Don't expect only compliments

I have the reputation of being a nice guy, at least according to some people. I also have the reputation of being a quiet guy. For me, the two often go hand in hand because I tend to live by the rule "if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all."

This is probably still good advice for the most part, but honestly I'm finding myself more bored by it than anything else. To only compliment other writers doesn't make for very lively interactions, and, sadly, I often treat book reviews I see by other writers as meaningless.

So, I've changed my stance.

I'm being more open with my opinions about other writers and agents and editors. And I have a greater respect for my peers who act the same way. There are definitely some honest reviewers out there, and I hope they know that I appreciate them.

Last week, Man Booker Judge Carmen Callil retired from the judging panel after the prize was given to writer Philip Roth. Beyond my own opinions of whether or not I think Roth is deserving of the prize, I appreciated the story being made public because 1. I'm tired of everyone always playing nice-nice, and 2. it made me think about my own opinions of what makes good or bad writing.

We shouldn't be afraid of bad reviews. When I look at book reviews, which I tend to do more often now, I find that both good and bad reviews can get me interested in a book. With bad reviews, I often want to buy a book because I'm pretty sure I'll disagree with the reviewer. Showing me a bad review written by a bad reviewer is probably the best way to get me to read a book!

And I'm pretty sure a lot of us writers are desperately seeking honest feedback. When I did my Tiger Mother reviews some time ago, I got a lot more people requesting the harsh review over the nice one. And the reviews people gave me for my own passage made me think harder about my writing. They made me a better writer (even if I was calling them names in my head).

Being honest about our opinions also gives us more credibility. I value the words of someone who I think is honest much more than someone who is always nice. I want my own words to have that sort of weight, so I'm going to be honest when I see bad writing, and I hope I'm going to be trusted when I talk about good writing.

I worry a bit about writing this post now, just a few days before I publish my collection The Wild Grass. Will this mean that everyone gives me bad reviews, and will this keep other people from buying my book? After thinking about it, though, I realize that I'm okay with whatever happens. If people are like me, the bad reviews might get them more interested in my work. For my own development, a bad review might make me a better writer.

Should You Protect Your Bubble?

I've been thinking a lot about bubbles, lately. Protective bubbles. I recently read a post about book reviews and whether or not an author should read them once their book is out. This post doesn't have to do with only published authors, however. I want to talk to everyone today about the bubbles you write in. Do you write in a bubble?

Davin and I have talked about how we both need a bubble in which we write. When I'm working on a rough draft, I'm pretty fragile in the emotion department. I don't want to be poked at by people criticizing my work - even if it's work that's already published. Well, especially if it's work that's already published because, you know, I can't really go and change any of that stuff. It's kind of permanently out there. When I put Cinders out there last year I read EVERY SINGLE REVIEW I could get my hands on. It was like this hunger I couldn't quell. I wanted the validation that my work was good enough since I had self-published it and didn't have the validation of a publisher. I've made it clear that when my novel, Monarch, comes out I won't be reading the reviews unless my publisher sends them to me or they are part of my blog tour or from a friend or family member. That might be all of them at first...but, my point is that I learned from from my Cinders experience that once you read a certain amount of reviews, you pretty much know what everyone else is going to say. You start to see a pattern, and there doesn't seem to be much reason to keep reading the reviews if you know the bad ones are going to start nagging on you. Read 50 5-star reviews and 1 1-star review and the only one you'll remember or care about is that 1-star. I'd rather stay away from that, personally.

For those who aren't published yet, maybe it's not reviews that you wish to avoid - but reader feedback on other work you've put out there on your blog, or beta readers giving you advice, or even blog posts you read every day which might make you start doubting your ability. You might read a post about some rule you're breaking, and lo and behold, you can't think about anything else as you write your draft. All of a sudden you are stunted and your creative energy withers. That happens to me all the time.

So what's best? Do you think you need a bubble where you can write your drafts? I know it's good to be aware of what others say out there, and it's wonderful to grow from feedback, but I think there is a time and a place for those things.

