Authors Interacting with Readers Online - More Controversial Than I Thought

Okay, before I get into the nitty gritty, I'd like to make a few announcements:

1) My "official" blog tour starts today. If you visit and comment on posts throughout the tour, there's a chance to win a gift certificate. : ) Today's post is over at Romancing Rakes where I'm talking about The Anatomy of a Sex Scene. (There's also a review of the book here.) I'd love it if you guys would stop by and say hi!

2) So, uh, I have a book coming out. SQUEE!!!!!! CRASH INTO YOU drops tomorrow. Though I will refrain from begging--*ahem* for now--I will be your BFF (you know, virtually braid your hair and paint your toenails) if you check out a copy. (Um, for you boys, I'll buy the beer and cue up the big screen for the bowl games.) And really, if nothing else, you can buy a copy just to see if I've followed all that writing advice I'm sharing on here all the time. And then make fun of me when I didn't. ;)

Okay, so onto today's topic...

Authors Interacting With Readers Online - Some Things to Think About

This past week I ran across a thought-provoking post over at Dear Author, Is there room on the internet for authorial interaction? In the post, Jane talks about the role of the author and when it's appropriate for the author to interact with the readers (when it adds value and when it taints things.)

The post itself is enough to get you thinking, but the slew of comments are just as enlightening. I was truly surprised to find out how some readers feel about authorial interaction.

Most agree (and I can see this point) that an author should not be commenting on reviews--mainly because once the author shows up it can make others clam up. Who wants to say something negative once they know the author is there listening?

But I was surprised to see that this even went as far as applying to the author saying thank you for the review. Jane and some other reviewers mentioned that a thank you almost makes them feel uncomfortable, especially in response to a negative review,because it implies that the reviewer has done a "favor" for the author. (I'm assuming this is for reviews you didn't directly set up with the reviewer. If you directly interacted with the blogger--like setting up a blog tour--then a thank you is obviously in order.)

Now, I'm southern. I say thank you for EVERYTHING. It's like a reflex. To think that my thank you may make someone uncomfortable kind of took me aback. When I say thank you, it's simply because I'm appreciative that the person took the time to read my book and to comment on it publicly (which is press--regardless of the content of the review.) Reviews are important. So my instinct would be to thank someone if I saw that they reviewed my book. (Plus I'm a dorky new author and just want to hug everyone who reads my book, lol.)

But perhaps the thank you should be a case by case basis and should be done privately via email instead of posting it on the review and shutting down other comments. 

The other issue that was interesting was how many of the commenters didn't like interacting with authors. They preferred to read and discuss the book without knowing anything about the author. They didn't want to hear the writer's perspective on why they wrote something the way they did.

I can understand this in the forum of a review. You don't want the author "defending" themselves in the comments, but seeing that many are opposed to any interaction is a little surprising and flies in the face of all we're told about connecting with readers online.

Some readers felt very strongly--finding authors "friending" readers on social networking sites as "rude". And another said they had enough drama in their life and didn't want to read about the author's life. Another was unhappy with authors hanging out on "reader" sites. One person said authors should only be known by their work. Also, many assume that if we're online and discussing books that aren't our own, we're just friends with that author and it's not genuine.

This prompted author Courtney Milan to ask in the comments:

How safe is it for authors to participate in discussions of books at all? Do people just assume that authors are friends with the author? Does that chill discussion?

The whole post and discussion was rather enlightening for me, a bit depressing and frankly, isolating. Yes, I absolutely agree that authors should refrain from commenting/defending/attacking in the comments sections of reviews. That's a given.

But now we're not supposed to discuss other books and we're not supposed to go in "reader" groups/areas? Yes, we're writers, but first and foremost we're READERS. Just because I have a book out there doesn't mean I'm not also voracious reader who loves to discuss books with others. Hearing that my presence in a reader group may be construed as something self-serving made me a little sad. Like I can't play on that playground anymore.

And maybe I'm the exception but even before I was a writer, I loved the idea of getting to know the authors behind the books I enjoyed. I liked reading the "why they wrote the book" posts or little explanations and insider information about the story. If I was actually able to discuss/chat about the book with them, well, awesome! So I know that there are other readers out there like me.

