Summer is here (and has been for a while), and with it comes so-called “beach reads.” These are easy reads that can vary from romance to comedy to thrillers to any kind of mix of these or more. What they all have in common is that these books are entertaining, and are not meant to be the next literary revolution. They are exactly what they sound like: books that you can throw in your purse, beach bag, or picnic basket, and just kick back at the beach to relax and enjoy them. Of course, to be honest, these types of books exist year round, but they seem to get a bigger plug and enjoy more popularity in the summer, when people take vacations and want to relax. Now, while I have read many more important works of literature--from Shakespeare to Milton to Ayn Rand--there is nothing like these light, breezy books when I just want to be entertained for a while.
Some people look down on these books. Perhaps they figure that any book that can be finished in an hour isn’t worth the hour it would take to read. I disagree. Given the choice, I would (usually) rather read for an hour than watch television, especially if one of these particular books is involved. And to me, any time someone would rather read than watch television, it should be encouraged. While this type of literature may not ever become a classic or even challenge me to think about what the author is trying to say about society, politics, or life in general, I am still reading. And what’s more, I am enjoying myself.
Too many people nowadays don’t take time to read. Part of the problem are all the fancy high tech gadgets out there today. How can a mere book compete with the Internet, high definition television, or even video games? With all sorts of devices out there ready to weave a story for you, to show you graphically so that you don’t even need your imagination, it’s no wonder many people--and you children--would rather pick up a video game controller than a book. And there’s also the time constraint. People today are busier than ever. It’s as if they don’t know what to do with themselves if they don’t have a regularly scheduled activity to attend. So between work, exercising, homework, school, going out, and any other number of activities, people don’t have much down time to devote to reading at all.
But how can this problem be fixed? Of course, there are never any easy solutions. But I think that something that would have a chance at being effective would be these very “beach reads” that so many look down upon. The reason I propose these books is twofold: first, they are easy and light to read, so that Mr. or Ms. Busy doesn’t have to take much time out to enjoy them. Second, they are entertaining and relaxing, and will not be “work” to read. The key to getting a person hooked on reading is finding something that stimulates and excites them. And that doesn’t necessarily mean reading something that the person struggles to understand conceptually as they go along. Instead, it just needs to be something that grabs and hold their attention. Something that they can’t and don’t want to put down until the final page. Something that makes them say, “Where’s the next book? What can I read next?” And who knows, someone who begins by reading thrillers or easy reads may progress to more “literary” works, and begin to enjoy those as well.
As well as prompting those not prone to books to read, these beach reads also add diversity to the literary world. Maybe not extreme diversity, but it does add something different nonetheless. And though I am sure there are better readers out there, I know that I personally enjoy sitting back and relaxing while reading these books, knowing that I will not have to think or be faced with any strong moral or ethical dilemma or crisis. I can kick back and just speed read, or even just take my time. I know that I don’t have to absorb every word, because I will not have to worry about missing little nuances in the story that pull the book together in the end. To me, this can be a bit of a relief if I have read many heavier books before I sit down with a simpler novel.
Sure, the plots do usually end of being predictable. And yes, there usually is a romance involved. In fact, there are usually two types of story lines that the romance usually takes on for these beach reads. Either (a) the character falls in love with the wrong person, gets hurt, then falls in love with the right person who has been standing on the sideline all along, or (b) the character meets the right person from the beginning, but they have to overcome some challenge or fight before they can live in everlasting happiness. I know this. And yet, I’m a sucker for these books. There is something comforting about knowing what is going to generally happen in the plotline. Why read it then, if I already can predict the outcome? Well, I read for the comedy, and for the little plot points and obstacles that vary from book to book. I read for the characters, who sometimes I can relate to, or who sometimes I can envision. And of course, I read these books for pure entertainment value, and for a simple escape. In essence, I read books for the same reason that people go to movies.
So next time you’re bored, and you consider rounding up some friends to go to a movie, think about sitting down with a book instead. With a book, you’ll get a much more in-depth plot, more developed characters, and more detail than any two hour movie can squeeze in. You’ll get a real story, not a watered down or condensed Hollywood version. And what’s more, you’ll be doing something good for your brain. Even if it’s not hard or challenging to read, you’re still reading. And, no matter what you’re reading, it’s a good thing. Oh, and don’t forget--if you get hooked this summer on these kinds of reads, they’re always around. Don’t put books down just because fall rolls around.
Michelle Mudry
Editorial Assistant
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
Thursday, July 19, 2007
Writing Groups: A Tool for Everyone
A writing group is a tool that any writer can take advantage of. It can offer benefits to your writing and maybe help generate ideas, while also encourage the less outgoing writer to overcome their fears.
There are many reasons to consider joining a writing group. First, the obvious: Reading your work to others will enable you to get honest feedback for improving your story. While your friends and family certainly want to see you succeed, they can something have a hard time being critical of your creative masterpieces. However, this will not be a problem at a writing group; the other members are writer and are there to support and help everyone along the way.