Are Reviews an Issue?

Yeah, so I have no brain because today is Thursday. I honestly thought it was Wednesday until my husband came home for lunch and informed of reality. So I really don't have  a post to put up today, but I would like to direct you to my post on Rhemalda Publishing where I DID remember to post! Please go stop by and comment!

I feel so dumb.

Are Reviews Only for Readers?

You Need to Read This Book!

A review and interview with Andrew Blackman about his award-winning novel, On the Holloway Road

I don't do book reviews here often. In fact, I'm not sure I've done any book reviews here. Which is a complete shame because there are so many out there, and I've read a few of them, and I'd like to share those with you. Today, however, we'll focus on one.

"Andrew Blackman's debut novel On the Holloway Road (Legend Press, February 2009) won the Luke Bitmead Writers' Bursary and was shortlisted for the Dundee International Book Prize. It tells the story of two young Londoners who, inspired by Jack Kerouac's Beat classic On the Road, embark on a similar search for meaning and freedom in modern-day Britain."

Soon after I met Andrew Blackman in the blogosphere, I planned to read his novel. It took me well over a year to finally buy it and read it. I'm lame, yeah. But I'm glad I got to it! This book is a gorgeously written, literary narrative that brought tears to my eyes on more than one occasion. Especially the end. At first I thought I would hate one of the main characters, Neil:

Compared to my own sad, shambling existence in the shadows of life, his was a kaleidoscope. I peeped from behind my mother’s curtains at the world outside and wrote about people like Neil. I never believed that he really existed until I met him.

Blackman brought to life a world I've never known: that of two young men, one completely reckless and full of life, the other so stiff you could snap him half, rambling about the English countryside getting into trouble, sleeping with girls, and pretty much breaking any rule they can find. As soon as I thought I'd figured out the novel, thinking it was all about Neil and his crazy existence, Blackman pulled back the fine layers of his story to reveal something much deeper and poignant. All of a sudden his main protagonist, Jack, came to the forefront. Everything about him I could relate to: his feelings of failure, his struggle to feel alive in an increasingly stiffling world, his constant comparing himself to others. This connection I felt to Jack took me back to my high school years, my college years, and then reminded me that I still deal with these feelings now. By the end of the novel Jack helped me view things from a different angle.

Blackman's prose is rich and flawless. His descriptions brought the story to life, each one like a rolling wave, constant and sure. On the Holloway Road combines this lovely prose with strong characters and a gripping plot, creating a novel you shouldn't miss.


INTERVIEW

MDA: First, I'd like to let you know how much I enjoyed your novel, On The Holloway Road. Can you tell us a little bit about the book and when you started writing in general?

Andrew: I'd always wanted to be a writer, but never really believed I could do it. So although I wrote bits and pieces in my spare time, I didn't really take it seriously. Instead I got a 'sensible', well-paid job as a corporate banker, first in London and then New York, and then for three years I worked as a staff reporter for the Wall Street Journal. I was writing and getting paid for it, yes, but I was still being 'sensible' and only taking a half-step towards doing what I wanted. I found myself getting up at 5:30am to write my own stuff before going to work, where I wrote other people's stories.

So in 2006 I moved back to London and for the first time really focused on writing fiction. I found temp jobs at nights and weekends to pay the bills, and during the days I wrote. I finished a novel, sent it off to agents and publishers, and accumulated a large manila folder full of polite but firm rejection letters. I revised it, sent it out, and got more polite but firm letters to add to my manila folder. In November 2007, for a break, I entered the National Novel Writing Month challenge to finish a novel in a month. I started on a completely new idea, something about a couple of young guys in London who set out to emulate Jack Kerouac's famous road trip in England, but discover that it's not as easy to be free and spontaneous in 2008 Britain as it was in 1950s America.

