About Author Branding

The world of commerce pushes brands. Now, I hear, we must even brand ourselves if we want to make it in any arena.

If you haven’t heard of author branding— don’t believe me. Just internet-search these two words. We are no longer artistic vehicles for good literature; we must write and continue to write the same kind of stories. Or, put another way, we can write what we want, but being successful depends on writing the same sort of material.

We’ve heard of actors lamenting they are offered the same sort of role over and over. Some famous authors say they are deemed capable of one genre only, and we chuckle at these poor successful souls who have what many desire: success in an impossibly competitive field. But at the same time, we shudder at the rigid educational tracking of a child, or the stereotyping of a person by race, or the judging of an individual by nationality. Now that is just awful. Right?

Fact: In 1900, L. Frank Baum published two books: The Wonderful Wizard of Oz and The Art of Decorating Dry Goods Windows and Interiors. Yup, the very same L. Frank Baum. Good thing he didn’t know about branding.

 

This Way—NO—That Way

What to do when trusted critics give advice that contradicts your sense? Anyone who’s ever asked for opinion on their work has been there.

Early on in my writing for publication I turned down an offer to revise and re-submit from a small publisher. Reason? They wanted a different ending to the story. A perfect and happy hanky-dory ending didn’t suit the story, I thought. It wound up being published by another publisher who asked for revisions, but saw the merit of the ending as it was.

Although I don’t regret staying with my vision then, I would do it differently now. This is how I approach revision suggestions today: I try it.

It’s painful and even feels wrong at times. But I have learned that trying to re-fashion per others’ suggestions is never a waste.

Best case scenario: you love the results.

 

Worst case scenario: you, and maybe even the suggester, wind up agreeing the re-direction was a dud. I have learned a lot about my stories when revising, even with clenched teeth.

 

 

Most likely it will be some combination. But like the Green Eggs and Ham fellow, you will know a whole lot more if you try it.

 

 

Teach Our Children Well

On this day, June 14, in the year 1642, the first compulsory education law in America passed by Massachusetts.

There are some amongst us who believe the laws should not interfere with parental choices, or that our government should not be invested in general education of the young, but they are outliers. Most of us recognize that the difference to all our lives, and the future of our societies, lies in support of education. Some of it must be done communally.

Let’s put it this way: without compulsory public education, communally supported, we will find ourselves where some third world countries are: parents paying daily to send their young to be schooled, and if one week the family’s short of puls (Afghani pennies) or Tambalas (Malawi pennies) – children must stay home that week.

Private education should always be a choice, just as we strive to make the public education as good as we can. But leaving it to the whim and sometimes meager pocketbook of parents should not be an option.

Obviously we who write, and cannot imagine a full life that doesn’t include reading, want a society that values this.

So today calls for a celebration. This day three-hundred and seventy-four years ago, (let me think… that’s eighteen score and seven years ago. Now doesn’t that sound learned?) some of our nation’s founders, before there was even a notion of becoming a nation, started us on the road to something truly grand.

So as the summer vacation starts all over the land, we rejoice that there is what to have a vacation from.

Why We Write*

*--Otherwise known as the other Big W Question

I’m re-reading a lovely collection of successful writers’ accounts, called WHY WE WRITE. It serves as a nice break between revisions, and for some reason I believe I deserve a break.

 

I enjoy the take of these incredibly talented and phenomenally successful folks on why and how they do what they do. From my humble perch, I recognize the process, and feel closer to some than to others.

It was something Armistead Maupin said about the “why” that struck not only a nerve, but turned the light switch to illuminate, at least for me. I quote:

“I write to explain myself to myself. It’s a way of processing my disasters, sorting out the messiness of life to lend symmetry and meaning to it.”

Life’s journey is understood in stories. In fiction we can organize the twists, and make the hairpin turns be more than pointless moments of extreme anxiety, but part of the whole. Everything fits, all for a reason, and endurance is heroic.

I also love that Maupin used the word symmetry. I’m a sucker for symmetry. I had spent many years working with traditional textiles, and getting comfort from their use of symmetry.

