Birthday thanks!

I would like to thank all 159 FB friends (family, friends, FB friends, fellow writers, et al) for sending me birthday wishes. This year I thought it only appropriate to thank each one individually, since they have taken the trouble to type in a greeting etc. So, thank you all!

Footnote: if only a quarter of those well-wishers read one of my books (I know, some have read some!), now that would be a wonderful birthday present – not the royalties, just the fact that the books are being read… [We write to be read, not to become rich…]

At my time of life, the gifts are simple, and appreciated: from my wife Jennifer, a CD of the 1965 TV series The Adventures of Robinson Crusoe starring Robert Hoffman as Crusoe and Fabian Canalos as Friday. Music by Robert Mellin and Gian-Piero Reverberi (We already have the B&W DVD). Plus from my daughter Hannah and 6yr-old grandson Darius, a Ravensburger 3D puzzle of Rome’s Colosseum (which Darius is anxious to assist in constructing!)

Our friends from UK, Margaret and Neil (he’s known me since 1959!) were visiting for three weeks and joined us for an evening at Bella Italia (walking distance from home) and enjoyed authentic Italian cooking. Followed by il conto and chilled limoncello.

Writing – competing in the marketplace

Long gone are the days when authors could simply spend their time writing novels. Yes, maybe some authors with the big publishers (five, six, a number that’s shrinking as I write?) can leave it to the PR machines – Cusslers, Archer, and Child, among a few hundred others. The rest have to fend for themselves and get their books noticed.

Why?

Because there are a lot of books out there, and the number shows no sign of reducing.

In 2013 (latest figures) the US traditional publishers produced just over 300,000 titles. And for independent publishers it’s perhaps three times as many.

Readers have never had it so good – so long as they can tell the wheat from the chaff, of course. Selection by genre can help, but not every book that’s available is necessarily a good book. At least with e-books, and the majority of online offerings, you have the opportunity to read the first chapter or so as a sample so you can get a feel for the story – do you want to read on? The online version of browsing in a bricks-and-mortar bookshop (remember those?)

Not so good news for readers is that market forces seem to be affecting book prices, too. A recent report from the Office of National Statistics says that the price of books rose by 12.8% in the third quarter of 2014, and an average of 7.4% over the whole of that year – the highest rise since their records began about 17 years ago.

Some pundits opine that these figures – which include hardbacks, paperbacks and e-books at online and high street outlets – suggest that book buyers are returning to the printed page in preference to the e-book. Hardbacks are selling well from bookstores, apparently; though I suspect only since they’re heavily discounted from the high cover price. I can’t understand the surprise. Avid book readers probably buy both print and e-book, and maybe have more on their shelves or in their reader than they can hope to read in a lifetime. Certainly, e-books reduce the imperative for yet more book-shelves; my e-reader has at least 180 items (several are book collections) so that’s a big saving on shelf space.

Talking of shelf space, most bookstores have only so much room in their emporiums. New books keep arriving, so the older books have to be shunted to the back store, or returned to the publisher. This fate doesn’t apply to books by best-selling names, of course, because they’re always in demand and create turnover of cash for the shopkeeper. So, should it appear on a shop shelf, your new book may have a short few weeks of glory. At least in the online stores, it’s visible ‘forever’ after an appropriate search.

 
Competing?
 
As hinted above, most book readers have only a finite amount of time to read. Their choice in the marketplace is already too large, and that applies to all genres. So, if authors want to be read, they really need to grasp the nettle and get their book noticed – it has to stand out from the crowd.
 
And that’s the conundrum. How to get your book noticed. [We’re not talking about how to make lots of money from sales. We’re talking about enlisting readers to your cause, your words, so they will come back for more (when you’ve written it, of course)].
 
Giveaways for reviews is a tried and tested method, and it might work. Nobody is forced to provide a review, however, and feedback suggests that giveaways do not generate great volumes of reviews.

Reviews. This is precious feedback from readers, and I'm always grateful for them! Usually, the reviews from friends can be spotted a mile off – ‘I love this book. I can’t wait for the next book from this author.’ There’s nothing wrong with friends reviewing honestly, seriously, of course. If you do get reviews, try to thank the reviewer on social media – they’ve made the effort, after all.