The result was On the Holloway Road. Of course I edited it later, but not very much - the basic manuscript was done in a month, and it was a lot better than the other novel that I'd spent years working on. For the first time I was writing for myself, not an imagined audience, and it worked really well for me. After a few months I entered On the Holloway Road for the 2008 Luke Bitmead Writers Bursary, a prize for unpublished authors. The prize was £2,500 and a publishing contract with Legend Press, and to my amazement I won. The book came out in February 2009 and has done well - it was shortlisted for the Dundee International Book Prize, and picked up a few decent reviews.


MDA: Wow! You've had such great success so far! Can you tell us if you'll be publishing any more books with Legend Press? Do you have an agent?

Andrew: Yes, I do have an agent, James Wills of Watson Little. He has been great in reading the drafts of my next novel and making suggestions for improvements. Right now I'm concentrating on getting it finished, and will let James advise me on the best thing to do next. I've been really happy with Legend Press and how they handled On the Holloway Road. They are not a very big publisher, but managed to get my book stocked in all the main bookshops in the UK, and have arranged lots of events for me to help get the word out. So I'd be happy to work with them on future books, but nothing's fixed right now.


MDA: That's fantastic you have such a great agent and press! I'm truly jealous because I love the idea of going small and still being recognized as you have. Amazon recently reported that ebooks are selling more than paper books. How do you feel about that? I already know you're a fan of the small press, but how do you feel about self-publishing and the ebook rise?

Andrew: To be honest I'm a little old-fashioned - I love paper books, and it's always been my dream to have a house large enough to have a room of my own with bookshelves from floor to ceiling around all four walls (right now they're in big piles all around the flat!). When I had On the Holloway Road published, Legend Press emailed me lots of pdfs to proof during the editing process, but the excitement when I received the first physical copy was completely different. As I held it in my hands, ran my fingers over it, saw my name on the cover and flicked through the pages, I felt for the first time that I had realised my dream. Personally I'd hate for paper books to disappear.

I also worry that the way we read will change, as the nature of electronic media is very different from paper. As more features are added to ebooks, they could become more like the internet - full of links to other books or websites, less linear and more associative. Of course there's a lot to be said for that, but I do like the way that right now you can read a book from beginning to end without distractions, and I worry that even the way we think could change quite radically in a very short time. Perhaps the changes are for the better, but I don't think we've really thought through all the implications.

I'm a lot more positive about self-publishing. To me it's great that so many people can now publish so easily and cheaply - it's very democratic, and is one of the things that technology is so good for. I never considered self-publishing for myself, because I am very bad at marketing and publicity, and have no interest in doing it - I prefer to write. With the traditional publishing model, the publisher takes a large percentage of the profits, but the advantage is that they get your book into the shops, they promote it, they use their media contacts to get reviews and profile articles published, etc. With self-publishing you're entirely on your own and have to do a lot of work to generate every sale. It's not for me, but it works for a lot of people and I think it's a very positive development.


MDA: For our last question I'd like to ask you what the one thing is that you want from being a writer. Is it fame? Sharing your work? Creating something beyond yourself and growing? I could go on and on.

Andrew: I've always been quite a shy person, and I often feel that in conversation I don't express myself very well. When I first discovered writing, back in my childhood, I loved the fact that I could take my time and get it right. There was no need to just blurt out whatever came into my head and then regret it later; I could think about what I really wanted to say and put that down on the page. I think today it's still more or less the same impulse. It's having ideas buzzing around in my head but finding that when I open my mouth they come out all garbled. Writing gives me the space and time to work through those ideas and express them in the clearest possible way.


MDA: It's scary how much I relate to your last answer! Thank you for taking the time for this interview! Where can we get your book, and do you know when your next will be out?

Andrew: No problem, thanks for reading the book and coming up with some good questions! The best way to buy On the Holloway Road if you're outside the UK is to go to the Book Depository, where they now offer free worldwide shipping. Alternatively you could go to Amazon UK, or Amazon US to get the Kindle edition or buy from a 3rd-party seller. The eBook is sold through UK bookshop Waterstones, and finally if you want a signed copy just email me and send me enough to cover the cost of the book and shipping to wherever you are. Or if you're in the UK, you could always go to a real, physical bookshop and pick it up from the shelf!

