[an error occurred while processing this directive]

Sime~Gen(tm) Inc.

WorldCrafters Guild(tm)

Where Sime and Gen Meet, Creativity Happens

     Chatlog for Class #8 of
Online Course
"Editing The Novel"

Given By

Editor and Publisher

Bonnee Pierson                    bonneebw.gif (71006 bytes)

and

Silke Juppenlatz

reserve your place in this course.

Come to Class every Sunday during the course, 3PM Eastern Time (USA)

Jean = Jean Lorrah; JL = Jacqueline Lichtenberg; AnnMarie = Ann Marie Olson, Greg = Greg Anderson who edited this log for us.  

Session Start: Sun Apr 30 14:25:52 2000

<Jean> I think writers who had imaginary friends as children have characters come and talk to them. If you don't see the world that way, you have a different approach.
<AnnMarie> I did have imaginary friends ... but even more I had a lot of friends who were actors. I work far more as a director and stage hand ... I'll put obstacles in the path of my characters and watch them try to cope. Sometimes I'll clap my hand over their mouth when they try to jump the conflict line too ... been doing a lot of that in AB. A lot of top writers don't do this though ... it does create a different feel to the end product
<Greg> except for Robbin Williams...don't all actors work from a script?
<AnnMarie> Yes and no
<Jean> For me it's as if the characters tell me their stories--and then I write a fictionalized version of what happened to them.
<AnnMarie> The words are in the script, as are certain stage directions, but nearly all of the expressions are from the actor.
<MargareTZ> Improvisational theatre was very big for a while
<AnnMarie> I love doing improv ... probably why I like writing so much
<Greg> do you think your styles...Jean and AnnMarie...are because of the type of things you write..ie the future and new worlds?
<AnnMarie> Not at all. I write to find out what happens next in the story ... some of why I don't outline well beforehand
<MargareTZ> but they may be drawn to certain genres because they feel comfortable there
<AnnMarie> I know the ending ... or at least the climax, as it is inherent in the hook, but that's it. I hook like a romance writer, it makes for a clean ending for me. I am a pure genre fiction writer ... I write for entertainment, myself and my readers. Artist I am not.
<Greg> I started with an idea and that idea grew to a one or two liner for each scene. From the one or two liners I built a few paragraphs.
<Jean> I've always written that way--doesn't matter what kind of story.
<Greg> Now I am using the paragraphs for the full scene.
<AnnMarie> Sounds like a classic top down style Greg. Yes, very much so.
<Jean> Whatever works is the method you should use.
<AnnMarie> I start with a conflict and let the characters run. Yes, I agree completely Jean.
<Jean> Each writer is different.
<AnnMarie> Mine is far more bottom up.
<Greg> I am new to writing...so I think I am still trying to find my style.
<Jean> I almost always start with characters. Ah, style is something else.
<MargareTZ> uhuh, I'm experimenting with as many different methods as I can manage. Where I find a crack in the block I keep at it.
<Greg> Yes...I think I should have said method.
<AnnMarie> The one thing I have found which works for all writers is lots of writing.
<Jean> I have used other methods--once I started with nothing but a title. But until I found the characters and they started talking to me, I couldn't write the book.
<AnnMarie> Yes, but is there any way to shut them up later other than large quantities of duct tape and saran wrap?
<Greg> Maybe my characters have not come alive...they may be just me with other names :(
<Jean> Write it, and cut it later.
<AnnMarie> That can work Greg, really. The strangest method I ever found was Tom Robbins'
<Jean> I used to have to cut huge amounts of what I wrote.
<Greg> I do imagine what they look like and try to feel what they feel.
<AnnMarie> He writes and crafts and messes with each sentence until its perfect ... and then goes to the next sentence. That's fine Greg ... if it works for you, don't sweat it. Your style ... the way you put the words together on the page, is gorgeous. SFWA has a really good collection of stuff on writing too. Goodness yes ... although my attitude is the more the better (which may be where some of those shenned modifiers came from).
<MargareTZ> lot easier to cut when editing than to try to expand, I think
<AnnMarie> Very true Margaret. I'd much rather cut, but so far all my stuff has been too sketchy to begin with.
<Jean> I write fat, and then cut and cut.
<Greg> I've read quite a few of Mary Higgins Clark and I enjoy her writing.
<MargareTZ> have you read any of her daughter's books?
<Greg> and Marion Z Bradley...she takes me right into her worlds.
<Greg> no I haven't...but I should do that
<AnnMarie> I'm just getting the hang of the 100K+ novel.
<Jean> Aaarrgh--don't get me started on the kids of best-selling authors getting all the book contracts!
<AnnMarie> Way of the world, unfortunately.
<MargareTZ> sorry, Jean, but IMHO Carol is a better writer than her mother.
<Jean> Yes--I think I posted that article to writers-l a few days ago. The article was not about her, but about half a dozen including her.
<AnnMarie> Odd that most of them were in straight fiction ... I would think more SF/F authors would do the nepotism thing because of being able to write in the same world as a parent.