 
Approach local newspapers. Forget the nationals and glossy magazines; they’re already inundated with thousands from the big publishers every week. Perhaps offer a copy of your book as a prize.

Blog and guest blog are two ways to spread the word.

Twitter can be used to plug your book.

FaceBook can be used selectively in appropriate focus groups.

Pinterest might generate interest (no pun intended).

Goodreads – offer the book as a prize or giveaway.

Give talks, at the end of which, plug your book or better still sell a few copies.

Book signings – if it’s a print version – worth a try, but if you’re an ‘unknown’ don’t dream of multiple sales (though some are fortunate enough to shift over a half-dozen copies!) Beforehand, you need to prepare a PR sheet and perhaps bookmarks to hand out.

Wherever you post online, ensure you have quoted the appropriate buying links.

All of the above takes time, dedication and eats into that creative writing time that’s already quite scarce.

Whatever method you employ to find readers, try to make your approach sincere, reasonable and not an ‘in-your-face’ shoutout. If you intend to repeat any of the above, try to vary the text and approach to maintain interest and avoid being categorised as 'spam' which turns people off. You want readers to be drawn to your prose – use that prose to generate that interest in your appeals.

Now, I must get back to writing that sequel…

 

 

Faceless rule-makers

Yesterday’s post about Facebook’s abysmal security algorithm prompts thoughts about the power of faceless rule-makers and how they deploy that power.  Lest we forget, computer applications are designed by humans, who are as prone as the next person to commit errors.

Whether it’s a computer, an in-car system or a game on a tablet, it cannot have been tested in every conceivable scenario. I recall some years back seeing the standard message on computers, along these lines – ‘You have committed an illegal action.’ Which definitely alarmed law-abiding new users, who worried about what they’d done… This is typical of some programmers – too lazy to program and test for all eventualities, they let the conditional options drop through a number of possible messages and then throw in a catch-all – ‘illegal alert!’ – to capture any other unforeseen route a user might go down.

It’s the English language being misused: illegal in my dictionary says it’s something that’s contrary to or for bidden by law. The last time I looked, computer programmers didn’t make law – they make rules. The same goes for android and robots used with regard to tablets and apps. Android is an automaton resembling a human being; robot was invented by Karel Capek in his story ‘R.U.R – Rossum’s Universal Robots’ and derives from the Polish, Ukrainian robota, forced labour, and Russian, robota, work. Early twentieth century definition now accepts that it can be a machine that carries out a variety of tasks automatically or with a minimum of external impulse (such as factory robots); that’s still a big leap from software applications.

Are the individuals who label these applications so devoid of imagination that they must steal an existing term for their jargon? Ask any sci-fi writer and he or she would probably come up with something appropriate. I realise that it’s academic my discussing this, when you consider that for the Windows operating system you have to click on ‘Start’ to log off (which was removed, sensibly, but the clamour from old users has demanded its return, a yearning for the familiar).

I digress. Consider two new ideas being bandied about of late – driverless cars and driverless lorry convoys!

We’re slowly blindly going down that path that was trodden decades before the Terminator movies were thought of, be assured.

If users become dependent on all these applications, then when they go wrong, as they do and will continue to do so, the resultant responses will be anger without management, frustration, and a tendency to rebel – whether as a hacker, a troll or in a more personal manner. It’s the stuff of science fiction. Harlan Ellison’s ‘ “Repent, Harlequin!” said the Ticktockman’ was about nonconformity being a felony, as well as being a moral tale. Sci-fi authors extrapolate current trends to see where it might lead. Jim England’s story ‘The Globe’ (published in Auguries #6, 1987 is about, among other things, litter louts being zapped by a surveillance stun-gun. And the late Bob Jenkins published a short story ‘No Fire Without Smoke’ (published in Adlib, 1985, reprinted Portsmouth Post, 2007) that casts cigarette smokers as public enemies, liable to be incarcerated or even shot…

'The Globe', 1987

 

The point – faceless rule-makers, if allowed, can take us down a road of unintended and even unperceived consequences.

Back to normal tomorrow…

 

FB – Face Bully?

