Author Site

This is a question more than an actual post.

I've been thinking lately about what would be necessary in an author site. In part, this is because I am designing one for my sister-in-law, whose non-fiction book on wedding etiquette comes out in February. (Just in time for those planning summer weddings.) Why is it so much easier to concentrate on other people's work than your own?

But still, even though non-fiction sites are very different from fiction ones, putting hers together has me thinking about my own. What's necessary in an author site? A couple of things she and I discussed (and this assumes it's your first book; if you have more books, you'll want the front page to reflect that):

About the book:
- media and reviews
- a buy it now link
- excerpts (should these be in the media section?)

About the author:
- bio
- contact information
- schedule/appearances

Blog, if you have one. (And it's easy enough to put a link to a group blog, if that's what you participate in. And if you only want your blog link to go to *your* posts, that's fairly easy, too.)

How about you guys? What do you think a site should have or should not have?

Footsteps We Follow

Terrie wrote a wonderful post about our upcoming mystery anthology. She even included a generous mention of me while I was out of contact with the world. Thanks, Terrie!

I also want to heartily thank Laura, Leah, Clare2e, Helen, Dawn, Crabby McSlacker, Travis, Alex and Lois for their cheers of approval.

Come celebrate with us if you can! Our launch party is being held on November 1st at the Partners & Crime book store in Greenwich Village (NYC). We'd sure like to meet you! And bring friends! Nibbles and beverages will be provided freely - along with our free autographs in your new MURDER NEW YORK STYLE books! Nothing smells as rich as a brand new book hot off the presses!

On the personal side, the launch will be full of exceptional meaning for me. My mom wrote children's stories all her life. Her time ran out before her stories made it into print. I know how much this launch would have meant to her. I followed in her footsteps, but I had an an asset she never imagined possible.

My mom died before the Internet Age was born. She missed getting connected to a wide range of remarkable writers like Terrie and the other gals in this blog, groups like the supportive Sisters In Crime, and all you phenomenal pen pals who share our masochistic passion for writing. How lucky I am to have you! How much I have to celebrate!

Thanks to you all for being part of our internet party! Hope you can join us in a real life celebration soon!

Write On!
Nan

Write Free! Write Blind!

Last weekend I attended a party for a dear friend’s eightieth birthday. It was hardly a surprise that the subject of writing came up.

First, my eighty-year old friend (Cristopher Dell) is both a published writer himself and the son of Floyd Dell…novelist, playwright, poet, and one time lover of Edna St. Vincent Millay. (Note that it is Floyd’s wife B whom I recall fondly, not Millay!)

Second, some of us read toasts that we’d prepared for Cris. Among such brainy folk, we reached for erudition.

Our lovely but devilish hostess had carefully arranged place cards, seating ten or twelve of us on a long bench behind two tables where – since we couldn’t escape – we engaged with unlikely neighbors. I found myself next to one of the birthday boy’s sons-in-law, a cinematographer of some renown, who had heard rumors I was writing a novel. “Just a mystery,” said I, modestly. “But I’m writing mysteries too,” said he. “I’m on my fourth!”

Enchanted to have discovered a passion in common, we compared sub-genres, word-length, agents, and writing challenges. His stories have a more international flavor than mine. They’re longer. (Pissing contest…a first for me!) He’s found an agent, while I’ve merely sent out tentative feelers. We both, however, write blind. That is, he sits at his laptop with a piece of blank paper covering the screen. And I – an accurate touch typist – sometimes sit at my own with closed eyes.

In essence it’s free-writing we’re doing, although both of us sustain the technique for longer stretches than do most free-writers (who actually set a time limit). He finds that he’s less inhibited when he drafts scenes this way, and only removes the taped paper for revising and editing. I use it when drafting new scenes myself, but the technique also comes in handy for revising a scene I find dead on the page. Or I'll do it to channel a character...to position myself behind her eyes instead of my own.

Another goal, I suppose, is right-brain fluency. It amounts to following one’s pen across the page in order to circumvent the censor. To prevent words from blocking expression of under-the-surface ideas. To layer ideas, as in brainstorming, without the critic’s nay-saying interference.

Typing super fast works too, but it’s dangerous for anyone whose typing skills leave something to be desired. I found myself barreling through the novel’s climax throughout my latest round of revisions, approaching warp speed at the keyboard. In similar vein my sister, who used to paint, has picked up her brush again recently, practicing a technique called "point zero" painting. She says this method doesn't focus on the product “but on the process of continually surrendering the mind to a more child-like state to allow intuition to be heard.” How cool is that!

