My story "Spinning Wheel" is the featured story this week at AlfieDog.com. It is a newish website offering e-reader short stories for sale, usually pretty cheap. I think "Spinning Wheel" may be the longest they have at 7,500 words, so it's a little more than most. Still, less than a dollar. I'm not sure how viable this business model is, but I thought it was worth trying out with one story.
Regardless of all that, "Spinning Wheel" is about the cycles of abuse that families can go through unless and until one courageous member can break out of it. Southern Gothic writing rife with symbolism and things crawling about under the surface. It will be part of my next collection, but that won't be ready for probably another couple of years, so this is your chance to get a sneak peek.
Showing posts with label literature. Show all posts
Showing posts with label literature. Show all posts
Wednesday, August 8, 2012
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
New Media and New Marketing XX
Well, I've not been around here for awhile, and I've got to mention that I'm about to give up. I continue to get good reviews for "The Job," for instance this new one at Simul Iustus et Peccator, but these things don't seem to ever show up on Amazon, Goodreads, B&N, Smashwords, &c. &c. where they could actually do some good. As well, a quick googling of some of my key words to this blog shows that it's not showing up even on the first 10 search pages. So what's the point? (or "pint," as I nearly typed). This blog has three followers, and I'm one of them.
On top of that, I was shut out of the Independent Publisher Awards, the only contest I had a chance to be recognized in. I'd entered in the humor and religious fiction categories, and came away with nothing. Not really surprising, but the winner of silver in religious fiction was "The Sherlock Holmes Church Mysteries." This was an author who stole an iconic secular literary character, long after its creator was dead, and adapted it to her agenda. And she gets an award for it. So I'm pretty close to giving up any kind of marketing. It's not what I should be about, anyway. Success in the marketplace is not the raison d'etre of art and literature, and certainly not of the Church.
On top of that, I was shut out of the Independent Publisher Awards, the only contest I had a chance to be recognized in. I'd entered in the humor and religious fiction categories, and came away with nothing. Not really surprising, but the winner of silver in religious fiction was "The Sherlock Holmes Church Mysteries." This was an author who stole an iconic secular literary character, long after its creator was dead, and adapted it to her agenda. And she gets an award for it. So I'm pretty close to giving up any kind of marketing. It's not what I should be about, anyway. Success in the marketplace is not the raison d'etre of art and literature, and certainly not of the Church.
Thursday, February 17, 2011
Flim-Flannery
I'm re-reading some of the works of the great Southern Gothic author Flannery O'Connor. This will be only the second time I've gone through most of them, but still I'm finding the Christian themes easier to pick up. I've tried to track down some literary criticism of her works, and I've found that people basically obsess with "A Good Man is Hard to Find." More on that later.
First, I personally find fiction with Christian themes much more thought-provoking and meaningful than simple apologetics. This is why I love O'Connor and Dostoevsky so much. In fact, my favorite C.S. Lewis work is "Screwtape Letters," which is undeniably apologetics but brilliantly written in the voice of a fictional character. Perhaps straight apologetic writing just seems too much like a lecture to me, while fiction allows the reader to bring his own levels of understanding into the writer's thoughts. This is what I try to do.
Although my stories to date have been more straight-forward Christian in nature than O'Connor's, I still give that freedom of interpretation, particularly in "The Job." For instance, you can tell in Grace Krispy's review that she nearly gets it, but Mary Ann Langan's "review" reveals she doesn't get it at all. As I turn more toward Southern Gothic in my writing, I'll try to keep this connection to Christianity without letting it become a sledge hammer.
So, anyway "A Good Man is Hard to Find" apparently is accepted as O'Connor's seminal story in the eyes of most, although I'm not so sure ("Revelation" and "The Displaced Person" deserve some consideration). It certainly is the most direct story in putting forward O'Connor's idea that violence is "the extreme situation that best reveals what we are essentially." It's shock value is probably why the secular world has latched onto it. But O'Connor's overall Christian outlook within her work -- that of portraying "the action of grace in territory held largely by the devil" -- is a little harder to find, the grace part anyway. The grandmother tries to talk the Misfit into being a good man, even in a way comparing his blood to Jesus', but he makes her a good woman by sticking a gun in her face.
That's the extent of my literary criticism. You're free to write your own without my interference. I highly recommend O'Connor's work. I will add this last thing -- the Misfit's complaint that "I wasn't there so I can't say (Jesus) didn't (raise the dead). I wisht I had of been there. It ain't right I wasn't there because if I had of been there I would of known," is very close to Ivan Karamazov's complaint in "The Grand Inquisitor" -- if only Jesus would prove Himself to me, then I could believe.