Another benefit to a writing group is that sitting and talking about your story or other people’s story may spark some creative flow. If you are in a room with other creative and imaginative people; hopefully you will be able to generate ideas and focus on writing.
Another benefit is overcoming the fear of reading—especially your own work—out loud and in front of others. Authors often do book readings and book signings, so it is important for them to be comfortable talking about their own writing in front of people. And a writing group is the perfect place to overcome this obstacle as the other people in the group are there because they want to hear your work. Remember, they are there to support you and help you, not to tear you down or rip you apart. Though it may be tough at time to hear constructive criticism, it is important to be able to take it. All the advice you may hear is probably not going to be great, but a lot of it may be worth thinking about and considering. Besides, after you finally get something published, there may be a review of your work that is not entirely positive. Being able to handle constructive criticism is the first step to accepting your work and not crumble at the first mention of negativity.
Joining a writing group is also a great way to connect with other people with similar interests. While it is great to have a diversified group of friends, it is definitely nice to have friends who share your passion and can relate to you on a creative level. Also, it is always nice to make connections where you can.
Finding a writing group shouldn’t be too difficult; today, anything can be found on the Internet. You can search for writing groups in your area to find out where and when they meet. You could also contact your local library and see if they have anything similar set up.
Attending a writing group meeting is something every writer should try at least once. With all the possible benefits, it’s certainly worth a short. And if it’s not for you, hey, at least you tried!
Here are a few links to check out for writer’s groups online or in your area:
http://www.forwriters.com/groups.html
http://www.writermag.com/wrt/community/groups/locations.asp
Michelle Mudry
Editorial Assistant
A writing group is a tool that any writer can take advantage of. It can offer benefits to your writing and maybe help generate ideas, while also encourage the less outgoing writer to overcome their fears.
There are many reasons to consider joining a writing group. First, the obvious: Reading your work to others will enable you to get honest feedback for improving your story. While your friends and family certainly want to see you succeed, they can something have a hard time being critical of your creative masterpieces. However, this will not be a problem at a writing group; the other members are writer and are there to support and help everyone along the way.
Another benefit to a writing group is that sitting and talking about your story or other people’s story may spark some creative flow. If you are in a room with other creative and imaginative people; hopefully you will be able to generate ideas and focus on writing.
Another benefit is overcoming the fear of reading—especially your own work—out loud and in front of others. Authors often do book readings and book signings, so it is important for them to be comfortable talking about their own writing in front of people. And a writing group is the perfect place to overcome this obstacle as the other people in the group are there because they want to hear your work. Remember, they are there to support you and help you, not to tear you down or rip you apart. Though it may be tough at time to hear constructive criticism, it is important to be able to take it. All the advice you may hear is probably not going to be great, but a lot of it may be worth thinking about and considering. Besides, after you finally get something published, there may be a review of your work that is not entirely positive. Being able to handle constructive criticism is the first step to accepting your work and not crumble at the first mention of negativity.
Joining a writing group is also a great way to connect with other people with similar interests. While it is great to have a diversified group of friends, it is definitely nice to have friends who share your passion and can relate to you on a creative level. Also, it is always nice to make connections where you can.
Finding a writing group shouldn’t be too difficult; today, anything can be found on the Internet. You can search for writing groups in your area to find out where and when they meet. You could also contact your local library and see if they have anything similar set up.
Attending a writing group meeting is something every writer should try at least once. With all the possible benefits, it’s certainly worth a short. And if it’s not for you, hey, at least you tried!
Here are a few links to check out for writer’s groups online or in your area:
http://www.forwriters.com/groups.html
http://www.writermag.com/wrt/community/groups/locations.asp
Michelle Mudry
Editorial Assistant
Monday, July 9, 2007
The Never-ending Debate: The Book or Movie?
With the newest Harry Potter movie right around the corner, the thought of books being made into movies stuck in my mind. So many books have been made into movies in the last few years that it appears society would rather watch television than read a good book. It also shows that Hollywood is having trouble finding an original idea. While these are debates in themselves, they are not the one I am focusing on at the moment. I will admit that some of these movies have been done well, but others have been extremely disappointing. In thinking about Harry Potter, I find the movies to be fitting, and little more. Since each movie had a different director, some are done better than others, but they still leave out so much of the books.
One book I found that was made well into a movie is Alexander Dumas’s ‘The Count of Monte Cristo’. It felt true to the storyline of the book, while bringing the characters to life on the big screen. Though I know some of the story line was taken out, it wasn’t obvious in the movie. This is nice; the audience isn’t fully aware they are missing something. In contrast, Jane Austen’s ‘Pride and Prejudice’ has been made into several movies, the latest with Keira Knightley. I enjoyed it, but I could tell where pieces of the story were missing.
Another aspect of books into movies is when the whole plotline is altered. This can be found in Nicholas Sparks' ‘A Walk to Remember’. The whole premise of the boy/girl meeting is completely different from the book to the movie. The relationship between the boy and girl is still there, but everything surrounding it has changed. This is due in part to modernization of the story. However, was this necessary? Do movies need to modernize books? Looking at ‘Pride & Prejudice’ or ‘The Count of Monte Cristo’, the answer is no. These movies made it big without modernizing a classic. Now, I’m not calling ‘A Walk to Remember’ a classic, but it makes one wonder if modernizing a story is a good idea. In this case, it worked, in the sense that the movie made a lot of money at the box office.
