Footnotes

In Fishing in Foreign Seas there are over 100 footnotes.  Nearly all of these footnotes deal with the technology of steam turbine-generators.  At the time, I felt that if Jamie (the principal male character) was going to be deeply involved in a $300 million negotiation for two of the largest, most powerful machines ever built, I should not leave readers in the dark.

The good news is that non-technical people who have read Fishing in Foreign Seas tell me that they had no trouble understanding the issues.  The bad news is that they feel there were too many footnotes, and that some were unnecessary and distracting.  Point taken.

This raises a question: should there be any footnotes in a novel?  In the novels I have written since Fishing in Foreign Seas (one published – Sin & Contrition; one about to be published – Bitter Charity; and one roughly half finished) I have reduced the number of footnotes to one or two.  Several of these stories involve characters speaking in a language other that English sometimes.  In these cases, I change font when the character is speaking in Arabic, rather than English.  And when this first happens, I insert a footnote which reads: “this font is used whenever the words spoken, read or thought are in Arabic rather than English.”

One might ask: is this really necessary?  Can’t the reader recognise that when character A (who speaks English and Arabic) is speaking to character P (who speaks only Arabic) that the conversation must be taking place in Arabic?  Yes, the reader might recognise this, but having a distinctive font is a clear reminder of differences in not only language, but also of differences is culture and values.

Sometimes a character will  use a word which is common in (Arabic), but which would not be used in English.  For example, a character might say, “Aleesha was wearing a hijab.”  Since the average reader might not know what a hijab is, I could put a footnote which says: “a headscarf commonly worn by Muslim women”.  The trouble with this, of course, is that it distracts the reader’s eye to the bottom of the page.  So what I would typically do in this case is to write:

Abdullah remarked, “Aleesha was wearing a hijab.” (a headscarf commonly worn by Muslim women)  

In this way, the word ‘hijab’ is briefly explained, without distracting the reader, and from the structure of the sentence, it is clearly not something that Abdullah said, but rather an explanation that the author has added.  The addition by the author becomes particularly obvious if what Abdullah says (in Arabic), within the quotes, is in a different font than the rest of the line.

So, I try to minimise the number of footnotes.  If I were writing Fishing in Foreign Seas again, I would dramatically reduce the number of footnotes, probably by including an appendix which explains the technical vocabulary.

(For more information about my novels, see www.williampeace.net.)

Surprises

Life can be surprising, with both welcome and unwelcome surprises.  And it can be predictable, featuring both desirable and unfortunate outcomes.  It seems to me that when we are reading fiction, we expect to encounter both the predictable and the surprising.  In fact, we rather enjoy reading about surprises in other people’s lives – even unwelcome ones – because it makes the reading more interesting, and because the unfortunate event(s) aren’t happening to us.  As a writer, I try to minimise predictability to keep the reader interested.  But if events become too unpredictable, the narrative loses its credibility and the reader’s interest.  So, I believe that, as in life, the narrative should have a mixture of predictable and surprising events, where the predictable isn’t just routine, and the surprising isn’t unbelievable.

Here are some examples from Fishing in Foreign Seas regarding the relationship between John (the main male character, Jamie’s younger brother) and Michele, John’s girlfriend.  John is a fancier of the  ladies, and he is somewhat mesmerised by Caterina, Jamie’s fiance.  But, at the same time, he is a bit shy about his first contact with a lady.  During a dinner dance on New Year’ Eve, there is this exchange between Caterina and John:

<“John, there’s a girl over there who’s got her eyes on you.”

“Where?”

“The girl with brown hair in the yellow dress at that table there to my left.”

“I think she’s watching you.”

“No she isn’t, John.”

“Well, maybe you’re right.”

“Why don’t you ask her to dance?  She is quite pretty.”

“No, I don’t think so – I don’t know her.”

“It doesn’t matter!  Go on, John, ask her to dance!”

Reluctantly, he took her back to their table, and disappeared across the dance floor.  A few minutes later, she saw that John was dancing with the girl in the yellow dress and they seemed to be having an animated conversation.>

That’s all reasonably predictable.  But later in the evening (in Philadelphia), this is what happens:

On the way home, after continued prodding from his mother, John confessed: “Her name is Michele, she’s French, her father works at the French consulate, and she’s a nurse at Pennsylvania Hospital.”

