Start making sense

Most of you know I live in southern California and today it's Santa Ana Winds week. We get static-charged dry air along with 60-mile an hour winds (no, I'm NOT kidding) that rearrange everything everywhere. Me? I get a headache.

I read some doctor's claim that there are very few sinus headaches and people who say they get them are simply misdiagnosed. I'd like to exchange heads with him for one of these Santa Ana days and see if he still believes that.

But even though I'd like to take a rock and hit myself in the head (unconsciousness would be good right now), that doctor has given me something to post about.

Science - what does the data really prove?

In my very first psychology class as a college freshman, my professor said the most astounding thing: "There is no scientific proof that cigarettes cause cancer." What?!? He then explained. To establish scientific proof, scientists would have to set up three groups of people of the same age. One group of people would never EVER smoke ANYTHING. One group would begin smoking a pack a day at age eighteen. The third group would smoke something that looked like cigarettes but were placebos.

"Then when they were all sixty, we'd count the survivors and have our proof," he said. "There is, of course, a moral and ethical code about running these kinds of experiments, which is why we have laboratory mice and we make comparisons and extrapolations and it takes years to convince anyone to put a warning label on a pack of cigarettes, instead of a skull and crossbones."

(By the way, he smoked. He just admitted it was not his safest choice.)

From that moment, I looked at all pronouncements, scientific or statistic, with a degree of skepticism. How was the testing done? How were the results gathered? Who is behind the study or poll? What do they have to benefit from the results?

I can say this attitude has served me, in that I no longer panic when a headline screams, "Analysts Predict Worldwide Financial Collapse Within Fifty Years." Which analysts? Define "financial collapse." How did they arrive at their conclusion?

It also made me fall in love with the idea of the pure test, without any anticipation of results. Let the data prove what it proves, instead of looking for your own personal AHA.

What does any of this have to do with books and writing?

Because I read Publisher's Weekly and a bunch of other publisher/agent/author blogs, I'm always reading about how e-books are overtaking print books - NO WAIT - the print books are still in the lead - NO WAIT - independent authors are becoming more legitimate - NO WAIT - the Big Six Publishers are still calling the shots - NO WAIT...

Good grief, I'm exhausted just trying to figure out what kind of data they've used to arrive at their conclusions. At the end of the day, I can only do what seems right for me at the time, but I do consider the headlines because 'what's right for me' has to include what the market is doing.

So when Joe Konrath threw this little test up in a recent blog post, it got me very excited:

Visit publishers' websites. Pick ten books by new authors that are being released in November. Then set up a Google alert for each title, so you get all the marketing, news, and publicity associated with it. Also watch and track Amazon and BN.com rankings.

Follow these books for a month. See for yourself how well publishers do in breaking out these ten new books. Do any get on the bestseller lists? Visit some local bookstores. How many copies do they stock, if any? Contact the authors and ask how they're being treated.

Then you can find out for yourself what a Big 6 publisher does for a new author, and you'll have a much better reason for either taking, or rejecting, any deal they might offer you.

A test with real data I could collect and use! This is useful to me because even though I've self-pubbed my last three books, I may still want to submit the next one to a publisher. Maybe - if they can do things for me that I can't do for myself, such as reach a broader audience. But how do I know they are helping their authors sell as many books as possible?

Joe's test can be a more analytical, less anecdotal, way to determine that, which can only help me.

If you're an author, is there any criteria you use for determining what path to take your career? Do you find yourself relying on anecdotes for your choices?

If you're a publisher or agent, are you seeing any differences in authors these days? Are you also looking at the anecdotes and making adjustments in your own career/company to meet the market needs?

I hope this makes sense, in spite of my "non-sinus" sinus headache.

Wah! Nobody loves me!

Okay, my last post was about how book reviews influence you as a reader. Now let's talk about how they influence you as a writer.

Of course, if you lived and died by whether all reviews of your work were glowing, you'd probably never write a word. Or, you'd become a serial killer, although I suspect you'd be easy to catch. ("The killer is targeting anyone who gave a bad review to Freezer Burn. I'd say our list of suspects is pretty short.")