I had a few additional things in common with my cinematographer friend from the party. We’re both MWA members. We find mystery writers sterling folks. We both envy Bouchercon 2007 attendees who even now are wending their way to Anchorage for tomorrow’s conference. (I hear next year’s is in Baltimore. For two mystery fledglings – both DC natives – an east coast venue seems less daunting.)

So what techniques do you recommend for keeping the critic at bay and unleashing the wild writer inside?

- Lois

Abusage

I'd been saving this article on Conveying Emphasis by John McWhorter from the NY Sun. In it, he examines whether quotation marks (found in news articles, I call them scare quotes) are the new boldface. He also discusses how written language adapts and resists verbal usage: Even standard English is used less formally today than it was back in the old days, but there are still limits. Notice how many people say That's a whole nother issue , and how we rarely if ever encounter "whole nother" in print, except if a person is quoted.

At the risk of seeming like a Hidebound McGrumperson, there's a pile of awkward vernacular I hate reading even in dialogue. For me, the casual spoken form of the verb 'to have' when used in the conditional form generates one of the most personally offensive constructions.

Clean and Correct, like a freshly-laundered pillowcase:

I wish I could have pulled the trigger myself.

With careful characterization, I can hear this spoken in my head as a mumble-mouth would, even without the typographical training wheels.

Obnoxious version 1 (best of the worst):

I wish I coulda pulled the trigger myself.

This is my favorite for use in dialogue or first-person POV if the writer's concerned that readers simply won't otherwise understand the quality of expression of a given character. I guess the woulda, coulda, shouldas of sporting disappointments over the years have eroded some of my resistance to it.

Obnoxious version 2 (wha?):

I wish I could 'a (also as could'a) pulled the trigger myself.

This one treats 'could have' like a contraction that's dropped the rest of the word 'have'. It's a fairly logical construction, but looks pretty clumsy since rarely used. If you've read a lot of dialect where 'in' is spelled i', you know how fatiguing this non-standard decrypting can become. Mashing the words together in a real contraction 'could'a' probably woulda been a better idea long ago, but now we've got the other three non-apostrophic messes fairly widely established, let's use them and save the visual strain. Besides, everyone knows the ink for apostrophes is made from the eyes of baby harp seals. Lucky for me, the ink for hyphens and parentheses is made from the celebrity of talentless and arrogant youths. Compound more words, ya'll, and maybe they'll go away.

Obnoxious version 3, and to me the most heinous:

I wish I could of pulled the trigger myself.

I believe I read this formulation in a book by one of the authors I admire most, a writer who is both a tremendous craftsman and MWA Grand Master. I may be misremembering, I got so woozy, but I've seen it. Oh yes, I've seen it. This nasty concoction merely incorrectly transcribes the phonemes coming out of an uneducated person's mouth. To employ three more famously abused homonyms, it doesn't matter to me whether a speaking character would be able to choose the word 'there' or 'their' or 'they're' correctly on the SAT, but a book's creator ought to be able to comprehend the difference. To purposely pick the wrong one in dialogue so as to confuse or irritate readers is inexplicable obscurantism. I expect the writer to communicate accurately what is intended by each character, whether or not Joey the Nostril would be able to scribble it correctly himself.

Similarly, in my personal worst version above, all traces of the verb 'to have' and its meaning are subtracted from the would/could/should equation, and substituted instead is a wholly different and, in this context, senseless word that happens to sound the same. Regular people do this constantly with phrases they've absorbed without the etymology. Thus we see 'towing' not 'toeing the line' and frequently hear things like 'hard roads' not 'hard rows' to hoe. If people who don't claim to be lovers of or merchants in language don't get the distinctions, okay. But for those who claim to be writing professionals, it's just malpractice to pervert clarity of meaning for idiotic gobbledygook out of some misbegotten desire for authenticity.

If you have created characters who speak in slang, way-out jargon, or unusual dialects, this is fair warning that I, as a reader, consider that to be properly your challenge, not mine. A writer can and should work hard enough on the dialogue and description that the character as well as the point gets across, because I'm not willing to suffer the confusing rants of an illiterate idiot. I have my own first drafts to get through, thanks.