That’s a bit of s surprise!

Some months later, Caterina and Michele are sharing a room in Jamie and John’s family house.  Look at the differences in the attitudes of the two women (one Sicilian, the other Parisian) to their bodies:

Michele proceeded to strip herself naked, tossing the clothes on her bed, picked up a towel and disappeared into the bathroom.  When she returned, she toweled herself at the foot of Caterina’s bed and began to make conversation.

Caterina was unnerved.  ‘I’ve got to keep my eyes on her face,’ she thought, ‘why doesn’t she get dressed?  Hasn’t she any modesty?

Michele was oblivious; she continued to talk about her work in the hospital, while carefully drying her under arms and her bottom.  Finally, she went to her suitcase, took out some underwear and proceeded to put it on, by now explaining to Caterina why none of the nurses liked a particular orthopedic surgeon.

Caterina had seen pictures in fashion magazines of underwear like Michele put on, but it had never occurred to her to buy anything like it for herself.  ‘It’s too provocative!’ she thought.  A yellow thong and push-up bra, both decorated with white lacy panels.

“You going to take a shower?” Michele inquired.

“Yes, I think I will.”  She got up, and took off her blue blazer, matching trousers, silk blouse, and her tights.  She put the trousers, blazer and blouse on hangers in the closet.  Picking out a fresh set of white underwear, she went to take a shower, her towel under her arm.

Michele eyed Caterina as she returned from the bathroom in her clean white underwear.

This is fairly predictable.

Several years later, John, who is still together with Michele, but unmarried, is suddenly diagnosed with bone cancer, and part of his left leg is removed.  This is the conversation between John and Caterina in John’s hospital room:

“What is it, John?” Caterina asked.

“Nothing.”

“John!  What is it?”

“Have you seen Michele?”

“No.  When did you last see her?”

“It was a couple days ago.  I called to tell her I was having the operation.”  He looked at Caterina with sad intensity.  “I haven’t seen her since.”

“Doesn’t she work in this hospital?”

“Yeah, she works in the operating theater.”

“You didn’t see her when you went in . . . ?”

“No, I was out like a light.”

“And she hasn’t called . . . or . . . ?”

“No.”  They looked at each other – dismay on both faces.

“Strange, very strange,” she said.

John’s cancer and the sudden disappearance of Michele are certainly surprises.  Caterina tracks Michele down in the hospital.  This is the conversation between them:

“Michele, I need to talk to you for a minute.”  Michele put down her magazine and stared at Caterina defensively.

“I’m on duty.”
“Come with me for a minute.”  Caterina took her arm and pulled her to her feet.  At seven pm, the corridor was deserted.

“What do you want?” Michele asked in a surly tone.

“It’s not what I want.  It’s what John wants.  He wants to see you!”

Michele’s mouth opened as if to say something; then she looked away, her lips trembling.  She tried to turn away, but Caterina took her arm again, restraining her.

“Tell me!“ Caterina demanded softly.

“He’s a cripple!  . . . I can’t. . . .  No, he’s a cripple,” Michele began to sob.

“He’s not a cripple!  He’s lost a leg.  In a month or so he’ll be walking again.  He needs you, Michele.”

Michele shuddered.  “A cripple,” she said softly.  The tears were coming profusely now.

Caterina retained her grip on Michele, looking into her face but saying nothing.

“My uncle . . .” Michele faltered

“Yes, what about your uncle?”

“He lost a leg in a bombing when he was fighting in Algeria.  . . . He used to come up behind me when I was studying. . . . I could hear his wooden leg on the floor.”  Her eyes were squeezed shut and she held her trembling hands out in front of herself in a defensive gesture.  “He touched my hair . . . and he reached around and . . . he touched me!”  She covered her face with her hands and sobbed.  Caterina put her arms around Michele and hugged her until she was quiet.  They stood motionless for a time.

“Michele, John loves you.  He is not your uncle.”

As Michele looked at Caterina, apparently without seeing her; her pager sounded.  She disengaged herself and looked at it.  “I have to go,” she said.