And maybe that's why the responses to the post surprised me. And, of course, this is a specific sample and may not represent readers as a whole. Many people commenting on the post were authors and book bloggers. Book bloggers are not your casual readers. They deal with authors daily. So I'm sure if you've dealt with one too many difficult authors, you can become a little more wary and jaded.

But here are my takeaways from the post:

1. Saying thank you publicly for a review may not always be a good thing. Send a note privately if you'd like to thank the reviewer.

2. Commenting on a review in any way can shut down reader discussion.

3. Readers may see you as an intruder with an agenda if you join book discussion groups. (So make sure you don't have an ulterior motive for joining.)

4. You may not be the best person to publicly promo your friends books (and vice versa) because many readers will only see it as helping a friend. This doesn't mean don't do it, but understand that it may hold less weight than independent reviewers so make sure you mix it up when you're promoting your book.

5. Some readers don't want to "connect" with you. It may taint their reading experience. Respect that. So interact, be available, chat, blog but don't go "hunting" readers and injecting yourself into their online lives if you weren't invited.

6. Don't jump into Facebook or Twitter discussions when people are discussing your book unless you're invited or messaged directly.

7. Do everything with genuineness. Don't "friend" people because you want them to buy your book. Friend them because you want to get to know them. (Duh.)

8. If certain issues or questions keep coming up in reviews, don't necessarily address them in the comments. Write a blog post on your own blog answering those questions so that readers who are interested in knowing more can seek it out if they'd like. (Good fodder for FAQ section.)

So what do you think about all this? Were you surprised by any of it? And how do you think these things should be handled? Do you think this represents a large group of readers or is more specific to bloggers who deal with authors daily?

Killing the Mystique: Can You Know Too Much About Your Favorite Authors?

Last night I was reading this fabulous post over at Dear Author on Three Must Haves for Author Websites. The tips were great, but what was even better was reading all the comments from readers on what they liked and hated about author websites.

Interestingly enough, not many commenters mentioned anything about author blogs.  Most were more concerned with having a user friendly site and easily finding book information. It really was all about the books--that was there main focus.

One commenter even said that she doesn't like to have the blog on the first page because she avoids blogs--reading the author's blog ruins the book experience for her. 0.0

Now I don't know if anyone else out there feels that way, but it did get me to thinking--at what point does our open-book online presence affect a person's reading experience? Having our lives and personality so easily accessible does kind of reveal the wizard behind the curtain a bit.

It used to be that we could imagine what we want about our favorite authors, just learning about them from the occasional article or interview. So we could picture that horror writer living in some old, spirit-filled house and typing away his manuscripts in a half-lit attic. We could weave our own image that matched the type of books they wrote.

Now instead we can hear about how that super scary horror writer spent his weekend taking a cake decorating class. It's real, but it does take away some of the mystique. (Kind of like when Ozzy Osbourne got a reality show. Or when Britney Spears actually started talking to the media without her people telling her what to say.)

But beyond that, I think the bigger concern may be that we can, in essence, create a new kind of "author intrusion." I covered traditional author intrusion in your writing here, but what I mean in his case is--you know so much about an author by following them that when you read their books, you *feel* the author's presence there and it pulls you out of the story.

For instance, a romance author tweets "I wish I could eat M&M's off Joe Manganiello's abs." (A valid wish, I might add.) But then you read her book a few months later, and her heroine is eating candy off the hero's stomach. Your mind is automatically going to scream "AUTHOR is here!" and it can yank you out of the story's world. Now, some people may not mind. It might be like a little inside joke--you know something another reader who doesn't "know" the author does. But it can go either way.

I don't think it's something we need to stress out about. But it does make a case for not venturing into TMI territory with your online presence. I definitely don't want to be reading a love scene in a book and thinking that the author is writing an autobiographical scene, lol. That definitely will pull me out of a story. *awkward*

I'm okay with sacrificing the mystique because the result is that you get to know an author and see that they're a real person. But there are also times when I wish I didn't know so much.

This is why when I went to a 30 Seconds to Mars concert and they were signing autographs in the lobby after the show, I didn't want to go meet them. My husband could not understand it. He was like--but you have this ridiculous crush on Jared Leto, don't you want to meet him? And I'm like--no, I don't want to ruin the fantasy image in my head. Of course, hubs then says: "This is because you don't want to truly accept that he's shorter than you, isn't it?"