<Jean> I really can't believe they are ALL better than their parents. More skepticism in SF/F.
<MargareTZ> most of the others I've seen aren't. that is why I noticed Carol
<Jean> It is a very weird publishing world there.
<AnnMarie> I think I'll stick with the epubs, thanks ... much more author friendly pool
<Jean> Probably the son or daughter of a major SF writer would use a pseudonym. Otherwise there would be a life-long stigma. There is SUCH snobbishness in SF!
<AnnMarie> Small pond right now in SF too. At least in paper
<MargareTZ> one of the advantages (potential at least) to ePublishing
<Jean> Small pond everywhere. That is why e-publishing is booming. Infinite ocean.
<AnnMarie> Yup ... epubbing ... lots of little ponds
<MargareTZ> a chance for the 9%
<Jean> Creates a different problem, though. 90%, maybe? How do people find you?
<MargareTZ> nope, thinking 90% crud, paper prints 1%. Leaves the 9%
<Jean> Oh--I see, the other part of the good 10%. Assuming the 1% that gets print-published is actually good.
<AnnMarie> Don't know if I would say paper picks out the best 1% ... haven't had much luck lately with paper published books.
<MargareTZ> I think what is published also follows the 90% crud rule.
<Jean> True.
<MargareTZ> but my 10% is probably different than your 10%
<Jean> Ah--that's what the editing course is for. We all should be able to distinguish between "it's good" and "I happen to like." That's what editors have to do.
<AnnMarie> I would say at least 80-90% of submissions are so much slush ... it's amazing what went across my desktop when I was part of the Critters workgroup.
<Jean> Well, to take something really obvious, all of us should be able to recognize whether or not a work has a conflict. I'll bet at least 50% of what you rejected had no clear conflict, Ann Marie.
<AnnMarie> Yup, no conflict, no plot or no story logic.
<Jean> That is the hardest thing for the beginning writer to learn.
<MargareTZ> or was 30s rewritten!
<AnnMarie> I'd take 30s rewritten over some of the pure slop I was getting! And the thing that gets to me is that without a clear conflict ... writers block is a constant pain in the a$%
<Jean> Exactly! Making new stories out of old is an ancient tradition. Just always steal from the best. The best stole from the best before them.
<MargareTZ> I was thinking more of outdated, poorly thought out stuff.
<Jean> I steal from Chaucer and Shakespeare all the time.
<AnnMarie> I steal from mythology constantly
<Jocelyn> Paper isn't always as picky about structure. I tried to read a book that had been made into a great movie. The first page was one giant run on sentence. I quit.
<MargareTZ> I bet!
<Greg> That is one thing I haven't done..seen a movie and read the book..or vice versa.
<AnnMarie> Rarely is the book at all decent if it was done in that order
<Jocelyn> Style is one thing but to just throw all the rules out the window doesn't always work.
<Jocelyn> The book came first.
<AnnMarie> Amazing, and the movie was watchable?
<Jocelyn> The movie was great.
<Greg> the mediums are so different...shouldn't expect a match
<Jocelyn> But I read for the story. I usually don't care about the style.
<AnnMarie> I get confused with a lot of modern movies ... I don't get them ... they go by too quickly
<Jean> Scriptwriting is different from fiction writing.
<Jocelyn> Most movies are just blown up TV
<Jean> Some things (conflict again) are the same. But you can't do characterization in a script except very broadly.
Where you see Brad Pitt, the producer will cast Don Knotts.
<Jocelyn> You need a better producer
<Jean> Once it's sold, it's sold.
<Jocelyn> Ow! That is why books will never go out of style. Paper published or Epub
<Jean> That's why there are different genres. None will die. Drama is much older than fiction. Juliet was originally played by a boy, remember.
<AnnMarie> all the female roles were
<Jean> Right--and acting style was much different, and there were no special effects. So if you write drama that LASTS, what you write now will be almost unrecognizable to you 400 years from now. If you choose to write drama, you accept that.
<AnnMarie> What would be fascinating is to see what music lasts
<Jean> Almost nothing older than 500 years. A handful of Gregorian chants.
<Jocelyn> But the melodies remain with different words or musical phrasing
<AnnMarie> A lot of that is because we did not have the music notation ... now we do
<Jean> How far back does popular classical music go? 300 years? 400? Pieces we all would have heard.
<AnnMarie> But that was not written down in the format we have now. The frequencies were not recorded for the notes and the scales were slightly different
<Jean> Well, people THINK they can play Mozart.
<MargareTZ> so much borrowing in music too, makes it hard to tell
<Jocelyn> A lot of popular music has classical buried in it.
<AnnMarie> Mozart was relatively late
<MargareTZ> or even earlier
<Jean> Not my field--that's why I'm asking.
<AnnMarie> Bach has not changed a great deal. His notation was very standard, and his instruments are still playable.
<MargareTZ> lots of Baroque copied
<AnnMarie> Actually there is probably a great deal of Russian 14th century still alive and being sung.
<Jean> "Greensleeves" goes back about 500 years.
<MargareTZ> and folk music goes way back
<AnnMarie> We have stuff originally written and composed in the 11th century, during the Moorish occupation of Spain.
<Jean> The words are by Ben Jonson, contemporary of Shakespeare. OK--do they PLAY those pieces in Spain today?
