to the filmmakers to properly raise this awareness–to tease us–without spoiling the experience.

***update***

BONUS THOUGHT: After sleeping on it, I wonder if book covers didn’t experience a similar skepticism during the transition from plain-leather-binding to printed works of art.  One could make a similar argument that cover art limits the reader’s imagination by introducing visual representations of characters and story world.  Even so, one could make the case that cover art allows a potential buyer to instantly glean an understanding of what lies within the pages, and that book trailers are merely the next technological leap in this vein.

by Categories: On WritingTags: , , , , , , , , 14 Comments

Parallel Development

It’s when two or more people, somewhere in the world, get the same idea without any influence from the other.  And it happens.  It just happened to me.

I opened imdb (The Internet Movie DataBase) today, and saw this:

The Hunter (2011)

For those who’ve read my story The Thylacine, you may know where I’m going with this.

If not, allow me to explain: I wrote a story in early 2010 featuring a man (“The Seeker”) with the exact same goal as this film.  Mine is a story where “A wannabe tracker heads to the land down under in search of the believed-extinct Tasmanian Tiger, or Thylacine.”  This movie is where “Martin, a mercenary, is sent from Europe by a mysterious biotech company to the Tasmanian wilderness on a hunt for the last Tasmanian tiger.”

Not exactly the same thing, but close enough to make my heart stop.  No, I don’t think I was plagiarized.  No, I haven’t seen this movie or read the book it’s based on (which Amazon tells me was published a decade before I wrote my story, so it’s a moot point from my end).  But as an unproduced writer, it leaves me feeling eclipsed every time I experience parallel development.

What’s to learn from this?  Not much.  Other than, don’t go screaming through the streets that someone stole your idea.  Ever.  It almost never happens.  It may make finding a market for my story that much harder, but I can take some comfort in knowing that I had a very marketable idea.  And for you?  Enjoy the story, enjoy the film, enjoy the book.  I’m sure they’re all three very differently executed, so why not have three different forms of enjoyment?

Official website for the film: http://www.thehuntermovie.com

by Categories: Fiction, On WritingTags: , , , , , , , , , , , 4 Comments

Books

I’ve started querying my historical fantasy novel, which I’ll refer to as WTZD until I can give out more details.  I wasn’t sure if I was going to blog about this, as publishers like to be tight-lipped about their in-development projects, and it dates my efforts to any agent looking at this site.  BUT that’s why I started this blog, to track my progress as a writer.  So what does that mean?  Unfortunately I can’t say much, yet.  Just that the novel is done, loved by my inner circle of critics, and ready to be shown to literary agents.  I am, as of this post, unrepresented.  That will soon change .

What I can share, is this image below, which I found while doing research for my queries.  It sums up, quite nicely, my goal with WTZD.  To enthrall and feed imaginations.

Wish me luck.

Books - That is exactly how they work

Source for: Books

by Categories: On Writing, WTZDTags: , , , , , , , , 3 Comments

On Pigeonholing

I’m re-blogging this from Jessen D Chapman’s original Blog Post.  It’s being published on this site with permission of the blog’s author.  If you want to do the same, contact him.  He’s pretty cool about it.

While there are those who disagree with me, I think this article applies to film as well.  I love Jurassic Park, The Shawshank Redemption, The Good The Bad and the Ugly, and Stardust.  So why should I have to pick only one of their genres to write in?

Without further ado…

Pigeonholed?

Posted: 28 November 2011 by jdchap in General bloggery
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

I’ve heard the advice as a writer: Pigeonhole yourself.  It makes you easier to market, because you’re easier to categorize.

To which, I immediately reply: Go screw yourself.  Why should I want to be easily categorized?  As a writer, I get paid to be interesting.

And yet this way of thinking is pervasive.  When people pick up a James Patterson book, they have a certain expectation, the marketing gurus say.  You don’t want someone to read your book on the vacationing habits of wood elves, enjoy it, then seek out your second novel only to be completely shocked when it’s about a reformed pedophile, right?

Wrong.  I want people to read a book of mine, enjoy it, then seek out my next book because they enjoyed the writing.  I don’t give two shits whether or not they are fans of the genre.  If I ever write a book about vampires (and please kill me if I do), I do not feel obligated to continue writing about vampires until the end of time.  Although, now that I think about it, that could be a great twist on the tortured immortal trope.

You should know if you’ll like the writing based on if you like the writer.  You should know if you’ll like the subject matter based on the back cover, and by reviews from friends and critics.  That’s why those things exist.

Nevertheless, the feeling seems to be, by agents for sure, I need to be able to brand you.  Horror writer.  Thriller writer.  Romance writer.

So why is it, I can say my favorite books are 1984, Freakonomics, The Velveteen Rabbit and The Things They Carried, but I can’t have a book in the vein of each of these within my authorial cannon?

I figure you, as an emerging writer trying to establish yourself, can do one of two things and survive shunning from the pigeonholers:  One, come out swinging as a genre writer, and then use a pseudonym if you ever decide to break the mold later on.  Or two, write two very different books, both classified as “literature”, and gain a reputation as someone who breaks the mold.

Which do I choose?  I dunno, maybe both.  But the one thing I will NOT be doing, is writing with marketing in mind.

by Categories: On WritingTags: , , , , , , , , 1 Comment