Thoughts on writing

Recently I came across an author's response to an Amazon review and I have to admit to feeling saddened by the exchange. I have removed names as this is not a personal attack, but a general comment about the use or abuse of our language. 

Here is the review: 

"This isn't a bad story but, like so many books, it is spoiled by a poor understanding of the English language. He was sat should be he was sitting, he was stood should be he was standing. Towards the end this seems to have been corrected so why let it spoil the first three quarters?

Also, every time the word 'yet' appears it is preceded by 'in' which makes no sense.

Possessive nouns and pronouns have no apostrophes and the awful word 'gotten' is used.

Hyphens keep popping up for no apparent reason!

If you can ignore the mis-use of the English language, the book is worth a read though a little slow."

And the author's response: 

"Authors these days are told not to use too many words ending with 'ing'. Such grammatical language alters through the years, but this is something which is frowned upon by editors and publishers, and has been for at least the past five years, so it is abided by at all times. I'm also a little worried having read your reviews, that you are mentioning the same things in each of them. 'The author wrote sat and used the word gotten' is written in all of your reviews on Amazon. These words are acceptable in UK English."

Who is told "not to use too many words ending with 'ing'."? If a writer overuses the continuous tense in her verbs, or peppers her work with gerunds, clearly that is poor style. Any tedious form of repetition may spoil prose. But if a writer needs to be told this, perhaps she should spend a few years reading others who do know how to write, before rushing to self-publish her own work while she still lacks a rudimentary understanding of language? 

It is true that the rules of grammar are constantly changing, but do editors and publishers frown upon the overuse of "words ending with 'ing' " any more than any other poor use of language? I don't think so - and what does "it is abided by at all times" even mean? I certainly don't abide by these dubious ideas about what is "acceptable in UK English".

The author is entitled to criticise her reviewer for repeated complaints about constructions like "He was sat" but perhaps this is a case of choosing your battles carefully. 

"He was sat" is incorrect, and in my view is not "acceptable" from someone who claims to be a writer. 

At the risk of being brought to task for repeating myself, I do think that if you want to publish or, in this instance, self-publish, your work, you have a duty to at least try to write well. For a fellow author to employ such clumsy and inaccurate constructions as "he was sat" and "he was stood" is shoddy. But to then defend such prose as "acceptable in UK English" is shocking. Acceptable to whom? Not to me, nor to several irritated reviewers of her book.  

Several very poorly edited books have famously become blockbusters. We can all probably name at least two. So should we blame writers for throwing their work out and hoping for the best? Am I an idiot to devote so much of my life to agonising over my choice of words, and my sentence structures? Does it really matter? Am I just an old-fashioned pedant to care about the quality of my published prose?

What do you think? 

Links to all my books can be found on my website http://leighrussell.co.uk 

Blogging

I wrote somewhere, rather pompously, that if you call yourself a writer you have a duty to at least try to write well. In my books I do my best to express myself clearly in correct English. This takes hard work because, as Robert Louis Stevenson said, 'The difficulty of literature is not to write, but to write what you mean.' 

Many authors, some of them very successful, seem to pay scant attention to the quality of their prose, which I think is a pity. Others, like Ian McEwan or Kazuo Ishiguru, express themselves so lucidly that it is a pleasure to read their books just for the beauty of the language. 

In my own way I'm a bit of a pedant, and quite old-fashioned. For example, I try not to including contractions in my work, although there is no good reason why a writer of commercial crime fiction should avoid them. There may even be an argument in favour of using them, as 'don't' and 'can't' speed up the pace, where 'do not' and 'cannot' maybe slow it down. I suppose decades of teaching teenagers how to write 'properly', in correct, formal English, has left its mark on my writing. 

But writing for a blog is different - especially when it is a post for my own personal blog. Here, I am  free to use excessive punctuation, for example!! (Would I ever use double exclamation marks in a book??? Of course not!!!) What might look inappropriate in a novel to my blinkered eyes, seems perfectly acceptable here. 

Of course blogs are not solely outlets for trivia. Many bloggers analyse, critique and comment on important issues in culture and current affairs. A blog can be whatever the writer chooses to make it, and we are fortunate to live in a period where blogs are so many and so varied.