Here is where another interesting question pops up. Is it better to read the book first or to see the movie? Does the order it occur in affect one’s feeling toward one type of media versus the other? For instance, if someone watches the Disney version of ‘The Three Musketeers’ years before they ever pick up the book, will they always love the movie better than the novel? The two are different, and it could be said that falling in love with one hinders love of the other. I’m not saying this is true of all book/movie relationships, nor of every person, but simply thought it was an interesting question to explore. This situation could be the same for ‘The Lord of the Rings’, ‘Narnia’, ‘Ella Enchanted’, ‘Bridge to Terabithia’, ‘Girl with a Pearl Earring’, and numerous others.
This also poses the question of whether books should ever be made into movies. On one hand, it brings a good story to a wider audience. On the other hand, it also could lessen the number of people who actually pick up the book. While much profit can be made off the movie, sometimes more than off the book itself, movies are becoming more and more expensive to see. A person could see a movie in a theatre once, and never see it again, or have to wait until it comes out on video. However, paying little more now for a book can allow someone to enjoy it for ages to come.
While it is nice to see a book come to life on the big screen, it also leads to the question of vision. Whose vision is this movie? Is it how the author truly thought it out, or is it solely the workings of the director. A director’s vision may not be at all what my vision is, deterring me from seeing the movie, liking it, or ever feeling the same way about the book. There is always the fear that the character will be different, that the way an event happens isn’t how someone pictured it, etc. While sometimes it turns out better, more often than not it doesn’t. Yet will any of this stop me from continuing to compare the two? Probably not.
I’d love to hear more opinions on this…
Some others weigh in on this debate:
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1134742,00.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/11/11/print/main528940.shtml
http://www.boxofficeprophets.com/column/index.cfm?indexID=49
Andrea Hall
Editorial Assistant
One book I found that was made well into a movie is Alexander Dumas’s ‘The Count of Monte Cristo’. It felt true to the storyline of the book, while bringing the characters to life on the big screen. Though I know some of the story line was taken out, it wasn’t obvious in the movie. This is nice; the audience isn’t fully aware they are missing something. In contrast, Jane Austen’s ‘Pride and Prejudice’ has been made into several movies, the latest with Keira Knightley. I enjoyed it, but I could tell where pieces of the story were missing.
Another aspect of books into movies is when the whole plotline is altered. This can be found in Nicholas Sparks' ‘A Walk to Remember’. The whole premise of the boy/girl meeting is completely different from the book to the movie. The relationship between the boy and girl is still there, but everything surrounding it has changed. This is due in part to modernization of the story. However, was this necessary? Do movies need to modernize books? Looking at ‘Pride & Prejudice’ or ‘The Count of Monte Cristo’, the answer is no. These movies made it big without modernizing a classic. Now, I’m not calling ‘A Walk to Remember’ a classic, but it makes one wonder if modernizing a story is a good idea. In this case, it worked, in the sense that the movie made a lot of money at the box office.
Here is where another interesting question pops up. Is it better to read the book first or to see the movie? Does the order it occur in affect one’s feeling toward one type of media versus the other? For instance, if someone watches the Disney version of ‘The Three Musketeers’ years before they ever pick up the book, will they always love the movie better than the novel? The two are different, and it could be said that falling in love with one hinders love of the other. I’m not saying this is true of all book/movie relationships, nor of every person, but simply thought it was an interesting question to explore. This situation could be the same for ‘The Lord of the Rings’, ‘Narnia’, ‘Ella Enchanted’, ‘Bridge to Terabithia’, ‘Girl with a Pearl Earring’, and numerous others.
This also poses the question of whether books should ever be made into movies. On one hand, it brings a good story to a wider audience. On the other hand, it also could lessen the number of people who actually pick up the book. While much profit can be made off the movie, sometimes more than off the book itself, movies are becoming more and more expensive to see. A person could see a movie in a theatre once, and never see it again, or have to wait until it comes out on video. However, paying little more now for a book can allow someone to enjoy it for ages to come.
While it is nice to see a book come to life on the big screen, it also leads to the question of vision. Whose vision is this movie? Is it how the author truly thought it out, or is it solely the workings of the director. A director’s vision may not be at all what my vision is, deterring me from seeing the movie, liking it, or ever feeling the same way about the book. There is always the fear that the character will be different, that the way an event happens isn’t how someone pictured it, etc. While sometimes it turns out better, more often than not it doesn’t. Yet will any of this stop me from continuing to compare the two? Probably not.
