The Readventurer
  • Home
  • YA Reviews
  • Adult Reviews
  • Contests and Giveaways
  • Policies
  • About Us
    • Flannery's Challenges
    • Catie's Challenges
  • Contact Us

Odds & Ends On the Web: August 18th Edition

8/18/2012

24 Comments

 
Odds & Ends Logo The Readventurer
Attention! The biggest scandal of the week! A crime perpetrated by Lauren Conrad and that can be seen on Buzzfeed in all its glory! Watch as Lauren shows the best way to "display vintage books or slightly used books" by cutting out and throwing away all pages of the books and sticking just the spines in a side of a storage box.

Clearly, this is the kind of craft project that can interest only people who don't read books but like to "display" them. Among the legitimate questions asked by book readers and book lovers are: Why didn't Lauren Conrad cut up her own books? Why did she destroy brand new books? And why weren't those Lemony Snicket book spines even glued to the box in order of publication (shudder)?!

The best response to this crime against literacy was delivered by Mr. Snicket himself, as reported by The Huffington Post:

"It has always been my belief that people who spend too much time with my work end up as lost souls, drained of reason, who lead lives of raving emptiness and occasional lunatic violence. What a relief it is to see this documented."

Conrad has since removed her video from both YouTube and her website, but hasn't spoken publicly about this incident yet.

Moving on to less silly articles. (Or maybe not.) If you remember, last week Sue Grafton had some, no, a lot, of very unflattering things to say about self-publishing, even though she wasn't expressly asked about her opinion on the subject. We all have our feelings about self-publishing, some very negative, especially in the current climate of many "indie" authors behaving unprofessionally or plain crazy. However, we also know that not all of the self-published authors are hacks. Self-publishing is a legitimate, fast-growing, profitable business option, and many authors have taken and are taking financial advantage of it. In her later clarification, Sue Grafton proves that just like Shannon Hale a couple of months ago, she has many ideas about self-publishing without actually knowing ANYTHING about it. Hugh Howey, who himself has had a lot of self-publishing success, articulates what we think about Sue Grafton's position very well in his responses to both Grafton's original and backtracked posts.

The way we see it, if traditionally published writers took time to learn about self-publishing and put their prejudices aside, they could actually make significantly more money. For example, do writers with existing fan bases really need their publishers' help to sell and market (and get a huge cut of the profits of), let's say, e-specials - short stories, novellas, guides, etc.? Hm, don't think so.

The discussion about why YA is dominated by female writers continues. This week Salon argues that
the reason why women writers dominate young-adult literature is the reason why many guys avoid it - that is that YA as a category of literature lacks prestige and thus is easier for women to enter. While there is certainly some truth to it - YA is kicked by just about any white man who has access to writing for The Guardian, Washington Post, etc., this assertion doesn't explain why other openly prestige-less genres (like SF or fantasy) have always been and are dominated by men.

Another topic that keeps getting discussed, constantly, is the necessity of removing DRMs from ebooks, so that paying readers could read their electronic books on any device they wish to use. But of course that would not do for the corporate machine. Why, we have no clue. Some time ago Tor pioneered the idea of going DRM-free and started selling its ebooks without DRM protection. Now UK's Hatchett threatens Tor's authors to assure their contracts have stipulations that require all their books to have DRM protection, or else! This threat is delivered under the guise of desire to protect intellectual properties from pirating, but really, who thinks that people who pirate and upload ebooks online wouldn't know how to go around DRM? As Cory Doctorow says:

"DRM doesn’t stop people who scan books, or retype books. DRM doesn’t stop people who download widely available cracks that can remove all the DRM from an entire e-book collection. And DRM doesn’t stop people who are inclined to download the DRM-free pirate editions. All DRM does is punish legitimate users who had the misfortune to be so honest that they paid for the book, rather than taking it."

When will this fear of ebooks stop? Publishers, embrace ebooks, make them affordable and movable. This way you will have much more people willing to pay for these books rather than search and obtain them for free online. Why is publishing an industry so resistant to change?

But let's get wrap up this post with something less negative. The Bulwer-Lytton Fiction Contest (a bad writing contest) announced its 2012 winners and runner-ups. And the winner is...:

"As he told her that he loved her she gazed into his eyes, wondering, as she noted the infestation of eyelash mites, the tiny deodicids burrowing into his follicles to eat the greasy sebum therein, each female laying up to 25 eggs in a single follicle, causing inflammation, whether the eyes are truly the windows of the soul; and, if so, his soul needed regrouting." (Cathy Bryant, Manchester, England)

Make sure to check the contest site for more "gems"!


