This evening, I took my daughter and a number of her friends to see the remake of Fame, and during the movie something crystalized that's been nagging at me for quite some time: writing is the only art that occurs almost entirely internally. When a musician picks up a guitar or sits down at a keyboard to practice or to compose, for instance, that experience is to some degree shared with anyone in the vicinity. Notes and chords, ready or not, reach nearby ears--even if the musician is unaware.
Visual arts are quieter, of course, but anyone who walks past a painter or sculptor at work catches at least a sense of the creation, can see what kind of work is in progress, what colors dominate, what feeling the piece conveys. Writing alone is different, isolated, hidden during its creation. Certainly someone could peek over the writer's shoulder as he scribbled on his pad or tapped away at his keyboard, but it would take effort, very close proximity, focus on the work before him. Nothing meaningful is, or could be, communicated at a glance, across a room, through a closed door. The writer's art exists in his mind alone until the moment someone turns to his work with the sole purpose of reading or hearing his words.
How does this change the process, I wonder, the fact that a musician creates out loud, that an artist's work is readily visible while it is in progress, but that a writer's product can only be absorbed with effort?
Saturday, September 26, 2009
Friday, September 25, 2009
Self-Publishing Revisited
Some time ago, I considered the pros and cons of self-publishing fiction. As I mentioned then, I'm not against self-publishing in general; I did quite well with a self-published book several years ago and definitely think that in the right niche with the right marketing plan, self-publishing can be lucrative.
However, I had (and have) reservations about self-publishing fiction. Quite by chance this evening I ran across a post that led me to a blog about this very process. As if self-publishing fiction weren't challenging enough, this author has self-published a children's book and is handling his own promotion--a tough job for a lot of reasons, not the least of which is the inability to price competitively. He has a clear plan, though, and I'm watching with interest; if you're toying with the idea of self-publishing in a non-niche area, I strongly suggest that you follow along and see what you can learn, too.
However, I had (and have) reservations about self-publishing fiction. Quite by chance this evening I ran across a post that led me to a blog about this very process. As if self-publishing fiction weren't challenging enough, this author has self-published a children's book and is handling his own promotion--a tough job for a lot of reasons, not the least of which is the inability to price competitively. He has a clear plan, though, and I'm watching with interest; if you're toying with the idea of self-publishing in a non-niche area, I strongly suggest that you follow along and see what you can learn, too.
Monday, September 21, 2009
Writing for a Living in the Internet Age
Recently, a friend started a discussion on Facebook about whether this was a good or bad time to begin a career as a professional writer. The question, which referenced both the decline of print media and the proliferation of unpaid bloggers, seemed to contain the assumption that it was not.
It’s an issue that’s ripe for discussion, both because there are valid points on both sides that bear consideration if one is embarking on a writing career and because the insights of the people who see opportunities in today’s market may be useful to anyone who hasn’t yet worked out how to make the most of the changes.
Those changes are sweeping: a shift away from print to online media, international competition that impacts pay scales, the ever-growing volume of free content available online, shifting publishing and distribution models for longer works, and more.
Writers and New Media
Print media is declining. That’s not up for discussion. But that doesn’t necessarily mean that professional writing opportunities are decreasing. The market is changing, and those jobs many think are disappearing have actually just moved out of our lines of vision. The answer may be as simple as looking over your left shoulder or off to the right, rather than staring straight ahead at the spot where the work used to be.
The Decline in Print Media is Matched (or Outmatched) by an Increase in Online Opportunities
The first step toward building a successful writing career in the digital age is understanding the opportunities. The new opportunities aren’t just web-based versions of the old ones. Web writing looks different, and writers must bring new skills to the table, and market themselves effectively by showcasing those skills.
For example, most paid web writing gigs require:
-faster turnaround
-lower word count
-Google-friendly text
-shorter paragraphs
-more visual formatting
Those aren’t difficult changes to make, but they require consciousness of the differences. A web publisher is looking for writers who can create web-friendly copy in a format that works for both search engine spiders and Internet audiences. It’s up to the writer—new or seasoned—to let a publisher know he can produce content that’s competitive in that environment.
This can be a problem for seasoned print writers; someone who has spent years writing feature articles for magazines may have a portfolio full of high-profile clips that simply don’ t reflect the skills a web publisher is looking for. The copy is typically too long and too dense; the paragraphs are probably too long and there are undoubtedly too few headers. Headlines and subheaders aren’t written with search engines in mind, and the visuals have most likely been handled by someone else.
If your name is big enough and your credentials rock-solid, someone will see past that…but if you’re a mid-level writer you should be prepared to prove yourself all over again in a new arena.
Results are Measurable Online
The goal of most paid writing has always been to sell something, whether it’s copies of a magazine or advertising space or a specific product. Online, though, it’s much easier to measure how effective those efforts are, down to the individual article. Whereas a print publisher knows only the number of copies of a particular issue sold and some rough information about the demographics of those purchasers, a web publisher knows exactly how many people opened your article, how long they stuck around, where they went when they left, whether they came back, and who linked back to you.
That means that where you’ve been published is no longer the primary credential; instead, a writer must build and be conversant in his stats. Some writers will have to learn a new language in order to sell themselves: hits, unique visitors, bounce rate, time on page, click-through rate and inbound links. These are the currency in which online value is measured, and if you have no idea what I just said, it’s time to learn.
When You Land the Job, It Won’t be the One You’re Used To
Thus far, we’ve only talked about landing writing jobs in the new world of web-based publishing, but that’s only the first step. Once you get the gig, of course, you have to do the job—and the job is a somewhat different one than most writers are accustomed to. (See, just look at that. I REGULARLY end sentences with prepositions, and I have no trouble getting writing work in this brave new world. Nothing is sacred.) And, of course, pay scales and compensation systems are different, as well. More on all that in future posts; for now, please share your thoughts and experiences on making the switch from print to cyber-publishing.
It’s an issue that’s ripe for discussion, both because there are valid points on both sides that bear consideration if one is embarking on a writing career and because the insights of the people who see opportunities in today’s market may be useful to anyone who hasn’t yet worked out how to make the most of the changes.
Those changes are sweeping: a shift away from print to online media, international competition that impacts pay scales, the ever-growing volume of free content available online, shifting publishing and distribution models for longer works, and more.
Writers and New Media
Print media is declining. That’s not up for discussion. But that doesn’t necessarily mean that professional writing opportunities are decreasing. The market is changing, and those jobs many think are disappearing have actually just moved out of our lines of vision. The answer may be as simple as looking over your left shoulder or off to the right, rather than staring straight ahead at the spot where the work used to be.
The Decline in Print Media is Matched (or Outmatched) by an Increase in Online Opportunities
The first step toward building a successful writing career in the digital age is understanding the opportunities. The new opportunities aren’t just web-based versions of the old ones. Web writing looks different, and writers must bring new skills to the table, and market themselves effectively by showcasing those skills.
For example, most paid web writing gigs require:
-faster turnaround
-lower word count
-Google-friendly text
-shorter paragraphs
-more visual formatting
Those aren’t difficult changes to make, but they require consciousness of the differences. A web publisher is looking for writers who can create web-friendly copy in a format that works for both search engine spiders and Internet audiences. It’s up to the writer—new or seasoned—to let a publisher know he can produce content that’s competitive in that environment.
This can be a problem for seasoned print writers; someone who has spent years writing feature articles for magazines may have a portfolio full of high-profile clips that simply don’ t reflect the skills a web publisher is looking for. The copy is typically too long and too dense; the paragraphs are probably too long and there are undoubtedly too few headers. Headlines and subheaders aren’t written with search engines in mind, and the visuals have most likely been handled by someone else.
If your name is big enough and your credentials rock-solid, someone will see past that…but if you’re a mid-level writer you should be prepared to prove yourself all over again in a new arena.
Results are Measurable Online
The goal of most paid writing has always been to sell something, whether it’s copies of a magazine or advertising space or a specific product. Online, though, it’s much easier to measure how effective those efforts are, down to the individual article. Whereas a print publisher knows only the number of copies of a particular issue sold and some rough information about the demographics of those purchasers, a web publisher knows exactly how many people opened your article, how long they stuck around, where they went when they left, whether they came back, and who linked back to you.
That means that where you’ve been published is no longer the primary credential; instead, a writer must build and be conversant in his stats. Some writers will have to learn a new language in order to sell themselves: hits, unique visitors, bounce rate, time on page, click-through rate and inbound links. These are the currency in which online value is measured, and if you have no idea what I just said, it’s time to learn.