Any personal peeves of your own?

P.S. If another of our recent hot topics fanned your flames, there's more heated discussion of Cayenne with Leah at The Goat's Lunch Pail today.

Wired For Sales

Please forgive me in advance for any incomprehensible gibberish--I returned from Italy mere hours ago. I should be catching up on "real" things, but instead I've been trying to catch up on all the Internet chatter from while I've been gone. Among the pages I read was this post by Nathan Bransford. Although Bransford makes a good point, what actually interested me was the last paragraph...and my reaction to it.

Bransford mentions his client's new book and my immediate reaction was to click the link and read about the book. It's not the kind of thing I usually buy, at least not in hardcover (though I am a political junky of sorts), so it wouldn't show up on my Amazon recommendations. And unless it made some kind of big splash, it might have passed under my radar entirely. But chances are that it will end up wrapped into a present for one of the other poltiical junkies in my family at Christmas.

This is something I hadn't considered in my own agent search. Sure, I read a lot of agent blogs. And I submitted to people who I got a sense of from their posts. But I never considered that my choice of agent might make a difference to my actual sales. And maybe it wouldn't. Maybe the copy of The Almanac of Political Corruption I buy as a holiday present will be the only one sold on the basis of that post. But if whoever I give it to reads it and recommends it, Bransford's post could have further-reaching effects.

Something to think about.

Murder New York Style

Nan and I would like to announce that we each have a short story in the upcoming anthology Murder New York Style, which will be released by LL Dreamspell on November 1, 2007.

We are both very grateful to the New York Tri-State chapter of Sisters in Crime. The chapter board and the anthology committee spent several years on this project, gathering and screening stories, making tough decisions and then finding a publisher.

I'll be sharing a lot of the excitement with all of you since this is my first published piece and I am a bit awed to be in the company of the twenty talented, professional and award winning writers whose stories fill the pages along with my beloved "Strike Zone."

The first mega-excitement is the book cover which, if I managed to insert it correctly, should appear to the right.

What do you think, so far?

Terrie

These things happen -

See postscript for loose image relevance. This gentleman and his harvest also reminded me of an apt Chinese proverb: That the birds of worry fly about your head you cannot help. That they make nests in your hair, this you can prevent.

- and I'm better at digesting them than I used to be. When my first MS title was appropriated by someone else under less-than-sunlit circumstances, I fumed. I well understand that titles aren't protected, but after finding a snappy word that captured the essence of my story, checking various places online to make sure it hadn't been used (recently), it was disheartening to be back to nothing on the title page before 'by'. And the interloper was a debut author whose agent coincidentally ( I must assume) had my MS which she'd requested in its entirety and had been sitting on without communicating yay-or-nay nor even responding to my few courteous follow-ups for over 6 months. Black Hole of Calcutta meet Salt in the Wound.

Of course, even once you've found a monikker you love, your agent or editor might despise it. Coincidences of awful duplicate timing do occur, but- demmit!- that's not the point, because I'm talking about the special self-pity of feeling ripped off by people who don't know I'm alive!

And it's happened again. Two days ago, a close (and brave) pal sent me an e-mail with a link to a new, bona fide entertainment entity using the same name as my latest, almost-done project. Sure, if I'd had already had my work sold and circulating, no one would've had the opportunity to use MY TITLE for their current project, and that's my fault. My artist-partner and I are tantalizingly close to having a portfolio package to share in the next month or two, but that's not even also-ran status really. As it turns out, the latest copycat is another SF/F concept, like what I'm developing. It's a different-enough premise, but it's already a fully-fledged interactive online animated series which has posted 23 of 130 splashy episodes to-come. It's no puny, stale graphic novel, oh no. Apparently today, that fixed-frame jive is the province of only osteoporotic Luddites like me. But truthfully, I'd already been concerned after noticing that fantasy juggernaut Neil Gaiman has an emerging film project from his previous book that's got a close name, too. Anyway, I was happy around a year ago when I found the name basically wide-open for use. Having failed to capitalize on it, those syllables are off to dance with better prospects who have cooler duds and their own cars.

Practically, my losses include the use of a related domain that I reserved, but thankfully, hadn't built yet. The online placeholder was cheap, but I'm grateful for more than just that. The premise is still good. The characters and storylines are still good. The artwork's still good. All the fundamentals are there, and this creative gig is about execution as well as luck. But only one of those aspects do I control. So, unlike the lousy rock bands who spend their hazy hours arguing over names and T-shirt logos rather than practicing, I just have to keep producing, let the ideas start percolating again and see what new identity pops up.