In the scheme of things, it’s no big deal. I can live without Face Book. I mean, there are children being slaughtered throughout the world, notably in Ukraine, Gaza, Iraq and Libya. Why does the world’s media call the latest incarnation of deranged misfits, IS, the Islamic State? Because that’s what they call themselves? They’re not the true face of Islam. They should be labelled for what they are – Insane Scum, Insane Savages or something more truthful.

Still, I digress.

A couple of days ago, I posted an FB message to a friend on his birthday, and also sent an image of tapas – since he has lived in Spain, and would get the virtual party reference.

Tapas - Wikipedia commons

 

I immediately followed up this with another image, this time of glasses of Spanish wine, for his virtual party. (I wasn’t able to include more than one image per message). And to cap it off, I sent an image of some bottles of cava – Spanish equivalent of Champagne at a fraction of the price…

Cava - and glasses of wine - Wikipedia commons

 

And immediately I received a FB message telling me a security check was required to ensure I was who I was. Great, I thought. I only had one of those last week, and answered the question and received a clearance code on my mobile phone, no problem. So, here we go again. I duly read the capture code or whatever they call it – say, KsFgLi – and input this – and immediately I was informed that I’d failed the security check and would be temporarily blocked for 30 days. This means that I can post to my FB timeline, and share other posts on my timeline; I cannot send PMs and I cannot comment on my own posts or anyone else’s anywhere on FB. No court of appeal, no best of three attempts at the code. As far as they’re concerned, I’ve fallen foul of their rules. Yeah, right.

In retrospect, it’s obvious to me that I mis-read the code, which isn’t surprising since often they are quite indecipherable; the point is, I didn’t feel unsure about the code, so I input what I thought I read.

Why am I bothering to write this? I’ll just have to wait out the 30 days, surely. Yes, I suppose I will. I was going to attend some FB friends’ virtual book launches, but that’s not possible now. There were other FB contacts about blogs etc I was involved in, regarding sharing information etc; I’ll find a way round that, eventually.

What bugs me is the Draconian approach to the blockage. FB in bullying mode.

Clearly, the algorithm system is programmed to identify any posts that originate from one source and consecutively aim at another source; the limit is probably three; it may be as little as two but I type fast…! It may be linked to images rather than simple text posts. The automatic response is a security check process. In effect, it’s a robot checking to ensure that I’m not a robot.

 
I take issue with the imposition of the blockage after I failed only once at the security check hurdle. Banks’ ATMs allow at least three attempts at getting the PIN code right.

I take issue with the imposition of 30 days’ blockage. Why 30 days? A nice round number. What does that achieve, exactly? If I had been a spammer, then I’d have learned my lesson after a month, is that it? I’d have thought spammers would have multiple accounts anyway. Does 30 days allow me to go to Specsavers so I can get my eyes tested and then better decipher their awful codes? There’s no reason why it should be 30 days instead of 24 hours; in effect this ‘grounding’ is tantamount to treating users as recalcitrant children.

 
We’ve all been there. Authorities impose constraints or new laws because of the irresponsible or even criminal few so that the majority suffer – whether that’s speed-bumps, traffic calming, the confiscating of nail clippers at airports, or a 30-day temporary blockage on FB. It isn’t rational, but they’re the rules we’ve made. Yeah, right. No, at best, it’s lazy programming, at worst, it’s bullying.

So, dear FB friends, if you don’t see my half-witticism comments on your pages for a while, that’s why. (You may even breathe a sigh of relief!)

Tomorrow, I'll look at some fiction that extrapolates on the 'punishment' meted out to rule-breakers...

[Later (26 August): while temp blocked you usually can't see a comment or like so you can't click on them. However, yesterday, on one post there was a like offered so I clicked on it. A message came up, saying I was blocked as I 'might' have violated the rules... but I could contact via help, which I did, and stated my case succinctly, and today I received a response to the effect that I am now unblocked, back to normal.]

“Why isn’t it selling?”

Today I was telephoned by an acquaintance whose autobiography has been published as an e-book by a small press in UK. She despairs because the book hasn’t sold very well at all, barely getting into two figures.