Like I said last time, I've gotten some really nice reviews, either in person or in writing (e-mail, blogs, Amazon), but of course, the one I remember most is when my doctor told me the ending seemed contrived, like I was trying to rush the story to get it done. She also said she enjoyed the book and that I was a good writer, but the C-word bugs the crap outa me.

Lesson learned for little Gayle Sue - skin isn't thick enough yet.

Even worse, in a way, was a little comment on the Wake Up Celebrity Author site. They're having a contest, where the book with the most votes gets a prize. I'd tell you all about it, but the site is problematic; I can only access it about ten percent of the time. At any rate, one guest voted for my book and gave it 3.8 stars, out of 5. Here's his comment: "I didn't read it but here's my vote."

What the hell? I mean, thanks for the vote, I guess, but you never read it and are reviewing it? What part of Crazy Town do you come from?

Someone said they didn't read their reviews because "if you believe the good ones, then you have to believe the bad ones." I don't remember who said this, but if you know, please tell me. If you do read reviews, you have to throw out the outliers. Good reviews that are so vague as to sound solicited are worthless. Ditto for bad reviews that focus on the author ("You're ugly and your mother dresses you funny" is not a review). If the ones left are mostly positive, then yay for you.

But what if they're bad? If they're meaningfully and thoughtfully negative, then maybe I owe it to the reader to take another look at what I'm writing. After I stop slamming doors and calm down, that is.

If they're just silly and stupid, there are a number of things you can do:

1. Submit them to The Worst Review Ever blog. It's a great site for posting bad reviews and talking about how you dealt with your feelings when you read them.

2. Blog about the experience yourself. Joe Konrath is pretty good at trotting out his hippo-thick hide and parading bad reviews in front of the rest of us, while he laughs all the way to the bank. Note: Can you believe that reviewers of his horror novel, Afraid, described as a "gore fest for fans of gross-out horror" complained that it was gory? What did they not understand about the description?

3. Read the negative review aloud, in your whiniest voice. This is a tip I got from another writer at a conference. Actually, I don't have to do this with my doctor's review - her voice is naturally whiny.

4. (Virtual) death to your enemies! This one was given to me by a therapist I saw many, many years ago, when I needed help in figuring out why I was married to the (seriously) wrong person. My favorite way to "kill" people in my head is to imagine them in a giant trash compactor. Sometimes I squish them quickly. If they've really pissed me off, I snap each bone. Individually. K-RunCH.

Or maybe you just don't read the reviews at all, good or bad. But if you do this, tell me your secret: how do you resist? I'm so insanely curious, I can't help but look. Must be why I like mysteries!

Come tell me - do you read your reviews (be honest)? How do you handle the negative ones?

The days of whines and jeezes

J.A. Konrath, who writes the Jack Daniels series, once described his writing style as (I'm paraphrasing here), "I give my main character a goal. Then I throw every obstacle I can think of at them to keep them from reaching that goal."

I think this describes most stories. The protagonist must have something they want, even if it's just to be left alone. And the author must spend the entire tale trying to keep them from getting it.

My main gal, Peri, wants to do low-risk investigations, like background checks and surveillance. You know, hunt around on the Internet and in libraries, sit in her car with a camera, easy stuff. Of course, that would make a pretty dull book. "Peri turned in her reports, went home and had a dirty martini, and they all lived happily ever after." The only thing to make that worse is if Peri never worried about her bills, her age, or her ability to buy Grey Goose vodka. Bo-ring.

And yet, as much as I like to read books with a quick pace and constant turmoil, I'd like my life to resemble the unsellable plot I've described above. No worries, no conflicts, happily ever after.

Today, however, I don't get my wish. I'm juggling three different events for my son's choir, worrying about the lack of sign-ups for summer horse camp, and trying to figure out how to squeeze a week's worth of travel to see my family in Illinois into our summer schedule. I thought I had a nice 8-day time frame worked out, when my husband said he needed to be back a day earlier and my son needs to be back two days before that.