Also, due to our casual discussion here of daily word quotas in WOM's comments, I have made a personal pledge and have been faithfully tallying. Therefore, I'm 3000-ish words along in a new story draft for this now-anonymous concept, much further than if I hadn't been inspired and encouraged by you, my pace being a Graham Greene-y saunter without the high quality, of course. So, what I most appreciate in this situation is that I have much more to offer a publisher than just a title. I've only really lost one word. I'm a writer. I ought to have surplus.

P.S. However sanguine I thought I was feeling, to my surprise, subterranean angst burbles. The evidence came during my therapeutic pie-baking as I failed to dust the apple slices with nutmeg and used red pepper instead.

Tolerance For Uncertainty: Should Chickens Write Novels?

Finishing that third draft, which amounted to a major structural revamp that required a lot of rewriting, was a huge achievement considering the degree of my anxiety about it. I’m pleased with myself, indeed I am. But the book’s in the hands of my writing group now, and I’m well-aware I’ll be facing another round of revisions, albeit less dramatic ones. And once I’m well and truly finished I’ll have to face the blurbs and queries and synopses and rejections…round after round of them. And they say the wise thing to do is to start that next novel while the carousel turns….

Frankly, I’m re-examining my ‘need’ to write fiction. In the pre-novel days – when I limited my literary efforts to the occasional personal essay or poem – the rewards weren’t as great. The heights were less lofty. But did I know what I was missing? Not a chance. What’s more, in those days, I didn’t walk around with an advanced case of the heebie-jeebies.

I’m well and truly hooked, however. No way I can quit. So what does that make me…a masochist?

The book that helped sustain me through the wrap-up is Art & Fear: Observations On The Perils (and Rewards) of Artmaking, by David Bayles and Ted Orland. It’s not a self-help book. It’s an exploration of “the nature of the difficulties that stop so many who start.”

Some excerpts:

“To make art is to sing with the human voice. To do this you must first learn that the only voice you need is the voice you already have. Art work is ordinary work, but it takes courage to embrace that work, and wisdom to mediate the interplay of art and fear.”

“What veteran artists share in common is that they have learned how to get on with their work.”

“In the end it all comes down to this: you have a choice (or more accurately a rolling tangle of choices) between giving your work your best shot and risking that it will not make you happy, or not giving it your best shot—and thereby guaranteeing that it will not make you happy. It becomes a choice between certainty and uncertainty. And curiously, uncertainty is the comforting choice.”

So, hey. I’m no masochist. Just playing the odds.

- Lois

In Reference to Murder

Our new friend, BV Lawson, has amassed a large and detailed link library over at the In Reference to Murder Blog. click here.

Need to look up some legalese? Click on BV’s law link, to open a long list covering everything from "before the needles," a site that looks at the history of executions in American before lethal injection, to the Federal Courts Law Review.

Want to know what’s available on Podcast? Click on her media link for a terrific pod list and lots of sites about radio, tv, screenwriting and more.

Need a respite from trying to find the perfect break point for chapter 15? Mosey onto BV’s game link. I spent way to much time there today, which prompted me to write this blog post. (I warn you now, stay away from GODOKU.)

So, thanks, BV Lawson, for all the effort you put into pulling together an excellent research site for all mystery lovers, both the readers and the writers among us. And an extra thanks for including Women of Mystery in your blog links.

Terrie

Sold!

In July, I wrote an item about completing a short story and sending it off -- with all the attendant angst, soul-searching, paranoia, and just plain fear.

It occurs to me that writers go through phases with a project very much like what Elisabeth Kubler-Ross described people going through at the approach of death.

Here are the stages of manuscript completion

1. Denial -- It can't be true. I'm not a writer. I can't finish it. Ever.

2. Anger -- Dammit, it's impossible to write under these circumstances. This is so unfair!

3. Bargaining -- I'd give my left boob to just finish this paragraph, let alone the whole chapter.

4. Depression -- Why bother? No one's ever going to read it anyway. What's the point?

5. Acceptance -- Fine. I'll just send it out this way. I've got nothing left. I'll call it quits.

Today, Ellery Queen Mystery Magazine bought the story, "Murder on the Main Line" and I couldn't be happier.