I’d love to hear more opinions on this…
Some others weigh in on this debate:
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1134742,00.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/11/11/print/main528940.shtml
http://www.boxofficeprophets.com/column/index.cfm?indexID=49
Andrea Hall
Editorial Assistant
Monday, July 2, 2007
Overcoming Writer's Block
Writer’s block is every writer’s nightmare. It can come seemingly out of nowhere, and it does not discriminate. It can affect writers at any stage of whatever they’re working on. And though some may argue as to when it’s worst (not being able to start writing can be a confidence killer, and yet what can be more frustrating than having already started something, and then just losing all sight and inspiration?), it’s always an annoying road block. However, just because writer’s block trips you up, it doesn’t mean that your work is ruined. Although there is no definitive “cure,” this article aims to help you out of this rut with various explanation and exercises to try.
There are many possible reasons why people experience writer’s block. A possibly endless number if each individual reason is taken into account. However, the following are some common ones:
-Distraction. If every time you sit down to write, you think of other things you “should” be doing, it will probably restrict your creative capabilities. Although worrying about other responsibilities can hamper anyone’s flow, there is an obvious fix: do whatever it is that you can’t take your mind off of. Pay the bills, wash the car, write a letter to Great Aunt Gert, whatever. And then, when the task is complete, tell yourself you accomplished what needed to be done, and then set aside some time to write.
-Excessive Self-Criticism. Having goals and high expectations for yourself is great, but if they’re hindering your ability to write, then it’s time to rethink them. Unrealistic expectations can lead to frustration and writer’s block. It is not reasonable to expect everything you write to be amazingly perfect the first time you write it; this is what editing and revising are for. If this seems to be your problem, there are a few things you can do. First, take a break and remind yourself that your first draft is, after all, only a draft, and that it’s not supposed to be perfect. Then, sit down and just write. Whether it’s a short story, essay, or chapter, just write whatever comes to mind. Don’t worry about how crazy or “bad” it is. This will hopefully get some creative juices flowing, and when you’re done, you can take a look at whatever you’ve written and perhaps even use or revise some of it. If nothing else, it has warmed you up to start writing and has gotten the “needs to be perfect” jitters out of they way.
-Writing what you “should.” This complication affects you when you are trying to write in a particular genre or style because it is “popular” or what you think you “should” be writing. However, just because it is popular does not mean you should do it (after all, if all your friends jumped off a bridge, would you? Sorry, couldn’t resist…). This can be an easy trap to fall into. After reading some immensely popular book, you think to yourself, hey, that was a great story. I bet I could do something similar and sell a million copies too. The problem with this is that a) it might not be—and probably isn’t—that easy, and b) you are essentially planning to write a knock off story. That’s not really what you want—you want a story that you truly wrote and that shows off your unique style and strengths. In this case, you should think about what you’re writing, and why. If it’s not something you love or are passionate about, perhaps you should consider setting it aside for a bit, and working on something you are familiar with and love.
However, if these three reasons don’t explain your lack of creativity and inspiration, there are still tings you can try to spark an onslaught of (hopefully) writing genius.
-Brainstorm/outline. This exercise may help if you’re fuzzy about what exactly you’re writing about or where the story is going. Plotting out a story line, even if it’s just in your head, or is just a rough idea, may help get you started.
-Talk to others. This can include anyone from your friends and family to a writing group. This technique may help in more than one way; first, hearing yourself talk about your idea may clear up or trigger some kind of inspiration, while the person or people you talk to may provide some valuable feedback or bring up a point that you may not have considered.
-Start wherever you want. If you are having trouble starting, consider moving onto a different part of the story that interests or intrigues you more. If you’re telling the story, who’s to say where it has to start? Of course, when you’re done you can always go back and add the beginning you had originally envisioned.
-Take a break. You may be stressing yourself out or drying up your creative wells by forcing yourself to write. So walk away for a little bit, and give your brain a rest. After a while, take another stab at it. Additionally, if you’re working on a computer, try writing on plain old paper, or vice versa. If you always write in the same spot and you’re in a rut, try moving to a different area for a brief period.
Although none of these ideas are guaranteed, hopefully they will spark a creative flood of sorts. If none of these works for you, there are numerous other writing exercises out there geared toward helping you overcome writer’s block. To find some of these, look online. And remember, no matter how silly the reason or the exercise, if it helps, then it’s successful.
There are many possible reasons why people experience writer’s block. A possibly endless number if each individual reason is taken into account. However, the following are some common ones:
-Distraction. If every time you sit down to write, you think of other things you “should” be doing, it will probably restrict your creative capabilities. Although worrying about other responsibilities can hamper anyone’s flow, there is an obvious fix: do whatever it is that you can’t take your mind off of. Pay the bills, wash the car, write a letter to Great Aunt Gert, whatever. And then, when the task is complete, tell yourself you accomplished what needed to be done, and then set aside some time to write.