<AnnMarie> "Royal Forester" the plot for "Summer's Song" was 12th or 13th century I believe.
<MargareTZ> and some of that arranged by Fala has been further 'borrowed' today
<AnnMarie> Yeah ... as much as its performed anywhere
<Jean> "Have" it and "it gets played" are two different things. "Greensleeves" is in every folksinger's repertoire.
<AnnMarie> Period music is still played, both modern adaptations and the original. The chants for many religious groups are quite old ... look at the Cantors in Judaism.
<Jean> Chants are a little different.
<N`omi> yes, I was going say Torah trope is still alive.
<Jocelyn> Not to mention Tribal music.
<Jean> Chants are sort of the bridge between music and poetry.
<AnnMarie> When you get out of industrialized areas, music goes back for centuries.
<Jocelyn> Ancient Rap
<Jean> Folk songs are sung in urban areas.
* N`omi chuckles
<AnnMarie> Urban folk songs change because the cultures around them change
<Jean> Yes--rap is indeed a form of chant. Hadn't thought of that.
<AnnMarie> When you get into the back country of places like Spain, the way of life has not changed for centuries ... they are still singing and dancing to the same music. It's pretty amazing
<Jean> Well, as we don't have records of earlier versions, we really don't KNOW how much it has changed.
<Jocelyn> Stories were often told in song before they were ever written down.
<Jean> Always. The oral tradition continues.
<AnnMarie> But with groups that have been observed for long periods of time, an extrapolation can be made backwards
<Jean> Even if some relative has written your family history, kids still learn it from their grandparents.
<AnnMarie> Or used to ... not so much in industrialized countries, if at all anymore.
<Jean> That is why we are all descended from knights and nobles and kings and "Indian princesses." And none of us are descended from malcontents, beggars, horse thieves, debtors, and serfs.
<Jocelyn> I am.
<Jean> It's called editing, which is what this course is about!
<MargareTZ> ahem, my grandfather bragged about the cattle thieves in his family tree.
<Jean> Our ancestors improved the stories as they passed through their hands. OK--daring rustlers and highwaymen and pirates. It's still a way of improving the story.
<Jocelyn> Common ordinary people.
<AnnMarie> That's what I tell myself when my characters decide to murder English/Russian/High Simelan ... they're just improving the story to their taste
<Jean> Jocelyn, eventually someone will turn the common ordinary people in your ancestry into Kunta Kinte.
<Jocelyn> People who are accepted by society rarely need to do anything interesting.
<AnnMarie> And so don't end up as fictional characters
<Jocelyn> Right!
<JL> AnnMarie -- notice the difference between the story in FIRST CHANNEL about what actually happened, and the allusions to it in HoZ and other novels set in later times. Romanticized is the word you're looking for - not improved, but made larger than life. There's a very special kind of truth revealed by that process. 
<Jean> So we make up stories about our culture's founders. Or dig up the stories that fit our times.
<JL> Or extract that kind of truth from the reality of what happened.
<Jean> Look at what our scandal-loving times have dug up on Jefferson.
<JL> In music it's called "arrangement" -- 
<AnnMarie> I romanticize stuff in later stories because I realized I goofed when I wrote the original if it happened later chronologically
<MargareTZ> tell it the way it should have happened
<Jean> And we no longer hear about George Washington and the cherry tree.
<JL> Margaret -- yes, MZB always said "SHOULD HAVE HAPPENED" is the way to tell it.
<MargareTZ> that's called having a Better Idea
<AnnMarie> But then all my S~G are interlaced to a frightening degree
<Jean> Exactly!
<AnnMarie> Yes Margaret, good way of thinking of it
<Jean> You do the same thing with a fictional story.
<Jocelyn> That is why writer write the need to fix things.
<JL> It may not be a "better" idea -- but rather a better understanding of "the" idea.
<Jean> You have a conflict and a plot that resolves it. Then you think of a more interesting way to do it. You have to think of the worst possible scenario.
<JL> The 'editor' has the job of trying to find that better understanding and pointing it out to the writer for rewrite, or what some editors call "clarification".
<Jean> Yes, if the story is already very exciting, an editor may look for clarification.
<AnnMarie> I'm pretty lazy and recycle the same theme for every story set in a world ... the world has an inherent theme, in the way I work things
<Jean> But if you have an exciting conflict and an ordinary resolution an editor may ask you to look for a more exciting resolution.
<AnnMarie> Isn't that asking for a new hook too?
<JL> Jean can address AnnMarie's "lazy" from the point of view of the academic -- they often talk about a single writer having just one "theme" behind an entire "period" of their work.
<Jean> There is nothing wrong with using the same theme for many works.
<MargareTZ> if they like it they call it "unifying theme"
<Jean> You just use it to tell different stories.
<JL> No, you write it over and over until you feel you've got it "right" -- or at least run out of things to say about it.
<Jocelyn> But all stories are basically the same story with different scenery.
<JL> One thing an editor looking to 'discover' new talent looks for is a fresh THEME -- \