The phrase "a new lease on life" comes to mind.

Now, if I can just get through the same five stages and finish my novel...

Excuse Me While I Howl at the Moon

I learned a new word.

Ingress. n. Also ingression: A going in or entering. Right or permission to enter. A means or place of entering.

It captures the essence of my latest passage as a writer. Only I haven't figured out how to use it in a sentence.

I'm certain I heard the wings of some celestial creature beating. I know time stopped briefly. I'm still dizzy. It nearly killed me. But I'm finished with my marathon revision of the final third of the novel. I've got a not-too-shabby honest-to-goddess manuscript. I've finally won ingression into the ranks of my blog sisters. (How's that for a stab at it!)

So was the total-immersion, two-and-a-half week sprint worth it? my husband wanted to know. He'd suffered my wild mood swings from the sidelines. Even contributed a pint of Haagen-Dazs when the going got roughest. He's hoping I'll pace myself more evenly next time around. But I have to admit, I'm pretty sure the story benefited from my hurtling dash.

Because I got into the zone on this one. Found my fingers typing solutions to plot problems I'd despaired of for more than two years. Sublime, inevitable, solutions. I kept saying, 'Now why didn't I think of that!' Weird.

The thrill lasted twenty-four hours. Shouldn't have gone back to peek at the middle chapters, because when I did, the glow faded. Clearly, I've got a couple more passes to do. But I think not the massive structural rewrites I faced during drafts two and three. So I'm gonna hand it off, finally, to a couple of folks in my writing group. A whole book that doesn't wobble too much.

I've written a book. It may have warts (and far too many instances of he shrugged) but I'VE WRITTEN A BOOK.

-Lois

Black Swans and Rats: Mystery's Future is Now

No, it's not Nessie, but a creature once likewise thought to be imaginary. Image via Angie Outlaw.

Today is a solemn anniversary, the anniversary of a previously unimaginable event that, itself, has been therefore labeled a black swan. But I can't compete or even know what to express, so, having had my moments of hard-swallowing silence, I'd like to highlight another anniversary of sorts, not 6 years ago, but 20.

I think most of us might agree that Big-Imprint genre publishing is broken, or at least bent. Aside from worrying for our own careers, fledgling though they may be, we see authors we love to buy and read getting dropped by publishers while the most craptastic shinola is pimped like it's the next Sherlock. For myself, I believe this has created not only dire circumstances, but more importantly, opportunities for those editorially consistent and selective small presses who are pleased to make money on steadily performing midlist titles rather than always hunting the elusive blockbuster.

[Additional Background if you like: Regarding one-in-a-million blockbusters, those hard-to-predict occurrences of high impact also philosophically named black swans, I've enjoyed reading a free online book titled On the Survival of Rats in the Slush Pile. Author Michael Allen, who's also known as the Grumpy Old Bookman, has written a monograph of sorts to explain why conglomerate publishing has proven so hapless at manufacturing (or even recognizing) blockbusters and how their nevertheless unflagging obsession has hurt them.]

It was with those thoughts simmering that I read Jim Huang's recent post on the state of mystery publishing, written after his 20 years in the mystery bookselling business. I know some other, bigger blogs have batted this one around, but we haven't yet here, and I think it deserves the attention and consideration, especially from writers like us just now trying to plant our flags in this shifting soil. The essay brings up a few, immediate questions for me, and I'd love to know how your answers tally with Jim's findings and my own opinions (in italics).

1) Are series worth loving what you seek as a reader?
Often, but not exclusively. I do always seek out authors I've previously enjoyed.

2) Would you cultivate loyalty to an imprint and/or store that was conspicuously dedicated to meeting that need?
I have local booksellers I do trust for recommendations, though I'll miss Bonnie and Joe- sniff. I'd also love to be able to trust a publisher's name on the spine enough to feel good about experimenting with their new authors. I think Hard Case Crime and Soho Crime exemplify the kind of tight focus on certain flavors of books that allow readers to take those kinds of chances with confidence. I want to know when I do love a new series that I won't get dumped or delayed after a single book, and I want better marketing clarity in explaining the type of experience I'm buying, so I can competently choose what suits my mood. I think all that is as great for new talent as it is for readers.