18^th Century embroidery from Karabagh

I have a writing friend who is a master puzzle-maker. Puzzles work this way as well; everything fits, and one thing ties to another. The anxiety of solving a puzzle, persevering while mulling the clues, can be exasperating. But in the end every square is filled, everything in place, and, to use a famous quotation from Robert Browning—

God’s in his heaven, all’s right with the world.

A House Divided

You won’t find me making many, or any, political statements. Once I passed my younger youth, I no longer found sustenance in that arena, nor much deep wisdom in political discourse.  I’d go as far as to say that I watched good people become unkind and even senseless when they took to the barricades.

Unless you count love of country, you won’t get me clicking on likes or re-tweeting statements from politicos. They’ll have to have their revolutions without me.

But this is the season here in the U.S.A. So my one forage into the minefields is to suggest the absurdity of a statement I keep hearing variation of from many directions: “The country had never been more divided.”

HEHHH? We had a civil war, people!

In the Civil War of the 1860s-- 2% of Americans died. That would be the equivalent of six and a half million people today. That’s not counting the maimed, or the homes destroyed and the fields burned.

 

And the vitriol that is hurled with regularity every election cycle has, even in recent times, been more pungent. I suffer from many things, but amnesia isn’t one of them.

My only antidote is, in my personal and public conduct, to affect and maybe effect calm thoughtfulness.

We may have to wait until December for the next wave to pass.

WINNING and LOSING

Or—

Now, be Nice

In this election cycle, the word “win” and “lose” are ubiquitous. One of the candidates, in particular, is fond of framing the world in those terms.

This got me thinking about what feels like winning or losing to me.

In worldly terms it’s only a bit complicated. The only distinction that seems to require discernment has to do with relationships vs. material gains, and which brings the greater sense of achievement. Steve Jobs, nearing the end of his life, said this:

“I have come to the pinnacle of success in business.

In the eyes of others, my life has been the symbol of success.
However, apart from work, I have little joy. Finally, my wealth is simply a fact to which I am accustomed.from work, I have little joy. Finally my wealth is simply a fact to which I am accustomed.

… Please treasure your family love, love for your spouse, love for your friends...
Treat everyone well and stay friendly with your neighbours.Please treasure your family love, love for your spouse, love for your friends…

Treat everyone well, and stay friendly with your neighbors.”

At the end of his life, Aldous Huxley imparted this simple wisdom:

“We should be nicer to one another.”

That does not take away the wish to win worldly prizes. But it puts it in some perspective.

It’s also empowering to sense that I can be a winner by my own choices, and what I can control.

Like I say to my cats when they swat at each other, “be nice.”

~NICE IS NO VICE~

Success by Blitz?

The question comes up now and then on kid-lit chat boards— when is it right to follow-up on a reply from an agent or editor, when the reply was a rejection?

 

It’s simpler than simple: when the rejection included an invitation to submit again, either a revision or other work. And then, ONLY if you made the revision per the suggestions, or the other work is at least as (or even more) right for this house or agency.

All other follow-ups are not welcome.

 

My agent has had to close her doors to unsolicited subs because people "followed-up," when not specifically invited to, with a barrage of "more work from me, since you were so nice" variation.

 

I confess that I’ve been guilty of this, with some too-nice editors, when I was a newbie. My excuse was that I didn’t know what I didn’t know. Specifically, I’ve never seen a slush-pile in person. They are so high they could hold the second story up like pillars, pushing up against the ceiling. I’ve never opened my Email to have a thousand emails pour in.

But that was then, and I’ve learned. By the time I started approaching agents, I knew better. No one got a follow-up unless they asked.

 

There are stories of success, in the uber-competitive professions, that involve unbridled blitzing. But, for the most part, these are urban legends. Mostly such have succeeded in closing the gates to self and others.