<AnnMarie> I tend to pick such big whompin' themes for the common one, it's not really finishable.
<Jean> That's okay.
<JL> Jocelyn - yes, in a given genre the stories are all "basically" the same. But not from one genre to another.
<Jean> We could argue that.
<JL> Still, all "story" has form -- the nature of the form may vary slightly, but "story" essentially means 'conflict' that progresses to a resolution.
<Jean> See Joseph Campbell's Hero With a Thousand Faces. The monomyth is retold in ALL genres.
<Jocelyn> Jean, what I mean is all stories are about human trouble and pain.
<JL> "Hero" in that sense is an archetype.
<Jean> Hundreds of times in every genre.
<AnnMarie> Yup, even the sort of stories people tell around the fire
<Jean> It's a plot, too.
<MargareTZ> Heroes Journey.
<Jean> You used it for Digen, Jacqueline--just didn't know its name. We used it again for Rimon. I used it again for Risa. It is THE story.
<JL> The artist's job is to find the "Hero" in every reader, and bring that hero to the fore -- so the reader can enjoy BEING the hero.
<Jean> You tell it whether you intend to or not.
<Jocelyn> Only the scenery gets changed.
* AnnMarie mutters "And who are you calling an artist?"
<JL> You and mostly Greg, AnnMarie.
<Jean> Yes, the hero has to be human.
<JL> But any writer is an artist -- even newspaper writers.
<Jean> Human in the sense of having weaknesses just as we have.
<AnnMarie> Nope, not me ... not an artist ... a writer, maybe, someday, a public clown, definitely on occasion ... not an artist.
<Jean> Not in the sense of homo sapiens.
<JL> Mortal is the term I prefer - even my nearly immortal lead characters are "mortal" in that sense.
<Jean> The weaknesses make it possible for the reader to identify.
<JL> The artist selectively re-creates reality to reveal an underlying truth -- that truth is the component of story that we call THEME. Without theme, you have no story -- because the theme is the essence inside the conflict.
<Jean> Heroes are people we COULD be--improbable, perhaps, but not impossible.
<AnnMarie> Superhero fiction has its place ... but even superheros have weaknesses
<JL> No, ESPECIALLY superheros have weaknesses. Superheroes have alter egos. It isn't a superhero without kryptonite.
<Jean> Right!
<AnnMarie> JL, not all of us write stories to explain great truths...I write stories to entertain myself and my readers, no more.
<Jean> But love is stronger than kryptonite.
<JL> The concept HERO contains the conflict -- to be a hero you have to OVERCOME something -- something within and something without. Without the something to overcome, you can't have heroism.
<Jean> It's easier to capture ma and pa Kent than find some Kryptonite.
<Greg> sounds like chapter 8 - Don't Write About Wimps.
<AnnMarie> Exactly Greg
<JL> The essence of entertainment is what you call GREAT TRUTH, AnnMarie.
<Jean> Heroes often begin as wimps, and have to come out of it to achieve.
<JL> You can write about wimps, but not from the wimp's own POV.
<AnnMarie> A wimp won't move the plot forward, sie'll sit there like a lump when faced with the conflict and leave the writer with 'writer's block'
<Jean> Another way they are like us.
<JL> It isn't the WIMP'S story -- story happens when the hero GOES UP AGAINST something -- and wimps don't "go up against" -- until they wake up one day and find themselves being heroic. Now THAT is a good story!
<Jean> Probably the only successful work about a wimp refusing to move the plot forward is Hamlet. DON'T imitate Hamlet! There has to be an exception to prove the rule!
<AnnMarie> Yes, and I copied bits of it for Pins and AB. It is -tough- working with a character who doesn't want to succeed and that is her goal ... had one of those
<JL> Well, when the goal is to fail, the CONFLICT is with something that impels success.
<Jean> The reluctant hero is a standard archetype.
<AnnMarie> That was exactly what I did, JL. Her goal was to be just like everyone else. Her conflict was she was bred and trained to rule ... and it kept coming out every time she dropped her guard. 
<Jean> Heroes have to learn to be themselves sometimes. Perhaps to be like every other hero. Risa Tigue just wants to disjunct, that's all.
<Jocelyn> A great story has ordinary people doing heroic things.
<Jean> Yes, Jocelyn, that is another great story line.
<Jocelyn> Joe Blow save the world stuff.
<Jean> We love it both ways--really coming out of nowhere, and The Hidden Prince (Luke Skywalker) who later learns where he comes from. Either way will work.
<JL> But there's also a "fashion" problem -- from an editor's POV, the customers seem to tend to buy books according to "fad" -- so sometimes the Hero is "in" and sometimes it's the anti-hero, and sometimes it's the WIMP FORCED INTO HEROISM and sometimes it's the ordinary person rising to the occasion. And as was pointed out, sometimes it's the SETTING that's the "in fad" (e.g. sometimes you can sell stories with a Biblical setting, and sometimes not.)
<Jean> *Sigh* I could probably sell something about angels if I could write it. Zero interest in angels here. Anything I wrote about angels would be flat.
<JL> Two TV shows about angels -- and now one about demons (on sci-fi) -- 
<AnnMarie> I sorta have angels ... all of Arkay's get and grand get have nageric wings ... does that count? <grin>
<Jean> The demon one failed on the network.
<Jocelyn> Lots more than that about demons.