Word.

But what do you think? Do you like knowing everything about your favorite authors? Have you ever been disappointed when you found out you really didn't "like" the author once you got to "know" them online? Do you sometimes miss the mystique? And have you ever had one of those moments reading a book where you felt the author standing there in the pages?

How Fast Do You Have To Write to Build a Successful Career?

So I've talked before about how I'm a perfectionist. I always have been. I'm the girl who got a grade on my final trigonometry test that would bring down my final average to a B+ instead of an A  and went to my teacher to go problem by problem until we found a place where he took off too many points for a simple mistake. I got my A, kept my perfect 4.0. Yes, I'm that annoying girl.

So when it comes to my writing, this perfection monkey sits solidly on my back squawking and whining as I try to draft my book. It's frustrating and it slows me down. On average it takes me about 6-7 months to write and revise a 90k-100k book. Six months of that is drafting. Six months of drafting.

In previous decades in publishing, expecting an author to write one book a year was pretty standard. And for the most part, it still is if you're writing literary fiction or if you're an already established author. But if you're a new author, the situation is different, especially with the advent of ebooks and self-publishing. Readers are expecting your next work pretty quickly. You don't want them to forget about you (or if you're writing a series, your characters.) You need to stay top of mind.

And if you want to make money, you'll hear it over and over again--backlist is king. To earn a sustainable living as a writer, you need backlist. One book (unless you're part of the Oprah book club or Stephanie Meyer) is not going to set you up for life. One book isn't going to allow you to quit your day job. You want readers to pick up one of your books, love it, and then have a whole slew of other books by you that they can click the "buy" button on.

But the caveat of write, write, write, get a backlist out there is that you also have to make sure you maintain the quality of your work. One horrible book can send your readers running for the hill and for all the other reading choices they have bombarding them from everywhere.

And I know it can be done--writing fast and producing quality books. Maya Banks stated in her Dear Author interview that she writes 8-10 books a year. (!!!) Some of those are novellas but still, my jaw dropped onto my space bar. She also says she usually is done and sends it to her editor when she finishes the first draft.

And I can tell you, I read Maya. Her books are fabulous. She's one of my favorite romance authors. She's also hit the New York Times list and this year, had a book nominated for a RITA (the Oscars of romance writing). So clearly her quality is not suffering. And last year, she said that she made 600k for income. And this year, she's on track to hit 900k. Yes, people, she gave out her numbers. And if you don't read erotic romance, this is not an author many of you have probably even heard of. There is clearly money to be made if you put out quality work in good volume.

Now, I know I will never be able to pen 8-10 books a year. I have a three year old and a husband who would like to see me sometimes. And I'm a new author, so all this getting my name out there and social networking stuff is a time eater. But I KNOW I have got to be able to write more than 1-2 books a year.

So I am going to challenge myself with these next books to write faster and edit less. Here are some of the things I am going to be putting on post-it notes to remind myself courtesy of author Candace Havens, who gives Fast Draft workshops on her online forum.

1. It is okay to write a sh*tty first draft.

I like revising. Why am I so dead set on getting it perfect the first time?

2. I will write a basic synopsis before I start writing.

I'm a pantser so the story will change and I will not outline every point, but to have a general overview will help me. (Plus, I'm going to have to do this if I want to sell on proposal.)

3. I will know the basics about my book before starting--mainly the Goal, Motivation, and Conflict of my main characters.

4. I will not get hung up for five minutes trying to find the perfect word. I'll change it when I revise.

5. I will refuse to believe in writer's block and will keep writing even if I feel like I'm not sure where I'm going.

And though this doesn't have to do with writing faster, I will also learn to write shorter stuff in addition to my full-length novels. I think the successful author of the future is going to know how to write in varying lengths and is going to utilize multiple avenues to get their work out there (traditional publishers, e-pubs, self-publishing, etc.)

So what kind of writer are you? Are you a fast drafter or a slow and steady one like me? How many books do you think you could legitimately write in a year? What do you think the future of publishing is going to look like?

UPDATE: I did a follow up post in response to the discussion in the comments - The Beauty of Books: Why the Literary vs. Genre Debate Isn't Necessary

Fill-Me-In Friday

Welcome to the new Friday feature--Fill-Me-In Friday where I share some of the best links I've come across during the week.