When You Land the Job, It Won’t be the One You’re Used To
Thus far, we’ve only talked about landing writing jobs in the new world of web-based publishing, but that’s only the first step. Once you get the gig, of course, you have to do the job—and the job is a somewhat different one than most writers are accustomed to. (See, just look at that. I REGULARLY end sentences with prepositions, and I have no trouble getting writing work in this brave new world. Nothing is sacred.) And, of course, pay scales and compensation systems are different, as well. More on all that in future posts; for now, please share your thoughts and experiences on making the switch from print to cyber-publishing.
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Jacquelyn Mitchard's No Time to Wave Goodbye
The sequel to Jacquelyn Mitchard's first bestselling novel, The Deep End of the Ocean, came out yesterday...and I don't have it yet. Of course, I wasted no time in ordering No Time to Wave Goodbye, but I ordered it through Amazon--not because I didn't want to or have time to run out and pick it up at Borders, but because it doesn't take all that many sales in a short period of time to make the various Amazon lists that boost publicity and, in turn, more sales. Now that it's in transit, though, I'm having a hard time getting interested in reading anything else.
If you've been here before, you know that I am a constant admirer of Mitchard's writing. I love her style and, above all, I love the truths that are dropped into her writing like surprise chips of chocolate in a creamy vanilla ice cream. As I've mentioned before, her novels always make me nod. "Yes, that's true...that's exactly right." Even though, of course, I might never have consciously entertained that thought before.
So I haven't even had the opportunity to start No Time to Wave Goodbye, and I can't comment intelligently on it. But the book's release does have me thinking about character development. It's been thirteen years since The Deep End of the Ocean made its splash, and we've all lived a lot of life in the interim. My daughter was an infant when I read it, and now she's teetering dangerously close to high school. We've all lived, laughed, cried: some of us have married and divorced (or divorced and married), some of us have had children, graduated from college, watched parents die, moved across the country. We are, most of us, in some way different people than we were in 1996. And yet, we care what became of this fictional family.
That's what we have to do, as writers, isn't it? Create stories and people so rich and deep that we forget that nothing actually happened to those characters after the book ended and feel as if they're somehow out there continuing to live their lives and their struggles?
If you've been here before, you know that I am a constant admirer of Mitchard's writing. I love her style and, above all, I love the truths that are dropped into her writing like surprise chips of chocolate in a creamy vanilla ice cream. As I've mentioned before, her novels always make me nod. "Yes, that's true...that's exactly right." Even though, of course, I might never have consciously entertained that thought before.
So I haven't even had the opportunity to start No Time to Wave Goodbye, and I can't comment intelligently on it. But the book's release does have me thinking about character development. It's been thirteen years since The Deep End of the Ocean made its splash, and we've all lived a lot of life in the interim. My daughter was an infant when I read it, and now she's teetering dangerously close to high school. We've all lived, laughed, cried: some of us have married and divorced (or divorced and married), some of us have had children, graduated from college, watched parents die, moved across the country. We are, most of us, in some way different people than we were in 1996. And yet, we care what became of this fictional family.
That's what we have to do, as writers, isn't it? Create stories and people so rich and deep that we forget that nothing actually happened to those characters after the book ended and feel as if they're somehow out there continuing to live their lives and their struggles?
Monday, August 17, 2009
The Worst Book I've Ever Read
Yeah, that's not really what I'm going to talk about. If you've read my post about the best book I've ever read, you probably won't be surprised to discover that I'm not going to try to pick an all-time low. But earlier this evening, I was reading a thread on Blog Catalog where people were nominating worst-ever books, and it got me thinking about what bad writing can mean to us as writers.
First, and perhaps most obviously, it can teach us what not to do. Many writers and editors and writing teachers suggest that the best way to develop a good sense of the language and improve your own writing is to read good writing on a regular basis. Sometimes, that provides direct lessons--sometimes we note a particular device that works well and adapt it to make it our own. But more often, we simply absorb the flow of good writing and it helps, almost unconsciously, to tune our ears. Reading too much bad writing, of course, could have the opposite effect; we don't want to immerse ourselves in badly-written prose to the point that it starts to sound normal.
But those clunkers jump out when someone else gave birth to them, don't they? The occasional tour of some poorly-constructed text can be an excellent lesson in What Not to Write.
More importantly, at least in my personal experience, bad writing creates perspective.
I was about sixteen when I read The Novel that would change my life. Though I'm not inclined to award the title of "worst book I've ever read" to anything, this book stands out in my mind as having been the worst book I'd read up to that point. It struck me how bad it was; it was hard to focus on the story because the writing was so very questionable. And that made it the most fascinating book I'd ever read.
You see, at sixteen I'd already known for years that I wanted to be a writer. I'd already been filling volumes--journals, short stories, bad poetry--for five or six years. But "writer" sounded a bit like "astronaut" or "rock star" back in those days. And then I held that paperback novel in my hands, published by an imprint of a major house, and thought, "I can do better." Not even "someday"--right then and there, in that moment, I was confident that I was a better writer than that published author.
Years later, I had a similar revelation looking at a short novel by a best-selling author. It wasn't that this novel was bad, but that it was so concise and simple. I was convinced that it couldn't have taken more than two weeks to write. That changed my perspective on the likelihood that I could write fiction while working full time, and the new perspective turned out to be correct: I've completed two separate novels in just about exactly 40 hours each, something I would never have undertaken without that flash of insight.
If you're an aspiring writer, read good literature. Study your heroes. There's no substitute for immersion in well-turned phrases. But every once in a while, make sure you look up and look around. Make sure you're aware of the full range of what's out there, and develop a realistic view of where in that spectrum your own work falls.
First, and perhaps most obviously, it can teach us what not to do. Many writers and editors and writing teachers suggest that the best way to develop a good sense of the language and improve your own writing is to read good writing on a regular basis. Sometimes, that provides direct lessons--sometimes we note a particular device that works well and adapt it to make it our own. But more often, we simply absorb the flow of good writing and it helps, almost unconsciously, to tune our ears. Reading too much bad writing, of course, could have the opposite effect; we don't want to immerse ourselves in badly-written prose to the point that it starts to sound normal.
But those clunkers jump out when someone else gave birth to them, don't they? The occasional tour of some poorly-constructed text can be an excellent lesson in What Not to Write.
More importantly, at least in my personal experience, bad writing creates perspective.
I was about sixteen when I read The Novel that would change my life. Though I'm not inclined to award the title of "worst book I've ever read" to anything, this book stands out in my mind as having been the worst book I'd read up to that point. It struck me how bad it was; it was hard to focus on the story because the writing was so very questionable. And that made it the most fascinating book I'd ever read.
You see, at sixteen I'd already known for years that I wanted to be a writer. I'd already been filling volumes--journals, short stories, bad poetry--for five or six years. But "writer" sounded a bit like "astronaut" or "rock star" back in those days. And then I held that paperback novel in my hands, published by an imprint of a major house, and thought, "I can do better." Not even "someday"--right then and there, in that moment, I was confident that I was a better writer than that published author.
Years later, I had a similar revelation looking at a short novel by a best-selling author. It wasn't that this novel was bad, but that it was so concise and simple. I was convinced that it couldn't have taken more than two weeks to write. That changed my perspective on the likelihood that I could write fiction while working full time, and the new perspective turned out to be correct: I've completed two separate novels in just about exactly 40 hours each, something I would never have undertaken without that flash of insight.
If you're an aspiring writer, read good literature. Study your heroes. There's no substitute for immersion in well-turned phrases. But every once in a while, make sure you look up and look around. Make sure you're aware of the full range of what's out there, and develop a realistic view of where in that spectrum your own work falls.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
The Conundrum of Successful Characters
Like most writers I know (perhaps most HUMANS), I am a fan of Robert Parker. I'm not particular, either. Naturally, I started with Spenser, but I love Sunny Randall and I'll take Jesse Stone. Since Parker published his first Spenser novel when I was 8 and seems to have put out a new book approximately every 14 minutes for several years, I still sometimes discover novels I haven't yet read. I'm always delighted when that happens, and I couldn't have been more delighted when I discovered that I'd never read the very FIRST Spenser novel, The Godwulf Manuscript.
I brought it home, dove right in, and....didn't like it.
Now, this happens sometimes: I'll read one or two books by an author and get all swept away, and then I'll pick up another and be disappointed. But I'd hazard a guess that I've read between 25 and 30 Robert Parker novels, and I enjoyed them all.