Then, there is one more surprise when John has just won an election as a US Congressman from Pennsylvania.  He and Michele have not seen each other for about a month. While John, his campaign staff, family and friends are celcbrating his victory in a hotel ballroom early in the morning.  Here is what happens:

Jamie saw her first, and he nudged Caterina.  From across the room, a solitary figure in a blue and white striped uniform and wearing white pointed cap was slowly approaching John.  Her demeanor was reserved yet determined.  It was Michele.  She stood slightly behind him and to his left, waiting patiently for him to notice her.  The two men to whom John was talking kept glancing at her until John turned to see who they were looking at.

“Oh, Michele . . . “ he said.  The two men moved away.

“Congratulations, John,” she said, nervously clasping and unclasping her hands.  “You did very well!”

He said eagerly: “It’s great to see you, Michele.”

At that, she dissolved and the tears started.  “Oh, John, I’ve been so stupid. . . . So very stupid.  . . . . Will you forgive me?”  She stood looking at him, her cap slightly awry, dark streaks of mascara on her cheeks, her hands at her sides and an expression of pure sorrow on her face.  John leaned forward on his crutches and embraced her.

“I’m so sorry, John, I’m so sorry!” she said softly.

“I love you, Michele!”

She began to weep in earnest: “I don’t know why. . . . I don’t deserve it.”

(For more information about my novels, see www.williampeace.net.)

.

Words

While there is no means of finding an exact count, it has been estimated that there are at least a quarter of a million words in the  English language.  The largest dictionary has over 400,000 entries, but should all of these entries be classified as words?  Many words are considered obsolete or archaic.  There are words like ‘hotdog’ that are combinations of two words, where the combined words have a different meaning than either of the elemental  words.  It is thought that about half the words in the English language are nouns and about 15% are verbs.  This leaves plenty of space for adjectives and adverbs.  But how many words does the average person know?  It has been estimated that the vocabulary of the average English-speaking college graduate is 20,000 to 25,000 words.  Professor David Crystal (linguist, author, academic) has estimated that a more accurate estimate is 60,000 active words and 75,000 passive words.  Estimates of Shakespeare’s vocabulary range from 18,000 to 25,000, depending on what one considers a word.

No matter what word count one adopts, it is fair to say that the writer has plenty of ammunition from which to choose.  Why is it then that we encounter so many cliches in writing?  How about:

  • He swept her off her feet
  • It was love at first sight
  • She quickly recovered herself
  • The dinner was well served and very tasty
  • There was a silver moon in the sky
  • He played a good game of tennis
  • etc.

While I can’t say that I am immune to the disease of cliches, I try hard to work around the traps that they represent.  Why traps?  They are traps because they are easy to fall into, and they add no value for the reader: they are vague, uninformative, and any emotive element they may have had at one time is long since washed out.

On my writing table beside me is my Oxford Thesaurus of English, and it rescues me whenever a cliche threatens, or I feel: that’s not the right word; it’s close, but it’s not right.  To avoid cliche, one has to be more specific.  Rather than say, “He swept her off her feet”, it would be more informative to say something like: “She was captivated by his languorous, baritone voice.”  ‘Beautiful’  is a word that I try not to use: it is so overused that it is hopelessly vague.  Depending on the situation in which ‘beautiful’ would otherwise be used, I might use ‘glamourous’ or ‘stunning’ or ‘beguiling’.

My thesaurus has a useful wordfinder, I can find onomatopoetic words like ‘judder’ (a rapid, forceful vibration) and ‘whoosh’ (the rushing sound of fast movement).  One can find foreign words and phrases like ‘al dente’ when one is writing about pasta, or ‘faux pas’ (socially embarrassing blunder), for which the equivalent English phrase is awkward.  And then, there’s the main section of the wordfinder where one can find a particular colour, or bird, or name for a district of a city, or card game, or . . .

One should try to choose words that convey specific meaning, are evocative, without being contrived, and without (hopefully) leaving the reader to think “I wonder what that word means”.

Endings

Some of us like happy endings in the novels we read.  Others prefer an inconclusive ending, where the reader can invent his/her own ending.  Sometimes we are stimulated by a message the author has given us: about life, or about being human.  I have to confess that, when I’m writing, I prefer to write happy endings – probably because I’m an optimist about life.  Fishing in Foreign Seas has a happy ending.  There’s plenty of trouble stored up before the ending.  Jamie, the principal character, loses a huge order.  His wife, Caterina, hates where they are living, is furious at her husband for being tempted by his PA, and her sex life isn’t working well.  Moreover, they have a Down’s Syndrome child.