3) Do you think the perpetuation of the bread-and-butter midlist and the "hit factories" are essential opposition?
Yep, even moreso as some of the big houses' specialized sub-imprints with tighter aesthetics got dismantled and reabsorbed into the motherships.

What's your vote and your prognosis?

What Book Are You?

I like to spend time visiting Leah, a writer in Alberta, Canada, who hangs out at The Goat's Lunch Pail. Click here

This Sunday, Leah linked to the Blue Pyramid Book Quiz. Click here

Leah turned out to be To Kill A Mockingbird (Who knew? Crabby? Dawn? Anyone?) and posted the book cover and the blurb describing her "Mockingbird" personality on Goat's Lunch Pail. Click here

I love these little Internet questionnaires and there's always a bit of truth in the answers! So I ran right over and took the test. I'm not talented enough to show you the book cover picture, but I cut and pasted the verbiage.


"You're Catch-22! by Joseph Heller"

"Incredibly witty and funny, you have a taste for irony in all that you see. It seems that life has put you in perpetually untenable situations, and your sense of humor is all that gets you through them. These experiences have also made you an ardent pacifist, though you present your message with tongue sewn into cheek. You could coin a phrase that replaces the word "paradox" for millions of people."


I'd stick around and amuse you with more of my wit and ironic humor, but I have to go coin a phrase . . .


Terrie

Sick Of It!!

Today I was in Borders (thinking about buying Borders stock? Read Paul Riddell's thoughts on the subject first) and I looked over the table of new mass market paperbacks. And shuddered.

Now, I understand trends as well as the next person. And I know that sometimes, as our own Nan Higginson reminded us last month, coincidences do happen and people come out with very similar books at the same time. But when does a publisher or agent put her foot down and say "I'm sick of this"? I think there were four (maybe five) thrillers on that table. A couple of historical romances and new releases in cozy series. And everything else--no joke, everything--was paranormal romantic suspense. Not psychics, either. Nothing so tame as that. No, every book "starred" a werewolf or a vampire, if not both.

A couple of years ago, it was all chick lit all the time. But since the majority of that was published in trade paperback, it never made the table at the entrance to my local Borders, so I never really noticed it except to read about its rise and to notice the growing number of shelves at the beginning of the romance section devoted to trade paperbacks.

This trend, however, disturbs me on any number of levels. First, there are a number of authors who didn't start out in the genre. I hope they have switched out of a true desire to and not because of pressure from publishers, but it doesn't seem too likely.

Second, I actually like to read Romantic Suspense. (Shocking, I know, but there it is.) And I like my protagonists to be of the same species. I mean, before I got married one of my dating criteria was that the guy not have a hairy back. I certainly don't want to read about women sleeping with werewolves! For that matter, I don't care for mysteries where cats talk or dogs solve crimes, either. My suspension of disbelief goes so far and no farther. (I don't mind a little psychic stuff, for example, as long as the whole plot doesn't hinge on a character's abilities.)

Third, and this may be my most serious objection, the "new release" table is often what attracts new readers. Bored browsers waiting for friends can look over that table without having to commit to a genre. That's where they get a sense of what's available to them. That much uniformity--especially so narrowly focused--is apt to turn people off, rather than on.

So yes, I think it's great to have a couple of paranormals on that table. And a couple of chick lit books. And some mysteries with cats. And some mysteries without. You see where I am going with this, don't you? I could be wrong, but I believe publishers pay for placement on those tables. Is the predominance of werewolf fiction dictated by the fact that publishers worry their wolves will get lost among, if you'll excuse the expression, the pack? Wouldn't it make more sense to figure that people who like that kind of book will search it out since it's so popular right now, and to spend the promotional dollars on a book that will really stand out on a table full of fangs and fur?

OK, I'll stop ranting now. And go back to counting my hives.

Branding Without the Branding Iron

Last week, my mentor offered a free miniworkshop on personal branding. I wrote back, asking if that meant a tattoo. Another one of my buddies wanted to know where the tattoo would be located.

Turns out, there is no need to bare your arms - or other body parts. No piercings necessary, either. She just wants us to come up with some way to make ourselves memorable to our target audience. She said it's like creating an elevator pitch that sticks beyond the life of one book.

Mark Twain instantly came to mind. He went all out and created a persona: shaggy eyebrows, white suit, white mustache and all. Samuel Clemens disappeared and the ironic humorist became a welcome house guest whenever his new book was published.