Oh, yeah, and there's the book launch party, my publicity and marketing plans (am I missing an opportunity? Ack!), and I should be working on the next book.

So, in honor of today's resemblance to a soap opera plot, I'm naming this Whine and Jeez Friday. Please feel free to post your latest whine, about your life, your writing, your career, your kids, your pets, your landlord, your spouse...

I'm listening.

If it's fiction, does that mean it's not true?

They say the worst liars are the people who blend a lie in with the truth. You can assume, with people who lie all the time, that they are lying each time they open their mouths. But when they tell the truth most of the time, but mix one lie in every once in awhile, how do you know which statement was true and which one was false?

When I started writing Freezer Burn, I knew I wanted to set it in Placentia. Call me crazy (no, it's okay, I've been called worse), but I knew which house I wanted Benny to live in, knew Peri's neighborhood, knew where they'd have lunch and get takeout and get gas in their cars. I've lived in Placentia since 1984, albeit in three different houses. If you'd asked me five years ago why, I'd have told you it was purely accident. Nowadays, I call it an instinctual accident. Let's face it - Placentia is a teeny little 'burb in north Orange County, engulfed by other, bigger 'burbs. But every time I needed to move, I looked around at the neighboring cities, then my gut called me home to Placentia. It's where I belonged.

The good thing about setting a fictional story in a real place is, you know the place well. I can drive you down real streets and take you to real places without having to make up new names. The bad thing is, you're afraid people will take umbrage if you don't represent their town well.

Some towns are huge and can take the heat. I doubt if anyone in Chicago reads J.A. Konrath's books and thinks, "That hoser - the way he tells it, Chi-town's littered with the bodies left by all the serial killers." Even the Irvine and Newport Beach areas of south Orange County don't whine that Dean Koontz is making them sound like they're all in imminent danger of some supernatural evil. As a matter of fact, they kinda like Dean down south.

When I was dropping people and clues and bodies around Placentia, I confess to a small worry. What if the Placentia citizens don't want bank managers with gambling problems, or sociopathic day care workers living in their borders? (Note: these are just examples, not actual characters.)

So I mixed things up a bit. For example, I set quite a few scenes at the Homeless Intervention Shelter, or HIS House. I am proud of our community serving the homeless in this way, and the setting fit in with a character who is down on her luck. But I gave the home a big grassy backyard, and I completely made up the interiors. Benny's house is in an actual location, but I changed the name of the church next door, and I took the basic house and exaggerated the style.

Now, of course, I'm wondering if I should have stayed more true to life, or should have renamed Placentia, like Sue Grafton in her Kinsey Mulhone series. She renamed Santa Barbara to Santa Teresa, except that everyone who reads her books knows it's really Santa Barbara so what was the point?

Anyway, whether you are a reader or writer, which do you prefer? Can you take your reality with a teaspoon of fiction, or does it bother you to know a neighborhood and have the author change a restaurant's name? I'd really like to know.

P.S. I would be remiss if I didn't mention a couple of things today:

1. I have a short story in the anthology series, Missing, from Echelon Press. Proceeds from the sale of this book will benefit the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, and it's ON SALE NOW. Buy it and read a bunch of cool stories by good authors, and earn some good karma by helping a worthy cause!

2. Has Karen Syed (publisher and queen of Echelon) got a deal for you! TODAY ONLY, buy ANY book/download for $3 or more from http://echelonpress.com/directory.htm and receive a FREE download of your choice! Don't wait!

3. This Friday (Feb. 6) is National Wear Red Day in recognition of women beating heart disease. So put on your red hat, or ruby slippers, or scarlet letter, and send a picture of yourself to Karen (echelonpress@comcast.net) for her wall of honor. C'mon, it'll be a fun way to call attention to an important health issue.

Writer's block

No, not that kind of block.

After writing 1,000 words today and feeling damned proud of myself, I went surfing and found some interesting sites for writers. So this post is a block of links for writers, get it?