24 Comments
Phoebe link
8/18/2012 05:20:34 am

I missed the Grafton/Howey hub-bub initially, but I think it bears saying: I'm a member of two communities (metafilter and absolutewrite) where I've seen Howey come in and perpetuate half-truths about traditional publishing. There are some again repeated in his posts:

<I>99% of all manuscripts submitted to the traditional machine never even land an agent. 99% of those that do, even if published, end up lost in the shelves with their spines out and nobody looking for them. </I>

Yes, and 99% of internet statistics are made up on the spot. The truth is more complex than that, and readers and aspiring authors should always keep in mind that self-published authors are always simultaneously marketing themselves even as they give publishing advice (claiming that traditional publishing is a near-impossibility that will give you a measly advance and force you to deal with evil agents and editors who hate art is selling the self-published success story). You should no more believe what self-published authors have to say about traditional publishing than you should believe what traditionally published authors have to say about self-publishing.

Man, are my jimmies rustled.

Reply
Phoebe link
8/18/2012 05:21:13 am

Whoops, excuse the bad HTML please.

Reply
Tatiana (The Readventurer) link
8/18/2012 07:33:22 am

I completely agree, Phoebe. Self-published authors indeed often over-defend and over-justify their choices, and there are certainly many lazy or incompetent self-published writers out there. But it ticks me off when traditionally published authors stand up so firmly against self-publishing without knowing anything about the opportunities (financial and creative) that it offers. Self-publishing and independent publishing isn't going anywhere. It would be wise for some authors to see it and take advantage of it.

Reply
Tatiana (The Readventurer) link
8/18/2012 07:35:48 am

I completely agree, Phoebe. Self-published authors indeed often over-defend and over-justify their choices, and there are certainly many lazy or incompetent self-published writers out there. But it ticks me off when traditionally published authors stand up so firmly against self-publishing without knowing anything about the opportunities (financial and creative) that it offers. Self-publishing and independent publishing aren't going anywhere. It would be wise for some authors to see it and take advantage of it.

Reply
Phoebe link
8/18/2012 08:03:48 am

I just want to say for the record that I don't think there's anything lazy about self-publishing.

However, there are a variety of reasons why a traditionally published author would not choose to self-publish supplementary or promotional novellas or short-stories, and many of them have nothing to do with ignorance about how self publishing works. Contractual limitations are a big one: many writers have self-compete or options clauses built into their contracts specifying that works which would compete with their novels (including novels set in the same world or intended for the same audience) not be released within a particular length of time.

You might wonder why any author would choose such a contract when they could rake in the big bucks self-publishing. The reason? Publishers make it financially worth it to sign such contracts. Contrary to what Mr. Howey says, many debut authors do much better than a $5,000 advance (a number volleyed around plenty, but based on a very dated and genre-limited survey by Tobias Bucknell). I'm not comfortable with sharing specifics, but I can say that I did not get one of those big PM deals, but am still making exponentially more than what Mr. Howey states most debut authors would--more than I've ever made at a day job, even after taxes. All without selling a single book. Of course, that level of income isn't guaranteed forever, but neither is it for Hugh Howey. That's the nature of freelance arts-based work.

So of course I'm happy to sign a non-compete clause. Happy, too, to offer promotional short stories so that my publisher can promote my work. This, despite the fact that I know how to design a cover and format an ebook. It's simply more lucrative for me to do it this way than that way.

The truth is, Howey is as inexperienced with traditional publishing as Grafton is with self-publishing. In the first post, he asserts that self-publishing is the best road to publishing success; it wasn't for me, and I'm beyond glad that I had the creative support of my agent and editor. And, contrary to his statement that an author can find success faster in self-publishing, he spent several years self- and indie-publishing books before he hit it big (just as I spent several years querying! Funny how that works). Blow-out successes like his are just as rare in self-publishing as NY Times bestselling debuts are in mainstream publishing. Very rare indeed, though that's not to say they don't happen. Authors like Rachel Hartman are as much a testament to perseverance leading to success in mainstream pub as Hugh Howey is a testament to persverence leading to success in self-publishing.