First, I personally find fiction with Christian themes much more thought-provoking and meaningful than simple apologetics. This is why I love O'Connor and Dostoevsky so much. In fact, my favorite C.S. Lewis work is "Screwtape Letters," which is undeniably apologetics but brilliantly written in the voice of a fictional character. Perhaps straight apologetic writing just seems too much like a lecture to me, while fiction allows the reader to bring his own levels of understanding into the writer's thoughts. This is what I try to do.
Although my stories to date have been more straight-forward Christian in nature than O'Connor's, I still give that freedom of interpretation, particularly in "The Job." For instance, you can tell in Grace Krispy's review that she nearly gets it, but Mary Ann Langan's "review" reveals she doesn't get it at all. As I turn more toward Southern Gothic in my writing, I'll try to keep this connection to Christianity without letting it become a sledge hammer.
So, anyway "A Good Man is Hard to Find" apparently is accepted as O'Connor's seminal story in the eyes of most, although I'm not so sure ("Revelation" and "The Displaced Person" deserve some consideration). It certainly is the most direct story in putting forward O'Connor's idea that violence is "the extreme situation that best reveals what we are essentially." It's shock value is probably why the secular world has latched onto it. But O'Connor's overall Christian outlook within her work -- that of portraying "the action of grace in territory held largely by the devil" -- is a little harder to find, the grace part anyway. The grandmother tries to talk the Misfit into being a good man, even in a way comparing his blood to Jesus', but he makes her a good woman by sticking a gun in her face.
That's the extent of my literary criticism. You're free to write your own without my interference. I highly recommend O'Connor's work. I will add this last thing -- the Misfit's complaint that "I wasn't there so I can't say (Jesus) didn't (raise the dead). I wisht I had of been there. It ain't right I wasn't there because if I had of been there I would of known," is very close to Ivan Karamazov's complaint in "The Grand Inquisitor" -- if only Jesus would prove Himself to me, then I could believe.
Monday, February 14, 2011
The Was that Will Be
First, kudos to Walt Kelly and the fact that I could steal and pretty much destroy his title for this very important blog post.
Once upon a time, the publishing business didn't really exist. After Gutenberg's invention of the press, authors would pay printers to print and bind their works, and then they would deliver them to local bookstores for sale. There wasn't that much reading material available, so stores were happy to take whatever books they could get, and readers as well. So what came to be known as publishers were just a hired service, and authors made only what they could get stores to pay them for books. If the author couldn't afford printing costs, well, that was just too bad.
Somewhere along the way printers found that they could take on the costs of publishing, thereby attracting popular authors and make a tidy profit. I don't know how this came about, but I do know that Charles Dickens became widely popular by having his stories serialized in magazines, then afterwards published as full books when the audience was well established. This was the mid-1800s.
So who cares? Nobody. But it appears we're back at square one, as traditional publishers struggle to squeeze out a profit while thousands of would-be authors pay self-publishers to print and bind their books for a fee. The catch again is whether these authors can get bookstores to carry their books, now in a culture where not only is there no lack of reading material, but also the broad audience would rather watch Hulu than read anyway. The growth of e-readers will only increase this cacophony of information. This is where I am with "The Job", although I add the twist of being my own printer. How to get notice remains the greatest challenge.
Once upon a time, the publishing business didn't really exist. After Gutenberg's invention of the press, authors would pay printers to print and bind their works, and then they would deliver them to local bookstores for sale. There wasn't that much reading material available, so stores were happy to take whatever books they could get, and readers as well. So what came to be known as publishers were just a hired service, and authors made only what they could get stores to pay them for books. If the author couldn't afford printing costs, well, that was just too bad.
Somewhere along the way printers found that they could take on the costs of publishing, thereby attracting popular authors and make a tidy profit. I don't know how this came about, but I do know that Charles Dickens became widely popular by having his stories serialized in magazines, then afterwards published as full books when the audience was well established. This was the mid-1800s.
So who cares? Nobody. But it appears we're back at square one, as traditional publishers struggle to squeeze out a profit while thousands of would-be authors pay self-publishers to print and bind their books for a fee. The catch again is whether these authors can get bookstores to carry their books, now in a culture where not only is there no lack of reading material, but also the broad audience would rather watch Hulu than read anyway. The growth of e-readers will only increase this cacophony of information. This is where I am with "The Job", although I add the twist of being my own printer. How to get notice remains the greatest challenge.
Thursday, February 3, 2011
Eragon-e
Get it? "Era-gone"? Oh well.
How do I hate thee? Let me count the ways -- Actually, I don't hate this travesty, but it's certainly a great example of what's wrong with modern publishing. First let me say I know virtually nothing about the book except what I saw in the movie version's trailer -- that it is a rip off of both "Lord of the Rings" and "Star Wars" mushed into one. In other words, as the old-time pundit, printer's-ink-in-the-veins journalists would say, it's "strictly boilerplate."
Probably violating some Amazon copyright here.