<Jean> Right now, the demon ones don't seem to last, except Buffy and Angel.
<JL> I meant the one where the angels have no powers on earth and go around trying to stop the demons from issuing DEALS WITH THE DEVIL by contract.
<Jocelyn> A demon is a fallen angel.
<AnnMarie> The figure of a winged person is a common image in world mythology ... which is some of where the whole thing comes from.
<Jean> You have to have some GOOD demons (vampires) for it to work.
<JL> Buffy and Angel aren't about demons - they just have demons in them.
<AnnMarie> Too bad I couldn't slip winged humans into M&S, but physiologically they are impossible
<Jean> Ditto Good vs. Evil--finally remembered its name.
<JL> RIGHT! Very forgettable name. 
<Jocelyn> Bumble bees aren't supposed to be able to fly.
<JL> Which brings us to titles. Editors LOVE to retitle your stuff -- less so these days than it used to be, but the market will swing around again to where the only thing that matters to sales is the title, and editors will be picking titles again.
<Jean> Titles are terrible these days.
<AnnMarie> They can ... and I can pull my story from them. For me the title is crucial.
<MargareTZ> The title can grab a new reader.
<Jean> I can never remember which is the standard romantic show and which is the really neat SF, Now and Again or Once and Again.
<Greg> The title and the art cover.
<JL> On TV the title usually is simply a commercial choice -- the person whose IDEA started the show has little or nothing to say about the title.
<AnnMarie> Don't mention cover art Greg ... most romance cover art is awful.
<Jean> Most cover art in general is awful--ask any author!
<AnnMarie> Half naked teenage looking males are not particularly aesthetic to me at all.
<Jean> One thing about e-books IFF you are an artist or have an artist, you CAN provide your own cover.
<Greg> Is that males making the decision on what they think females want to see?
<AnnMarie> Most non-romance covers are at least inoffensive now
<Jean> If you're me, though, you are stuck with what the publisher can provide.
<AnnMarie> Actually from what I've heard, a lot of women like those covers.
<MargareTZ> some ePublishers have artists who will work with writers.
<Jean> Hmmm--I hadn't noticed males on romance covers looking particularly young. Bland, though.
<AnnMarie> Most ePublishers do pretty darn well with the covers.
<JL> Greg - the cover art decision is purely economic. And the subject of the art is simply CLOSE TO what had big sales last month! That's why the romance covers are all the same -- they copy the one with the biggest sales.
<Jean> Horribly bland.
<AnnMarie> They do to me because they are so bland. Bland = child to my mind ... which does not make me think of romance, thank you
<MargareTZ> I almost prefer text only covers. at least they aren't misleading
<JL> With e-books though the cover art may have less impact on the sales-volume, and so we have a better chance of getting an illustration rather than 'cover art' -- 
<AnnMarie> Children tend to have very similar looking features, adults vary a great deal more.
<JL> Also, with eBooks we may soon have a chance for more interior full-color illos.
<AnnMarie> I can deal with covers that don't have people on them ... it's when people get involved, particularly childish ones on romances, my stomach turns over.
<Greg> Unless I am looking for a specific author..it is the art work that catches my eye...or the title.
<JL> Greg - that's what covers are FOR -- to help the consumer face a wall full of dazzling covers and zero in on the ONE they want to buy!
<AnnMarie> Most of the women on the covers of romances look about fifteen or sixteen to me.
<Jean> Right now, we are back to the old fanzine level: B/W interior art because the incredibly popular readers like RocketBook can only use b/w. That will change.
<JL> That's all a cover is for -- to attract the eye from across the room -- and stand OUT from the wall-full of other covers just like it.
<Jean> Cover art does not do the job it is supposed to do.
<AnnMarie> Actually some of it is for disk space too ... large, high color art takes a lot of room.
<Greg> The bookstore aisles look like the cereal box aisle in the supermarket.
<Jean> Yes, Greg--same concept!
<AnnMarie> I would agree with you completely Jean.
<JL> So you get trends like "this month no yellow on covers because yellow doesn't sell" -- and next month only YELLOW COVERS will sell. Trends, fads, popularity. That's the only consideration with "cover art".
<AnnMarie> I wish they would put the money into the binding rather than the gold embossed foil on the cover
<Jean> As authors, though, we need to forget what they did to our covers, and get out there and promote.
<JL> And the PAPER, AnnMarie - I wish for paper that lasts!
<AnnMarie> That's a bit more expensive.
<Jean> When people order via amazon.com, they are looking for an author or title.
<JL> At a big publishing house, usually the EDITOR has very little to say about the cover art.
<MargareTZ> my pet peeve is back covers and inside quotes from reviews and nothing about the story.
<Jean> Margaret, I agree with you! I HATE that modern idea!
<AnnMarie> I don't buy books from blurbs or covers at all ... so to me its pretty pointless personally except as a writer
<Jean> IFF they quoted reviews that gave an idea of what the book was about, it would help.
<MargareTZ> well, so often reissues have different titles, I want to know if I'm buying something new