The thing is, in The Godwulf Manuscript, Spenser wasn't yet the character he is today. He didn't HAVE the character he has today. When people told him that he wasn't as amusing as he thought he was, they were right. And he drank too much and didn't make very good decisions. I didn't like him all that much.
Obviously, over time, his character evolved; undoubtedly, when Parker turned out that first novel, he didn't know that Spenser would become a cultural icon. If I hadn't been 8 years old when this book came out, if it had been the first Spenser novel I ever read, I'm not sure that I would ever have discovered the others.
But something else jumped out at me that made even more of an impression than the evolution of the character. Spenser described himself, in 1973, as "approaching 40". That was 36 years ago, which has the man currently "approaching 76". Of course, that's glossed over--his character remains perpetually middle-aged, as he must if Parker is going to continue to crank out those books (and I hope he does). But an author gets into a bit of a bind when he announces an age like that. It's important to character development, sure, but who thinks, when he's describing a character, "I'm going to have to have this guy viable in a street fight 36 years from now"? I'm guessing no one--and suspecting that if anyone did, it would paralyze his writing and pretty much ensure that his character didn't have this kind of longevity issue.
But it raises an interesting issue for fiction writers. Should we expect our characters to take on lives of their own and move beyond the plans we have for them? And if so, how do we keep their options open while still fitting them into the stories we've woven?
I brought it home, dove right in, and....didn't like it.
Now, this happens sometimes: I'll read one or two books by an author and get all swept away, and then I'll pick up another and be disappointed. But I'd hazard a guess that I've read between 25 and 30 Robert Parker novels, and I enjoyed them all.
The thing is, in The Godwulf Manuscript, Spenser wasn't yet the character he is today. He didn't HAVE the character he has today. When people told him that he wasn't as amusing as he thought he was, they were right. And he drank too much and didn't make very good decisions. I didn't like him all that much.
Obviously, over time, his character evolved; undoubtedly, when Parker turned out that first novel, he didn't know that Spenser would become a cultural icon. If I hadn't been 8 years old when this book came out, if it had been the first Spenser novel I ever read, I'm not sure that I would ever have discovered the others.
But something else jumped out at me that made even more of an impression than the evolution of the character. Spenser described himself, in 1973, as "approaching 40". That was 36 years ago, which has the man currently "approaching 76". Of course, that's glossed over--his character remains perpetually middle-aged, as he must if Parker is going to continue to crank out those books (and I hope he does). But an author gets into a bit of a bind when he announces an age like that. It's important to character development, sure, but who thinks, when he's describing a character, "I'm going to have to have this guy viable in a street fight 36 years from now"? I'm guessing no one--and suspecting that if anyone did, it would paralyze his writing and pretty much ensure that his character didn't have this kind of longevity issue.
But it raises an interesting issue for fiction writers. Should we expect our characters to take on lives of their own and move beyond the plans we have for them? And if so, how do we keep their options open while still fitting them into the stories we've woven?
Saturday, January 10, 2009
Moral Clarity: A Review of 36 Pages
I'm jumping the gun, I know, and this can't rightly be called a review. I was jumping the gun last week, too, when I emailed several friends and suggested that they buy this book, even though I hadn't yet reached page 20.
Some time ago, I wrote about why I can't ever answer the question "What's the Best Book You've Ever Read?" "Best" is just such a nebulous term. There are most entertaining books, and best written books, and the books that touched me the most, and books that made me think.
But in the end, I favor the books that make me think, even when they're novels. My favorite experience with a book is barely being able to get through it for the need to set it aside and write about the ideas that have sprung into my head while reading it. When I'm torn because I need to keep reading and I need to stop reading to write, that's my idea of a good book.
With that standard in mind, Moral Clarity: A Guide for Grown-Up Idealists may be a great book. And I may never finish it, but I'll have reams of new writing by the time I get to the end.
It's true that points of disagreement, holes in the presentation, are part of my motivation to write and extrapolate and expound, but Neiman herself points out that the book isn't and can't be an exhaustive analysis of the philosophers and philosophies she incorporates.
Even now, I'm resisting the temptation to slip in a little paragraph or two on the oversight in the treatment of religious philosophy on "good", and I really want to analyze Socrates' assertion that loyalty and good can be at odds, but I'll bite my tongue. Err...um...fingers. Or something. If that all sounds dense and intimidating to you, don't be fooled--it's easy reading and I'd probably be done with the book right now (instead of on page 36) if it didn't keep sending me off on these tangents.
If you think, if you like to think, if you'd like to start thinking, I can't recommend this book enough. At least the first 36 pages. I don't hesitate to make the recommendation on that basis because I've already gotten my money's worth out of those 36 pages.
Some time ago, I wrote about why I can't ever answer the question "What's the Best Book You've Ever Read?" "Best" is just such a nebulous term. There are most entertaining books, and best written books, and the books that touched me the most, and books that made me think.
But in the end, I favor the books that make me think, even when they're novels. My favorite experience with a book is barely being able to get through it for the need to set it aside and write about the ideas that have sprung into my head while reading it. When I'm torn because I need to keep reading and I need to stop reading to write, that's my idea of a good book.
With that standard in mind, Moral Clarity: A Guide for Grown-Up Idealists may be a great book. And I may never finish it, but I'll have reams of new writing by the time I get to the end.
It's true that points of disagreement, holes in the presentation, are part of my motivation to write and extrapolate and expound, but Neiman herself points out that the book isn't and can't be an exhaustive analysis of the philosophers and philosophies she incorporates.
Even now, I'm resisting the temptation to slip in a little paragraph or two on the oversight in the treatment of religious philosophy on "good", and I really want to analyze Socrates' assertion that loyalty and good can be at odds, but I'll bite my tongue. Err...um...fingers. Or something. If that all sounds dense and intimidating to you, don't be fooled--it's easy reading and I'd probably be done with the book right now (instead of on page 36) if it didn't keep sending me off on these tangents.
If you think, if you like to think, if you'd like to start thinking, I can't recommend this book enough. At least the first 36 pages. I don't hesitate to make the recommendation on that basis because I've already gotten my money's worth out of those 36 pages.
Monday, November 17, 2008
It Was Funny the First Time...
We've all known people in the real world who come up with a line that gets a laugh, and the next thing you know, they're using it everywhere. Their spouses start to roll their eyes, and then the neighbors do, too. I suppose it shouldn't come as any surprise, then, that writers can fall victim to the same trap, enamored of their own cleverness or the response they once got...but what about editors?
For illustration, I'm going to pick on Janet Evanovich--but before I do, I have to say that I REALLY enjoy Evanovich's work. I particularly enjoy the Stephanie Plum series, but I'm partial to Alex Barnaby as well. In fact, I like Janet Evanovich's books well enough that I recently took the outrageous risk of checking out Fearless Fourteen from the "Quick Picks" shelf at my local library--a shelf full of books that are due in SEVEN DAYS and carry a fine of $1 PER DAY if they're not returned on time. Since I haven't returned a library book on time since 1976 unless my mother called me up and reminded me, this was a serious gamble.
So I mean no offense, truly. And, of course, if I did, Evanovich certainly wouldn't care, since she has millions of readers and millions of dollars.
But here's the thing: one day I was reading one of the Stephanie Plum novels and Stephanie took Morelli's dog out for a walk and walked around "until Bob was empty". I remember the first time Evanovich put it like that--it struck me as mildly amusing, and as a writer myself I have a solid appreciation for a fresh expression of a mundane concept. The second time Stephanie walked Bob until he was empty it clunked a little, but I decided (consciously) that it must just be the way this character thought. Walking a dog until he was empty was just something Stephanie Plum did.
And then...
You know what happened, don't you?
Alex Barnaby took a dog for a walk. It was Hooker's dog, Beans, of course. I was willing to overlook the whole "female lead walks boyfriend's dog, whose name starts with a 'B' thing". I mean, you stick with what works, right? But when Alex walked the dog until Beans was empty, it put me over the edge. If your neighbor's husband had used that line as many times, you'd be wondering why she didn't divorce him.
Now, you're probably thinking (and you're quite right) that Janet Evanovich is doing just fine. You're probably thinking that it's likely the reason her editor didn't point this out is that MILLIONS OF PEOPLE KEEP BUYING HER BOOKS. And you're right. She can get away with it.
But unless you're someone I'd be shocked to find reading my blog, you and I can't. And if a writer as accomplished as Janet Evanovich can become so enamored of her own turn of phrase that she doesn't notice when it starts to clank, imagine what risk the rest of us are at.