I'm waiting to hear if I got that part right - that Mark Twain was Sam C's personal branding personna. I think that's pretty close, if it isn't a dead ringer here.

Back to the personal branding requisites. There are four factors in this official version of a personal brand: personality, appearance, competencies, and differentiation. My personality's pretty okay, my appearance is less than stellar - without makeup I tend to scare little children (which can be an advantage at times). Competencies? Hmmm. And I assume "differentiation" has to do with what makes me different from, say, the Wicked Witch of the North?

I'm thinking we're supposed to come up with something that makes us worth remembering. The goal is to present ourselves to the public as someone memorable enough to show up on a mental Google whenever readers think of mystery writers.

Or maybe not. Stay tuned.

Meanwhile, it's worth brainstorming about - both privately and with your closest allies in this preparation stage, prior to marketing any more of our wares. You’re invited to take a few minutes and jot down details of your personality, appearance, competencies and differentiations. Next week I'll post my ruminations and review any comments you leave for me to ponder.

Thanks for helping me with my homework! I’ve reviewed the assignment with you. Think I know what I’m supposed to do. And I guess I’d best get it done while it still makes sense.

Meanwhile,
Write On!
Nan

If the Road is All...I'm About to Get Off

Ever hear best-selling authors talk about how they put in twelve hour days - day in and day out - on their novels? On panels at meetings and conferences, I've heard a number make the claim . Janet Evanovitch. Lisa Scottoline. Wendy Corsi Staub. Harlan Coben.

I'm convinced they're hoping to discourage us minions from the writing life. In despair at the poky pace with which I'd progressed through my third-draft revisions this summer, I decided to give the butt-glued-to-chair-heads-down approach a whirl. Announced to my clients I'd be unavailable for two weeks straight. Took the phone off the hook. Told my adult kids and my friends I was AWOL. While I didn't go so far as to shut off my internet connection, I imposed stern limits on email, and stopped reading my forum digests.

By day five my mood registered desperate. By day seven I'd hit a wall, unequivocally paralyzed. My writing group friends lent immediate support. Proffered words of encouragement and propped me upright. At day ten, I can truthfully say that I'm moving through Act III at quite a clip. But at this point I bear an uncanny resemblance to "Mad-Eye" Moody.

If twelve-hour days foreverrrrr, honey are really what it takes, you can count me out. Besides, I need a new frig. Maybe it's time I stopped complaining about the day job.

RABID

Nan’s recent post on the requirements for writing Christian romance reminded me how intriguing it is to learn about cultures, religions, careers, geographies, anything unfamiliar. Although I do read and enjoy non-fiction, I tend to read pre-Civil War American history, so, of necessity, my avenue to the unfamiliar runs through fiction. I love to follow the story and learn along the way.

Our Sister in Crime, T K Kenyon, has written a fascinating novel that teaches a little about science, a little about religion and a lot about the shortcomings of human nature.

Within the first few pages, Conroy Sloan’s wife, Bev, is crushed by her discovery of his infidelity. When she goes to her parish priest for guidance and consolation, she is shattered to find that he has been removed for alleged sexual improprieties. In desperation, she turns to the temporary priest for counseling. In that moment the plot is set. Father Dante will meet Conroy and a dance of distrust will begin,

Publishers Weekly describes RABID as an “impressive medical thriller.” That it is, but it is so much more. Kenyon brings us into highly complex human relationships. Conroy Sloan, is a scientist and professor. He pretends to pivot to his graduate student/mistress, to his wife and to his wife’s priest, who has both an M.D. and a Ph. D in neurology. Behind that mask, Conroy expects everyone to heel to his ambition.

I wouldn’t normally use the words “passion” and “science” in the same sentence, but RABID reveals an unexpected world of passionate competition for scientific glory. Like the remnants of a five car collision on the highway, we are drawn to and repelled by Conroy Sloan’s inability to care about anyone or anything other than his own burning desire for a Nobel Prize.

If you have a need to be educated and riveted at the same time, give RABID a try. Click here



Terrie

Trafficking in Numbers

Four antihistamines, two steroids, three trips to the emergency room and--still--innumerable hives. But that's not actually what I meant.

It used to be that when authors talked about numbers, they meant the number of books they've sold, or the size of their first print run, or how much their advance was.