 

 

 

I know it’s hard to get in the door. If it were easy, everyone would have their starring role in a movie and their published novel. It’s hard, and discouraging, and if only…

 

 

Here’s the deal: life is better spent perfecting the craft, and following the golden rule. Worldly success may or may not follow, but one’s contribution to the general pot would have been good, regardless.

Save your wits—do not blitz

 

 

Social Connectivity

Connecting with others over our lifespan is good for us, the Happiness Study from Harvard had found.

Being rich and famous won’t make you happy or healthy. Having love and giving love will. It’s advice scriptures and counselors and grandmas have given from time immemorial.

You may be saying, DUH. You may be wondering why they needed to spend $$ and sixty years of an ongoing study to find this out. You may be sulking that you did not get this wisdom from the previous generations in your family.

The thing is, it’s still the honest truth.

The other thing is that today is the first day of the rest of your life.

If you only have fifteen spare minutes today, watch this TED talk about this extraordinary study of The Good Life—

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-7zAkwAOYg

If you can’t spare fifteen, call a dear friend and make up a time to get together. 

The good life is possible as long as you live. Don’t spend another minute reading this blog, unless, of course, it makes you feel more connected.

That’s all I ever hoped for, writing it.

Don’t Over-protect Your Characters

The title of this post is also a post-it I have over my computer. Reminder to self.

In my first chapter book story, written with the hope to publish, the main character dealt with such challenging issues as wondering how to make others hear him, how to accept less than perfect days, and how to accept a new sibling. All this he did while his loving and supportive family was both nurturing and helpful. The boy had the childhood we all wished we had, and wish with all our might we have the wisdom to give to our children.

I think I wanted to wrap him in a warm and fluffy blanket and keep him from harm. No wonder this story was a non-starter as far as the publishing world goes.

You think I might have been over-protective?

It took me a while to allow my characters, a.k.a. my fictional children, to get into deep trouble. The kind of trouble I would hope my real-life children never will.

And then, of course, the characters find a way out of the bind. It could be they defeat some evil, solve an urgent practical problem, or accept a difficult aspect of life internally. But they had to be in deep doodoo to begin with. It was hard.

I’m still working on it. I know I’ve made progress because one beta reader asked me recently why the antagonists in my story had to be so awful. Couldn’t they be, well, more reasonable? I explained that they could, but then there isn’t any story to tell.

Editors sometimes refer to this as “raising the stakes.” Don’t fear it, face it, and the readers will have a chance to do the same.

Kosher for Passover Lesson

This being Passover, or Pesach of the Jewish year 5776, I find myself munching on a matza while ruminating over my manuscript and the excellent feedback I got from a discerning Beta reader.

Working to polish and repair the gaping holes in a manuscript is painful. After all, this is a manuscript that only a short time ago seemed to be a glowing jewel. A good Beta will quickly tap that illusion out of it, and this is neither easy nor fun for a writer.

But here comes the good part. Once I overcome the denial (“Beta is wrong!”) and the crushing sense of defeat (“Beta is right, and it’s hopeless…”) comes the moment of glory.

It's the realization that I was given a map to a treasure.

I was thinking about this Passover joke, so apropos—

What, in your opinion, is the most reasonable explanation for the fact that Moses led the Israelites all over the place for forty years before they finally got to the Promised Land?
   a. He was being tested.
   b. He wanted them to really appreciate the Promised Land when they finally got there.
   c. He refused to ask directions.

 

 

Here is the good news: I asked for the directions. Now that I have them, I know I don’t have to wander in the dessert for forty years.

Back to work.

Harnessing Feelings for Creative Projects

Ever get the feeling that nothing you do, or can do, really matters?

I’m thinking of something different from futility. It’s not that anything anyone does will not make a substantial difference. Other people seem effective and even powerful. It’s the sense that your own endeavors don’t amount to “a hill of beans,” to quote an old colloquial expression, made famous by the movie Casablanca.

Another word for this feeling is helplessness.

 

It may be the primary feeling of childhood, and one of the major themes of children’s literature. It occurred to me that rather than wallow, I could use it when I write.

