So Where Does Luck Come Into It?

In the past week I've been on the fringes of two online discussions regarding self-publishing, gaining audiences and rejection. Both are on different venues with different participants. Both dialogues evolved from quite different starting points. Both conversations have a number of similarities.

I thought I'd look at some of the points I've noticed.

There can be a feeling among newer writers that their work is not selected for publication simply because they're unknown. This is common, and I believe it is often due to an inexperienced writer not seeing the problems with their own work. The automatic reaction, and I confess to having passed through this phase myself, is that the editor obviously missed the whole point of the story. This seems to be accompanied by a feeling of  'what's wrong with the story, and I'll change that.'  The writer seems to look for the simple fix. Did I use too many commas? Should I change the character's name? Did I use the wrong font? If the fix was that simple, the editor would have asked for a simple rewrite. No, it's often more complex than that.

At this point the consolation from other writers often kicks in. "I'm sure your writing is fine. It's simply the wrong market." Even though I concede that this can be true, this approach generally annoys me as too much false praise can be harmful. If a story has received several form rejections, then perhaps you need to consider the possibility that the problem is in the writing.

Shortly after gathering a heap of rejections, some writers decide that since editors are all too stupid to see the value in their work, they will self-publish, unleashing their masterpiece on the world. And so Smashwords and Amazon are filled with stories, novellas and novels for bargain prices. As I've pointed out before, I have concerns about publishing work that a number of editors have elected not to publish. Surely there's a message in that. Oh, and please stop pointing out the two or three self-published successes that continue to be the poster-children. They are exceptions, and extremely rare ones at that. However, I realise self-publishing has its place. The best piece of advice I received from my mentor was not to stampede towards publishing your own work or your first collection.

Accompanying this is the current trend to refer to all self-publishing as 'indie publishing.' Sure, I recognise that there is a certain amount of independence in self-publishing, but I feel it detracts from the true independent publishers, the small presses that strive to build reputations, and differentiate themselves from the major houses.

Then there is the spam I receive on these venues from a number of self-published authors promoting their latest work - often three or four times. The argument raised in their defence is that it's hard to break free from the millions of other self-published stories. Yeah? Well spamming me has simply ensured that I will never buy your work. And if your work has been rejected by a number of editors, what makes you think it will stand out anyway?

Then, of course, comes the old argument about how difficult it is to get your work published. How difficult it is to even get your work seen by an editor. How all those other successes were simply lucky. It may surprise some people, but editors want to find good stories, want to publish stories and novels that sell well and win awards. And agents, they want to have authors on their books that will make them money. "JK Rowling was rejected 17 times. All those editors got it wrong. They don't know what they're doing." Actually 17 rejections isn't that many. Many writers have had far more than that. Those editors obviously couldn't see how the book would fit into their imprint. There was no precedent for the success of that tale. The publisher who did pick it up, Bloomsbury, was a minor player, who only did a small print run. They weren't even sure if they were going to take the second book. It was only because Scholastic picked it up for U.S. schools and kids' word of mouth that caused it to go nuts. Yes, editors can get it wrong sometimes, but they're more often right and good work will be picked up eventually.

"Oh, but it's all luck," I hear. So many of those authors made it because they knew someone, or were in the right place at the right time. I actually take offence to that comment. I know that I have minimal experience and successes, but I've had to work hard to achieve those sales. I studied, learned, wrote, rewrote, submitted and resubmitted for all those sales.

Yes, luck can come into the story. But ultimately its about the quality of the work.

Gentle Truth.

I recently read a blogpost in which an author had received a form rejection for a submitted story.

The author then stated that he could see why the story had been rejected - it was because he had opened the piece with dialogue rather than description.

While this may be the case, I believe it is extremely unlikely the story was rejected outright simply for this one particular reason. If that was the only problem with the story, wouldn't he have received either a personal rejection or a rewrite request?

Too many writers won't accept their writing is not perfect. Too much time is spent by writers patting each other on the back and telling each other that simply because a piece was rejected, there's nothing wrong with it. Time and time again I see and hear newer writers stating that "it's only one editor's taste" or "it was the wrong market for that piece." And yes, taste and matching markets do come into it. But once the same story has been kicked back a number of times, surely you have to question it. Yes, I know Robert J. Sawyer had a story kicked back 17 times before it was accepted, and it went on to win an Aurora award. J.K Rowling's first book was rejected a dozen times before it was picked up and became a phenomenon. But these are exceptions - and rare ones at that.

Guess what. Some people can't write. Some people will never improve. Most writers can't see the faults in their own work. Some stories are crap. Some stories need rewriting. And some stories should be permanently trunked.

I'm all for encouraging writers. By all means, keep subbing the piece to different markets. But when it's come back a few times, at least wonder why.

Encouragement needs to be balanced by gentle truth.

Aim For The Stars.

Last week, while down in Rye, I was able to find a couple of Op Shops (or Charity Shops as they are called in the UK) with semi-decent books for sale.  Yes, I picked up a few, but that’s nothing new.  I always do. But as I perused the pictured shelves, I realised just how many books existed by authors I’ve never heard of.

I know of quite a few authors.  I teach English at a College. I have a degree in Literature, and another in English Education. I’ve spent three years working part-time in a bookshop, funding my way through University. I’ve also spent half my life browsing these shops. And yet there are literally thousands of authors with published books that I don’t recognise and that no-one really knows.

Writers like J.K. Rowling and Dan Brown are the exceptions, yet people presume that if your name is on a book, you’ve made money. Very few published authors get to make their entire living by writing novels alone.

I remember one day when I was working in the Uni Bookshop, a customer came in looking for a book on how to write a screenplay. I asked him if he had a great idea that he needed to get down.  He told me he didn’t actually have any idea yet, but surely writing a screenplay would make him very rich and he could quit work.  I told him that perhaps he needed to look into the publishing and film world a little more closely.

I sold him a book anyway.

Looking at some of those names on the bookshelves, I wondered how many of them made a living from their books. I guess at some point they were all thrilled to be published, and, thought they were ‘on the way’.

Did people buy those books?  Were they remaindered within the first six months? As writers we can’t afford to rest on our laurels, seeing your name in print, seeing your writing on a shelf somewhere, even being recognised or commented on by someone.

I guess we need to have a series of goals, each one higher than the previous one, and just keep working towards them. I know what I want. I'll keep shooting off stories to Writers of the Future. And as an old friend of mine once told me, ‘Aim for the stars, even if you only hit the chimney.’