What's the Purpose of this Blog?
I'm verbose and associative, so hang on...
Long answer:
I am a writer and a reader. I like to discover, to stumble upon and then fall in love with the works of unknown or overlooked writers. I think of "unknowns" as those who have taken the gamble to write a book without the backing or seal of an established publishing house. "Overlooked" writers, for me, are those talented writers who have taken the traditional route but for whatever reason never gathered a following; generally this means the publishing house did not bother to or, in the case of the small houses, could not afford to publicize the work of their "newer" writers.
Frankly, I'm delighted to see that writers who have not been published by the traditional houses (you know what I mean) are no longer instantaneously labelled as "vanity" publishers. That said, I do believe there are "vanity" publishers out there: I define this as those who do not possess writing/storytelling skills, yet remain determined to publish a book.
I'm way behind on the times, but I'm thrilled that talented writers who are unable/unwilling to publish via traditional means are now being labelled as "indies." As far as I'm concerned, it's a much more dignified and accurate term, and one that empowers rather than belittles the independent writer. Let's face it, Virginia Woolf may not have succeeded (in her life) had it not been for the creation of the Hogarth Press (which also published T.S. Eliot's work, etc.). Okay, but what does this mean? In each era, writers/visionaries find ways to band together and to help one another "put out the word." In our modern landscape, publishers rarely put much energy into publicizing, etc., unless the writer has a proven record or is famous. People don't seem nearly as interested in reading these days, and if they do read, it's difficult to get them to bother with what is not sanctioned as "good or phenomenal" fiction/non-fiction.
It's sad to think of the writer in the present environment, but I do believe that new/undiscovered/indie writers now have an advantage that we didn't about five years ago. For one, talented writers are able to publish and have the world discover them rather than rely on an editor to find merit in the work, and determine if it will sell. If all goes well for you, as an indie, then the publisher shall find you through the audience you collect. Furthermore, editors generally skip from house to house--at least that's what I learned from the late Stanley Colbert, who was once an agent and later became the head of Harper Collins (if memory serves correct) in Canada. Incidentally, Colbert is one (the story is told in so many different ways: I heard it from Stan, but he liked a good story and could tell it well, so I won't take sides on the discovery of Jack Kerouac) who waded through more than 1,000 pages of what became On the Road and found the gem (about 275 pages) locked inside and is the one who revealed the "real" story to Malcolm Cowley, from Viking. Yes, that would be the Cowley who brought us William Faulkner, but I stray... When I was in my MFA program (and this was years ago), I was told to be wary of editors and find an agent instead. I didn't bother, but I'll leave that for the "about me" page, which will be written at some point.
Short answer:
I hope to help you get just a little more publicity. But there is a catch (first you need to read the following paragraph)....
AM I SIMPLY OUT TO REVIEW BOOKS?
NO. I also like to admire nice covers, discover great quotes, revel in all that is done in the book world (and I'm not just talking about writing--many creative artists use books as a medium to express their worldview/feelings. If I see something like this, I'll post it. And I'll post good deals from bookstores, funny (at least to me), comics related to the book arts, and inspirational quotes. I may even post writing prompts. And I'll direct you to what I feel are great blogs for readers and/or writers.
THE CATCH: (don't worry, it's not bad)
1) If you wish me to read and POSSIBLY review your work, then please email me with a synopsis of your book BEFORE SENDING ME YOUR BOOK as an attachment. Yes, I know, it's annoying for you, but it is courteous to me. Hate to say it, but I'm a MOM, a writer, a researcher, a housekeeper: a person who wears many hats. Furthermore, I get, via the synopsis, a sense of how you write. And you may prefer that I do not review your work. See point 4.
2) At present, I do not have a P.O. Box, so I will be (once we agree that I shall read your work) reading your novel/book via an electronic device. Personally, I prefer having the book in hand, for I like to highlight and make notations and yes, I have a Kindle, etc., but it's just not the same when you're thinking about the work: depth of characters, point of view (consistency), writing style, etc. So for now, I'll be reading on electronic devices, but in the future, I will be asking for a hard copy. I prefer, for real reading, a book that I can hold in my hands. But I need to get the P.O. Box. I may ask you to wait until I get that P.O. Box for a hard copy of your work: takes more effort on both of our ends, but you'll get a more thorough review (not promising a better review... I'm promising a more thorough review WITH a hardcopy on hand.)
3) I do not read "erotica". If this is your genre, go elsewhere. I have nothing against erotica as a genre, but I have, through friends, discovered that much of the indie erotica is soft porn and generally poorly written at that, and I'm not interested in the subject, which means you're better off without my review/comments.
4) If I read your work, I still may not review it. This deserves an explanation.
I will not review a book that is terribly written. It amounts to my belief that you're better off without having a review that blasts your style than having a review on your page. Controversial reviews can be good: I will review a book that I do not like, IF it is well-written. Such reviews (controversy), as I just said, can help. What does not help you is a review that condemns your writing abilities. Example, which I have just made up: "'No,'" she cried vehemently. "'Do not cut his throat.'" The rogue laughed, his tongue seeming to lash out at her as he exclaimed...." I hope you get the picture.
In the event that I agree to read your book, but opt against reviewing it, I will email you to explain the reasons. Yes, this can hurt, but it may help, and it is certainly better than having a negative review.
4A) I'm not going to edit your book though! (See above.) Frankly, I'm not a line-editor either. If anything, I'm a content editor, but I'm not going into that realm, for I am also writing a book and re-writing another.
5) Please consider sharing reviews on books (whether on this site or others) by other writers on your social networks. Books are hyped by word of mouth, so hype something that appeals to you, and hope that another who visits this site hypes your work. I'm not asking you to share reviews on your personal blog, but all of you who are reviewed are aiming for visibility. If you find a review that makes you think that YOU might be interested in reading the book, then why not share it? In the end, this tactic will help you and your fellow writers--I hope.
Frankly, I just want each of you to get more publicity, so think of each other! (sorry, sounding like a mom.)
Those are the catches, for the moment.
Please know that I will read your work with care, but also remember that I am one person who is doing many things. If this blog takes off, as some do, I shall enlist the help of some great editors/reviewers.
No comments:
Post a Comment