A younger voice is never more effective than when we harness these feelings and work them into a story.

While our protagonists solve their problems, we solve ours. A writer’s main problem often amounts to the lack of a compelling and authentic narrative voice.

From voice comes character, and from character comes a plot. That’s a lot of birds hit with one sling. Yes, I chose an expression that connotes power to end this post.

Now go get ‘em.

A New Way to STORY

After some prodding, I finally relented to DS ‘s urging me to try playing a computer game he insisted he knew I would like.

It was a revelation.

Don’t get me wrong; I’ve seen computer games, read about computer games, and even critiqued a colleague’s MG book that was in essence a tale taking place in the mind of a MC playing a computer game. But I have never experienced one such as this, where I found myself the protagonist of a surrealistic philosophical story, experiencing first-hand the anxiety, despair and elation of a full-fledged existential crisis.

It was like reading a novel, only I wasn’t identifying with the main character, I was the main character.

It was wrenching. It was stressful. It was amazing.

 

I’m still old-school, and this will not replace good reading for me. But it got me thinking about the dawning of a new age of writing. The possibilities that will come with electronic books, when they finally realize they don’t have to just be cheap versions of print, are almost here. They can tell a story in a new way, merging what literary narration and technology they are capable of, to give the deep personal experience readers seek.

We can use games such as Wii to play virtual athletic games, waving our arms and watching a screen. But can we enter fully-fledged stories? I can see it now.

The death of the novel has been predicted for a long time. I don’t foresee death, but a re-birth with new dimensions.

 

 

Author Photos

Or—

The Good, the bad, and the Ugly

On the Kidlit chat boards the question arises periodically: should I have a photo of self on my website, and should it be a formal author photo, or would any snapshot do?

This is not a question about the photo that goes on your published book. The publisher will determine this, and they will specify what they require. House-style varies, and a writer receives guidance when the time comes.

This is also not a question for the famous among us. Their faces are known, many times known, and their websites (if they have such) may not include an image of the author’s face anywhere.

The question of putting one’s face out there in virtual land was one I struggled with six years ago. Once I succumbed and accepted it, I must admit that I gave it little thought. But when I saw others who wiggled about whether and how, I realized there is what to consider.

Some are on the verge of their debut release, which prompted me to make a website in the first place. Others just wanted to have a web-presence where, unlike the social networks, they had full control. Their reasoning? Just in case an agent or editor they were writing to wanted to make sure they were not scary and, in fact, rather pleasant and thoughtful folks.

I asked myself if I must have a photo at all, and the answer was a resounding YES. I have to confess that when I look up someone’s book or Internet musings, I am sorely disappointed if I can’t see his or her face. I suspect they don’t really want to be published, (literally, be made public) or they are in deep hiding in the witness protection plan. Better to swallow the squeamishness and just put our faces out there.

This brings us back to the beginning. What makes a good author photo, and should a professional take it?

{Disclosure: my daughter always took mine. I suppose she is a professional of sorts, as she has taken publicity photos for her colleagues at Juilliard. But she and the IRS know I never paid her for mine.}

If you take into account that author and bio photos are not all-important, will not be decisive deal makers, and that professional photographers charge as little as $100 and as much as $3,500 a session—It becomes a matter of your financial situation. It was never in my budget, but everyone is different. You will be fine if you know a talented friend, at least until you begin to make enough money to take this expense as deductible from your taxes. Only you know the answer to that.

What makes a good author/writer photo is, to my mind, a photo that truly represents you. It looks like you, not you after a radical makeover. The setting tells the story of what you do, (Write? Illustrate? Edit?) and the facial expression says what you want to communicate. If a wide-tooth smile isn’t right for you, don’t. If wearing a professional blazer makes you look like a corporate attorney, not an artist, then don’t wear one. The photograph should say this is me, and, again, only you know the answer to that.

It is a good idea to have people who know you chime in. Things that matter not a bit for a bio picture bog us down. (Are my eyes green enough? Was I having a less that perfect hair-day? Is that a double-chin? A pimple?) Another pair of eyes will take in the overall feel, the “vibe” if you will, and help your choice.