For illustration, I'm going to pick on Janet Evanovich--but before I do, I have to say that I REALLY enjoy Evanovich's work. I particularly enjoy the Stephanie Plum series, but I'm partial to Alex Barnaby as well. In fact, I like Janet Evanovich's books well enough that I recently took the outrageous risk of checking out Fearless Fourteen from the "Quick Picks" shelf at my local library--a shelf full of books that are due in SEVEN DAYS and carry a fine of $1 PER DAY if they're not returned on time. Since I haven't returned a library book on time since 1976 unless my mother called me up and reminded me, this was a serious gamble.
So I mean no offense, truly. And, of course, if I did, Evanovich certainly wouldn't care, since she has millions of readers and millions of dollars.
But here's the thing: one day I was reading one of the Stephanie Plum novels and Stephanie took Morelli's dog out for a walk and walked around "until Bob was empty". I remember the first time Evanovich put it like that--it struck me as mildly amusing, and as a writer myself I have a solid appreciation for a fresh expression of a mundane concept. The second time Stephanie walked Bob until he was empty it clunked a little, but I decided (consciously) that it must just be the way this character thought. Walking a dog until he was empty was just something Stephanie Plum did.
And then...
You know what happened, don't you?
Alex Barnaby took a dog for a walk. It was Hooker's dog, Beans, of course. I was willing to overlook the whole "female lead walks boyfriend's dog, whose name starts with a 'B' thing". I mean, you stick with what works, right? But when Alex walked the dog until Beans was empty, it put me over the edge. If your neighbor's husband had used that line as many times, you'd be wondering why she didn't divorce him.
Now, you're probably thinking (and you're quite right) that Janet Evanovich is doing just fine. You're probably thinking that it's likely the reason her editor didn't point this out is that MILLIONS OF PEOPLE KEEP BUYING HER BOOKS. And you're right. She can get away with it.
But unless you're someone I'd be shocked to find reading my blog, you and I can't. And if a writer as accomplished as Janet Evanovich can become so enamored of her own turn of phrase that she doesn't notice when it starts to clank, imagine what risk the rest of us are at.
Saturday, August 23, 2008
Dumbledore is Not Gay
I know it's been almost a year since J.K. Rowling announced that Dumbledore was gay, but that's okay--because this post isn't really about Dumbledore, or even Rowling. Not specifically. It's about the nature of literary characters.
Dumbledore, of course, is a creature of fiction. J.K. Rowling made him up. He exists only in the pages of her novels. While many literary characters touch our hearts and minds and thus weave their way into our cultural consciousness, there is one thing they cannot do: grow outside the pages of the novels in which they are born, live, and die. As a character, he is fully formed within those pages or...he remains incomplete.
I couldn't care less what Dumbledore's sexual history is like, except for one thing: he doesn't have one. At least, not one we know anything about. And Rowling's "revelation" doesn't change that. It's a cheat. The shot at developing a character comes WHILE YOU'RE WRITING THE BOOKS, and you either take it or you don't. But if you don't, you can't make things up later.
Of course, no character's entire history can be revealed, detail by detail, in the course of a single novel--or even in a series. But the pieces that define the character are revealed through his actions, his interactions, his reactions, his backstory, the things other characters say about him. Sometimes that information is subtle and incomplete, and when a "revelation" like Rowling's makes the rounds, we readers say, "Ah, yes...THAT explains why in book three...." or "So THAT was the big secret in his past that he kept alluding to." Even those seem a little cheap to me, a kind of literary easy way out. After all, it's much simpler to announce a new detail about a character in an interview than it is to weave that characteristic or piece of history subtly into the story itself.
But even that didn't happen with Dumbledore. The announcement was "bombshell". Why? In part, perhaps, because some groups had a moral opposition to the idea of a prominent children's character being "outed", but it was more than that--it was because no one had ever suspected. I don't doubt J.K. Rowling's contention that she always thought of Dumbledore as gay, but she didn't convey that notion to her readers. Dumbledore is a man without sexual identity. Kind of rough on the guy, perhaps, but that's the way he was made. And coming back later with an "oh, and by the way..." doesn't change that.
Dumbledore, of course, is a creature of fiction. J.K. Rowling made him up. He exists only in the pages of her novels. While many literary characters touch our hearts and minds and thus weave their way into our cultural consciousness, there is one thing they cannot do: grow outside the pages of the novels in which they are born, live, and die. As a character, he is fully formed within those pages or...he remains incomplete.
I couldn't care less what Dumbledore's sexual history is like, except for one thing: he doesn't have one. At least, not one we know anything about. And Rowling's "revelation" doesn't change that. It's a cheat. The shot at developing a character comes WHILE YOU'RE WRITING THE BOOKS, and you either take it or you don't. But if you don't, you can't make things up later.
Of course, no character's entire history can be revealed, detail by detail, in the course of a single novel--or even in a series. But the pieces that define the character are revealed through his actions, his interactions, his reactions, his backstory, the things other characters say about him. Sometimes that information is subtle and incomplete, and when a "revelation" like Rowling's makes the rounds, we readers say, "Ah, yes...THAT explains why in book three...." or "So THAT was the big secret in his past that he kept alluding to." Even those seem a little cheap to me, a kind of literary easy way out. After all, it's much simpler to announce a new detail about a character in an interview than it is to weave that characteristic or piece of history subtly into the story itself.
But even that didn't happen with Dumbledore. The announcement was "bombshell". Why? In part, perhaps, because some groups had a moral opposition to the idea of a prominent children's character being "outed", but it was more than that--it was because no one had ever suspected. I don't doubt J.K. Rowling's contention that she always thought of Dumbledore as gay, but she didn't convey that notion to her readers. Dumbledore is a man without sexual identity. Kind of rough on the guy, perhaps, but that's the way he was made. And coming back later with an "oh, and by the way..." doesn't change that.
Friday, August 01, 2008
Sometimes our Language is Just So...Apt
I saw a subject line on a discussion board this afternoon about "pet peeves", and it suddenly hit me that I'd never really thought about the phrase before--something that surprised me, because I think about words a lot. Sadly, though, there aren't enough hours in the day to think about all of them, so sometimes I have to wait until something like this hits me out of the blue.
Pet peeves. PET peeves? As in, ones that we choose and like to keep close to us and feed and nurture?
Now why would we do that?
I don't have any pet headaches, or pet car problems, or pet financial problems. I have no foods that I love to hate or television shows that I turn on just to annoy myself. So why would I want to keep those peeves as pets? Why wouldn't I choose to turn them back into the wilds and go on with my life just a little LESS annoyed?
Pet peeves. PET peeves? As in, ones that we choose and like to keep close to us and feed and nurture?
Now why would we do that?
I don't have any pet headaches, or pet car problems, or pet financial problems. I have no foods that I love to hate or television shows that I turn on just to annoy myself. So why would I want to keep those peeves as pets? Why wouldn't I choose to turn them back into the wilds and go on with my life just a little LESS annoyed?
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Blogging as Journalism, Part I
I've seen a lot of discussion in online forums (especially blogging forums, of course) recently about whether or not bloggers should be treated as journalists. There are almost as many views on this subject as there are blogs, but mine is pretty straightforward: if you're conducting interviews, finding credible, first-hand sources and generating original news and feature stories, you're a journalist. If you're rehashing what you've found on someone else's news site or in the newspaper or telling us about your experience with the auto mechanic this morning and how much you're dreading your visit to Great Aunt Sarah, you're not acting as a journalist in that moment. That doesn't mean YOU'RE not a journalist, but that particular action isn't journalism.
This is a big topic that I expect to span several posts, but this morning I wanted to focus on someone outside the usual debate. We're accustomed to hearing from bloggers who want (demand?) to be treated as journalists, but it seems that all the while there are bloggers out there quietly acting as journalists without ever thinking to stop and fuss about what they're called.
I ran across a great example this morning, in the form of a recent interview with Lisa Smith-Batchen. This kind of thing is unfortunately relatively uncommon on blogs--the blogger conducted and published an actual interview...an interview with a woman who happened to appear this morning on the Today show. She didn't have a media operation or a budget or a press pass...she just went out and found the information, directly, and shared it with her readers. If more bloggers--especially those who purport to be dealing in news--were to take that initiative, maybe the perception of blogging and bloggers would improve on its own and we wouldn't have to spend all this time debating whether or not we should be considered credible.
This is a big topic that I expect to span several posts, but this morning I wanted to focus on someone outside the usual debate. We're accustomed to hearing from bloggers who want (demand?) to be treated as journalists, but it seems that all the while there are bloggers out there quietly acting as journalists without ever thinking to stop and fuss about what they're called.
