Queen of the Universe
All right . . . If I were running things:
Muzak would be banned the world over. I do NOT need to hear "Miss You" by the Rolling Stones redone on the pan flute or whatever the hell this company does to music. It would be a punishable crime to destroy music that way.
Automated phones that stick you in an endless loop instead of live people? Gone!
Oh . . . you know, I could go on all day here.
BUT . . . with some many people saying the current publishing model is bound for the dustbin . . . you have suddenly been made king or queen of the PUBLISHING universe. What are you changing?
And my story is up over at Lurker Monkey's.
Fondly,
Queen of the Universe
32 comments:
If I were king of publishing universe, I'd create a way for writers to find an audience and sell a reasonable number of their books while maintaining more control over their work.
You asked me to wish for anything I could wish for.
Another answer to your questions if the question is viewed in a different way:
I think writers have to analyze why they write.
If you hope to write for a living, then you work through the traditional channels in the traditional ways.
If you write to be read by at least a few others, you have other outlets.
And if you write just for yourself, the rest of it doesn't matter anyway.
Oddly, this aspect of your question is something I was thinking about myself just this morning.
If I were Queen of the Publishing Universe I would banish any writer who doesn't do his or her "homework" when trying to find an agent, therefore jamming up the inbox for those who have.
Joe:
I agree . . . it would be wonderful if every writer who wrote a certain kind of book could find their audience--or have their audience find them.
E
Amy:
Amen to that! Truly!
E
Haha, good one Joe! :)
If I were Queen, I'd make every writer sell 5 short stories and/or novellas before attempting to find an agent and sell a novel.
It's called the "Paying your Dues" program.
I also would remove the stigma of online sales. There's a lot of great readership out there in the electronic universe!
Starbucks:
I don't know about the short story/novella thing . . . it may simply not be someone's form of art.
And I agree with the online mag things, etc. Though I would like to see the bar on quality continually raised. If everyone's online mag was as nice as yours . . . . .
E
If I were Queen of the Universe? First, I would have to make my wife a lesbian because I don't do well without her.
I would make the querying process involve a truth in rejection clause. If you get rejected, they have to tell you what sucked.
No more, "an interesting read but not right for us." They could easily say, "You're an idiot if you think anyone will ever want that story." and we would know not to query that one anymore. just a thought.
I don't want to be Queen of the Universe. Too much pressure and I don't want to be held responsible for everyone else's misery, especially since so much of it is self-inflicted.
I like starbuck's 'paying your dues' method, though I personally suck at short fiction. I'm still trying. I write at least a few shorts a year to resounding rejection and I can tell you the form isn't easy for me. I can't see things in short fiction the way I can in full length. But it doesn't mean I won't keep trying.
And your spider entry at Lurkers was awesome, Erica. I love those prompt contests - it's always amazing to see the directions different writers will go in on the same picture.
I've stopped reading those articles. I like that Nathan Bransford summarizes things nicely for me (yes, for me) once a week.
Oh, did I miss the part where you asked what we'd do as Queen of the Universe? Does it have to be the publishing universe? :P
Hmm... I like the reasons for rejection in query letters. I understand why they don't, but as someone who WANTS to improve, it would be helpful to know what turned them off.
If I was queen of the publishing universe, I'd probably still have a crush on Scarlet Johannson. So there.
And I'd figure out a way to combine the written word with available media technology into a new medium that consumers would go crazy for, and suddenly demand for written stories (noticed I didn't say "books") would skyrocket.
Then I would try to write the best of these things I could. So not much different in that respect.
Allen:
I wonder how many people REALLY want to know though. But I hear you!
E
Merry:
I am guessing I went someplace no one else did. But who knows? I love the prompts too. You should do one next month!
E
Melanie:
Here's what I honestly think about the honesty clause.
If you SUCK, you really don't want to know that (most don't, not deep down). If you have talent, then any answer is subjective based on the editor.
Jon:
Well said!!