On the web...

 

Sherrilyn Kenyon's keynote speech from RWA - Totally made me cry when I heard it in person. If you ever want to get whiny about writing, go read this and kick your own ass.

*not actual cover, check out others here*

A Social Media Marketing Success Story via Anne R. Allen and the post she's talking about: An Unfinished Book Hits Number One

Things Learned at RWA 11 via Dear Author - I linked to it on Wednesday, but if you didn't check it out, go now. :)

Romances Don't Have Enough Condoms and Have Too Much Fantasy - Smart Bitches, Trashy Books take on the latest study blaming all of life's woes on romance novels. All of the stuff that is blamed on romance novels makes me tired. Really, really tired. (And for the record, I would say 99% of romance novels I read tackle the issue of protection. The only ones who don't are historical novels where birth control methods weren't exactly available.)

Forget Everyone Else by Jessica Faust - On writing the story you want to write.

There's going to be a Q & A with author Maya Banks on Dear Author on Sunday- Everything you were afraid to ask about publishing. Maya is both e-pubbed and traditionally pubbed and is now venturing into self-pubbing. You can go submit questions still and she said not to hold back! :)

Kristen Lamb is giving her intitial thoughts on Google+ and is generously going to test it out for those of us who are wary of entering yet another social media zone.

What Separates Man From Penmonkey by Chuck Wendig - Warning: If you haven't read Chuck before, his posts are hilarious and insightful, but rated R. There, you've been warned. :) Now go read it.

What You Missed on my Author Blog:

Boyfriend of the Week: Jensen Ackles

Weather P0rn - Where Would You Move If You Could?

And if you missed Monday's post, I'm still looking for people willing to host me for a spot on my blog tour for CRASH INTO YOU. If you're interested, please sign up here.

And last bit of personal pimping--I've been interviewed for the Writer's Knowledge Base newsletter. Check it out here! And if you haven't already, subscribe to this super helpful free newsletter. Lots of good info each month.

Hope everyone has a great weekend! What was your favorite link of the week? Have you read any of the ones above yet?

Tweet

  All content copyright of the author. Please ask permission before re-printing or re-posting. Fair use quotations and links do no require prior consent of the author. ©Roni Loren 2009-2011 |Copyright Statement|

Death by Critique - 6 Tips on How To Avoid It

Recently I talked about the risk of overediting your manuscript. In other words, making it SO technically perfect that it was about as lively as boiled broccoli. Some of you agreed with me; others argued that you can always make a manuscript "more perfect", that you should never stop trying to make it better.

As a perfectionist myself, I understand where those people are coming from. In all aspects of life, I feel like I can always do better, that I should never stop trying to improve. And improvement IS good. We can't get complacent. We should always be learning. BUT, I do believe that with a manuscript it's a bit of a bell curve when it comes to editing it.

You start with your funky rough draft. You rework, rewrite, polish. You work with your crit partners. The dot on the graph moves up--you're making it better! But I do believe you hit a point, a peak, where you've gotten it as good as it's going to be (before a professional editor takes a look at it.) If you keep pushing it after that point, you're reworking it so hard that you are draining the fire and magic from the words. You're taking out what makes that book special and different from other books (and oftentimes inserting your critique partner's vision of your manuscript instead of your own). You're murdering the vision your muse had in the first place. And the story is going to be pasteurized by the time it hits an agent's or editor's desk.

Don't believe me? Dear Author had a post this week talking about what she learned from this year's RWA from talking to editors. One of the points on her list spoke to this issue:

Editors think that authors self censor too much (and that critique partners may be doing more harm than good). I heard more than one editor say that the manuscripts that they like best are ones where they can see the raw voice of the author. Many times, submissions come in that are polished so much that they are too smooth to be interesting. Write with raw passion, authors. This is an industry built on emotion and the manuscripts have to show this.

Re-read that statement again. Editors are looking for the raw talent in your voice, in the way you tell a story--not if you had one too many adverbs on the page.

Now that's not to say you shouldn't study craft and grammar and use things correctly, but that isn't what you should be obsessing about. Polish your manuscript but you don't have to follow EVERY RULE ever created for writers. And your critique partners are there to help you, but what they say IS NOT LAW. Even if they are a more established author than you are. This is YOUR BOOK.