In his droll and whimsical novel, Tristram Shandy, the eighteenth century writer Laurence Sterne set out to break all the contemporary rules of fiction, in an ingenious parody of the rather self-consciously worthy novels of the time. I think Sterne would have relished the liberty of a blog.

http://leighrussell.co.uk

Authors on Social Media

I just came across an article in Publishers Weekly presenting The Future of Reading: 10 Trends for 2014 and Beyond, published in 2014. Not all the predictions have come true... yet. We are not all wearing 'reading glasses', not reading glasses like those of us with what I like to call 'mature' eyes wear, but glasses that actually do the reading for us. (As with most technology, I may have totally understood that. Perhaps I really do need a device to do my reading for me... )

Among the paragraphs on 'Visual Literature' and 'Data-Driven Narrative', 'Print-on-Demand' and 'Instant Translation' was this: "In the social media era, it’s become commonplace for authors to provide free content on blogs, Pinterest, and Tumblr, and to interact with fans on public forums (Twitter, Facebook, etc.) as a way to establish their distinctive brand personas."

So authors are not only expected to appear at literary festivals for free (cf my last post for my views on this topic) we are also supposed to establish 'a distinctive brand persona', whatever that is. (I have to confess to being out of my depth with all this.) And of course we have to find time to do that other thing... what was it?... oh yes, write books. 

Some authors are better than the rest of us at exploiting the opportunities offered by social media. Many of the very successful self-published authors have a background in PR of some sort. Of course it's a given that they write books other people want to read, but well done to them for having the knowhow to help promote their books. If I had those skills, I'd use them. Who wouldn't? When  it comes to self-promotion most of us are clumsy amateurs. 

So is this 'free content' online really useful to an author? First literary festivals, now blogs and twitter and Facebook and all the other outlets, Pinterest, Instagram, Tumblr... there are so many, most of which I have only vaguely heard of. Should we give up our time 'for free' to interact with fans? 

I have to admit to loving my little forays into social media. Confession time: it's fun to write a blog post where I can go crazy with hyperbole and indulge myself with ridiculously excessive punctuation!!! It's very different to writing books, where I take scrupulous care with my language. Facebook is fun too. I post photos there, something I haven't mastered on my blog. Sometimes it works. Mostly my attempts fail, or the photo is ridiculously large, or refuses to go where I want it. 

But if writers don't enjoy social media, it really doesn't matter.

I'm not suggesting that, as creatives, we need only sit in our ivory towers and write a book for great wealth to pour into our needy coffers meaning we never have to work for a living again. Isn't that how it works? We are the Cinderellas of the world, and the Prince - let's change his name from 'Charming' to 'Success' or 'Fame' - will seek us out and save us from the nightmare of obscurity, a pitiful existence where no one has heard of us. 

What I am saying is that most of us are doomed to - or possibly blessed with - obscurity. It all depends on your attitude. The fairytale teaches us that there is only one prince. There can be only one Cinderella. Losers outnumber winners in that family. The majority of us are destined to play the role of the ugly sisters, names unknown. Yet Cinderella's sisters never had to sweep the floor or do menial work around the house, and they were invited to the royal ball. When you think about it, they had a very comfortable existence. They just had a bad attitude. They thought they were entitled to marry a prince.  

So here's my advice, for what it's worth. Use social media if you want to. It can be fun. You meet all sorts of lovely and interesting people online (and, just between us, it's a great way to procrastinate!) but don't expect it to turn you into a 'distinctive brand persona'. Live in the real world, and manage your expectations accordingly. I don't expect my efforts on social media to bring me fame and fortune. I'm relying on my fairy godmother to do that. 

Authors at Literary Festivals

Forgive me if the following post is controversial or sounds in any way smug, in an "I'm all right so what's all the fuss about" way. But I don't understand the problem with authors being offered peanuts, or in some cases nothing at all, for appearing at literary festivals. If it's such a problem, the solution is perfectly simple. Don't go. No author is forced to attend a literary festival. If the festival is not offering a fee, you are under no obligation to accept. Not many books are sold at festivals, unless you are already a big name already selling millions elsewhere, in which case the number you will sign at the festival is going to be insignificant.

Publishers may be prepared to pay for their authors' travel and accommodation, but this is a financial consideration and will understandably depend on how well the individual author's books are selling. Your publisher will obviously be happy to cover these expenses if the amount is insignificant compared to the revenue they derive from your books. Otherwise, it would be unreasonable to expect them to pay. (I hope my publisher never feels the need to remind me I said that... )

  

To claim that authors depend on income from such appearances is a contradiction in terms. Fortunate enough to earn a living from writing fiction, these days I call myself a 'full-time writer'. Before I could afford to give up my day job, I called myself a teacher who wrote books. If you rely on teaching or public appearances to pay your bills, you are a teacher, or a public speaker, who writes books. You are not a full-time writer. I do appreciate the terrible irony of the situation. When you earn enough from your writing to easily fund trips to festivals yourself, someone else will pay for you to be there. While you are struggling with the finances, you are on your own. 