But the right choice is the authentic you on a good day.

---

Articles of interest—

 Two snarky rants about clichés

http://www.nytimes.com/1993/12/12/books/haul-out-the-old-cliches-it-s-time-to-shoot-an-author-photo.html?pagewanted=all

http://flavorwire.com/117566/against-promotional-author-photographs

And two that take it seriously and attempt how-to advice—

http://maryrobinettekowal.com/journal/debut-author-lessons-the-author-photo/

http://bookinabox.com/how-to-take-an-author-photo/

The Sin and Sepsis of SYNOPSES

{All right, that title^ is cleverish by half, and lame to boot. But I had to take my angst out somewhere.}

 

Agents and editors may ask for a synopsis. Synopses are most writers’ least favorite things. Rejections hurt less, some will tell you. Synopses feel like whacking a seven-layer cake into a pancake. It’s all still there, but the air is out.

 

Now that’s done, let’s sympathize with a writer who has just reduced her fifty-thousand-word lusciously layered lyrical story to five hundred words, while retaining some of the voice, all of the major plot points, all the major characters, and giving away the surprise end.

It was painful.

 

The best part about this beast is that even if editors or agents don’t ask for it, it will help a writer notice major plot holes or weakness in the full manuscript. Summarizing delineates the arteries of a story.

 

But otherwise, they are evil.

 

There are a lot of superb sites that give helpful advice about tackling the synopsis. Here are a few I found helpful:

 

https://janefriedman.com/novel-synopsis/

http://www.marissameyer.com/blogtype/6-steps-for-writing-a-book-synopsis/

http://www.writersdigest.com/editors-picks/learn-how-to-write-a-synopsis-like-a-pro

 

Here’s a bit I found helpful that I didn’t see anywhere else. I found that I write an effective synopsis if I had not re-read or looked at the story for a few weeks.

Yup, this helps me extract the essence and not be tempted to include many of my favorite parts. I can see the arc more clearly. It feels less like homework, and has a clarifying effect.

 It works for me, anyhow.

 

 

 

Now back to work, revising the synopsis. Not funny, Yea. But a necessity.

 

 

PURIM, the Festival of Lots

As written in the Book of Esther, it means a "lot.” Purim is the plural form of the word `Pur', and thus means "lots.” The festival is called Purim because of the lots cast by Haman. The word Pur is also related to the Hebrew word `porer,' which means to dismantle, break, destroy, or break into crumbs.

 

Purim is around the corner. It has few reverberations outside of Synagogues and Hebrew schools in the United States. But when I was growing up in Israel, it was THE HOLIDAY for us kids. Think of it as Halloween for dress-up and merry making, and then take out the ghoulish creepers. Unless you consider the historic back story, which is re-told and re-read in synagogues at that time, and includes the first of many hateful men who set out to kill all the Jews.

 

When the miserable haters bent on destroying us are part of a people’s reality from time immemorial to today, we don’t need skeletons and zombies to make merry. Besides, this is a story of triumph over adversity. I still remember the end of the story, with its joyous exclamations about Haman being hung from a tall tree along with all his children. I remember NOT being too happy about that, but I got over it with some delicious Hamantaschen (literally, cookies shaped like Haman’s ears) and the promise of competing in Best Costume with a prize to boot.

I did win first prize once, in fifth grade. For the life of me I can’t understand why. I can only assume my “Mad Man in Pajamas” was so pathetic it was a pity-prize.

 

While we ate our rectangular filled cookies, the grown-ups were commanded to get so drunk they could not tell the difference between the evil Haman and the pious Mordechai. That’s the same as between the bad and the good, and the injunction to drink was a commandment, not a suggestion, folks.

 

Add to it that this holiday is named for “lots,” and extend that to the lottery, gambling, and other vices-- and you get one happy party. That it sometimes fell on or near my birthday didn’t hurt.

 

What can I say? I miss it.