Tatiana (The Readventurer) link
8/18/2012 08:16:17 am

I guess, the main lesson here is that both sides should be respectful of each other's choices and stop being dismissive of them, because there are many reasons why authors pick one option over another.

Phoebe link
8/18/2012 08:17:15 am

That, I can always agree with! :)

Tatiana (The Readventurer) link
8/18/2012 09:19:42 am

Good, now we both can sleep at night:)

If you ask me why I am even compelled to defend self-publishing (considering that I hardly ever read anything self-published), it would be very hard for me to answer. But I do know of a few authors who I respect that chose that route - Cat Valente originally had her MG fantasy as online fiction, a few already known and acclaimed authors like M.K. Hobson and Kate Milton chose to finance their projects via Kickstarter when their publishers (I assume) were not interested in these projects. These authors are not lazy or untalented.

There are also numerous readers who find something in self-pubbed works that traditional publishing can't satisfy. I think a lot of published and modified fanfic is the answer to those cravings that the original authors couldn't sate.

Hugh Howey link
8/18/2012 11:33:21 pm

"The truth is, Howey is as inexperienced with traditional publishing as Grafton is with self-publishing."

I appreciate you highlighting the other side of the argument, but this statement (on which much of your comments about me seems to be based) isn't true. My first book was queried with agents and publishers. I signed with a small house for a modest advance and a traditional contract. More recently, I signed a deal with Random House for a UK/Australia/NZ hardback release, so I've worked through that negotiation process with agents, performed edits and various marketing duties, and have learned what it's like to be with a major publisher.

Unless Sue Grafton has recently self-published, I would posit that while her experiences are much deeper than mine, having written in the same manner for many decades, mine might be broader and more up to date. I learned a lot about publishing by working in bookstores and with publishing reps, by working as a book reviewer and covering conventions and interviewing authors as a member of the press. And unlike Sue, who admits to knowing very little about modern publishing in her retraction, I am active on forums and websites where I learn about this daily changing industry.

It seems I may have upset you at some point, perhaps with being too pro-self-pubbing on AW, which I was long before my success, and I'm sorry about that. But it doesn't help the discussion to mischaracterize my publishing experience or to paint me as biased from only working one side of the industry. I have a top agent and over 15 contracts with major publishing houses all over the world. My advice comes from someone who has been offered massive advances from major publishers, looked over contracts that are painfully unfair, and want to warn others from making the mistake of signing non-compete clauses and shoddy royalty rates. This industry will change for the better when authors begin exercising their options and creating a competitive marketplace, and not before.

With all respect,
Hugh

Flannery (The Readventurer) link
8/18/2012 08:40:37 am

I always appreciate hearing from authors like you, Phoebe, who actually put thought into what the positives and negatives are to both avenues. I'm sure most people in the publishing, writing, and blogging spheres have a reasonably balanced viewpoint on the issue, but those are not often the people whose posts get the most play. As it is with almost every topic, there are always those outliers who make me wonder what their motivation is for speaking publicly on a subject they haven't fully researched. (obviously if I knew the motivation for why people share uninformed opinions, I could then easily solve all the problems of the world! Huzzah! :))

While I think there is some crap being published in both arenas, more crap is available in the self-published world for obvious reasons. There are many reasons why it might be a great idea to self-publish but there will *always* be some authors self-publishing because their work is subpar, and that (seemingly large though I am only speaking from my experience as a reader) group gives self-publishing a bad name.

I think both Grafton and Howey were less than balanced in their statements and don't fully agree with either of them but I did/do find them both interesting enough to post. I have Howey's Wool Omnibus out from the library and I fully intend to read it before my time expires to see what it's like. Have you read it? (Are you going to for IA?)

Reply
Phoebe
9/1/2012 03:19:38 pm

Apologies on my radio silence on this--I unsubscribed without intending to. I tried the Molly Fyde books a few years ago but never finished; those would be more appropriate for the Academy than Wool, but we're kind of up to our ears in stuff right now anyway (Sean was covering self-published stuff for awhile but it seemed like his enthusiasm for that waned pretty quickly or something. I dunno. I should try to get him to give it a shot again.)

Andrea link
8/18/2012 10:56:53 am

My advice to people with a fresh, brand-new manuscript is to submit it to trade publishing for a couple of years while working on the next couple of novels. Then consider the rights they want (if they offer to take any) and decide then which path to take.

The delay (for a first manuscript, at least) gives a writer time to get some distance from their MS, and hopefully be better able to see the quality of what they've produced.