-Excessive Self-Criticism. Having goals and high expectations for yourself is great, but if they’re hindering your ability to write, then it’s time to rethink them. Unrealistic expectations can lead to frustration and writer’s block. It is not reasonable to expect everything you write to be amazingly perfect the first time you write it; this is what editing and revising are for. If this seems to be your problem, there are a few things you can do. First, take a break and remind yourself that your first draft is, after all, only a draft, and that it’s not supposed to be perfect. Then, sit down and just write. Whether it’s a short story, essay, or chapter, just write whatever comes to mind. Don’t worry about how crazy or “bad” it is. This will hopefully get some creative juices flowing, and when you’re done, you can take a look at whatever you’ve written and perhaps even use or revise some of it. If nothing else, it has warmed you up to start writing and has gotten the “needs to be perfect” jitters out of they way.
-Writing what you “should.” This complication affects you when you are trying to write in a particular genre or style because it is “popular” or what you think you “should” be writing. However, just because it is popular does not mean you should do it (after all, if all your friends jumped off a bridge, would you? Sorry, couldn’t resist…). This can be an easy trap to fall into. After reading some immensely popular book, you think to yourself, hey, that was a great story. I bet I could do something similar and sell a million copies too. The problem with this is that a) it might not be—and probably isn’t—that easy, and b) you are essentially planning to write a knock off story. That’s not really what you want—you want a story that you truly wrote and that shows off your unique style and strengths. In this case, you should think about what you’re writing, and why. If it’s not something you love or are passionate about, perhaps you should consider setting it aside for a bit, and working on something you are familiar with and love.
However, if these three reasons don’t explain your lack of creativity and inspiration, there are still tings you can try to spark an onslaught of (hopefully) writing genius.
-Brainstorm/outline. This exercise may help if you’re fuzzy about what exactly you’re writing about or where the story is going. Plotting out a story line, even if it’s just in your head, or is just a rough idea, may help get you started.
-Talk to others. This can include anyone from your friends and family to a writing group. This technique may help in more than one way; first, hearing yourself talk about your idea may clear up or trigger some kind of inspiration, while the person or people you talk to may provide some valuable feedback or bring up a point that you may not have considered.
-Start wherever you want. If you are having trouble starting, consider moving onto a different part of the story that interests or intrigues you more. If you’re telling the story, who’s to say where it has to start? Of course, when you’re done you can always go back and add the beginning you had originally envisioned.
-Take a break. You may be stressing yourself out or drying up your creative wells by forcing yourself to write. So walk away for a little bit, and give your brain a rest. After a while, take another stab at it. Additionally, if you’re working on a computer, try writing on plain old paper, or vice versa. If you always write in the same spot and you’re in a rut, try moving to a different area for a brief period.
Although none of these ideas are guaranteed, hopefully they will spark a creative flood of sorts. If none of these works for you, there are numerous other writing exercises out there geared toward helping you overcome writer’s block. To find some of these, look online. And remember, no matter how silly the reason or the exercise, if it helps, then it’s successful.
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
Just the Basics...
Writing a book, novel, even numerous poems, are each a challenge in their own way. Once accomplished, one should feel relief. Yet, the next phase looms in the background, causing more anxiety than before. The task of getting the work published. Putting the piece of oneself out into the world, in hope that others will enjoy it. But before this dream can become a reality, there are many steps to take and questions to answer.
After the writing is finished, there are smaller tasks of writing ahead. A synopsis of the book should be put together, in case it is requested. A cover letter and query letter are also good to have done, as they will be easy to send out when needed. Putting together a short paragraph of information about the author can also be useful, as it allows a writer to list other accomplishments in the publishing world. Make sure the work is in proper manuscript format also. If you’re unsure what this is, a good website to visit is http://www.shunn.net/format/. It gives examples of the proper format for short stories, novels and poems.
Another question to answer is that of getting an agent. Some individuals find them to be useful, as they have numerous contacts in the publishing world, which could help a piece of work get published. However, if one decides to take this route, then there is the task of finding agents to contact, and hoping one loves your work. If an agent isn’t something you feel is necessary, then it’s time to do some more research.
If working on your own to send out a manuscript, I recommend starting a list to help organize the process. Make sure you list the company, contact person, address, if they accept simultaneous submissions and most important, how they want to receive your manuscript. If they ask for a query letter first, DO NOT send them your entire manuscript. You want your first impression to be positive, and that means following directions. Always try to keep the publisher happy when thinking about your work, because that can help you go a long way.
After compiling the list of publishers, look over it again. If you have a preference between a big or small publisher, note that, and reorganize the list. Also look at how many places allow simultaneous submissions. This will determine if you can send out several manuscripts at once, or only one at a time.
Once the manuscript(s) are mailed, the waiting begins. Remember that it can take between 3 and 6 months for a publisher to acknowledge that they have received your work. This doesn’t mean they have read it yet, but that it is in their hands. If you haven’t heard anything after 6 months, then it is acceptable to call or send an e-mail inquiry. However, keep it short and professional. Simply ask if they have received your manuscript, as you want to make sure it wasn’t lost in the mail. Do not call and yell at the publisher for their inability to run an efficient company. No one likes that, and it will deter them from wanting to work with you, ever.
The work of sending out a manuscript is a lot, and often one receives a rejection letter. This is for many reasons that may have nothing to do with your work. For instance, it may not be the right genre for that company, or an editor may not be able to sell it to the department. However, there are many publishers out there, and it’s just a matter of finding the right one for you. Good luck.