With Sin & Contrition, it wasn’t really possible to write a happy ending.  Instead, I gave each of the six characters a chance to have a final say.  Some of them come off rather well; others less so.  The message is that all of us are actually sinners.  The extent to which we are forgiven (and forgive ourselves) depends on the extent to which we admit our mistakes and try, conscientiously, not to repeat them.

Recently, I’ve taken the view that the ending of a chapter is important, too.  In the post about Beginnings, I made the point that the writer must try to intrigue the reader with the first few sentences.  If one assumes that most readers pause their reading at the end of a chapter, I think it’s a good idea to leave the reader uncertain about what will happen next.  S/he therefore has an incentive to pick the book up sooner – rather than later – to find out what happened.  I’m not a fan of any particular soap opera, but it seems to be a universal technique that the viewer is presented with a twist in the plot at the end of  an episode, and the viewer hears, “Tune in next Tuesday to find out how Sally copes with . . . ”  Of course, if the author presented the reader with this kind of a teaser at the end of every chapter, the reader would begin to feel that the story is too contrived.  So, I’m only suggesting that the writer give a thought about how to bring a chapter to conclusion in a way that keeps the reader’s interest.

For example, here is the conclusion of Chapter 9 of Fishing in Foreign Seas.  Valerie is a sales engineer who works for Jamie.  She has just turned in the big bid, and she invites him for a drink.

 

Valerie was interesting company.  She talked about her family, what she did during the summers as a teenager, and she had some funny stories about her friends.  On her second drink, she told him about her ex-boyfriend.  Apparently, he had been very ‘fit’ (read ‘sexy’), but he had tried to manage her life, and she had dumped him.

“I prefer a more mature man who’ll give me some space, and rather likes having a woman with a strong libido around.”  She looked at him meaningfully.

“Yes, I see,” he said, vaguely, and asked the waiter for the check.

“How about I buy you dinner?  After all, this was supposed to be my drink,” she suggested.

“I have to get home, and get my beauty sleep, ready for Arizona Electric at seven tomorrow.”

“OK.”  She paused.  “Do you like Margaritas?”

“Yes, I do.”

“Well, I make a great Margarita!  Next time at my place.” 

 

Does Valerie get Jamie to her place?  You’ll have to read more to find out.

Beginnings

I think it’s very important to catch the reader’s interest at the very outset of a novel, so, in my opinion, the first page of the first chapter should not be an ‘introduction’ to the novel.  I believe it should plunge the reader right into the action, so that by the end of the first page, s/he is emotionally and intellectually involved.

For example, here are the first three sentences of chapter one which appear on the screen of a Kindle reader on the Amazon website.  (I have no idea what the book is.):

“The churchyard was peaceful in the summer afternoon.  Twigs and branches lay strewn across the gravel path, torn from the trees by the gales which had swept the country in that stormy June of 1545.  In London, we had escaped lightly, only a few chimney-pots gone, but the winds had wreaked havoc in the north.”

There is a similar beginning on the screens of Kindles on advertising posters in the London underground.  The first sentences are about a river and how the river is the beginning.

Do these beginnings engage your interest?  Mildly, perhaps.  By way of contrast, here is the beginning of the first chapter of Fishing in Foreign Seas:

“The phone on Mary Beth’s desk rang.  She picked it up, and cocking her head to one side, put the instrument between her blonde hair and her ear.  “Sales and marketing, Mary Beth speaking. . . .  Oh, hi, Eddie what are you up to?” with a sassy smile.  “I’m sure it must be more exciting than that in St Louis! . . .  Who, me?  I’m just a good little girl!” feigning a priggish face for Jamie’s benefit.  Jamie started to grin.

There’s a lot of information in this brief paragraph.  There are three characters: Mary Beth, Eddie and Jamie.  We know that Mary Beth is blonde, she alternates between being sassy and priggish, and claims to be a ‘good little girl’.  We know that Eddie is in St. Louis, and that he has apparently told Mary Beth it’s not particularly exciting there.  Then there’s Jamie, who grins when Mary Beth pretends to be priggish.  Hmm.  Wouldn’t the reader like to know more about these characters?