E
Stated, henceforth, by the King of Publishing, that all publishing houses shall:
Only publish as many novels as they can effectively support. Ie., if you cannot afford to promote the novel, do not publish the novel. Do not publish novels "just because." Each novel will be treated lovingly and with respect and given enough to find an audience.
Secondly, publishing houses shall cease to evaluate a book's performance on its "opening weekend" and/or six weeks.
Thirdly, publishing houses shall provide financial support for media outlets that review novels and books in general by way of advertising, ie., for books, for bookstores, for author tours, etc.
Fourthly, all of the above-mentioned items shall be applied indiscriminately and enthusiastically to all works created by Mark Terry, irregardless of how you feel about those works and/or Mark Terry. (Because all rules have exceptions, why not me?)
Mark:
I like it. But the last clause, please change to Erica Orloff.
:-)
E
Hmm, I don't know what I'd do per se, but I think one of the things I would experiment with is taking my pseudonym's publishing model on a bigger scale. It could make a living for a whole lot more authors who can't, currently, support themselves with fiction. At least it could support small press and niche authors with small press audiences, whereas now they get paid beans, LOL.
I can't believe I just used "per se." I hate that phrase with a passion. Please mentally erase that.
And HAH! to Mark!
Natasha:
I hear you, per se, ergo . . .
LOL!
E
I would make it so that booksellers can't return unsold books. It would make them more discriminate in what they stock thereby forcing publishers to be more discriminate in what they buy and by default more invested in supporting books they publish.
The drawback is that fewer books would be published traditionally. This would in turn expand the e-market which eventually would be able to grow into something respectable. Once it gets respect it will be an effective gatekeeper for those of us who want to simply pick up a good book to read.
Richmond:
You know . . . that's a pretty bold and compelling argument there. The practicalities, I suppose, is more decimation of indie stores. But stil . . . interesting thought!
E
How could you not like egro. It just rolls off the tongue and sounds high and mighty.
Anyway...As Queen of Publishing I hereby grant all of Mark Terry's clauses. Even the last one, because I think he's made of awesome for making up those clauses.
I would add that "no reply means no" shall be abolished. Anyone who uses it...Off with their head. Same goes for anyone who answers a query letter--yes that one page with up to three paragraphs--after a year.
Editors should be allowed to edit again and not just acquire.
Lastly, chick-lit will no longer be dead. You will no longer have to label your work humorous women's fiction.
Melissa:
LOL! Yes, it would be nice to not have to make up names for the gene that you write.
E
Yes, it would be nice to not have to make up names for the gene that you write.
Lol. I know. It's pointless because everyone knows "humorous women's fiction" is code word for chick-lit. Almost like the genre had to go into a witness protection program just to sell again.
If I were King... publishers and editors and agents would magically just understand the value of writers as creators and would follow us, begging to to publish us and vowing to have editors work with us to bring out the highest form of our creativity.
Or, yanno, just give myself the skill and confidence necessary to write and be published :)
Aw, thanks, Erica. I agree, the bar on quality should be raised. Market driven would be helpful. :)
I know some people would disagree with the short story thing. But I used to feel that way, too (I'm a novelist, not a short story writer, damn it). And yet, when I started to write short stories in earnest I actually learned to write, and pretty quickly too (not that I totally know how to write, but I gained some competence). This after writing FOUR BAD NOVELS--something like 500K words.
Also in my genre, spec fic, most writers must pay their dues with short story sales. It shows with some stellar writing. Ditto literary. I wish it were true across the board.
Good ideas, Richmond!
Brian:
I agree . . . the balance of "power," so to speak . . . it would be nice to have it a little more even at least.
E
Starbucks:
I pubbed a handful of short stories in both literary pubs and feminist small publications. I definitely agree I honed some skills there. I wish the short story genre was more celebrated. In general, there are just a HANDFUL of magazines, for example, printing them at all (Esquire . . . The New Yorker) . . . I wish more mainstream pubs would re-embrace the art form.
E
Post a Comment