Reinventing Yourself

QUESTION: In a recent interview, a famous author said that she has reinvented herself (changed what she wrote) three times. Why did she do this?

Almost everyone who writes long enough for the NY conglomerate publishers has to reinvent themselves or leave publishing.

Markets die. For example, when the historical romance market faded drastically some years back, many of its writers started writing contemporary romance, paranormal romance, and romantic suspense.

Publishers die or drop lines, and some authors are trapped in contracts that won't allow them to move their successful series to another publisher or write anything in direct competition to their series so they have to make a major change in direction with a new and very different series.

Selling numbers can fall to a point that no publisher wants her books so the author has to start over with a new name.

Authors change. One successful paranormal romance author lost her young child, and she left paranormal romance and started writing inspirational novels.

Some authors get bored.

Other authors are trend whores (their term) who change with the shifting popularity of types of books.

The danger with the constant shift in types of books is that you lose fans every time you make a shift, and you have to work extra hard at marketing yourself to a new group of people.

The most successful way to reinvent yourself is to build a brand with a certain type of books, write at least six, then start a second series or type of book that shares many of the same readers. Then you publish at least one book of each type every year.

QUIZ: Do You Have What It Takes to be a Writer

 Do you have what it takes to be a fiction writer? Here's a true or false test to find out.

Be brutally honest. The only person you will be cheating is yourself. Choose TRUE if the statement describes you or what you believe, FALSE if it does not.

1. I don't need to know grammar and spelling. That's the job of the editor. My job is to tell the story.

2. Most authors make lots of money. That's why I want to write.

3. I want things NOW. I'm just not a patient person.

4. Friends or family want to watch a movie you really want to see, but you haven't written your quota for the day. You usually stay at the computer and write.

5. If I don't write every day, I get grumpy or edgy.

6. There's one secret to writing a publishable story, and when I learn what it is, I'll succeed.

7. Criticism really hurts me. If someone criticizes my work, I feel like a failure.

8. If someone criticizes my work, I will change it immediately.

9. I love to read a certain kind of story, and that's what I want to write.

10. It's easy to write and sell a novel. All I will have to do is sit down and write it, then I will sell it.

BONUS POINTS QUESTION: I dream of stories to tell, or characters demand their stories be told, or I envision whole scenes, and I want to find out what happens next.

ANSWERS

1. FALSE Editors are busy people, and they don't have the time to correct simple mistakes. Simple mistakes indicate a poor writer, as well, and usually brings a fast rejection. WORTH 10 POINTS

2. FALSE Most authors are very poorly paid, expenses are high, and the time required is intense. The average writer can't support herself or her family on several books a year from a major publisher with good distribution. A few self-published writers do but most don’t.  WORTH 10 POINTS

3. FALSE Traditional publishing is an excruciatingly slow process. First you write the book, then you wait for months as you send out queries, more months for them to look at a portion of the manuscript, and even more months to look at the complete manuscript. And if they want to publish it, it will take a year or more to see print. Even self-publishing a book, if you do it correctly with an editor, etc., takes many months of work.  WORTH 10 POINTS

4. TRUE You have to create writing time and that means you have to give up other things. You have to want to write, or you'll never succeed. WORTH 10 POINTS

5. TRUE Writing is an adrenaline addiction. WORTH 10 POINTS

6. FALSE There is no one secret to creating a publishable novel. There are, however, a few things you need to do. The first is sticking your rear in a chair in front of the computer with some consistency and writing. WORTH 10 POINTS

7. FALSE A tough skin must be standard equipment if you want to be a novelist. Every step along the way will be filled with criticism and rejection. The trick is to realize that they are talking about your work, NOT you. WORTH 10 POINTS

8. FALSE Writing isn't a project by committee. You know your work best so you must decide if a suggestion has value or not. The trick is determining what changes are part of learning craft and what changes force your voice or story in the wrong direction. WORTH 10 POINTS

9. TRUE You have to enjoy, respect, and read the types of stories you write. This gives you a good basis for knowing what works and what readers want.

Nothing is more obvious to a reader or an editor than a writer who doesn't read in her field. This is especially true in romance. A reader can spot someone who is writing for the money really fast. WORTH 10 POINTS

10. FALSE Writing is a craft that must be learned. You are as likely to have the natural skills to be a publishable writer as someone who has never played basketball would have the skills to play professional NBA basketball.