I ran across a great example this morning, in the form of a recent interview with Lisa Smith-Batchen. This kind of thing is unfortunately relatively uncommon on blogs--the blogger conducted and published an actual interview...an interview with a woman who happened to appear this morning on the Today show. She didn't have a media operation or a budget or a press pass...she just went out and found the information, directly, and shared it with her readers. If more bloggers--especially those who purport to be dealing in news--were to take that initiative, maybe the perception of blogging and bloggers would improve on its own and we wouldn't have to spend all this time debating whether or not we should be considered credible.
Wednesday, June 04, 2008
The Tiffany Retrospective
Today is my 42nd birthday. This is a comfortable place for me, because I've always thought of 40 as sort of the last landmark. I'm comfortably past the midpoint now, and no more concerns. I've been blessed with the ability and opportunity to do almost everything I ever aspired to--even the things that once seemed outrageous.
Of all of those amazing opportunities, there are four things that stand as corners of my life: motherhood, social services, teaching and writing. Today, I'm looking back, and since this is a writing blog, I'm thinking about writing here. I'm going to share a few words from my past and present. They're not necessarily the ones that paid the best or were highest profile or anything like that, but just a handful across the spectrum that I'm glad to have as part of my history.
None of them will include my adolescent poetry or college fiction writing. (I know how disappointed you are, but I'm firm on this.)
Who Stole My Phone Booth? I've always been partial to this piece because I wrote it about the phase of my life when I was doing the most high profile (and in some ways, most exciting) writing of my career--and discovered that it didn't change a thing. I think that anyone who has ever tried to wear multiple hats simultaneously can identify with this. It appears in a newsletter, so you have to scroll down to see it.
Math Made Manageable is one of my favorite pieces about my daughter--and about the quick and easy little things we can incorporate into life that make a big difference.
The Most Profitable Thing I Ever Wrote for Free : This was my first in-depth bio of Rick Springfield. I wrote twelve drafts, spent more than fifty hours on it, and obtained photo permissions from numerous people/organizations, including Buena Vista International and Rick himself. If you're a regular reader here, you know where that ended and how profitable it eventually became (which is part of the reason I come down so hard on the case-by-case basis side of the writing for free debate).
The File Folders in Your Mind Are Filled With Information You Can Sell! (As evidenced by the rest of this list) If I've had a thought, chances are that I've written an article about it.
Just a Bunch of Newspaper Articles - But these hold a special place in my heart because after many years of digression into things like practicing law, the editor at the Aurora Beacon News took me on as a stringer when I didn't have a clip that was less than ten years old and not a single one that was relevant. Without that foot in the door, I might still be working in another field. (Thanks, Char!) McGruff the Crime Dog was the first one, and it took me HOURS to write and rewrite.
Why Web Writing is Different: This three part series helped me land my first full-time, salaried writing job. It's several years old, but still useful as a basic primer for print writers making the shift to web writing.
PayDay Loan Stores - In the two years that I worked full time as content manager for a legal internet marketing firm, I wrote hundreds of articles and pages of consumer information about the law and legal issues: collections, bankruptcy, DUI, divorce, consumer protection, personal injury, insurance companies, tort reform, criminal defense, constitutional rights and more. The really great thing about it was that I had the opportunity to get paid to write and promote information that benefitted the public.
Although they're not available online, I wrote a number of articles for Austin Family Magazine, which I wanted to mention purely for personal reasons: my very, very, very, very dear friend Barb Cooper was editor of the magazine at the time, and more than once she wrote one of the lead stories and I the other; I just loved seeing my name and hers side by side in that box, especially given that we'd met in a writer's group back when both of our credentials were quite a bit lighter than they are today.
I'm beginning to think this list could go on forever, because there's some reason that every piece of my writing career holds a special place in my heart, whether because of the subject matter or the relationships or the stepping stone it provided or any of a dozen other associations. Here's the important point, though: very few of those publications were huge and dramatic; very few paid large sums of money. But together, they've added up to a career in words. It can happen to anyone, if you build it piece by piece.
Of all of those amazing opportunities, there are four things that stand as corners of my life: motherhood, social services, teaching and writing. Today, I'm looking back, and since this is a writing blog, I'm thinking about writing here. I'm going to share a few words from my past and present. They're not necessarily the ones that paid the best or were highest profile or anything like that, but just a handful across the spectrum that I'm glad to have as part of my history.
None of them will include my adolescent poetry or college fiction writing. (I know how disappointed you are, but I'm firm on this.)
Who Stole My Phone Booth? I've always been partial to this piece because I wrote it about the phase of my life when I was doing the most high profile (and in some ways, most exciting) writing of my career--and discovered that it didn't change a thing. I think that anyone who has ever tried to wear multiple hats simultaneously can identify with this. It appears in a newsletter, so you have to scroll down to see it.
Math Made Manageable is one of my favorite pieces about my daughter--and about the quick and easy little things we can incorporate into life that make a big difference.
The Most Profitable Thing I Ever Wrote for Free : This was my first in-depth bio of Rick Springfield. I wrote twelve drafts, spent more than fifty hours on it, and obtained photo permissions from numerous people/organizations, including Buena Vista International and Rick himself. If you're a regular reader here, you know where that ended and how profitable it eventually became (which is part of the reason I come down so hard on the case-by-case basis side of the writing for free debate).
The File Folders in Your Mind Are Filled With Information You Can Sell! (As evidenced by the rest of this list) If I've had a thought, chances are that I've written an article about it.
Just a Bunch of Newspaper Articles - But these hold a special place in my heart because after many years of digression into things like practicing law, the editor at the Aurora Beacon News took me on as a stringer when I didn't have a clip that was less than ten years old and not a single one that was relevant. Without that foot in the door, I might still be working in another field. (Thanks, Char!) McGruff the Crime Dog was the first one, and it took me HOURS to write and rewrite.
Why Web Writing is Different: This three part series helped me land my first full-time, salaried writing job. It's several years old, but still useful as a basic primer for print writers making the shift to web writing.
PayDay Loan Stores - In the two years that I worked full time as content manager for a legal internet marketing firm, I wrote hundreds of articles and pages of consumer information about the law and legal issues: collections, bankruptcy, DUI, divorce, consumer protection, personal injury, insurance companies, tort reform, criminal defense, constitutional rights and more. The really great thing about it was that I had the opportunity to get paid to write and promote information that benefitted the public.
Although they're not available online, I wrote a number of articles for Austin Family Magazine, which I wanted to mention purely for personal reasons: my very, very, very, very dear friend Barb Cooper was editor of the magazine at the time, and more than once she wrote one of the lead stories and I the other; I just loved seeing my name and hers side by side in that box, especially given that we'd met in a writer's group back when both of our credentials were quite a bit lighter than they are today.
I'm beginning to think this list could go on forever, because there's some reason that every piece of my writing career holds a special place in my heart, whether because of the subject matter or the relationships or the stepping stone it provided or any of a dozen other associations. Here's the important point, though: very few of those publications were huge and dramatic; very few paid large sums of money. But together, they've added up to a career in words. It can happen to anyone, if you build it piece by piece.
Thursday, May 15, 2008
Bloggers Unite for Human Rights
As anyone who regularly reads this blog knows, I'm an active member of Blog Catalog. One of the best things about Blog Catalog is that virtually from the moment the current ownership took over, the community has been looking for ways to use blogging to make the world a better place. Part of that effort is the Bloggers Unite campaign.
Today's issue is human rights, and it probably won't surprise you to know that I had a hard time deciding what to write about. There are so many human rights issues around the world--and even at home--today that it's almost impossible to decide where the spotlight should shine most brightly. Some of critical topics my fellow bloggers have hit on already this morning include:
Free Tibet
Capital Punishment by Stoning
The Blocking of Life-Saving Supplies the International Community Would Like to Offer the Citizens of Myanmar
Congolese Women
Sadly, this list could go on indefinitely. We haven't even mentioned Darfur, or the human rights abuses perpetrated by our own government at Guantanamo Bay, or any of a hundred or thousand situations in which people around the world are living in fear, being jailed, murdered, deprived of basic necessities like food and medical care and more for no reason other than that they were born in the wrong place or into the wrong race or practice the wrong religion or have the courage to speak their minds.
But you know all that, don't you?