Here are some other good websites to visit that will help you along the way...
http://www.writersdigest.com/
http://www.writersmarket.com/
Andrea Hall
Editorial Assistant
After the writing is finished, there are smaller tasks of writing ahead. A synopsis of the book should be put together, in case it is requested. A cover letter and query letter are also good to have done, as they will be easy to send out when needed. Putting together a short paragraph of information about the author can also be useful, as it allows a writer to list other accomplishments in the publishing world. Make sure the work is in proper manuscript format also. If you’re unsure what this is, a good website to visit is http://www.shunn.net/format/. It gives examples of the proper format for short stories, novels and poems.
Another question to answer is that of getting an agent. Some individuals find them to be useful, as they have numerous contacts in the publishing world, which could help a piece of work get published. However, if one decides to take this route, then there is the task of finding agents to contact, and hoping one loves your work. If an agent isn’t something you feel is necessary, then it’s time to do some more research.
If working on your own to send out a manuscript, I recommend starting a list to help organize the process. Make sure you list the company, contact person, address, if they accept simultaneous submissions and most important, how they want to receive your manuscript. If they ask for a query letter first, DO NOT send them your entire manuscript. You want your first impression to be positive, and that means following directions. Always try to keep the publisher happy when thinking about your work, because that can help you go a long way.
After compiling the list of publishers, look over it again. If you have a preference between a big or small publisher, note that, and reorganize the list. Also look at how many places allow simultaneous submissions. This will determine if you can send out several manuscripts at once, or only one at a time.
Once the manuscript(s) are mailed, the waiting begins. Remember that it can take between 3 and 6 months for a publisher to acknowledge that they have received your work. This doesn’t mean they have read it yet, but that it is in their hands. If you haven’t heard anything after 6 months, then it is acceptable to call or send an e-mail inquiry. However, keep it short and professional. Simply ask if they have received your manuscript, as you want to make sure it wasn’t lost in the mail. Do not call and yell at the publisher for their inability to run an efficient company. No one likes that, and it will deter them from wanting to work with you, ever.
The work of sending out a manuscript is a lot, and often one receives a rejection letter. This is for many reasons that may have nothing to do with your work. For instance, it may not be the right genre for that company, or an editor may not be able to sell it to the department. However, there are many publishers out there, and it’s just a matter of finding the right one for you. Good luck.
Here are some other good websites to visit that will help you along the way...
http://www.writersdigest.com/
http://www.writersmarket.com/
Andrea Hall
Editorial Assistant
Monday, March 26, 2007
Publishing Wisely: Advice for New Poets and Writers
Authors tend to want to see their latest books in print, at any cost, and often at the expense of any number of considerations. But I strongly contend that if you're looking to publish at all, that one ought to consider proceeding wisely.
For example--if you're a poet looking to publish a collection of poems, keep in mind that once those poems are published in book form, most of these poems will not be eligible to be published in most of the quality national and international literary magazines. The upside to publishing a book, however, is that in the future your poems will probably be more likely to get in those magazines.
But some will be better served by collecting written endorsements, and laying the networking foundations now for your future publications. If you work on more than one book at a time, that's even better, because you can start planting all sorts of seeds for that book as well. Most authors can expect lead times ranging from 1-5 years from acceptance to publication anyway. One of the most important thing you can do now is to get those endorsements, which will help lead to reviews in the big pre-pub. trade journals, which dramatically increases the likelihood that the book will be reviewed in major daily papers, litmags, and get all kinds of other mass media coverage. Good blurbs can make the difference, then, as to whether your book is exposed to thousands or millions of people.
Also--before you're tempted to start stuffing envelopes with all your lesser poems and stories for what you deem "the lesser magazines": these magazines are likely to sense your condescension; or worse, they'll publish this mediocre work of yours; so there may be thousands of people who only know you by a mediocre poem that even you admit is not as good as the 3-5 you sent to THE NEW YORKER, THE ATLANTIC MONTHLY, and THE GEORGIA REVIEW. If any of those readers see your name in ink again, they'll very possibly say something like "Oh yeah--I know that guy--he's the one that wrote that mundane poem in THE LITTLE LITMAG REVIEW that I thought was so forgettable."
Every time you publish something: fair or not, the quality of the writing will most likely come under scrutiny somewhere, and people may judge the corpus of your work from a little excerpt. If it does not represent you at your best, why put it on full display? Of course this isn't fair, but it's real, and bias works in mysterious ways--so why go out of the way to help the biases of others defeat your cause by showing them your least impressive samples?
--Christopher White, Chief Editor
For example--if you're a poet looking to publish a collection of poems, keep in mind that once those poems are published in book form, most of these poems will not be eligible to be published in most of the quality national and international literary magazines. The upside to publishing a book, however, is that in the future your poems will probably be more likely to get in those magazines.