Then there’s this opening paragraph of Sin & Contrition:

“‘It’s hard to tell’,LaMarr thought, ‘what angle I should fire the shot.  Can’t see the road.  Not really sure how far it is.  Maybe about like this.’  He drew back the small leather patch which was attached to the arms of the slingshot by strong rubber bands, and extending his left arm upwards at an angle, he released the shot.  He could not see it, but he heard the marble pass through the leaves of the trees overhead.  He waited, listening for the marble to strike.”

Something strange is going on here.  LaMarr is using a slingshot to shoot marbles up through the trees, apparently trying to hit a road which he can’t see.  Why is he doing that?  Wouldn’t the reader like to know?

But, I think that a new chapter should similarly engage the reader’s interest.  If the reader sets the book aside at the end of a chapter, and picks it up at the beginning of a new chapter, s/he will want to be drawn into the situation right away.  Consider this opening paragraph of chapter two of Fishing in Foreign Seas:

He saw her across the bar-lounge of the Teatro Massimo in Palermo.  She was the most incredibly beautiful woman he had ever seen.  She was tall – about 5 feet 9, he guessed, with jet black hair down to her waist, but gathered by a blue ribbon at the nape of her neck.  She was wearing a white pleated linen dress, belted at the waist to emphasize her slim figure.  She was sipping champagne and surveying the crowd around her.  He had to meet her, even if he made an idiot of himself because he didn’t speak a word of Italian.”

This passage prompts the questions in the reader’s mind: will he meet her?  will he make an idiot of himself?

Or this from the beginning of chapter two of Sin & Contrition:

Ellen Weybridge was lounging against the headboard of her queen-sized bed, a pillow behind her.  Her friend, Josie, was sprawled, carelessly, on the bed to her left, while Bettina, the third girl in this close-knit trio, sat cross-legged at the foot of the bed.  All three thirteen-year-olds, classmates at Dorseyville Middle School, were similarly dressed in jeans and sports T-shirts.”

Why are they there?  What are they up to?

Explicitness

This is a follow-up on my post regarding sex.

A lady friend of mine (probably in her sixties) told me she was put off by the chapter in Sin & Contrition which is entitled Finding Out. This chapter deals with teenagers discovering sex, and their reactions to their discoveries.  There are various reactions: disgust, fascination, bravado, feeling left out, etc.  While she didn’t say so, I think what put my friend off were the descriptions of three boys discovering heterosexuality, and of one boy achieving sexual maturity.  She said, “It was just too much.  I had been through some of that with my sons, and I didn’t want to be reminded of it.”  Naturally, I didn’t ask her about her experience with her sons, but evidently it wasn’t good.

In thinking about this feedback, I’ve had several thoughts.  First of all, I didn’t intend to offend any one’s sensibilities.  I had been through what I wrote about (many years ago), and there’s nothing exaggerated in any way.  I remember it clearly, and I remember feeling much as LaMarr is reported as feeling.  In retrospect, it’s neither good nor bad; it’s just part of growing up.

My second thought was, ‘maybe I should have made it less explicit’.  (What happens is pretty clear.)  But it’s not erotic.  Some readers might consider it ‘disgusting’, but on this basis, lots of body functions would be so labeled.  The problem with making it less explicit, is that it loses its emotional impact.  LaMarr experiences his first ejaculation.  He sees it; the reader sees it.  He reacts emotionally, and the reader has an opportunity to empathise.  If it is written in such a way that what he sees is vague, it becomes more difficult for the reader to share his feelings.

As I said in the previous post, I don’t believe in explicitness about events that please or feel good to a character.  With a little hinting, we know what he or she is feeling.  But for strange or painful events, I think it is harder for us to tune into what the character is feeling.  We have a natural tendency to deny difficult or hurtful things.  So for these events, I may feel the need to be explicit. 

The battle scene in Sin & Contrition in which Mason is killed and LaMarr lies weeping over his friend’s body is  another example.

(For more information about my novels, see www.williampeace.net.)

Sex

Those of you who have read my novels will know that there is a fair amount of heterosexual activity  included.