A month or so ago, I had the opportunity to see Paul Rusesabagina speak at a local college. Rusesabagina is the heroic hotel manager portrayed by Don Cheadle in movie The Hotel Rwanda, and seeing in person this seemingly ordinary man who saved the lives of more than a thousand people by sheer persistance was an amazing reminder of what each and every one of us could do if we were so inclined, and believed that we could make a difference. It was also a troubling reminder of a line from the movie that had always haunted me: after Cheadle's character suggests that once video footage reaches the west, someone will have to do something, the cameraman tells him that people will look up at the television and say, "That's horrible" and then go back to their dinners.
That's the choice we make today. Bloggers around the world are uniting to bring human rights issues to light, but are we then going to go back to our dinners? Regular readers of blogs about parenting and poodles and writing and jewelry-making and making money online and humor and a thousand other topics are seeing, today, a slice of what's real and raw and bleeding in the world...but are you then going to go back to your dinner?
I'm not here to tell you which human rights issue deserves your attention. I'm not here to show you horrific photographs--we all know what's going on out there. I'm simply here to ask you to do something about it. Just something. Tell someone, write an article, send a check, join a group, attend a protest, send a letter to the editor, blog about it, write your Congressman, vote your conscience, sponsor a child...if you're strong and healthy and have the resources, ADOPT a child, go on a mission, rebuild a house. Just something. There are a lot of us, and a million somethings, no matter how small, will make a difference.
UPDATE: Here's a great round-up of just some of the posts from around the world today: http://focusorganic.com/bloggers-unite2/
Today's issue is human rights, and it probably won't surprise you to know that I had a hard time deciding what to write about. There are so many human rights issues around the world--and even at home--today that it's almost impossible to decide where the spotlight should shine most brightly. Some of critical topics my fellow bloggers have hit on already this morning include:
Free Tibet
Capital Punishment by Stoning
The Blocking of Life-Saving Supplies the International Community Would Like to Offer the Citizens of Myanmar
Congolese Women
Sadly, this list could go on indefinitely. We haven't even mentioned Darfur, or the human rights abuses perpetrated by our own government at Guantanamo Bay, or any of a hundred or thousand situations in which people around the world are living in fear, being jailed, murdered, deprived of basic necessities like food and medical care and more for no reason other than that they were born in the wrong place or into the wrong race or practice the wrong religion or have the courage to speak their minds.
But you know all that, don't you?
A month or so ago, I had the opportunity to see Paul Rusesabagina speak at a local college. Rusesabagina is the heroic hotel manager portrayed by Don Cheadle in movie The Hotel Rwanda, and seeing in person this seemingly ordinary man who saved the lives of more than a thousand people by sheer persistance was an amazing reminder of what each and every one of us could do if we were so inclined, and believed that we could make a difference. It was also a troubling reminder of a line from the movie that had always haunted me: after Cheadle's character suggests that once video footage reaches the west, someone will have to do something, the cameraman tells him that people will look up at the television and say, "That's horrible" and then go back to their dinners.
That's the choice we make today. Bloggers around the world are uniting to bring human rights issues to light, but are we then going to go back to our dinners? Regular readers of blogs about parenting and poodles and writing and jewelry-making and making money online and humor and a thousand other topics are seeing, today, a slice of what's real and raw and bleeding in the world...but are you then going to go back to your dinner?
I'm not here to tell you which human rights issue deserves your attention. I'm not here to show you horrific photographs--we all know what's going on out there. I'm simply here to ask you to do something about it. Just something. Tell someone, write an article, send a check, join a group, attend a protest, send a letter to the editor, blog about it, write your Congressman, vote your conscience, sponsor a child...if you're strong and healthy and have the resources, ADOPT a child, go on a mission, rebuild a house. Just something. There are a lot of us, and a million somethings, no matter how small, will make a difference.
UPDATE: Here's a great round-up of just some of the posts from around the world today: http://focusorganic.com/bloggers-unite2/
Thursday, April 10, 2008
Somewhere in Huntsville, Texas...
an English teacher made an assignment.
That's no surprise, of course.
What is a surprise is that I, a 41-year-old legal editor in Illinois, know this (and only this): a group of students in Huntsville, TX were given an assignment related to the last line of Ernest Hemingway's The Sun Also Rises.
I know this because on this very blog, I have a post about the last line of The Sun Also Rises. Earlier this evening, I got a couple of visits to that post from different IPs in Huntsville, Texas, and both came in on Google searches for strings like "Sun Also Rises last line" and "what is the last line of the sun also rises?"
Those visitors were, undoubtedly, disappointed. My post about the last line of the novel doesn't reveal the line itself, although if--as I suspect--they're high school students, they may have picked up some insights that might sound impressive in the classroom. And, of course, I'm not exactly sure what the assignment is.
I'm pretty sure, though, that it's due tomorrow. As it got on toward ten and eleven o'clock tonight, that search traffic from Huntsville, TX really picked up.
That's no surprise, of course.
What is a surprise is that I, a 41-year-old legal editor in Illinois, know this (and only this): a group of students in Huntsville, TX were given an assignment related to the last line of Ernest Hemingway's The Sun Also Rises.
I know this because on this very blog, I have a post about the last line of The Sun Also Rises. Earlier this evening, I got a couple of visits to that post from different IPs in Huntsville, Texas, and both came in on Google searches for strings like "Sun Also Rises last line" and "what is the last line of the sun also rises?"
Those visitors were, undoubtedly, disappointed. My post about the last line of the novel doesn't reveal the line itself, although if--as I suspect--they're high school students, they may have picked up some insights that might sound impressive in the classroom. And, of course, I'm not exactly sure what the assignment is.
I'm pretty sure, though, that it's due tomorrow. As it got on toward ten and eleven o'clock tonight, that search traffic from Huntsville, TX really picked up.
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Rational Outrage Launches on March 17!
Not long ago, I mentioned in a post that there were just too many projects and not enough hours in the day (a feeling I know is familiar to many of you).
I'm excited to announce that despite all of the competing priorities, my webzine, Rational Outrage, will be launching on March 17.
The March 17 issue is set, but we're still accepting submissions for the March 31 edition until March 24, so check it out and let us know what you're outraged about. This is a paying market, though it's not MUCH pay at this point.
I'm excited to announce that despite all of the competing priorities, my webzine, Rational Outrage, will be launching on March 17.
The March 17 issue is set, but we're still accepting submissions for the March 31 edition until March 24, so check it out and let us know what you're outraged about. This is a paying market, though it's not MUCH pay at this point.
Sunday, March 09, 2008
5000 Words is About 20 Double-Spaced Pages
I suspect that most regular readers of this blog know that. I also suspect that most regular readers of this blog know that things like margins and even fonts can impact that number considerably, and so it's just a very loose guideline.
So do you find yourself wondering, "Just why did Tiffany decide, this morning, to make a gratuitous announcement about what 5000 words amounted to in terms of pages?
I'll tell you (you knew I would, didn't you?)
Some months ago, I found this question in my search traffic: "5000 Words is How Many Pages?"
Because I have another blog dedicated entirely to answering questions I find in my search statistics (though some more seriously than others), I wrote a post with that title.
Now, I get about a dozen visitors a day on related search strings. It's ALWAYS 5000 words. Here are a few of the recent searches that have landed people to that post:
5000 words how many pages
How many pages is 5000 words?
How many pages is 5000 words double-spaced?
5000 words = how many pages
5000 words = ? pages
5000 words in pages
5000 words double spaces
5000 words pages
How many pages in 5000 words?
All of these examples have been pulled from the past three days, and most of them appear multiple times. I found this a bit surprising and a little entertaining when it first started happening, but then I came to a couple of conclusions:
1. There are a lot of people out there who don't know how many pages 5000 words works out to and wish they did; and
2. Those people are much more likely to find other information of interest and use to them on THIS blog than on my search statistics blog.
So do you find yourself wondering, "Just why did Tiffany decide, this morning, to make a gratuitous announcement about what 5000 words amounted to in terms of pages?
I'll tell you (you knew I would, didn't you?)
Some months ago, I found this question in my search traffic: "5000 Words is How Many Pages?"
Because I have another blog dedicated entirely to answering questions I find in my search statistics (though some more seriously than others), I wrote a post with that title.
Now, I get about a dozen visitors a day on related search strings. It's ALWAYS 5000 words. Here are a few of the recent searches that have landed people to that post:
5000 words how many pages
How many pages is 5000 words?
How many pages is 5000 words double-spaced?
5000 words = how many pages
5000 words = ? pages
5000 words in pages
5000 words double spaces
5000 words pages
How many pages in 5000 words?