It seems to me that authors benefit hugely from literary festivals. That is why many writers attend even if they are not participating on panels, or giving interviews. Apart from the opportunity to catch up with fellow authors, network with industry professionals, and meet readers, festivals are interesting and enjoyable. And if you are contributing, not only is it fun, but you have the added bonus of seeing your name in the programme, which is free promotion to a target audience. 

I happen to think literary festivals are an important cultural phenomenon, allowing us to meet our readers face to face, in a world where so much of our life is acted out online. If you don't buy into the ethos of literary festivals, stay at home and spend the time writing. Vote with your feet, and stop bleating. 

http://leighrussell.co.uk

Life as a full-time writer

I suspect there are many aspiring writers who would love to be in my position, earning a living from writing fiction, with a series in development for television, travelling to exotic locations for research... it sounds wonderful. And, to be fair, for the most part it is a fabulous life. I've been very lucky.

Of course being a published author involves a great deal of hard work and can involve staying up far too late writing. I am permanently tired. Eugene Ionesco was absolutely right when he wrote, 'A writer never has a vacation. For a writer, life consists of writing or thinking about writing.' When we took a city break in Barcelona, I dragged my poor husband to three different police stations, in case I ever needed to include one in a book. In fact, since I began writing crime fiction, I haven't travelled anywhere without doing some research along the way. As a writer, you become a kind of gannet, storing away any snippets of information you come across. You never know when they might be useful. Research is one of the reasons I find my career so interesting. Some of my research has given me wonderful experiences, like my recent visit to the Seychelles, some has been quite horrific, but it has all been fascinating. 

So how can there be a downside to all this excitement? Well, here I am again, waiting for my next book to be published. So what's the big deal? you might ask. I've been in this position before, many times. It's just another book, you might think. But it's so much more than that, because once again I'm sticking my head above the parapet, hoping I won't be shot down. 

Whenever a new book comes out, I'm worried about how it will be received. I think every author feels the same. When you are writing a book it belongs to you, and you can do what you like with it. Once it's published, it is no longer the property of the author. It belongs to readers who can say whatever they like about it... and they may not like it. So far I've been lucky. I've had my fair share of positive reviews. But although Journey to Death will be my twelfth published book, it is my very first in a new series for a new publisher. As if that isn't enough to make me nervous, I'm aware that this new series differs from my existing Geraldine Steel and Ian Peterson detective series. 

Unlike Geraldine and Ian, my new protagonist, Lucy Hall, is not a police officer. Another difference is that she is in her early twenties at the start of the series. As happens every time I have a new book, I find myself wondering what on earth I'm doing. While I can't claim to be a 'big name', my books are quite well known in the field of crime fiction. Sometimes I wish I was completely unknown, and could just write for myself without worrying about how my next book would be received. But here I am, and as President Truman liked to say, 'If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.' 

So here goes again. I shall gird my loins, pluck up my courage, and face the world smiling, if not fearless. Wish me luck! And if you're just starting out as a writer, don't stress about your future success. Enjoy your early anonymity as well as the success that may be waiting just around the corner. Whatever happens, you're going to have an exciting experience!

Links to all my books are on http://leighrussell.co.uk 

and here's the link to Journey to Death on Amazon http://www.amazon.co.uk/Journey-Death-Lucy-Hall-Mystery/dp/1503951928/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=

Girl Online

There has been what we might call a little literary scandal over the publication of a new book for teenagers, Girl Online. To many of us - all right, us oldies - it seems fairly missable, dismissed in the Telegraph as a book that "even Winnie the Pooh might regard as a bit twee". But hang on - a young author's fluffy debut novel published by Penguin and reviewed in a national newspaper? 

To preempt any accusation of sour grapes, I should point out that I've had my fair share of media reviews. My latest book was number 1 in The Times crime review last month. So I am not griping about the success of Girl Online out of any sense of personal entitlement, or jealousy. As it happens, I am thrilled by the huge success my own books have enjoyed. I'm certainly not jealous of the public humiliation Zoe Suggs has suffered. 

I'm just slightly bothered about the issues it raises.

Girl Online has attracted attention from the media that many hard working genuine authors can never hope to receive. I use the work 'genuine' advisedly, because of course we all know that Zoe Suggs did not write Girl Online herself. When Penguin decided to put her name on the cover, they also decided not to disclose the fact that the book had been ghost written by a 'real' author. Their duplicity backfired, angering a lot of people. 