Six Tips to Help Watch Out for Death by Critique

But first, a disclaimer...

If this is your first book, get good critique partners and listen with open ears to everything they say (even if you don't incorporate it all) and read books on craft. On your first go around, many times more experienced crit partners are going to have advice you really need to hear. This goes back to my rule: Don't query that first book until you've had someone not related to you or sleeping with you to critique it.

If this is not your first rodeo...

1. Write your rough draft without input from others.

Stephen King said in On Writing--write the first draft with the door shut. Then after you're done, open the doors and windows and let others in. I have found this to be true for me. If I get feedback while I'm drafting, it freezes me up and confuses my muse. Critique and creativity do not make good bed partners for me. Now, I know some will disagree with this and prefer to have chapter by chapter input as they are writing. If that works for you, that's fine. (Julie Cross sends chapters to her editor as she writes and that works great for her.) But make sure it's really working for you. Have you finished a manuscript yet? Or are you just constantly re-working as you go because you're getting outside input?

2. Get critiqued on big picture.

Line edits (super detailed edits) are notorious for sucking out voice. Your word choice, the style of your sentences, structure of your prose is YOUR voice and your style. This is why finding the right editor for this is so important once you're publishing. You have to find someone who "gets" your voice and style. When others who don't get it (or those who are focused on following every rule) start tinkering with it, it muddles that at best, murders it at worse. So ask you crit partners for feedback on the big stuff: plot holes, flow, logic, characterization, emotional arc, plot arc, etc. Those are the things that are hard to see in your own work because you're so close to it. And save the line edits for a pro who gets you. My publisher has "style sheets" made for each author so that editors know what our style quirks are. Mine says things like: sometimes uses short incomplete sentences. That's part of my style, and though it's grammatically incorrect, it's kept.

3. Check your gut.

This is your story and these are your characters. You know them better than anyone. So if your crit partner gives you a suggestion, step back and make sure it resonates with you. I don't care if they are a NYT Bestselling author--if the change doesn't feel right in your gut, don't do it! That goes for when you have an editor, too. You don't have to make every change if you don't feel good about it. Have the confidence to know that you can tell the difference between advice that makes your book better and advice that doesn't. This confidence only comes with time, unfortunately. However, if more than one person bring up an issue, it may be something to look hard at even if your gut is fighting you.

4. Re-evaluate your critique partnerships regularly.

Crit partners are wonderful. I don't think I would've gotten to this point if I hadn't joined my first crit group. I learned so much. But that doesn't mean that group or that person is going to be right for you forever and ever, amen. We outgrow each other. We go in different directions. Or maybe THEY'VE become too close to your writing as well and now can't see the things they need to see to help you. If you feel like you're getting crits back and the advice is no longer helping you or it's draining your voice (even though the advice is good-intentioned), then stop wasting their time and yours. Doesn't mean you have to stop being friends, but maybe you don't need to be beta readers for each other anymore.

5. Know enough about craft and grammar so that you don't distract from your story.

Yes, I'm advocating not shooting for perfection and for playing with style. BUT you also need to have a good handle on craft and grammar. If your handle on the rules and conventions is so low as to pull the reader out of the story, you're not going to get anywhere no matter how good your story may be. You need to know the rules in order to make deliberate style choices if and when you decide to break some of those rules.

6. Edit until you love the story, not until it's perfect.

Outside of crit partner relationships, edit your story until you can read through it and love it. Don't edit it until you can't find ANYTHING to change or fix because there will always be something you can find to fix. And that's when you start cutting too deep. It's like people who want a little plastic surgery. They just want to fix that bump in their nose. But then they get that done and realize--ooh, now that makes my chin look too big. So they fix that. Then their cheek bones don't look angular enough. And so it goes until they don't resemble the person they used to be.

Don't do this to your manuscript. The things we love the most often have imperfections--and sometimes that's the very reason we love them. Make sure your manuscript is the one that the editor can feel the raw passion bleeding from. Do that, and you're golden.

So what do you think? Does this idea send you into a perfectionist panic? Does it give you a sigh of relief? Have you ever sensed your manuscript was getting more and more anemic as you edited it? Have you ever had to leave a crit partner relationship because it just wasn't working or helping anymore?