First of all, I always recommend the Blood Red Pencil blog (http://bloodredpencil.blogspot.com/). It's full of editors telling us writers that they won't eat us alive and have our best interests (okay, our writing's best interests) at heart. Trust them, they don't bite... hard.

Alexandra Sokoloff also has a great blog for writers, or even non-writers who study how stories are told, no matter what the media. We frequently talk about movies in our attempts to dissect story arc, character development, and what makes a good hero-villain relationship. Visit the Dark Salon - I dare you.

And, of course, there's Joe (http://jakonrath.blogspot.com/). The fun part about his discourses on writing is that he manages to engage so many differing opinions. One of these days, I'm going to witness a cyber-fist fight on his blog, I'm just certain of it.

Today, I had three new posts lobbed at me. One of them came via the Echelon Authors Group (my tail still wags when I realize I'm one of the Echelon authors). It's an e-article from ForeWord Publishing by Tom Christensen about the importance of blogs (visit article here). Basically, it says, you'll get more hits if you stop talking about yourself so much and turn your focus on your reader. The really funny part of the article for me was when Tom studied several blogs to prove his point - according to his research, Penguin Books UK actually got TWENTY-THREE comments on one of their blogs. Wow. Joe Konrath's last post is still going at 56 comments. Many of the posts I read get over 20 comments with almost every post. Maybe Tom needs to branch out on his blog studies.

Next, I read an interesting, albeit old (from September) post by E.E. Knight, a science fiction and fantasy writer, on famous writing blunders he has seen. Okay, most of these pits have been pointed out to me along the way, but there were a few faux pas I'd never seen before. Thankfully, I've also never committed them, either. If you're a writer, look here for one more list to tack on your wall.

Lastly, a magnificent letter from John Steinbeck, giving advice to new writers. In one of Joe's recent posts, he was arguing about whether published authors are the best equipped to teach writers. There are two schools of thought about this, but Steinbeck's letter seems to indicate that he would not have made a good teacher. After years of writing and being successful, he sounds as if he puts the words to paper and then "a miracle happens" to make them mean anything. Read it here.

So much for a block about writers. Read and learn, padawans.

Yeah, what Joe said

Joe Konrath has an interesting post (as usual) today about the cost of being a writer (visit http://jakonrath.blogspot.com/2009/01/writer-as-spendthrift.html to read the full text). I completely agree that there are a lot of people out there who are willing to charge writers money in order to teach them what they already know. And amazingly, there are a lot of writers who will pay it. They run from one conference to the next writing course, dropping enormous amounts of cash while talking about what they're going to do someday when they "become writers".

Here are my own caveats to Joe's very excellent advice:

1. Taking writing courses from people who've never or only rarely been published. There are writing courses, and then there are writing courses. Some people need help with the basics. These are the people who've managed to drift through 12 years of schooling without realizing that verbs must be paired with nouns. They need to be taught by a licensed professional, and it doesn't matter if the pro has been published or not.

Why do they want to be writers, you ask. Because telling people you are a writer is cool. If you're a man, you get to wear turtleneck sweaters. If you're a woman, you get to have headshots taken that make you look gorgeous without feeling self-indulgent. OK, you and I know that being a writer is not cool, it is hard work because you have to actually think, and turtlenecks are hot and itchy and headshots are a big pain in the butt. But let these people have their fantasies. Maybe they'll take a few classes and decide it isn't worth having to tell the difference between an adverb and an adjective. Or maybe they'll learn and want to keep writing. You aren't the boss of them, so smile and be encouraging when your 80-year old illiterate uncle tells you he's going to write a memoir of when he was at Iwo Jima, except you know he had a desk job in Roanoke the entire war. At the very least, he will be keeping the local writing instructor employed.

2. Don't buy what you can get for free. There are so many wonderful blogs on the Internet now about writing and editing and being published, it's a wonder that anyone should pay for a class or a seminar or a conference. Yet, there are some times when you should. One is if you are reading all of these wonderful blogs and are still flailing about, because you can't organize your thoughts around the information you're being given. The other is when there is a payoff you can't get from the Internet. I have gone to several writer's conferences in the past 3 years, due to both of those reasons.