All of these examples have been pulled from the past three days, and most of them appear multiple times. I found this a bit surprising and a little entertaining when it first started happening, but then I came to a couple of conclusions:
1. There are a lot of people out there who don't know how many pages 5000 words works out to and wish they did; and
2. Those people are much more likely to find other information of interest and use to them on THIS blog than on my search statistics blog.
Saturday, March 08, 2008
The Evolution of Punctuation
I am not a fan of the evolution of language. The idea that misuse of words ultimately develops into "new meaning" makes my brain explode, and I was dismayed about a year ago to come upon a line in St. Augustine's Confessions that seemed to suggest that this kind of distortion had been going on as early as the third century.
For the past few years, though, an ugly suspicion has been growing in my mind: a suspicion that the language and grammatical structure that I know and love and think should be frozen in time forever is itself the product of evolution. It all started when I noticed that C.S. Lewis used semi-colons in a manner inconsistent with proper usage. Or, I should say, CURRENT proper usage. It seemed unlikely to me that Lewis failed to grasp the appropriate use of a semi-colon, but after a bit of research failed to turn up anything conclusive, I decided to comfort myself with the assumption that the English used semi-colons somewhat differently than we Americans used them. I'd already learned from Lynne Truss that there were minor variations between British and American punctuation.
Sheldon Vanauken was American, and he'd used them in the same way, but he was a disciple of Lewis, and had studied at Oxford as well. It seemed reasonable that he might have adopted the British style; it seemed equally reasonable that he might have adopted Lewis's.
And I was untroubled, later, to discover the same format--the use of the conjunction "and" in combination with a semi-colon--in Jane Austen's work. British. Very British.
But Austen did something else that troubled me deeply: she used apostrophes in her possessive pronouns. "Her's" was disconcerting enough, but just a few pages later to be confronted with "their's"! I nearly swooned, and most certainly should have required attendance had there not been comfortable seating and clean air at ready access.
And, I am afraid, none of my excuses about British custom or emulation could explain the curious use of the semi-colon in the SECOND SENTENCE of the very first of The Federalist Papers
. After a period of steadfast resistance in the face of all evidence to the contrary, I find myself forced to consider the possibility that semi-colons have not always been limited to the artful attachment of two otherwise independent sentences, and that they have instead been applied in a variety of circumstances in which their only function seems to have been to keep a sentence from going on too long without division.
I find myself unequal to the circumstances.
For the past few years, though, an ugly suspicion has been growing in my mind: a suspicion that the language and grammatical structure that I know and love and think should be frozen in time forever is itself the product of evolution. It all started when I noticed that C.S. Lewis used semi-colons in a manner inconsistent with proper usage. Or, I should say, CURRENT proper usage. It seemed unlikely to me that Lewis failed to grasp the appropriate use of a semi-colon, but after a bit of research failed to turn up anything conclusive, I decided to comfort myself with the assumption that the English used semi-colons somewhat differently than we Americans used them. I'd already learned from Lynne Truss that there were minor variations between British and American punctuation.
Sheldon Vanauken was American, and he'd used them in the same way, but he was a disciple of Lewis, and had studied at Oxford as well. It seemed reasonable that he might have adopted the British style; it seemed equally reasonable that he might have adopted Lewis's.
And I was untroubled, later, to discover the same format--the use of the conjunction "and" in combination with a semi-colon--in Jane Austen's work. British. Very British.
But Austen did something else that troubled me deeply: she used apostrophes in her possessive pronouns. "Her's" was disconcerting enough, but just a few pages later to be confronted with "their's"! I nearly swooned, and most certainly should have required attendance had there not been comfortable seating and clean air at ready access.
And, I am afraid, none of my excuses about British custom or emulation could explain the curious use of the semi-colon in the SECOND SENTENCE of the very first of The Federalist Papers
. After a period of steadfast resistance in the face of all evidence to the contrary, I find myself forced to consider the possibility that semi-colons have not always been limited to the artful attachment of two otherwise independent sentences, and that they have instead been applied in a variety of circumstances in which their only function seems to have been to keep a sentence from going on too long without division.I find myself unequal to the circumstances.
Friday, March 07, 2008
Know Your Audience: It's Easier Said Than Done for Bloggers
Last week, after a discussion thread on Blog Catalog about all of the "make money blogging" blogs out there, I wrote something I planned to post here on RockStories. It was a parody of those posts that many of us run across ten times a day on blogs and in forums, titled "I Made $XX Online in January!" and filled with helpful tips on how you could, too. Except that the "XX" was my actual January online income and my helpful tips included things that have helped me earn a living from home, like obtaining an advanced degree from a first-tier school and securing the assistance of a rock star at a critical point in your career development.
Usually I draft my posts right here in blogger and post them immediately, but I had some reservations about whether this one would be recognized for what it was, and so I sent it out to two friends and asked them if the point was clear or if it sounded condescending. Both are mothers with professional backgrounds working in creative fields. One felt strongly that it sounded condesceding and braggy, and that there had to be a better way to make the point. The other said it was funny and not the least bit condescending and I should post it right away.
Naturally, I did nothing. But I did start thinking about an issue that's bigger than whether or not that particular post would be well received: "know your audience" is a standard in the writing profession, but that's not as easy in the blogging world as it is when you're writing for other kinds of publication.
If I'm writing for a parenting magazine, or a humor magazine, or a writing website I have a pretty good idea of who my readers will be. Just as important, they have a pretty good idea of what to expect when they type in that URL or flip open the magazine. And that's true for some bloggers, as well. It's true for bloggers who write within a narrow niche, and for those who have a strong regular readership. But the vast majority of traffic to my blogs comes from search engines, which leaves me with little information about those visitors. And even the regular visitors come, I think, more for something about my writing style or perspective than subject matter--I think that because I have a writing blog, a dog blog, a personal blog, a Catholic blog, a social commentary blog and a search engine humor blog, and a surprising number of those who subscribe to or regularly read one read several (or all) of them.
There are some broad perspectives out there, depending on which blog they started with. Even these two good friends of mine, who know my style and my perspective well, had two very different takes on the same piece. With a little reflection, the reason was obvious: one of them works online and daily encounters the kind of posts I was parodying, so that the format and intent were immediately recognizable to her. The other doesn't frequent the kind of blogs and forums and such where those posts appear.
But what about the rest of the world? I just don't know. I'm certain that if I posted that piece, I'd have readers who thought it was hilarious and dead-on and cheered me on for it. I'm equally sure that I'd have readers who weren't familiar with the format and thought I was bragging about my income and my education and my connections. And I'm suddenly concerned about just how many other topics and approaches and perspectives might trigger exactly this kind of conundrum.
Usually I draft my posts right here in blogger and post them immediately, but I had some reservations about whether this one would be recognized for what it was, and so I sent it out to two friends and asked them if the point was clear or if it sounded condescending. Both are mothers with professional backgrounds working in creative fields. One felt strongly that it sounded condesceding and braggy, and that there had to be a better way to make the point. The other said it was funny and not the least bit condescending and I should post it right away.
Naturally, I did nothing. But I did start thinking about an issue that's bigger than whether or not that particular post would be well received: "know your audience" is a standard in the writing profession, but that's not as easy in the blogging world as it is when you're writing for other kinds of publication.
If I'm writing for a parenting magazine, or a humor magazine, or a writing website I have a pretty good idea of who my readers will be. Just as important, they have a pretty good idea of what to expect when they type in that URL or flip open the magazine. And that's true for some bloggers, as well. It's true for bloggers who write within a narrow niche, and for those who have a strong regular readership. But the vast majority of traffic to my blogs comes from search engines, which leaves me with little information about those visitors. And even the regular visitors come, I think, more for something about my writing style or perspective than subject matter--I think that because I have a writing blog, a dog blog, a personal blog, a Catholic blog, a social commentary blog and a search engine humor blog, and a surprising number of those who subscribe to or regularly read one read several (or all) of them.
There are some broad perspectives out there, depending on which blog they started with. Even these two good friends of mine, who know my style and my perspective well, had two very different takes on the same piece. With a little reflection, the reason was obvious: one of them works online and daily encounters the kind of posts I was parodying, so that the format and intent were immediately recognizable to her. The other doesn't frequent the kind of blogs and forums and such where those posts appear.
But what about the rest of the world? I just don't know. I'm certain that if I posted that piece, I'd have readers who thought it was hilarious and dead-on and cheered me on for it. I'm equally sure that I'd have readers who weren't familiar with the format and thought I was bragging about my income and my education and my connections. And I'm suddenly concerned about just how many other topics and approaches and perspectives might trigger exactly this kind of conundrum.