If they receive an offer, the advertising (even just the listing in catalogues) and 'legitimacy' gained from a trade publication or two is invaluable for a self-publisher, but you have to be willing to swallow the contract terms (which for both publishers and agents are increasingly draconic) and treat those books as something you're more or less willing to 'give up'.

And if you don't get any offers, self-publishing works better if you have a couple of books to release in a string, anyway.

As for this kerfuffle, I feel sorry for Sue Grafton, and will forgive her for not keeping up with the current publishing situation because I liked the first dozen or so Kinsey novels, though I think it's never a good idea to speak authoritively about things you haven't dealt with for years.

Reply
Flannery (The Readventurer) link
8/18/2012 02:12:19 pm

You're like my go-to person when I tell people about self-published authors "doing it right." I hope the weight on your shoulders isn't too heavy.

Lectus link
8/18/2012 08:43:52 am

I actually like that craft idea!
Writing is an art but the publishing industry is a business. She didn't use old books but new ones which means more sale :-)

Question, is it wrong to do this because the books are new but is okay to delete books you don't like on your Kindle?

Reply
Flannery (The Readventurer) link
8/18/2012 08:52:31 am

The thing is, if you delete a book from your Kindle, it isn't gone. It is still available in your archive, to redownload from Amazon, or in a cloud drive. (It also could be saved on your computer) If you cut up a perfectly good book, it is dead. All that's left is paper to be recycled. I think so many readers find it offensive because if she wasn't going to read it, she could've/probably should've donated the books to children who would read them, schools, libraries, etc.

I've seen people use books for craft projects before but it has almost always been books that were not in good condition anymore--falling out of their hardcovers, drawn all over, etc. If she'd used books that were at the end of their usable life, I think far fewer people would've taken issue with it.

Reply
Tatiana (The Readventurer) link
8/18/2012 09:26:17 am

I personally find this craft idea silly and slightly disrespectful because 1) if she wanted to display those books, she could have just put them on her shelf and 2) if she wanted to have those spines on the box, a color copy of them would have sufficed. As is, ruining those new books for such a silly reason is just a waste of trees. If the books were ruined or damaged, nobody would have minded her recycling just the spines.

As for Kindle book deletes, I agree with Flannery. The only thing you waste by that is the money that you paid for a digital file.

Reply
Lectus link
8/18/2012 11:46:26 pm

" ruining those new books for such a silly reason is just a waste of trees" I agree BUT, is not her fault the publishing industry kills trees!

After I posted the above comment it came to me that you'd mention the donating part to a library. I work in a library and I'm sick of people coming up to me to donate books! I have boxes of them because we don't do anything with them. Why?
1- they donate to the wrong department
2- I work in a huge library and we have priorities in what needs to be cataloged

I shared the video with my sister and she said the idea was stupid!
God! I'm officially stupid now.

Cassi Haggard link
8/18/2012 11:56:16 am

So the box she made actually did look cute. The problem is that nobody who really loves books could ever destroy a book.

Is it odd that I somewhat in jest thought of the "destroy the ARCs" argument (BTW I cannot destroy even bad books) that went down earlier this summer?

Reply
Tatiana (The Readventurer) link
8/18/2012 12:10:36 pm

I am with you, Cassi. I can't bring myself to discard bad ARCs, never mind good books to decorate a carton box with their covers. I have no idea how many readers can actually do something like this.

Reply
Missie
8/18/2012 03:30:35 pm

Oh, Mr. Snicket! He's lovely, isn't he?!

Reply
Jasprit link
8/18/2012 11:06:10 pm

I didn't even know that Lauren had done that with other writer's books, you can see how much out of the loop I am! Also the Bulwer-Lytton Fiction Contest is hilarious! eyelash mites seriously? I've never heard of that before! I'm off to check out more entries! Thanks for sharing! :)

Reply
Kate C.
8/19/2012 06:29:23 am

Oh man, laughed so hard at the Snicket comment. hahaha

I think it's pretty awesome that both self-publishing and traditional options exist. I've seen many authors releasing their backlists to make extra cash which is so cool, because I love feeling like I'm supporting my favorite authors that way.
I don't think either option is a right or wrong one. I am an obsessive control freak, so I'm not sure if traditional is the way for me. (Case in point, while I know authors that would and HAVE signed non-competes, that gives me the chills. :))
On the other hand, a writer friend of mine (Vicki Keire) has both an indie series and a series with an actual publisher. One of my favorite YA indies, Kait Nolan, has some indie books, but has an agent (Julie Kagawa's agent, actually) and is working on a manuscript that she plans on shopping around. I love how writers are just embracing the best roads for themselves.