The next one will probably not be out until next spring or summer at the earliest, and that's assuming that I finish soon and that my agent loves it and says it doesn't need any more rewriting. Both quite optimistic assumptions, but I think writers have to be optimists :-)

Learning The Language of Your Book Reviewers

I've had the luxury of taking several writing classes in the last few years. Mostly, critique sessions within those classes take on a standard structure: Writer hands out the story. Reviewers read it and give comments on what they think is working and what isn't.

But, occasionally, I've found myself in groups that like to mix it up a little. Some alternative critique styles include:

A) Only saying positive things

B) Only asking questions

C) Letting the reading start off another conversation, any type of conversation.

The first two methods probably seem at least sensible, even if they aren't your preferred method. You may think that it isn't helpful to not get direct comments on what isn't working, but I'd argue that sometimes these alternatives let us see our work in a different way. The third method, at first, seemed completely pointless to me. I wrote a story, and the group started talking about Thai food! Then, I stepped back and remembered that the people leading the discussions were writers that had been working for decades. Like, four decades. Maybe they knew something I didn't know.

When we let someone read our work and they give us feedback on it, this isn't a one-way road. Remember that who the person is affects their response as much as your actual writing does. Rather than take a comment at face value--"I didn't like your protagonist"--figure out why your reviewer didn't like the protagonist. It may because the reader doesn't like anyone who isn't a vegetarian, or anyone who isn't from Jupiter. As objective as a reviewer tries to be, they come to your work with expectations, and you should try to know what those expectations are. Learn the language of your book reviewer.

Getting back to my third example of critique styles, what I realized was that these digressions my teachers allowed to happen were pretty good reflections of what non-writing readers would do after reading a story. Rather than thinking about how it could be better--which also happens, I'm sure--many readers will simply let the piece sink in and affect their thoughts and their moods. That's good to know, and if I didn't want the conversation to stray a certain way, I had to think about what I was putting into the story that triggered those thoughts. To this day, this reviewing style helps me when I write. Almost any review, as cryptic as it may seem at first, has the potential to be helpful.

What's the most mysterious comment you've ever gotten on your writing? What did you do to make sense of it? In the end, was it helpful?

What should you say in a book review?

In our "Just Ask" section, Annie Louden said:

I have been seeing posts recently about not naming the books we're reading, in case we don't like them, because we don't want to upset an author or agent. Here's a link from Janet Reid

http://jetreidliterary.blogspot.com/2009/08/your-invisibility-cloak-isnt-working.html

And here is a wonderful response that I agree with

http://blog.shaundavidhutchinson.com/2009/09/your-book-sux.html

I don't think we should be afraid to have opinions on books. They're just reviews. It's not bashing.

Anyway, I'd be interested in the discussion.

Annie,

Hopefully, others will speak up on this topic as well. As I was thinking about it, two considerations came up. First, ethically, I think writers should feel free to name books and to discuss them as they see fit. The culture of fear we encourage and reinforce among ourselves in the hopes of getting published is, in my opinion, responsible for the monotonous writing we can often encounter in contemporary books and literary magazines. If we are afraid to give our opinions, then no one will hear our opinions, and no one will know what readers and writers are truly feeling about the direction of our art and which writing is truly affecting.

You had mentioned Janet Reid's post on invisibility. I'd bring up that she has another post saying that the discussion of art, whether good or bad, is a great thing. For me, this is a bit hard to accept, but I really do believe that any publicity is good publicity, if you are trying to get a readership. If someone writes a fair critique of your book, meaning they are able to discuss what they liked and what they didn't like, chances are it will help you see your work in a different way, and it will make readers curious about your book. If someone reads a bad review about a work, there is still a chance that he or she will read it. If someone has never heard of your book, there is no chance. If, on the other hand, someone writes an unfair critique of your book, whether it is all good or all bad, chances are, the review will end up revealing more about the reviewer than the original writer.