The first novel rarely sells. Most published writers write several before they sell. Some can write up to a dozen novels before selling. WORTH 10 POINTS

Bonus Points Question: TRUE If this doesn't happen to you, you really aren't meant to be a fiction writer. All the other things above can be learned, but this can't. WORTH 100 POINTS

SCORES

0 to 99 A writing career isn't for you. Do a happy dance because you have escaped such an evil fate and go read instead.

100-145 If you're willing to change and work hard, you can become a professional writer.

145-190 Congratulations. You are completely insane and the perfect candidate for being a professional writer.

Dissed Writers Fight Back

 QUESTION: I am so tired of being sneered at when I tell people I write. How should I handle this?

Artists have always been met with idiocy and blank looks. It's our lot. We ARE different, after all, but different is good! Without the artists and other creative people, the world would be a bleak place.

For some reason, especially in America, writers and other people with brains are treated with contempt. It's the dumb jocks who are the norm. Painting yourself blue in midwinter and rooting for your football team in an open stadium is normal, but you are weird if you write or read books, or go to sf conventions, or belong to the SCA. Personally, I beg to differ. 

I've discovered that my enthusiasm can win over those blank stares. The trick is to believe in what you are doing and who you are. If you give those people with sneers or blank stares the power to define who you are, then you've lost, and you are nothing. 

Instead, believe in yourself and what you are doing. Writing is one of the hardest jobs in the world, and if you succeed only a little, be that success a finished short story or a few chapters of a novel, then you are a success. Glow with it, and no one can belittle you. 

Writing the Same When We are Different

QUESTION: Why don't authors keep writing the same kind of book? Some of my favorite romance authors have switched to different genres, and I HATE it.

There isn't a simple answer. Here are a few possibilities.

* Failing markets. The writer's genre starts losing readers so publishers want fewer books, and fewer books are sold. An example is historical romances.  Its established authors branched out into contemporaries, paranormals, and suspense novels to continue making a profit at their writing. 

* Respect. Romance authors, in particular, get no respect from their non-romance peers, and this gets really old. Non-romances also have more professional cache. 

* Authorial control. Romance editors exert more control over the final product than in any other genre so the final product is often more of a collaborative effort. At a certain point in a writer's career, this can get really old, particularly when some kid in their first editorial job decides she knows better than an established writer.

* Boredom. An author spends months writing a book that takes you an evening to read, and she then starts another book. If every book is exactly like the last as some readers want, this process can become boring. The creative juices dry up. If the author doesn't change gears, the readers will be the next to be bored.

* Innovations. Genre, as a whole, doesn't stay the same. Romances have changed dramatically over the last twenty years, and woe unto the writer who doesn't change with it. 

* Bandwagon Syndrome. Some authors see a trend become popular, and they absolutely must write to this trend. 

* Changes in an author's life. Writing is an emotional process, and sometimes, things happening in an author's life make them change the direction of their writing. I have had friends going through an ugly divorce who could no longer write about everlasting love when their true love proved to be a cruel, manipulative jerk. One writer lost her young son to a sudden illness. When she started writing again, she turned to novels that expressed her faith in God. 

As much as writers want to please their readers, sometimes, they simply must change direction with their writing. 

We Foreshadow Our Own Future

 At a writing forum I hang out at, Quora if you are interested, a newbie asked if writers put foreshadowing in while we are writing or when we are editing.  The answer is both, of course, but I have found as I start editing my books that I have added foreshadowing of things I wasn't even aware that I was going to do until I did them.  My subconscious knew that an important thematic and plot element was the darker self, and there were images and metaphors of mirrors, shadows, moonlight, and twins sprinkled from the first page.

All this to say aren't we all writers long before we know we are, and the writer in our brain has been busy taking notes?  Yeah, now I've stopped everyone here so they can consider that question.

From the first bedtime stories my dad invented on the spot, I always wanted to be a writer, and stories were flowing through my mind, but putting them on paper as a book was some day, not right now, while I worked on my college degrees in literary analysis and teaching.  

When I finally started putting it on paper, I realized that many of those long analysis papers I wrote were as much about figuring out how to create the stories I wanted to write as figuring out the metaphoric structure of a novel by James Fenimore Cooper.  