According to Wikipedia, the incredibly talented and home-schooled Christopher Paolini began writing "Eragon" when he was 15, and it was first published in 2002 by his parents' company, Paolini International LLC, which had been formed only five years before. He then toured some 135 schools promoting the book, so the folks definitely had plenty of financial resources to invest in marketing. Eventually "the stepson of author Carl Hiassen found Eragon in a bookstore and loved it, and Hiaasen brought it to the attention of his publisher, Alfred A. Knopf", and the rest is history.
This is an odd twist on "it's who you know," which is an absolutely true platitude in publishing, and also in succeeding (financially) in any of the entertainment arts. No respected agent or publisher would ever have given a second look to a book written by a 15-year-old, but his own parents sure would. Also no school would ever have given time to an adult wanting to promote his fantasy book to a captive audience of kids, but another kid -- wow, that would be inspirational. Christopher cashed in on the money and grunt work his parents invested, and on his own youth to find a core market, one of whom had a connection with a real publisher. All this for a story that will be completely forgotten by the next generation.
So I guess I'm just jealous, because in truth it's exactly what I'm doing. I've got my own "publishing" company simply to give "The Job" an existence before my core audience, which is Christian reviewers and media in general. My real hope is that one member of that market will see the real worth of "The Job" and become its advocate. It's a total shot in the dark, but let's face it, God loves weakness, and there really couldn't be much of a weaker attempt than this. We'll see what He does with it.
It ain't the way it used to be -- more about that later.
How do I hate thee? Let me count the ways -- Actually, I don't hate this travesty, but it's certainly a great example of what's wrong with modern publishing. First let me say I know virtually nothing about the book except what I saw in the movie version's trailer -- that it is a rip off of both "Lord of the Rings" and "Star Wars" mushed into one. In other words, as the old-time pundit, printer's-ink-in-the-veins journalists would say, it's "strictly boilerplate."
Probably violating some Amazon copyright here.
According to Wikipedia, the incredibly talented and home-schooled Christopher Paolini began writing "Eragon" when he was 15, and it was first published in 2002 by his parents' company, Paolini International LLC, which had been formed only five years before. He then toured some 135 schools promoting the book, so the folks definitely had plenty of financial resources to invest in marketing. Eventually "the stepson of author Carl Hiassen found Eragon in a bookstore and loved it, and Hiaasen brought it to the attention of his publisher, Alfred A. Knopf", and the rest is history.
This is an odd twist on "it's who you know," which is an absolutely true platitude in publishing, and also in succeeding (financially) in any of the entertainment arts. No respected agent or publisher would ever have given a second look to a book written by a 15-year-old, but his own parents sure would. Also no school would ever have given time to an adult wanting to promote his fantasy book to a captive audience of kids, but another kid -- wow, that would be inspirational. Christopher cashed in on the money and grunt work his parents invested, and on his own youth to find a core market, one of whom had a connection with a real publisher. All this for a story that will be completely forgotten by the next generation.
So I guess I'm just jealous, because in truth it's exactly what I'm doing. I've got my own "publishing" company simply to give "The Job" an existence before my core audience, which is Christian reviewers and media in general. My real hope is that one member of that market will see the real worth of "The Job" and become its advocate. It's a total shot in the dark, but let's face it, God loves weakness, and there really couldn't be much of a weaker attempt than this. We'll see what He does with it.
It ain't the way it used to be -- more about that later.
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
New Media and New Marketing IV
Here's a link to the latest review of "The Job", from Literary R&R. It is the most in-depth review so far, quite thoughtful, but still obviously falls short of fully understanding the book. A friend pointed out to me the letters of C.S. Lewis, in which he goes through a long list of reviews of "Out of the Silent Planet." The reviews were all glowing, but none of them understood the theological underpinnings of the story. I was prepared for this with "The Job"; in fact, it's somewhat gratifying to me that the story can be appreciated on several levels even by those who don't get it. I'm still awaiting that meaty review with real insight, though.
This all brings to a head the requirement that arts offer the consumer room for discovery. If an author (or painter, composer, etc.) makes his point so heavy-handedly that the consumer can't bring anything of himself into the work, then the artist has failed. The artist must be willing to allow the consumer to interpret the work either rightly or wrongly. I think I know what Dostoyevsky was getting at in "The Brothers Karamazov," but short of talking to him about it I'll never really know. But if I'm right, the man was a blinking genius. If an artist can leave an audience thinking that, whether they get it or not, then he's done pretty well.
This all brings to a head the requirement that arts offer the consumer room for discovery. If an author (or painter, composer, etc.) makes his point so heavy-handedly that the consumer can't bring anything of himself into the work, then the artist has failed. The artist must be willing to allow the consumer to interpret the work either rightly or wrongly. I think I know what Dostoyevsky was getting at in "The Brothers Karamazov," but short of talking to him about it I'll never really know. But if I'm right, the man was a blinking genius. If an artist can leave an audience thinking that, whether they get it or not, then he's done pretty well.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)