The second part of this discussion is the business side of things, or rather, the side where we are managing our images in the hopes of staying in everyone's good graces. Sometimes, writing a critical review of a book can offend an agent or an author. In that case, yes, you may end up hurting your chances of collaborating with a couple of people. And, perhaps you are hurting your chances with someone that really means something to you: a favorite writer, or an agent whom you want to represent your work. That's something for you to decide. But, I'll bring up that, though you may offend one person, you may also gain one or more fans who admire your courage, your intellect, and your taste.

What does everyone else think?

For Your Consideration

One of the most beautiful things I have come to expect from my fellow writers is that almost everyone is considerate. When we disagree, for the most part, we are able to discuss our different views in a reasonable way. We know when to let something go and when to agree to disagree.

There's one considerate message, though, that I think we writers spend too much time on, and I'm wondering if we can get some sort of consensus on it once and for all.

Here's an example of what I'm talking about.

Dear writer,

I read your book and I thought your character, Priscilla Persimmon, was just a wee bit too rude.

Please keep in mind that this is just my opinion, and I could be the stupidest person in the world. Also keep in mind that other people could have a different view of things. Oh, and I hope you don't forget that these opinions of mine are only what I'm feeling on this particular day and time, and they might actually possibly change at some point in my life as I learn more about this craft of writing.

Yours ever so humbly,

Davin

Haven't most of us included this sort of disclaimer at the end of our critiques? We want to make sure that the writer we are reviewing doesn't take our word as law. We want to protect our own reputations in case we accidentally say something stupid. I, for one, spend far too much time making this point when I review someone's work.

Part of this has to do with our trust in the writer...or maybe the lack of it. We personally understand that someone's review is just their opinion, but we don't know if another writer knows that our review is just our opinion. When, in fact, they probably do.

So, here are my questions for you on this lovely Monday morning. Do we really need to include that "this is just my opinion" clause in all of our reviews? Can we, as a group, accept that as a given? Or, maybe, we can come up with some nice acronym that we put at the end of all our reviews that will always and forever represent the idea that our reviews are nothing more than our personal judgments, something we can just include at the bottom of the page.

Dear writer,

Priscilla P. is rude.

IYFAH,

Davin

Review of Water for Elephants by Sara Gruen

I recently read Sara Gruen's book Water for Elephants, which was a New York Times Bestseller, a Book Sense #1 Pick of the Month, and has ranked consistently high on Amazon, along with selling, I think it was, at least 2 million copies. This novel tells the story of Jacob Jankowski and his adventures on a circus train, where he works as an unofficial veterinarian and falls in love with a glamorous performer named Marlena in this not-so-glamorous and often violent circus world. Interwoven among chapters of high-drama antics are quieter chapters about Jacob as a ninety or a ninety-three-year-old resident in a retirement center in the days before the circus is coming into town. My honest analysis of this book is that I didn't love it. BUT, I should point out that I tend to be a lover of the classics, preferring Anna Karenina to Life of Pi and Light In August to The Kite Runner.

Having said that, I have a lot of praise for the book. Gruen carefully researched her subject matter, and from that was able to depict what I assume is a historically accurate depiction of circus life during the depression. Gruen mastered the language of the times and recounted interesting adventures, several of them based on anecdotes preserved from people in the know. She also created sympathetic characters in the people and the animals along with colorful villains and quirky minor players. All of this adds up to an entertaining read that for many people will be quite the adventurous romp.

I admire Gruen. I have a lot to learn from a writer with such an amazing ability to create a book like this. Style, prose, and emotional complexity aren't everything -- though I personally value them -- and Gruen shows that one can engage readers, millions of readers, by perfecting the more fundamental elements of storytelling: creating sympathetic characters, an interesting setting, and a plot structure that builds to an dramatic and surprising climax.