I sympathised. I pointed out that no matter how well written, sadly, autobiographies by ‘unknowns’ – that is people who are not celebrities – will not sell well unless they’re aggressively marketed. Even then, it will be an uphill struggle; but I've seen it done. A small publisher will have little or no marketing budget. I would advise against paying large sums of money to advertise the book, too. I asked if she used the Internet. Her answer: no, but I have a friend who does…

Whether we authors like it or not, if we want readers, we usually have to get involved in marketing our work. And that means books published by publishers as much as those self-published.

‘If I could I would always work in silence and obscurity, and let my efforts be known by their results.’ – Emily Bronte.

Most authors would prefer simply to create the next book. Now, that’s fine, but if the first one doesn’t get out there, a second one won’t necessarily do any better.

Things haven’t changed all that much, really, since the ‘good old days’.

Mid-list authors, like Jack Higgins who served his apprenticeship on crime and action fiction, were retained and nurtured in the hope of finding an audience that would not only follow them but also in the belief that the author would produce that breakout novel after years of honing his craft (as Higgins did, spectacularly, with The Eagle Has Landed) .

Mid-list authors didn’t sell in large numbers, as a rule, but gained a following as they added to their output. Reviews in the press for mid-list authors were virtually non-existent. Sales, not reviews, determined whether the mid-list author would be retained.

I’m generalising here, and there are always exceptions even to generalisations, but the trend seems to be along these lines.

Nowadays, publishers’ so-called mid-list authors are rarely maintained by the big five, since they’re considered uneconomical. They can’t afford the cost and time to nurture mid-listers.

Actually, mid-listers haven’t gone away, they’re read in the e-book world.  

E-book authors are also published in Print On Demand paperback format, but these are not mass market paperbacks, so they’re always going to be dearer to buy.

Print reviews of mid-list authors in e-book or POD are virtually non-existent.

Now, however, new authors and mid-list authors can market their books via the social media. Now, they can gain reviews online at online bookstores, and in various book blogs and Facebook groups. Indeed, mid-list authors can obtain reviews where before they never could.

You can probably see where this is heading.

‘A boy has to peddle his book.’ – Truman Capote.

Authors need to market online, because that’s where your book will be visible most.

Yes, authors love to have their books on bookshelves in bookstores. But stop to think about it. Unless you’re a big name, who commands considerable shelf-space, you’ll be lucky to see one or two copies of your book there – and they won’t be there long, because every week thousands more books are published, all fighting for that same limited shelf-space; your book’s life on the shop’s shelf is measured in weeks, if not days. Online shelf-space is slightly more egalitarian – new unknowns can rub shoulders with the famous by dint of the category or selection of the online browser.

I’m a writer, not a salesperson! That’s the cry of many authors. Fair comment. But it won’t wash in the floodtide of competition out there. You’ll just be sunk – almost without trace.

Primarily, I believe the majority of writers have to write because they want to be read; payment for honest toil is welcome, of course. But we need to be read – and unless we produce a tome that sells by word of mouth, we’re going to have to market it. No, don’t use the sales pitch of a snake-oil salesman – ‘a wonderful account of…’ Be honest about what your book offers; it won’t be for everyone – so think about the niche market it will appeal to, and try aiming your endeavours there. If you get honest reviews, quote them, because the reviewers have been good enough to read and comment on your work, after all.

‘A book is like a garden carried in the pocket’ – Chinese proverb.  Now, the author has to sow the seeds to see his book grow in popularity and readership.

This doesn’t mean posting a blatant sales pitch every day on Facebook. Besides being irritating to regular browsers, they’ll be deleted from email links without reading. You need to genuinely connect with your online readership. If a subject crops up that relates to your book’s theme or subject, fine, give it a plug, but don’t belabour the point. The most annoying adverts on TV are the ‘shout ads’ that demand you use this, buy that; I’m surprised they’re still around, surely they turn off most viewers?

Bear in mind what Isaac Asimov once said: ‘Writing is the most wonderful and satisfying task in the world, but it does have one or two significant flaws. Among those flaws is the fact that a writer can almost never make a living at it.’ You might, if you grasp the marketing nettle. If you don’t, then you probably won’t.