In September, 2006, I attended my first Southern California Writer's Conference in Palm Springs. At the time, I was a newspaper and magazine columnist who wanted to write a novel, although I didn't know what to write it about. I sat in workshops and listened and took notes and decided to take one of my short stories and turn it into a novel. I didn't plan to go to the San Diego SCWC in February, but I had a big chunk of my horrific novel written and I couldn't figure out why it was so horrific, so I went. In San Diego, I heard the professional writers/publishers/editors tell me why it wasn't good, but I still didn't "get" it. It took me another conference to figure it all out. That's when I wrote a good book, went to another conference, met Karen Syed and sold FREEZER BURN.

Did I spend a bit of money? Yes, BUT it was concentrated in one direction and I got results from my investment. Do I think everyone at SCWC gets a good return on their dollar? No, because I've seen a lot of people at these conferences who don't go to the workshops or listen to the experts. They use the conferences as a writer's group, sitting in read & critiques and submitting their first 20 pages to every editor and publisher on the panel. If you're one of those people, save your money. Join a writer's group and learn to send out queries.

Nowadays, I do visit a lot of bloggers and take a lot of their advice to heart. For example, LJ Sellers was waxing poetic about the need for a character database. I didn't build one for FREEZER BURN, but now I'm starting the next book about Peri and her friends (tentatively titled HIT OR MISSUS) and I spent most of an evening looking at the previous book for characters I wanted to re-use but couldn't remember their last name, hair color, etc. LJ was right - the database makes everything SO much easier.

Will I continue to attend the conferences? Depends upon who is going to be there and what I need from the conference.

Joe is absolutely right to warn writers against poring money into the process unless they absolutely need to. Sometimes you do need to spend a little money, but you need to look at what you're ultimately getting for your dollar. Is it moving your writing career along, or is it teaching you more of what you already know?

Stop talking about "becoming a writer". Write and "be a writer".

The Butterfly effect, Part 2

Can we be frank? I've gotten a Butterfly Award and two Premio Dardos ("Prize Darts") Awards, and when I look around to see who to pass them on to, I see that everyone I read is getting multiple Butterflies and Darts. Are we supposed to be passing them around within the group to build interest in each other's blogs somehow, or are we supposed to be cross-pollinating, introducing ourselves to new people?

Seriously, I can't tell.

So here's what I'm going to do: First, I'm going to try to insert that pretty Butterfly picture into this post. Pray for me - here goes nothing -

See anything? Me neither. Damn.

Never mind, let's go to the next step. If I read every interesting blog out there, I'd never eat, sleep or write, and forget riding my horses. But here's who I read regularly: The Life of a Publisher, A Newbie's Guide to Publishing, Alexandra Sokoloff, Morgan Mandel, Writely So, and Write First Clean Later. These lovely people have been showered with blog awards from myself and others. Please keep visiting them, and comment often. We all get lonely.

Here are some blogs I've recently discovered by looking at Blogger's "Blogs of Note". I don't know if they need any more followers, and they're not all about writing, BUT they are either pretty, or fascinating, or helpful in some way. Check them out if you've got the time and the inkling:

Book Flap (indy bookstore in Menlo Park, CA)

The One-Minute Writer (quick writing prompts to get your fingers and brain moving)

The Book Design Review (reviews/discussions about book covers - fascinating)

Editorial Anonymous (real-life lessons on what not to do)

Query Shark (same as E.A. for query letters)

Detectives Beyond Borders (international crime)

Poem of the Week (well, yea, what it sounds like)

Cheerful Scoop (good news when you need it)

Synch-ro-ni-zing (beautiful photos)

If It's Hip It's Here (cutting edge products - this was giving me story ideas)

I'll try to alert these folks to their Butterflies, but mostly I just want to spread the seeds of information around and keep us all from inbreeding ideas. Enjoy.

Now that I've spread my Butterfly's wings - have I had any effect on the atmosphere?>