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Publishing Pitfalls for Parents
In addition to maintaining six blogs, I've done some writing for parenting magazines and websites and written some essays for writing publications that touch on family life, and I've always been very cautious. I see a lot of articles and blog posts that make me cringe on behalf of children, because having made my living in Internet marketing for a time, I know that those little stories, those vents from mom or dad, those blow-by-blows of the struggle with the school system are with those kids for life.
I took down my website in 2002, and at least three versions of it are still readily available online. I've personally seen situations in which people weren't hired for jobs because of information online, and read numerous news stories of others whose blogs or facebook photographs or any of a dozen other e-media sources cost people jobs--even jobs they already held. And I question whether we have the right to make those decisions for our children.
I'm not talking about those cute little stories that might embarrass your high-schooler but that we all have and ultimately won't impact anyone's life. I'm talking about doing real harm with the best of intentions.
It seems to me that the most seemingly innocuous posts and articles can come back to bite them in ways we'd never anticipate. Twelve-year-old daughter has a learning disability and you're Not Ashamed Of It? Great, but does that mean you should decide for her that her future prospective employers should be able to Google her and find that information? It's easy to do now, and indexing is getting more sophisticated every day.
Even subjective comments with the best of intentions could hurt. Maybe you son goes out and puts on a brave and poised front in public, and you're so very proud of him because you know that in reality he's having major anxiety attacks and he comes home and collapses from the stress of keeping up that together front? Praise him for it online, share your pain as a parent watching him struggle...and then maybe you'll get the chance to do it again five years down the road, when the interviewer who was so impressed with his poise and professionalism reads the archives of your blog and starts to think maybe he wasn't quite as together as it looked, to wonder whether maybe he's STILL putting up a brave front when he's really cracking underneath.
Think I'm paranoid? Maybe. Maybe the cases I've seen and read about in which people who never thought their private profiles or blogs or web pages would be discovered lost jobs and custody and lawsuits are all flukes. Maybe the dizzying advance of technology that's making it easier and easier and easier for the average person to find information on the Internet will come screeching to a halt, and maybe those popular archiving services will stop archiving and delete their files. Maybe.
But is it a chance we want to take on behalf of our kids?
I don't.
And, in fact, this week I got a lesson in just how careful I have to be. I've always thought about the posts and articles that might have a long-term impact and avoided them, but those cute little stories seemed harmless to me. After all, my daughter is in middle school, and the chances that her friends were reading my blogs or parenting magazines or writing newsletters seemed pretty slim. And so far as I know, none of them are.
But the other day, I wrote two posts about buying my daughter tickets to the Jonas Brothers concert for her birthday. There aren't any secrets in them...at least, nothing that would seem like a secret to use grown-ups. And we're the only ones reading my blogs, right?
Well, that was true. That is, until the news aggregator at a Jonas Brothers fan site picked up my posts, and a small flood of click-through traffic from teenyboppers began.
We really do live in a different world, and whatever we put online we're putting out there forever, for the world to do with what it will. For some of us, that's an acceptable risk, but is it one we should take for our kids, our parents and our friends?
I took down my website in 2002, and at least three versions of it are still readily available online. I've personally seen situations in which people weren't hired for jobs because of information online, and read numerous news stories of others whose blogs or facebook photographs or any of a dozen other e-media sources cost people jobs--even jobs they already held. And I question whether we have the right to make those decisions for our children.
I'm not talking about those cute little stories that might embarrass your high-schooler but that we all have and ultimately won't impact anyone's life. I'm talking about doing real harm with the best of intentions.
It seems to me that the most seemingly innocuous posts and articles can come back to bite them in ways we'd never anticipate. Twelve-year-old daughter has a learning disability and you're Not Ashamed Of It? Great, but does that mean you should decide for her that her future prospective employers should be able to Google her and find that information? It's easy to do now, and indexing is getting more sophisticated every day.
Even subjective comments with the best of intentions could hurt. Maybe you son goes out and puts on a brave and poised front in public, and you're so very proud of him because you know that in reality he's having major anxiety attacks and he comes home and collapses from the stress of keeping up that together front? Praise him for it online, share your pain as a parent watching him struggle...and then maybe you'll get the chance to do it again five years down the road, when the interviewer who was so impressed with his poise and professionalism reads the archives of your blog and starts to think maybe he wasn't quite as together as it looked, to wonder whether maybe he's STILL putting up a brave front when he's really cracking underneath.
Think I'm paranoid? Maybe. Maybe the cases I've seen and read about in which people who never thought their private profiles or blogs or web pages would be discovered lost jobs and custody and lawsuits are all flukes. Maybe the dizzying advance of technology that's making it easier and easier and easier for the average person to find information on the Internet will come screeching to a halt, and maybe those popular archiving services will stop archiving and delete their files. Maybe.
But is it a chance we want to take on behalf of our kids?
I don't.
And, in fact, this week I got a lesson in just how careful I have to be. I've always thought about the posts and articles that might have a long-term impact and avoided them, but those cute little stories seemed harmless to me. After all, my daughter is in middle school, and the chances that her friends were reading my blogs or parenting magazines or writing newsletters seemed pretty slim. And so far as I know, none of them are.
But the other day, I wrote two posts about buying my daughter tickets to the Jonas Brothers concert for her birthday. There aren't any secrets in them...at least, nothing that would seem like a secret to use grown-ups. And we're the only ones reading my blogs, right?
Well, that was true. That is, until the news aggregator at a Jonas Brothers fan site picked up my posts, and a small flood of click-through traffic from teenyboppers began.
We really do live in a different world, and whatever we put online we're putting out there forever, for the world to do with what it will. For some of us, that's an acceptable risk, but is it one we should take for our kids, our parents and our friends?
Monday, February 11, 2008
Torn Between Two Projects
Okay, for most of us it's usually more than two...a lot more than two. But I couldn't resist the backhanded allusion to some old country song I don't even know who sang--my daughter likes to say that I have a song for everything, and she doesn't seem to mean that in a good way.
I suspect that the story I'm about to tell is a familiar one to many writers out there. I'm in the process of launching a social commentary webzine. I'm taking submissions, but even so I expect to do about half of the writing for launch myself, and I'm very eager to launch.
Which is fine: I'm a fast writer and I'm excited about getting this new venture off the ground.
The only problem is that I have a slightly-more-than-full-time day job, where equally exciting things are going on.
And I have a romance novel that's been done for more than a year that I have to figure out what to do with.
And I have a novella in progress that a friend of mine is eagerly waiting to film.
And I have a novel in progress that I'm personally very invested in.
And...well...six blogs.
And my sister just handed me a new magazine that my work would fit right in with.
I've heard writers talk about starting a lot of projects and then losing interest, but this isn't quite that problem. I'm entirely interested in all of this, and a few more things that I have in the works but aren't quite so pressing. There just aren't enough hours in the day--and then the world seems to want us to interact and pay bills and mop the kitchen and shower and stuff on top of it all.
What's a writer to do? How to prioritize? I haven't quite figured that out yet. Obviously, paid work comes first, but after that? Usually, it's the fun stuff that comes next, which is why I'm starting a new webzine and working on a novel when I've got a finished book sitting around that I can't find time to submit.
I suspect that the story I'm about to tell is a familiar one to many writers out there. I'm in the process of launching a social commentary webzine. I'm taking submissions, but even so I expect to do about half of the writing for launch myself, and I'm very eager to launch.
Which is fine: I'm a fast writer and I'm excited about getting this new venture off the ground.
The only problem is that I have a slightly-more-than-full-time day job, where equally exciting things are going on.
And I have a romance novel that's been done for more than a year that I have to figure out what to do with.
And I have a novella in progress that a friend of mine is eagerly waiting to film.
And I have a novel in progress that I'm personally very invested in.
And...well...six blogs.
And my sister just handed me a new magazine that my work would fit right in with.
I've heard writers talk about starting a lot of projects and then losing interest, but this isn't quite that problem. I'm entirely interested in all of this, and a few more things that I have in the works but aren't quite so pressing. There just aren't enough hours in the day--and then the world seems to want us to interact and pay bills and mop the kitchen and shower and stuff on top of it all.
What's a writer to do? How to prioritize? I haven't quite figured that out yet. Obviously, paid work comes first, but after that? Usually, it's the fun stuff that comes next, which is why I'm starting a new webzine and working on a novel when I've got a finished book sitting around that I can't find time to submit.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)