But, increasingly, what you'll hear is people talking about "website traffic." The old saw about a little knowledge being a dangerous thing applies very well here. Authors are told they should have web presences. They are told that they should use those presences to connect with readers, for marketing and publicity, etc. And that's all true. A website can be a powerful tool.

All too often, however, people (and this isn't just authors, it's anyone who's new to website management) believe that the number of "hits", the amount of traffic, on their site is important. They go out aggressively searching for people to link back and forth with because that way they can move up in the google rankings. But does that really matter? Not so much, as it turns out.

I have an online store. It's a vital part of my business so I have to check out both 1) how people find me and 2) how long they stay on the site. I do check on whether they buy anything, but it's very rare that people find me through google or links from other sites and buy things. Usually, my buyers are people who have met me at a trade show or know me from the several online forums I post to. That being the case, why do I care about the stats at all? Because they help me get a handle on what people are looking for, what I need to produce more of, what they find interesting. They may not buy anything from me online, but many of them will be my trade show customers down the line. (I don't have a blog or forum on my site because I maintain my community contacts in more general settings.)

I know why the numbers are important for my business. But those reasons just aren't valid for authors. Here are the last 5 ways people found us:
1) Linked from Marijke's latest blog post
2) Google search on "4 mystery addicts"
3) Google image search on "toadstool"
4) Google search on "short short fifties teens"
5) Google search on "rich women 1800s"

Does that help me particularly? Nope. Interesting, curious even, but not particularly helpful. We average 35 visitors a day, so for grins I checked the last 35 entries. In addition to the above 5:
16 "unknowns"--people who didn't follow a link, just came directly to us
Another Google.uk image search on "toadstool"
2 Google searches on Meg Ruley
1 Google search on Stephanie Kip Rostan
1 link from my.yahoo.com
3 links from blogger profiles
1 Google search on "what woman wrote the first mystery story"
1 Google search on "why are women late to dates"
1 link from http://seanachi.wordpress.com/
1 Google search on "descriptive passages on anger"
1 link from an email
1 link from The Cozy Chicks
1 self-referential link (they came to the front page via an older blog post)

Marijke, Sean and the Cozy Chicks all have links to us in their sidebars. But as you can see, the vast majority of our visitors come either out of the blue or from Google searches that don't much relate to our content. If I were using this blog as a tool to try to sell books, I might be worried about those numbers. But I don't post here in the hope that someone will buy my book. After all, I don't have a book to sell.

Writers will often buy a book even if it's not to their taste, just because they want to support the book's author. That's not true of the general public, though, so I wouldn't expect a reader of this blog to run out and buy my book just because I seemed like a good person. In fact, chances are better that I might offend someone, thereby causing them not to buy my book. (I try not to offend people, but it does happen.)

A while back, the Smart Bitches had a discussion of what works and what doesn't for promotion. Some promos were deemed more useful than others--canvas totes and nice pens being more useful than bookmarks--but no matter how useful the item was, it would never actually prompt someone to go out and buy a book they would not otherwise have bought. The same, I think, is true of a website.

Why, then bother having a website at all? I can't speak for everyone, but for myself, I like to connect with people. It's the same thing I enjoyed about working retail, the same thing I still enjoy about trade shows, and part of the reason I became a teacher. I got a lovely email yesterday from a woman who read an article I wrote for Art Jewelry Magazine. She had, as it turns out, not found me through the magazine at all, but through one of the online communities to which I belong, where I'd gone over some of the details that got lost in editorial translation for the original article and answered more complicated questions about the process I'd described. If I'd just had a stable website, my storefront, she might never have found me "approachable" enough to email.

I expect that several of the people in the community of beaders, beadmakers and jewelers to which I contribute will buy A Snake in the Glass when--yes, when, not if--it gets published, but that's not why I "hang out" there. If it were, pretty soon people would figure out what I was up to and I'd be cast out on my keister.

So what does all this rambling on mean for authors trying to figure out what their agents, editors, etc, mean when they say "you need a web presence?" It means "think before you act." Before you go out and put up a website, think about what you want from it and what kind of "internet person" you are. Do you enjoy going online? Are you the type to frequently update your own site? Can you commit to posting in a blog once a week--or more often? Do you want to hear from your readers, or would you rather they looked to your site for information rather than communication? Will you be posting excerpts from your books? Will you have contests?

There are an infinite number of ways in which you can use your web presence. Before you create your new "home", consider why you're moving.