I think that, for most adults, sex is something we enjoy, and we have a natural curiosity about the experiences of others (short of being voyeuristic).  But, from a writer’s point of view, there is more to it than that.  What we do, with whom, when, how, and the way we feel about it are character-defining aspects.  For example, Ellen’s first real boyfriend in Sin & Contrition  is Rick, whom she admires greatly: he is good-looking and two years older than she.  She engages in some heavy petting with him, but she dumps him when he pressures her to go further.  Later, however, with Rick’s younger brother, Gene, she lets down all her barriers.  Ellen is self-confident and intelligent; she recognises that Rick wants to use her, while Gene really loves her.

Also in Sin & Contrition, Gary, who is bright and has a big ego, but not much common sense, makes his life-defining mistake: he cheats on his wife.  She takes their daughter and leaves him.  He slips  into alcoholism.  But, with the prospect of getting her back, and, with a little help from his friends, he gives up alcohol, and becomes a model husband and father.

In my opinion, the problem for a writer is: how far does one go?  At one extreme, one doesn’t ‘go there’.  This is the ‘romance but no sex’ school of thought typified by Victorian and earlier novels, where two characters get married, and the story resumes a month later.  I can guess what might have happened, but I’d like to know!  People are capricious and unpredictable.  That’s what makes them so interesting.

At the other extreme, one goes there and wallows in it.  This is the ‘sex before romance’ school of thought typified by some chic lit, where even the size of the equipment is described.  This is probably intended to arouse, but for me, it gets confusing.  I wonder, “am I reading something arousing, or am I reading something enlightening?  Which is it?  It can’t be both!”

So, I struggle to steer a middle course, trying not to let the reader doubt what has happened, in at least a general sense, but more importantly how the characters feel about it.  I don’t use slang words, except when a character would be out of character not to use them.  I try to keep the passage somewhat oblique and non-descriptive, using non-traditional words.  In a later post, I’ll discuss some rare instances where I’ve written explicit (but brief) passages, and I’ll explain why I did so.

Comments from the readers are welcome!

Publishers

My third novel, Efraim’s Eye, a thriller, with romance, has just been accepted for publication by Strategic Book Publishing.  So Efraim’s Eye is about a corrupt charity which provides funding to a terrorist.  The terrorist is planning to knock the London Eye over into the River Thames with 800 people locked inside the capsules.  The plot is discovered by a consultant who audits the charity with an Isreali woman who works for the British head office of the charity.  The consultant and the Israeli become lovers, but can they stop the terrorist, and do they have a future together? In my post about literary agents, I promised to discuss publishers later, so it’s time to make good  on that promise. First of all, I’m hardly an expert on publishers, but I think I’ve learned enough to offer some (hopefully) useful comments. In my view, there are three types of  book publishers:

  • self publishers (like Lulu)
  • co-operative publishers (like Strategic Books), and
  • conventional publishers