DRM makes me sooooo mad! If I say anymore I will start spewing venom, but let me just say that I think ppl are really shortsighted about this. And about ebooks themselves. There should be better lending rights (not just 1 person two weeks!). There should be more ebooks for libraries!!! There should be more reasonable prices (and no, higher or as high as a hardback is NOT reasonable!) .

Reply
Flannery (The Readventurer) link
8/19/2012 01:57:24 pm

On the backlist point, amen. I dream about some future time when out of print books are more readily available as ebooks. A few times in the past year, I've put the one copy of a book my library system has on hold and they've had to get it from Central Storage. I also like when authors publish short stories or novellas (when they are allowed to in their contract, obviously).

Reply
Scribble Orca link
8/20/2012 08:05:28 pm

Very nice article (and comments) presenting info on both sides. The biggest problem faced by writers who neither self- or traditionally published not knowing whether it is the quality of their writing that is the problem, or the saleability of their book. A publisher takes a punt on the manuscript, but I'm not sure the rate of predictive accuracy is much better than the meteorological department. A self-published writer takes a risk as well - but its generally a lot harder to be objectively critical about your own work.

And that means the publishing industry still acts, rightly or wrongly, as the gatekeeper of books for the reading public. It's something of a catch-22: the publisher puts a book onto the market that is expected to appeal, and puts a budget behind it, but whether or not the reading public agree with that bet can only be determined by sales. And who is to know whether the reading public might not have purchased an alternative which isn't offered because the publisher thought it would not appeal.

Very arbitrary.

Reply



Leave a Reply.

    Follow Us On:

    Facebook Twitter Feed

    Subscribe:

    Subscribe
    Follow on Bloglovin

    Subscribe via email:

    Delivered by FeedBurner


    What We're Reading:

    Blood of my Blood cover

    Flannery

    Goodreads
    Monstrous Affections cover

     Tatiana

    Goodreads
    Rules of Civility cover

      Catie

    Goodreads

    Archives 

    March 2014
    September 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013
    February 2013
    January 2013
    December 2012
    November 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012
    July 2012
    June 2012
    May 2012
    April 2012
    March 2012
    February 2012
    January 2012
    December 2011
    November 2011
    October 2011
    September 2011
    August 2011
    July 2011
    June 2011

    Categories

    All
    Author Spotlight
    Book Events
    Book Vs. Movie
    Catie's Adult Reviews
    Catie's Y.A. Reviews
    Contest Or Giveaway
    Flannery's Adult Reviews
    Flannery's Y.A. Reviews
    If You Like This Maybe That
    Library Quest
    Odds & Ends On The Web
    Randomness
    Readalong Recaps
    She Made Me Do It
    Tatiana's Adult Reviews
    Tatiana's Y.A. Reviews
    Three Heads Are Better Than One Or Two
    Year Of The Classics


    Blogs We Follow

    Angieville
    Anna Scott Jots
    Badass Book Reviews
    The Book Geek
    The Book Smugglers
    Book Harbinger
    Books Take You Places
    Bunbury in the Stacks
    Chachic's Book Nook
    Clear Eyes, Full Shelves
    Collections
    Cuddlebuggery
    For the Love of Words
    The Galavanting Girl Books
    Inkcrush
    Intergalactic Academy
    Ivy Book Bindings
    The Nocturnal Library
    Rainy Day Ramblings
    The Readers Den
    The Reading Date
    Realm of Fiction
    Sash and Em
    Stacked
    The Unread Reader
    Vegan YA Nerds
    Wear The Old Coat
    Wordchasing
    Wrapped Up In Books
    Young Adult Anonymous 

    Grab A Button

    The Readventurer
    <div align="center"><a href="http://www.thereadventurer.com" title="The Readventurer"><img src="http://www.weebly.com/uploads/7/8/9/9/7899923/custom_themes/149267861480723643/files/TheReadventurer.png?1321429794244" alt="The Readventurer" style="border:none;" /></a></div>

    Parajunkee Design
    SiteLock
    Since 2/4/2012

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 United States License.
Photos used under Creative Commons from savillent, vue3d, vue3d, ljcybergal