<JL> For example, on my vampire novel, THOSE OF MY BLOOD -- there's a picture of a dish antenna. Now it happens that the book is set on the moon, and there is an array of dish antennas some miles from the setting -- which we do get to go to at the end of the book. BUT - basically, THOSE OF MY BLOOD is a vampire-romance with overtones of international intrigue, not a nutsnbolts sf novel. Turned out the cover they put on it was a painting left over from a nutsnbolts
<Jean> But all you get is "fast-paced," "wonderful characters" and such.
<JL> novel. That didn't get delivered on time, so they slapped it on my book.
<MargareTZ> and comparison with other authors
<JL> That was St. Martin's press's idea of how to publish a hardcover "breakout" novel.
<MargareTZ> the new whosis
<AnnMarie> I only have a problem with offensive covers, like the ones on so many romances ... I still can't bring myself to actually buy a true mainline romance because of the covers.
<Jean> Well, since we can't control covers, we have to work on what we CAN control.
<AnnMarie> Margaret, look on the info page, it has to say if it is a repub and from what it was republished
<MargareTZ> I do when I have time and check copyright dates
* AnnMarie likes epub stuff because I can take months to decide to buy
<Jean> Most stuff on the stands is not republished. And that doesn't tell what the protagonist's conflict is anyway.
<JL> Jean - my question is "If writers could control their cover art -- would sales increase?"
<Jean> Probably not.
<AnnMarie> The person who recommended it to me usually tells me that, Jean ... I don't buy paper cold anymore.
<Greg> Why do authors change their names...doesn't that hurt the following they may have?
<AnnMarie> Probably not, JL
<Jean> It's usually because they change genres.
<JL> Pseudonyms are usually requested by editors.
<Jocelyn> Most romance novels are like the fruit cake that gets passed on everyone gets it no one wants it.
<AnnMarie> Because they've gotten in a tangle with a publisher, gotten too many rejects, changed genres, changed styles ... and so on
<Jean> It doesn't work to change because you're blacklisted.
<AnnMarie> I have a couple of active pen names in reserve
<Greg> oh...but people in the business usually know who they are anyhow..don't they?
<AnnMarie> For some people it does, Jean
<Jean> The editors all know who your agent is, and you can't change agents when you're listed as unsellable.
<AnnMarie> Particularly if the originally name doesn't show on the sub at all. Good reason, it sounds to me, to not have an agent now
<Jean> You can try without an agent, and then get shot down when you introduce the agent at the offer stage.
<JL> There are several reasons to found a new pen name. 1.) if you're too prolific, they can't put more than one story under a byline in a given issue of a magazine, so the SECOND STORY by you for the month gets a new byline chosen by the editor. 2.) changing genres -- a romance byline won't do for an Action Genre. 3) YOUR AGENT refuses to handle a property under your popular byline so you pick another and THESE DAYS a 4) the computers show your other byline tanked. Jean has made some great points too.
<AnnMarie> I will probably go with Michael Dare's system if I ever get pubbed and not go with an agent, but rather with a contract lawyer
<Jean> Most lawyers will lose the contract for you.
<JL> The byline issue is now more tied to the computerized method of tracking sales than to the issue of being too prolific. Jean's right about that one.
<Jean> They do not know the publishing industry, and will ask for all the things you can't have.
<JL> Not ask - demand. That's the problem - lawyers don't know how to negotiate.
<Jean> Then they will get nasty and threatening, and the publisher will say, "so goodbye already."
<Greg> Are there males that write romance under female names?...do you think that is ethical if they do?
<AnnMarie> Yes, there are quite a few Greg.
<Jean> The publisher can ALWAYS get another book.
<AnnMarie> I haven't heard anyone quibble about it.
<JL> The problem is that your book is not a unique property or any kind of opportunity for a publishing house. Their slushpile is full of great novels waiting to be found -- and bought for a song.
<N`omi> excuse me for being slow, but, JL, what did you mean by "tanked"? "4) the computers show your other byline tanked"
<AnnMarie> Not if the only thing the lawyer ever does is vet the contract ... they should never even be saying boo to the editor
<Jean> But the lawyer will tell YOU not to sign until the demands are met.
<JL> Yes, there are a lot of women romance writers who moonlighted in WESTERNS with male bylines -- in publishing that's ALWAYS been a perfectly ethical practice.
<AnnMarie> Then ignore hir if it's bad advice ... and cancel the contract with the lawyer ... this isn't rocket science
<JL> The byline is just another sales-tactic as far as editors think.
<MargareTZ> Andre Norton actually legally changed her name
<AnnMarie> I've read more than a few standard contracts for publishing and they aren't complex.
<Jean> Exactly--there are some pieces of boilerplate that can be changed, the rest that can't.
<JL> Oh, "tanked" -- meant that the number of copies sold within a given time-period was LESS than the previous title by that author in a similar time-period. (such as a calendar quarter)
<AnnMarie> Now contracting for international shipment of radioactive materials ... that's complex.