Conventional publishers are the ones we are most familiar with: Harper & Collins, McGraw Hill, Penguin Books, etc.  They receive manuscripts from literary agents, and after editing, they print, promote and sell the book, taking full responsibility for everything that happens.  They pay the author royalties (out of which  the agent takes a commission).  They use various techniques to induce the book stores to carry the book.  But book stores generally take books only on a ‘sale or return’ basis.  If the book doesn’t sell, the publisher has to take the unsold copies back, and provide the book store with a refund for the unsold copies.  The return of unsold copies represents a major risk for conventional publishers. Interestingly, Amazon does not operate on a ‘sale or return’ basis: it buys books outright at heavily discounted prices, which it can command because there is no risk of  returns.  Amazon also has a stocking advantage: it faces a very large  market with centralised stock, instead of facing a local market with local stocks as book stores must do. In my mind, conventional publishers work on a ‘push’ basis.  They use advertising and  promotion liberally to get the books into the book stores.  They push books into the stores to drive up volume.  They work hard to get media coverage of their books: again pushing their books. Other publishers (self publishers and co-operative publishers) work on a  ‘pull’  basis.  They tend to be rather passive in a sales and marketing context, relying on their authors to create demand for the book. I’m not really familiar with self-publishers. but my understanding is that for a fixed fee, they will print and bind a completed manuscript as an agreed number of copies.  All other responsibilities fall on the author.  If the author is able to sell some copies, s/he can pocket all the revenue. Co-operative publishers (like Strategic Books) lie between self publishers and conventional publishers.   They won’t necessarily accept every submitted manuscript.  Those that are accepted are subject to cost and revenue sharing with the author.  The author pays an up-front fee to get the book into print.  This fee includes layout, typesetting, back and front cover design, ISBN number, copyright, establishing a price, listing of the book in catalogues, and with the online book sellers.  They make the book available through their distribution network.  They insist that their books be professionally edited.  (They will either do it for a fee, or the author can have it done.)  Strategic Books uses three print-on-demand printers: one in the USA, one in the  UK and one in Australia.  Print-on-demand raises  the cost of printing, because – in theory – a press run could be as short as one book.  But, on the other hand there are no unwanted books  printed. The co-operative publisher will typically offer the author a 50% royalty.  Which means that the author is entitled to half of the difference between sales of the book and the cost of printing it.  Authors can buy copies of their book at slightly more than  the cost of printing it. After the book is printed the co-operative publisher will provide the author with a website and will write and issue a press release.  They have considerable marketing and promotional advice which they make available.  All of this is included in the up-front fee.  There are a number of other services which are optional at extra cost.  These include reformatting the book as a Kindle and eBook, participation in major book fairs, special websites and press releases.  Book signings were included in the basic fee, but they are no longer offered, perhaps because of the difficulty of getting book stores to carry books which are non-returnable.  (I offered about ten independent book stores in London the opportunity to hold stock for them, but none was interested.  Not  enough book shelf space; too much trouble for one book.)  Recently, Strategic Books struck a deal with Barnes and Noble where B & N would agree to stock pre-approved books in certain selected stores, provided that the author would reimburse them for unsold copies.  The reason I haven’t pursed this is that Strategic Books wanted me to take 100% of the risk (on the down side), while they retained 50% of the benefits on the up side.  I argued that this wasn’t equitable and fair – to no avail.  The business model for co-operative publisher is based on no returns. In all other respects, I find Strategic Books professional, competent and fair.

I should add that more recently, Strategic Books offers authors the option to make a book available to bookstores on a sale or return basis.  There is a fee for this (about $350) which includes issuing a press release that the book is available on sale or return and which covers the publisher’s administrative costs.  The fee is also used as a deposit against the costs associated with returns.  (So, the author still has 100% of the risk and only 50% of the profits.)  But, I think I’m going to try this with my sixth novel when it is published at the end of 2014.

Literary Agents

Every author would probably like to have an agent.  After all, an agent can probably find the author a publisher.

I don’t have an agent.  I work directly with a co-operative publisher.  (More about this in a later blog.)  My experience with agents hasn’t been good.  When my first book was ready to publish, a friend referred me to the Writer’s Handbook, which lists the UK and US literary agents.  I wrote to all of the relevant US agents, and in that process, I was referred to my current publisher.  When my second book was ready for publication, I wrote to all of the relevant US and UK agencies.  I say ‘relevant’ because a particular agent may not be interested in specific genres (romance, science fiction, etc.).  When I say I ‘wrote’ to the agents, this can be quite a time-consuming task, because I double-checked the agent’s ‘submission requirements’ against what was posted on the agent’s website.  In my experience, most agents want:

  • a cover letter introducing the writer and the book; it should also say why the agent should be interested in the writer and his/her book.
  • a one page synopsis of the book
  • a brief biography of the author
  • the first three chapters of the book, double spaced, Times New Roman #12, on one side only

The vast majority of agents want the submission via post as a hard copy.  (This saves them the time and expense of having to print the material.)  A few will accept email submissions; several agents protest that they are concerned about becoming infected with viruses.  A tiny minority accept submissions via their website, so that the author is requested to paste the desired material into the windows on the website.  For many of the agents to whom I submitted, the bundle was over eighty pages, and, if one wanted the material returned (I didn’t), it was necessary to include a self-addressed envelope with return postage.

Most agents say that it will take about eight weeks before they are able to respond; some say that they receive over one thousand submissions per week.  At the time I submitted my first novel, quite a number of agents were saying that authors should advise them if the work was being submitted to more than one agent.  For me, this was a coded way of saying, “We are not going to compete for your work.”  Recently, an agent’s website made the point that “we don’t engage in beauty contests”.  I didn’t particularly like this attitude.  Do agents really expect authors to make one-at-a-time, serial submissions?  If so, based on the agent’s typical eight week response time, it would take a year to approach six agents.

