The Sandwich Generation

When I wrote the first post for this blog, I said I would deal with issues of communication and how it impacts us.

For the last few posts, I looked at changes in the publishing industry that created levels of discrimination within the writing world. Today, I return to my central theme – communication – and what all this says about who we are as writers and as people.

This is a hypothesis for sociologists to explore but I suggest that the flood of DIY and subsidy published books is a demonstration of our need to tell our stories. Sure, some people publish with the idea of becoming rich and famous, but many others just want to share their human experience. They think writing a book will get people to listen to them.

Long ago we shared our lives around the campfire, passing our wisdom and feelings from one generation to the next. That evolved into cave painting and then into writing. Letters maintained the link between families and friends and established our history.

We no longer gather around burning logs (or the dinner table) and very few of us use paper and pen to maintain contact with friends and family. If we communicate at all, it is in short, quick bursts of text boiled down to the fewest possible words and letters. DIY publishing and blogging have replaced the campfire.

I advocate all the things that we consider part of good writing: sound premise, good structure, and correct grammar. I also believe that the marketplace will deter or dissuade those writers who produce a product that is not worth buying. Once their story is told, they will not exert the effort to market it or to write another.

Peg Herring, a writer friend of mine, suggested that we are in the “sandwich generation” in more ways than one. Not only are we the caretakers of two generations, we are caught between the old publishing paradigm and the emerging new one.

As I considered her words, it occurred to me that no matter how poorly written a book or blog may be, someone made the effort to write it. Someone took the time to put words into sentences in an attempt to convey a message. When writers discriminate against other writers and try to silence their voices, if we block the road for those coming after us, we put out the campfire.

Communication is so important that the founding fathers of the United States put that freedom first on the list in the Bill of Rights. I hope that my fellow writers do all they can to nurture other writers and teach them how to do it well. It is up to us to keep the campfire burning.

Discrimination - Part Three

There is a Web site, hosted by a genre fiction magazine, where writers can check out publishers, agents and others prior to doing business with them. This informal clearing house warns writers away from fraudulent situations and scams.

I applaud these efforts. Scams and frauds should be exposed.

My concern is that this group paints with a very broad brush. Their home page states the site is for serious writers – with an exclamation point. On another page titled Warnings, they provide rules for spotting scam publishers. Using their rules, all subsidy publishers are scam perpetrators. I don’t think that is accurate or fair. To say all subsidy publishing is a scam is like saying all doctors are quacks.

First, I am very serious about my writing and about my writing business. Second, if I contract with a company for a service and receive that service in full, I have not been cheated.

I hear many grievances about subsidy publishing. Primarily, those doing the complaining did not read the contracts they signed, expected something for nothing and dreamed of fame and wealth without doing any of the hard work necessary to achieve either one. In their effort to attain unrealistic goals, they sometimes get taken. There is an adage that covers this – if it sounds too good to be true, it is.

For my first three books, I used a subsidy publisher. I decided on this company by reading the contract, comparing their services to competitors’ options, and interviewing other writers who had also used this and other subsidy publishers. I even checked the Web site referred to in the opening paragraph. I got exactly what I expected and what I paid for. That is not a scam.

I have no doubt that the original intent of this site was to protect writers. Now their reasoning seems more self-serving. By convincing writers that publication by any company other than those on an “approved” list is a scam, they preserve the status quo. By discriminating, they hope to stave off change just a bit longer.

I suggest writing organizations go back to providing real service to their members and all writers. Instead of denouncing alternative publication methods, help writers understand the changing business. And expose the real scam artists – there are plenty of them out there.

Think I’m the only one addressing these issues? Please visit http://pmibooks.com/blog1/.
These eloquent essays are well worth your time.

Discrimination - Part Two

When Greased Wheels debuted in 2002, the local mystery writing community welcomed me. I was considered an odd duck for using a subsidy publisher but there were other writers in the area who self-published and whose work was respected. My publishing choice was a matter of some interest and I spoke on convention panels about it.

By the time Horse Power was published in 2006, things had changed substantially. My writing improved; my standing among my fellow mystery writers did not. Even though I moderated panels at two of the largest conferences in the world, conference organizers congratulated themselves on preventing my participation in the future. Professional writing organizations to which I belonged blocked my participation in certain events.

Instead of judging me based on the quality of my work or the success of my business, they proclaimed that I am not a legitimate writer because I did not receive an advance, I did not have a print run of at least 1,000 books, and my books are not returnable.

I was once told that I didn’t need to earn as much as a man because I would never have to support myself. I was assaulted in an elevator by an officer of the company that employed me. I am a woman. I have experienced discrimination repeatedly.

The discrimination currently promoted and practiced by the established writing community is particularly unfortunate because it comes from people who claim to be open-minded and progressive. By closing ranks and blocking my participation in traditional marketing venues, they hope to maintain the status quo.

I have one word to say to these groups – HarperCollins.

HarperCollins is a large New York-based, “traditional” publisher. It publishes some of the big names including Sidney Poitier, Mario Batali and Faye Kellerman. If I was published by HarperCollins, I would be “legitimate” in the eyes of these groups. I would have received an advance against royalties, had a press run of over 1,000 books and my books would be returnable.

However, on April 4, 2008, HarperCollins made a startling announcement. It is embracing a modern business model. For its new imprint (division), it will not pay advances against royalties and it will use print-on-demand technology – books printed to order. No more large print runs. And the final slap at tradition – these books will not be returnable.

The HarperCollins announcement did not receive much attention because it came at the same time Amazon was making waves. It is, however, solid proof that change is flowing into the publishing business like water through a broken levy and nothing the old guard does will stop it.

Part Three coming soon.

Discrimination - Part One

Discrimination is an integral part of our lives. To be labeled discriminating when selecting a car or a coat is a good thing.

There is, however, a dark side to the act of discrimination. We go there when we make choices or decisions that have nothing whatever to do with individual merit. We go there when we are afraid.

At a mystery conference a few years ago, I listened to a best-selling thriller writer deliver the opening speech. In it, she bemoaned the loss of readers in general and then condemned independent and subsidy-published writers for flooding the market with books that readers chose over hers.

Several rebuttals come to mind immediately.

First, librarians tell me that reading is up. It is the manner of reading that is changing. People are reading with their ears rather than with their eyes. Audio books, in all formats, are flying off the shelves, so to speak.

Second, books are expensive and they take up a lot of space. I stopped buying books some time ago. I patronize my library. Now, with the focus on environmental responsibility, libraries make even more sense. This writer should be careful not to confuse readers with buyers. Sales may be down but her readership may be up.

Finally, that thriller writer may have declining sales because readers no longer want to read what she writes. People’s tastes change. She should examine her product and decide if it needs to be altered or replaced with a new one. She would not be the first writer to do that. We all love Spenser but we like Jesse Stone, too.

Writing is a craft; publishing is a business and that business is rapidly morphing into something entirely different. If this thriller writer owns an iPod, she is part of the change that happened in the music business. Similar changes can be seen in book publishing. She probably feels the revolution in the music business was good. She benefits from it. Obviously she, and others like her, feel those same changes in the publishing industry are not good. They are afraid.

In their fear, they lash out. They announce that the writers who have embraced the change are lower class and unworthy. They close doors to marketing opportunities. They prevent us from participating in conferences and professional organizations.

In other words, they discriminate.