<N`omi> ahh, thank you!
<Jean> The option clause--you want that publisher to have the option on the next book IN THAT SERIES, not your next book. You want to get rid of "on the same terms."
<Greg> Seems like a course on the business end of writing would be a good idea.
<Jean> That can be changed. You can't get a bigger advance.
<JL> We have plans for a course in contracts done by our lawyer.
<AnnMarie> SFWA has a bunch of great stuff on the business end, Greg
<Jean> You can't get higher percentages.
<AnnMarie> In paper, Jean ... in e, percentages are sometimes negotiable
<Jean> You CAN get more author's copies!
<JL> SFWA is a specialty point of view. We hope to do something more general on publishing contracts in a variety of fields.
<AnnMarie> The thing to remember about reviewing any contract, is it is literal. More like reading a computer program than any thing else.
<Jean> IFF you have a track record, you can get, not the percentages changed, but the point where 6% goes to 8% lowered. But not on a first book.
<AnnMarie> Epub is anywhere from 20-50% for reference
<Jean> E-pub is a whole new ballgame.
<AnnMarie> That's what I've studied primarily
<Jean> Nobody knows--and new e-pubs are starting up actually COMPETING with one another to give better contracts!
<JL> Xerox, by the way, is now marketing a system for ePublishers that prevents COPYING.
<MargareTZ> and the writers union suggested contract is a bit unrealistic there
<AnnMarie> Even though does anyone here know what minimum advance is on a contract for SFWA membership?
<Jean> BUT--you go with the best offer, that publisher may never sell more than three copies, and be gone in six months.
<AnnMarie> That's why you study the publishers if you want to go epub and not paper
<JL> There's no minimum advance requirement for SFWA membership (yet).
<AnnMarie> That was why I heard epub did not make requirements for SFWA
<Jean> Most e-pubs give NO advance.
<JL> They're changing the SFWA requirements to allow e-pub only authors to qualify. 
<AnnMarie> According to the site, there should be -no- problems with qualifying by epub either in periodicals or novels.
<Jean> That's going to be a dilly of an argument.
<AnnMarie> But I have heard they have been refusing epub authors. The biggest thing about epub contracts is to make sure they don't slip in a ringer.
<Jean> Yes--watch out for print-on-demand clauses.
<AnnMarie> Like a 10 year e-Rights clause! Or first paper refusal. Yes, I -hate- POD clauses. To my mind, the reason I am going with epub, is to keep my paper rights.
<MargareTZ> and one that lists a whole bunch of rights
<Jean> They will prevent you from selling first printing rights to anyone else.
<N`omi> print-on-demand clauses. please, what does this mean?
<AnnMarie> It means the publisher also buys the paper rights along with the e-rights.
<JL> print-on-demand can print ONE copy of a book at a time, instead of thousands.
<N`omi> yikes! thanks AnnMarie
<JL> But what it means is that your book is technically "in print' forever, so you can never get the rights back and sell it for real $$$
<N`omi> yuck, thanks JL!
<MargareTZ> epublisher.org wants all sorts of stuff
<AnnMarie> The nice thing about the good epub contracts is there is no hold on paper rights at all. Preditors and Editors keeps pretty good tract of ePublishers
<Jean> Right. Lois and I are with Crossroads--one year e-rights (extendable) and no paper.
<AnnMarie> The other big thing to watch out for, like with a paper publisher, is if they ask for money. If they want money from you, run away really fast unless you know exactly what you are doing and with whom.
<Jean> Never pay for reading or publishing.
<MargareTZ> or if they say no charges and then add on afterwards
<Jean> What afterwards?
<MargareTZ> the conclusion I came to was that other than copyright possibly, the publisher should foot the bills
<Jean> If there is no claim on you for payment in the contract then they cannot ask for it later.
<AnnMarie> I wouldn't say never, Jean. But self publishing is a whole different game
<Jean> You should file your own copyright.
<MargareTZ> I know a couple of writers who thought they'd found good pub. then turned out all sorts of things were needed that they had to pay for
<AnnMarie> I would never send any money at all to a royalty publisher. <big period> If they are a vanity or self, then you're in a different market entirely
<Jean> Fax the publisher a copy when you get it--DON'T trust the publisher to do it right.
<Jean> Or to do it at all. That's e-pubs. The paper presses have legal staffs who do it and do it right.
<MargareTZ> e is my main interest
<Jean> E-pubs are people like you and me.
<AnnMarie> Basically if you find yourself writing a check to the publisher, you have a problem
<Jean> File your own copyrights--as me what goes on what line if you can't figure it out. I've been doing copyright forms (print--I don't know from artwork or computer software) for 25 years.
<AnnMarie> But that isn't a check to the publisher, it's to the copyright office, if the publisher doesn't do it for you
<AnnMarie> It isn't tough, from what I remember
<MargareTZ> if it is book length I think writer is better off doing it herself
<AnnMarie> The problem is the newer ePublishers don't quite have their act together yet.
<Jean> Right--and there are some confusing items on the copyright form.
<MargareTZ> yes, some seem not to have even researched the field