But some will be better served by collecting written endorsements, and laying the networking foundations now for your future publications. If you work on more than one book at a time, that's even better, because you can start planting all sorts of seeds for that book as well. Most authors can expect lead times ranging from 1-5 years from acceptance to publication anyway. One of the most important thing you can do now is to get those endorsements, which will help lead to reviews in the big pre-pub. trade journals, which dramatically increases the likelihood that the book will be reviewed in major daily papers, litmags, and get all kinds of other mass media coverage. Good blurbs can make the difference, then, as to whether your book is exposed to thousands or millions of people.
Also--before you're tempted to start stuffing envelopes with all your lesser poems and stories for what you deem "the lesser magazines": these magazines are likely to sense your condescension; or worse, they'll publish this mediocre work of yours; so there may be thousands of people who only know you by a mediocre poem that even you admit is not as good as the 3-5 you sent to THE NEW YORKER, THE ATLANTIC MONTHLY, and THE GEORGIA REVIEW. If any of those readers see your name in ink again, they'll very possibly say something like "Oh yeah--I know that guy--he's the one that wrote that mundane poem in THE LITTLE LITMAG REVIEW that I thought was so forgettable."
Every time you publish something: fair or not, the quality of the writing will most likely come under scrutiny somewhere, and people may judge the corpus of your work from a little excerpt. If it does not represent you at your best, why put it on full display? Of course this isn't fair, but it's real, and bias works in mysterious ways--so why go out of the way to help the biases of others defeat your cause by showing them your least impressive samples?
--Christopher White, Chief Editor
Tuesday, December 19, 2006
Some Principles Guiding Principles of Selection
I will continue to flesh out and clarify and/or qualify and elaborate my various arguments throughout these posts. Those who are hung up excessively on consistency of viewpoint have likely not been charmed and haunted by Whitman's famous quote: "Do I contradict myself? Very well then, I contradict myself."
I mention that quote because I'd like to qualify some things from my last post, but also because I feel that I'm performing a public service by disseminating the quote even more, though I've heard it pop up more and more in recent years.
Thinking of Ezra Pound's pronouncement that "nations will be judged by their anthologies," the crucial matter behind that phrase is the notion that principles of selection and judgment are the sole means by which the accomplishments of the "guardians of art" will be judged.
But the principles of selection for a magazine, even one of the highest caliber, are not the same principles of selection that we should use when selecting works for anthologies, or even for selecting books to publish, based on their literary merits. Magazines play a vital role in showcasing the influential trends in art and other endeavors. There is generally a rather higher level of quality in the quality national literary journals than is acknowledged by the most curmudgeonly among us; but magazines in general, even the quality quarterlies, should not be held to an impossibly exacting standard in their selections of works that they choose to showcase. The literary magazine in the past century has been a vibrant, dynamic battlefield of ideas, experimentation, and tentative judgments. So the best magazines sometimes publish the less-than-excellent work by famous names, when others have a hard time finding their way into print. So what? It's not for the magazines to decide which of these poems should be gathered into anthologies, textbooks, "Best American So-and-So" and so on; this is the duty of our cultural guardians, and this is where the impossibly exacting standards of judgment and selection should come into play.
The problem of the pandemic distribution of really bad anthologies is far more problematic than the fact that winning a Pulitzer guarantees wide publication in magazines. This is apparently a problem of blurred roles. So I won't be so unreasonable as to insist that the creation of bad art is automatically bad for art. I think, however, that most of the time when bad art is held up as being excellent art, such posturing is no help to the state of the arts in any form.
It should be obvious to all literary tastemakers, and common knowledge among anyone who would make literary judgments that one should judge any artist based on the best of that artist's work. There are some literatteurs who are more consistently skilled than others, but there is only one commonality among all artists, even the greatest: all artists have created bad art. Some create nothing but bad art, but to write five truly important poems in 50 years of devoting a lifetime to writing poems is a major accomplishment. With any luck, and with years of application, one might conceivably create a body of work which is largely excellent, but even among the masters we should not confuse greatness or confidence with perfection or infallibility. So hero worship will ultimately disappoint. I admire many poems by James Wright, for instance, and so would call him a great poet. But I won't pretend that all of his poems are great.
It's true that sometimes great art strikes out of seemingly nowhere. But then, we rational humans are quick to take credit for the work of our subconscious mind, which is always doing some of our homework for us. It's true that sometimes the best work seems to write itself, and that the act of creation becomes more an act of surrender than the imposition of one's rational will. The masters understand the benefits of revelation, but also the pitfalls. One should not confuse poetic or artistic powers, epiphanies, flashes of clarity, etc. with creative omnipotence. Too often discussions on these matters is dichotomized, stripped of its gradations. One introduction to poetry textbook, for instance, downplaying the contribution of drugs and drink to the process of literary creation says something along the lines of "It's a steep, rocky drive up Parnassus, "--which is to say something like "friends don't let friends drink and drive up the gods of poetic inspiration." I think it's more important to make the point that one shouldn't REVISE under the influence of inspiration, drugs, mental breakdown, that sort of thing. But one should certainly follow the urge to write if and when it strikes. Sometimes miraculous acts of art appear at bizarre or inopportune moments. But it's important for new artists to understand that all acts of art which one creates from some seeming extra-rational source is not automatically excellent, and depending on the skills and/or instincts of the creator of the work, is often just inspired bad art. But it's also important for the advocates of fine craftsmanship to acknowledge the experience of ecstatic revelation in the act of creating art for many a fine artist. To deny that spirit of revelation called by various names is to dismiss a force that many artists recognize as being very real, and will likely erode the ethos of whoever propagates such a denial.