So, I’ve always been a writer and a reader, plus a writing teacher, and my subconscious has known my whole life.  How about you?

Criticism and the Writer

In the early days of writers' lives, our works are our babies, and no one wants to be told that the baby is ugly, or has bad manners, or isn't the brightest tot on the block.  It's hard sometimes even for a pro writer to remember that the work isn't really our baby, and we must learn to separate ourselves from our work.

The trick with writing and publishing is to remember that criticism is about the work, NOT ABOUT THE WRITER.  Criticism, constructive or otherwise, also isn't about the dream of being a writer, it's just another part of the work of being a writer.

Learning writing craft is similar to what an athlete does to become good at his game.  We start out with no skills but work until each necessary skill reaches a certain level of competence. 

It requires practice, even more practice, sweat, pain, criticism, the pained self-knowledge that we are not perfect, and a realization that the dream of being published or being on the team doesn't magically happen. Then the cycle begins all over again as we grow as athletes  or writers. 

As a writer, you have a choice of whether you want to dream the dream or you want to buckle down to the hard work, the criticism, and the incredible learning curve of creating publishable craft.  

The criticism, both positive and negative, will never go away if you choose to be a writer.  You need only read the cruel Amazon reviews of some of the best writers to see that even fame, fortune, and success have an ugly side.  Or listen to the stories from pro writers who have to deal with incompetent or control-freak editors and publishers.

The work of improving craft never goes away. It is the same whether you are a newbie without a clue or an established writer.  Nora Roberts and Stephen King have said so, and I imagine any other writer you respect has said the same thing at one time or the other.

Dreaming the dream with no work or emotional toughness may be fine in the short term, but in the long term that dream attracts the predators-- the scam agents, fake contests, and vanity publishers-- who convince you that you are perfect then suck money and dreams right out of you until even the writing is no longer enough, and the dream becomes a nightmare.  

If you love the writing and want to be published, you need to decide if it's a goal worth fighting for as well as a goal worth the time and distress of learning the craft and putting up with the shit.  If it isn't,  you need to find another goal worth the effort.  

We Foreshadow Our Own Futures

 At a writing forum I hang out at, Quora if you are interested, a newbie asked if writers put foreshadowing in while we are writing or when we are editing.  The answer is both, of course, but I have found as I start editing my books that I have added foreshadowing of things I wasn't even aware that I was going to do until I did them.  My subconscious knew that an important thematic and plot element was the darker self, and there were images and metaphors of mirrors, shadows, moonlight, and twins sprinkled from the first page.

All this to say aren't we all writers long before we know we are, and the writer in our brain has been busy taking notes?  Yeah, now I've stopped everyone here who decided to write late in life to consider that question.

From the first bedtime stories my dad invented on the spot, I always wanted to be a writer, and stories were flowing through my mind, but putting them on paper as a book was some day, not right now, while I'm worked on my college degrees in literary analysis and teaching.  

When I finally started putting it on paper, I realized that many of those long analysis papers I wrote were as much about figuring out how to create the stories I wanted to write as figuring out the metaphoric structure of a novel by James Fenimore Cooper.  

So, I’ve always been a writer and a reader, plus a writing teacher, and my subconscious has known my whole life.  How about you?

Why Don't You Write a Real Book?

For some unknown reason, people like to denigrate fiction writers and what we write. Any science fiction or mystery writer will tell you about the comments they've received from jerks of various sorts.

But the most insulted of all writers is the romance writer.

Over time, I've heard from a number of my friends in the field who have asked for advice on how to reply to comments. 

Here are my suggestions. Many will work just as well with whatever fiction you write.

Most will work for readers as well.

The first comment is usually, "Why don't you write a real book?"

Rude reply: Why haven't you gotten a cure for foot-in-mouth disease?

Quotation reply: "Literature is an occupation in which you have to keep proving your talent to people who have none." Jules Renard. 

Considered reply: First, ask them to define "a real book." 

If they reply "non-fiction because it's useful and the truth. Fiction is a lie."

Fiction is the truth in parable form. In the BIBLE, Jesus and the Old Testament prophets explained eternal verities by the use of stories. The parable of the Good Samaritan is a perfect example. Is its message any less valuable because the Samaritan was a fictional character created by Jesus?

Fiction writers are telling the truth through their fiction. They create the world as they see it and offer their own beliefs. That belief may be as simple as "everyone has a true love and with courage and compromise can win that love." 