<AnnMarie> The biggies, like DU, Star Publications, HardShell, Awe-Struck, Disk-Us all seem to work pretty well.
<Jean> Most are very straightforward, but then you have an anthology, for example, or a pen name.
<MargareTZ> or poetry with several different poets
<Jean> Right! And then the ~!@#$%^&* courts go and muddy the waters. I MUST find out about that court ruling last week.
<MargareTZ> which one?
<N`omi> where would you go to get kind of info, Jean?
<MargareTZ> state or national level?
<Jean> A newspaper columnist lost the rights to all her columns because the court ruled that the newspaper's compilation copyright did not cover them!
<AnnMarie> Ouch
<Jean> That OVERTURNED what the copyright law says on that matter!
<MargareTZ> yikes!
<Jean> What I have to find out is whether her NOTICE was on the columns.
<Jean> We may have all lost our rights to stories in magazines and anthologies over this ruling.
<MargareTZ> uhoh, is this going to mean having to include individual copyright notices with every item?
<Jean> I HOPE it will be that simple!
* N`omi pales at the implications for all writers
<Jean> I HOPE it turns out that the paper failed to include a notice of the columnist's copyright.
<MargareTZ> uh, Jean, as Editor of T-zero this really scares me!
<AnnMarie> Don't get your knickers in too much of a twist, N'omi ... copyright suits are limited to damages, fortunately
<Jean> It SHOULD scare you. It scares ME!
<AnnMarie> For us catfish, it is a future worry
<Jean> No, no--there can BE no damages here. The author LOST her work into the Public Domain.
<AnnMarie> It bothers me, but as there is nothing I can do about it now or in the future, I figure I'll cope when I get there.
<MargareTZ> we (WVU) have copyrighted issues but want our contributors rights protected
<Jean> I THINK if you have individual copyrights they are protected. Notices, that is.
<MargareTZ> ayi
<Jean> I have to find out the FACTS about that case.
<N`omi> maybe we should include a copyright notice at the end of each column, Margaret?
<AnnMarie> Often the common media gets these sorts of things entirely backwards
<MargareTZ> do you know what state it was in? or with the byline
<Jean> I THINK we can all protect contributors by putting notices on every piece.
<N`omi> the all rights reserved to the writer kinda of thing
<Jean> No--it was one of those news blurbs sent to me, with no further info. Infuriating!
<N`omi> I do notice that on some things
<Jean> I have asked our legal advisor to try to track down the case and the facts.
<AnnMarie> Those news blurbs are usually harder on the blood pressure than anything else
<Jean> I am SO GLAD I have written very few short stories. At least my novels are indisputably mine.
<N`omi> You will pass on the info in writers-l , Jean, please?
<AnnMarie> An example of how copyright violations usually are fought, N'omi, is if for example, I were to get AB accepted by Baen ...
<MargareTZ> even the Star Trek ones?
<AnnMarie> The JL's could sue my behind for violation and take the money received away from me.
<Jean> No--Trek is a "work for hire" contract. Paramount owns the copyright.
<AnnMarie> One of the very icky things about writing Trek novels
<MargareTZ> yep. OTOH I don't have to feel guilty about buying them used
<Jean> Icky but necessary.
<AnnMarie> Plus of course any damage I caused to their financial status because of said violation ... that is the expensive part with very valuable copyright goods
<Jean> We are required by law to protect our copyrights, and so is Paramount.
* N`omi missed why the JL's could sue AnnMarie?
<JL> But unlike Paramount, we are open to contributions from those who want to help build Sime~Gen.
<Jean> As long as no one SELLS S~G stories, no problem--just as Paramount has better sense than to try to stop fanzine Trek.
<JL> So you CAN do it legally, through us.
<AnnMarie> If I were to get a S~G story published professionally
<N`omi> but you wrote it?
<MargareTZ> without the JL's consent
<Jean> We would be forced by the copyright law to sue AnnMarie.
<JL> AnnMarie we WANT you to get a S~G story published professionally -- but do it correctly, and protect the whole universe of S~G for everyone involved.
<AnnMarie> Particularly as it is unacceptable works according to the copyright holders.
<Jean> Anyone can WRITE a S~G story without our consent. It's only if they want to get it pro published that they have to go through us.
<JL> But that's not TRUE AnnMarie. Everything is acceptable.
<Jean> We can't guarantee that they will get it pro-published.
<AnnMarie> JL, most kindly, you would never accept any of the stories I've written, they violate canon in a big way.
<JL> But I can make them work without changing the violations. I've already invented the mechanism for handling such stories. It exists. The only requirement for contributing to the S~G professional books is to write something that has an existing market.
 WHEREUPON the discussion veered away from the topic of novel editing and into the intricacies of Sime~Gen.  


Session Close: Sun Apr 30 18:08:56 2000

 

 

 

SEARCH ENGINE for simegen.com : Find anything on simegen.com. 

Match: Format: Sort by: Search:

Submit Your Own Question

Register Today Go To Writers Section Return to Sime~Gen Inc. Explore Sime~Gen Fandom    Science Fiction Writers of America

 

This Page Was Last Updated   05/02/00 03:57 PM EST (USA)

Sime~Gen Copyright by Sime~Gen Inc.