With my first two novels, all the agents I contacted did send form letter responses, making the point that because of the number of submissions received, they could not elaborate on their reasons, other than to say “it’s not for us.  Good luck.”

With my third novel, I made submissions to thirty-one UK agents.  After about ten weeks, I sent follow-up letters (or emails) to those twelve from whom I had heard nothing.  Months later, there are still seven who have not responded at all (not counting those who say “if you don’t hear from us, assume we aren’t interested.)

This must be a difficult time for literary agents.  Independent book stores are going out of business; big book store chains are cutting back.  Amazon, with its purchasing and discounting policies, is putting great pressure on publishers’ margins.  Kindle and other eBook forms have very low margins.  And to top it off, Amazon has started to cut deals directly with big name authors.

But I continue to believe that literary agents have a place in the world.  They can be excellent coaches/critics for their authors (a role that publishers have largely abandoned and I doubt that Amazon will ever take up).  If one believes, as I do, that there will always be bookstores – in some form – the route into them will be via the ‘push publishers’ and literary agents.

It seems to me that there are some things that literary agents could do to make their life easier (and longer-lasting):

  • better define what it is that they are looking for (or what they’re not interested in).  This implies that some agents should consider specialising in limited genres.
  • shorten their decision-making process.  I believe that the first three chapters with every initial submission is a waste of time and money for everyone involved.  Reading the first ten pages of a book, one can tell whether the author can write.  If the submission passes the genre test (via the short cover letter and brief synopsis) and the author can write, the next step could be the first three chapters and – maybe – a face-to-face meeting.

Critics

In my experience, capable, honest critics are hard to come by.  All writers need thoughtful criticism, but it’s not easy to find. 

My wife reads my material, and she often points out passages that could be improved.  Mostly, she’s right.  Occasionally, I’ll disagree with her, but her comments are always valuable.

One of my friends read the first few chapters of a novel I was writing with an existential theme.  He found it ‘boring’, so I have set it aside for now.  Interestingly, his wife was fascinated with my descriptions of college life at Notre Dame University.  She said, ‘but you went to Yale.  How do you know so much about Notre Dame?’  The answer to this question can be found in my post about Research.  (There is also a passage about Cornell University in Sin & Contrition.  My father went to Cornell and I have visited the campus several times as a child/teenager, but I had to research Cornell in depth to write that passage.)

Most friends who are asked to be critics, recognise that their feelings about a book are likely to be coloured by their preferences.  Some people like war stories: others enjoy love stories.  According to their preferences, they like a book or dislike it.  But this preference may not distinguish good writing from bad writing.

There are, of course, lots of professional critics out there.  They include literary agents and publishers.  Of necessity, their most important criterion is: will this sell?  Then they examine the quality of the writing.  The decision ‘will this sell?’ is not as straight forward as one might think.  We can all mention books that should never have been published, and some that were initially refused publication but which caught fire with the public when they appeared.

Similarly, a book reviewer has to consider what the subscribers to his/her newspaper like to read.

Perhaps academics have the least biased viewpoint.  No commercial considerations are present to colour their judgement, and they can focus on the quality of the writing.  But book publishing is a business, and, as a business, commercial decisions are essential.  Besides, for the author, seeing his/her ‘creation’ published represents an important recognition.

It is very easy for a writer to produce less than perfect quality material.  Before even considering ‘will this sell?’, there are many things that can go wrong:

  • grammar and syntax errors (a good editor should catch these)
  • spelling errors (ditto)
  • excessive wordiness
  • insufficient clarity
  • stereotyped characters
  • characters without credibility
  • excessively complex plot
  • plot is too simple to be interesting
  • dialogue is stilted
  • confusing sequence of events
  • use of confusing language
  • etc.
  • etc.

A well-known American author wrote about a female character: ‘her pussy was like a baseball glove’.  I thought ‘Whoa!  What does that mean?’  Then it occurred to me that the writer was trying to use unique language to differentiate himself from the hoi polloi of writers.  OK.  But, still, what does it mean?  Does it mean that the lady was leathery?  had a pocket? was worn? was used to play a game? or something else?  To me, ambiguous writing is not good writing, even if it is unique.

So, I seriously and sincerely invite the reader to comment on my blog and to criticise my novels.  Because I’m still learning, you may find that I agree with you.