Is a novel any less valuable than the true-life story found in "Reader's Digest" which illustrates the same point? I don't think so. The only difference is the medium used to express that belief.

"But fiction isn't useful like non-fiction."

Yes, it is. Fiction is like that perfect school teacher who makes learning interesting. It gives information in small, easy to swallow doses. Historical novels give you history, science fiction science and the future of technology, mysteries and thrillers insight into the human mind and modern criminology techniques. 

Of course, some fiction offers little factual data and appears to only entertain. But that's all right too. Few people protest because most television shows and movies aren't useful, yet many feel the written word requires some justification. It doesn't. The written word has as much right to merely entertain as any other medium. 

There's no shame in just entertaining.

"But a real book is longer."

The average length of "literary novels" is the same as a Silhouette Presents or a Harlequin Romance. Usually, they're skinnier. Critics praise this shortness for its intensity. 

"But these are only women's novels."

Women aren't second-class citizens, and they aren't second-class readers either. You never hear anyone say Tom Clancy is only a men's novelist because many of his readers are male. Women writers and readers deserve the same respect. 

A hundred years or so ago, some male critic made a snippy remark about "those damn women scribblers" and their terrible books. He included Jane Austen and the Brontes in the comment. We should all wish to be in such company as "only" women writers.

"A real book is literary. It is the kind of book the New York Times reviews and college professors teach. It is great literature. It isn't popular fiction."

Almost every major noncontemporary fiction writer now taught in universities was a popular writer. The Neil Simon of his time, Shakespeare wrote bawdy jokes in his plays for the commoners.

Hawthorne was the Stephen King of his period. So was Poe. Mark Twain amassed a fortune through writing bestsellers.

Dickens' novels created a furor unequalled in modern times until the Harry Potter novels. For example, THE OLD CURIOSITY SHOP was published in installments in a British magazine. As the ship carrying the last chapters docked in New York, a mob of fans waited for it. Men ran down the docks and screamed to the passengers, "Is Little Nell dead?" 

Only recently has the strange idea that popularity is a failure of literary standards materialized. I'm not certain where this idea comes from, but it smacks of the elitist mentality which believes the masses are incapable of appreciating art. 

Some authors whom literary critics have praised have become massive bestsellers. The same critics promptly change their opinion of the writer "who has sold out to popular acclaim."

"But today's popular novels aren't great literature."

No contemporary critic can truly define a current work as "great literature." Time is the only true test of that term. Books and authors praised a hundred years ago have disappeared except as footnotes in esoteric articles. 

Books which were damned as junk are taught in college. Read the scathing reviews of Melville's MOBY DICK if you want to see the perfect example of this. Melville's praised travel books are forgotten, but MOBY DICK is immortal. 

"Certainly you aren't comparing any romance to MOBY DICK or Shakespeare?"

Not really. I'm under no illusion that most romances are more than entertainment. But there's nothing wrong with entertainment. Is a chef condemned because he makes pastries instead of main dishes? Of course not. Is he any less a chef because he creates calories with little food value? No. 

To carry this analogy a little further, the pastry chef and the romance writer have a great deal in common. Any cook will tell you that creating an original cake recipe is much harder than making a casserole recipe. The ingredients and spices in a casserole can be varied with little problem. Variation in a cake, especially the important ingredients like baking powder and flour, can create disaster.

The romance is like that cake--airy, delicate, and delicious. But fail as a writer with one important element like character or plot, and the whole novel is rock hard and impossible to enjoy.

Other types of books, even the so-called literary books, are casserole books. The writer's touch need not be so delicate, and mistakes are much easier to be forgiven.

Lee Smith, a major Southern literary novelist, told me that she tried to write a Silhouette Presents when the market was wide open. The book was a failure, and her agent couldn't sell it. Lee confessed that she never intended to write another because they were too darn hard to write. 

The romance novel form is capable of generating great literature. Jane Austen and the Bronte sisters are perfect examples of this. 

Currently, some romance novelists are showing promise of creating the emotional and literary resonance necessary for great literature. Some of us are pushing the parameters of romance toward more literary acceptability. Only time will tell if great literature comes.

If nothing else, we're entertaining people and giving them love. We're taking them away from their troubles and pain. And what's more real than that?