Speaking of denial; that is the primary danger of relying solely on the intuitive and inspired utterance in creation and revision. Certainly revision has been known to disrupt the vision; so perhaps the revision has no place in the vision. In which case revision might begin post-inspiration. The creation of art is often a passionate act. Revision should be a more sober one, but need not interfere with the vision, and one can save revising for less-inspired moments.
I mention that quote because I'd like to qualify some things from my last post, but also because I feel that I'm performing a public service by disseminating the quote even more, though I've heard it pop up more and more in recent years.
Thinking of Ezra Pound's pronouncement that "nations will be judged by their anthologies," the crucial matter behind that phrase is the notion that principles of selection and judgment are the sole means by which the accomplishments of the "guardians of art" will be judged.
But the principles of selection for a magazine, even one of the highest caliber, are not the same principles of selection that we should use when selecting works for anthologies, or even for selecting books to publish, based on their literary merits. Magazines play a vital role in showcasing the influential trends in art and other endeavors. There is generally a rather higher level of quality in the quality national literary journals than is acknowledged by the most curmudgeonly among us; but magazines in general, even the quality quarterlies, should not be held to an impossibly exacting standard in their selections of works that they choose to showcase. The literary magazine in the past century has been a vibrant, dynamic battlefield of ideas, experimentation, and tentative judgments. So the best magazines sometimes publish the less-than-excellent work by famous names, when others have a hard time finding their way into print. So what? It's not for the magazines to decide which of these poems should be gathered into anthologies, textbooks, "Best American So-and-So" and so on; this is the duty of our cultural guardians, and this is where the impossibly exacting standards of judgment and selection should come into play.
The problem of the pandemic distribution of really bad anthologies is far more problematic than the fact that winning a Pulitzer guarantees wide publication in magazines. This is apparently a problem of blurred roles. So I won't be so unreasonable as to insist that the creation of bad art is automatically bad for art. I think, however, that most of the time when bad art is held up as being excellent art, such posturing is no help to the state of the arts in any form.
It should be obvious to all literary tastemakers, and common knowledge among anyone who would make literary judgments that one should judge any artist based on the best of that artist's work. There are some literatteurs who are more consistently skilled than others, but there is only one commonality among all artists, even the greatest: all artists have created bad art. Some create nothing but bad art, but to write five truly important poems in 50 years of devoting a lifetime to writing poems is a major accomplishment. With any luck, and with years of application, one might conceivably create a body of work which is largely excellent, but even among the masters we should not confuse greatness or confidence with perfection or infallibility. So hero worship will ultimately disappoint. I admire many poems by James Wright, for instance, and so would call him a great poet. But I won't pretend that all of his poems are great.
It's true that sometimes great art strikes out of seemingly nowhere. But then, we rational humans are quick to take credit for the work of our subconscious mind, which is always doing some of our homework for us. It's true that sometimes the best work seems to write itself, and that the act of creation becomes more an act of surrender than the imposition of one's rational will. The masters understand the benefits of revelation, but also the pitfalls. One should not confuse poetic or artistic powers, epiphanies, flashes of clarity, etc. with creative omnipotence. Too often discussions on these matters is dichotomized, stripped of its gradations. One introduction to poetry textbook, for instance, downplaying the contribution of drugs and drink to the process of literary creation says something along the lines of "It's a steep, rocky drive up Parnassus, "--which is to say something like "friends don't let friends drink and drive up the gods of poetic inspiration." I think it's more important to make the point that one shouldn't REVISE under the influence of inspiration, drugs, mental breakdown, that sort of thing. But one should certainly follow the urge to write if and when it strikes. Sometimes miraculous acts of art appear at bizarre or inopportune moments. But it's important for new artists to understand that all acts of art which one creates from some seeming extra-rational source is not automatically excellent, and depending on the skills and/or instincts of the creator of the work, is often just inspired bad art. But it's also important for the advocates of fine craftsmanship to acknowledge the experience of ecstatic revelation in the act of creating art for many a fine artist. To deny that spirit of revelation called by various names is to dismiss a force that many artists recognize as being very real, and will likely erode the ethos of whoever propagates such a denial.
Speaking of denial; that is the primary danger of relying solely on the intuitive and inspired utterance in creation and revision. Certainly revision has been known to disrupt the vision; so perhaps the revision has no place in the vision. In which case revision might begin post-inspiration. The creation of art is often a passionate act. Revision should be a more sober one, but need not interfere with the vision, and one can save revising for less-inspired moments.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