What on earth prompted Penguin to behave in such a cavalier and disrespectful fashion towards authors, books and readers? 

The truth is, Penguin probably don't care about the criticism, because Zoe Suggs has 6 million followers on her vlog, where she chats about fashion and girly issues. Enough of these young girls are buying Girl Online for it to be number 1 on the bestseller list on amazon, admittedly only in hardcover. Penguin expect it to be the number 1 bestseller for Christmas, and I daresay it will be. Teenage girls don't care if Zoe Suggs wrote the book or just put her picture on the cover of a book someone else wrote. They are fans, devoted in the way that only teenage girls can be. Penguin know what they are doing, and it's all about sales. They have come a long way from their original raison d'etre in the 1930s, publishing cheap paperbacks to ensure literature would be accessible to everyone, regardless of income. These days they are running a business, struggling to survive in the competitive world of publishing. Regardless of any rights or wrongs, Girl Online is a profitable project.

The cult of celebrity meets the cult of youth. It's a winning formula. It's nothing new. Shakespeare complained in 1601 about unskilled child actors taking work from experienced professionals. For "there is, sir, an eyrie of children, little eyases, that cry out on the top of question and are most tyrannically clapped for ’t. These are now the fashion." Fashion, by definition, is ephemeral. Does anyone today know who those child actors were?

Instead of putting their efforts into promoting a transient fad, for a short term financial gain, Penguin would be better off supporting their many genuinely talented authors. Is Zoe Suggs (who isn't actually Zoe Suggs at all) really the best they can pull out of the bag as their Number 1 book for Christmas? They should be embarrassed. Publishers need to be working hard to introduce readers to talented new authors. If they don't, what is their role other than to make a quick buck?

If publishers simply try to cash in on current fads, they risk hastening their own demise. That is the real issue.

Evening at Waterstones Piccadilly

My name is on the list

Signing one of my books for David Mitchell

With authors Barry Forshaw and Howard Linskey

With my agent Annette Crossland

We all had a fabulous evening - really busy - with plenty of wine and mince pies! Thanks to Waterstones for looking after us so well. 

How to Sell Books

The buzz word for authors these days is 'discoverability.' After all, what is the point of  publishing your book if no one reads it? And how is anyone going to read your book if they don't know about it?
This may be less pressing with ebooks which don't incur all the production and distribution costs of physical books. Whatever form the books take, it must be possible to cut corners for writers on a tight budget, determined to see their work published. But publishing any book still costs money, time and effort. Someone has to do the work, and put in the hours.
Whatever their expenses, self-published authors don't want to be exploited. Yet a shocking 98% of self-published authors fail to even cover their costs. It seems that making money out of aspiring authors is a mega-industry these days. Someone is making money, and it's certainly not the authors.
Regardless of whether they are traditionally published or self-published, all authors want readers, whether because they provide them with an income, or for personal satisfaction. In order to survive, books ('products') need readers ('customers'). In this respect publishing is the same as any other business. Publisher and author enter into a symbiotic relationship. Successful books benefit everyone involved in their production: agent, publisher, production team, technical team, editor, proof readers, sales team, distributor, publicists, translators, bookseller, reader... it's a long list, right down to the modest author who kick starts the whole process.
What can authors do to find readers? That is the big question. Whether we like it or not, the stereotype of the author as remote and isolated in an ivory tower is largely defunct. Most authors nowadays accept that speaking at literary festivals and signing in Bookshops is part of the job.
But the best marketing comes from readers. Word of mouth is the most powerful marketing tool, and it's one that is impossible to control, except by writing books that readers want to read and recommend to their friends.
So the author's job is still to write the best book they can. Some things never change.

The Death of the Novel?

First as reader, now as author, all my life I have  have been permanently engrossed in at least one book.  Like many people, fiction is, paradoxically, my 'reality'.
One of the appeals of fiction is that it offers us an escape from life where the pace of change seems to be speeding up all the time. Most events are consigned to the relative oblivion of history after a year, or a month, sometimes even less. As HW said, "a week is a long time in politics."
But sometimes it can be instructive to take a longer view, so let me take you back in time to 1666, the year of the Great Fire of London. One of the most remarkable records of that event comes from an eye witness account by Samuel Pepys, whose diary has survived. This is not a novel. Not only is Pepys telling us about real events, but he couldn't have been writing a novel in 1666 as the form did not yet exist. It would not emerge for nearly another century.
The first novel in English was published in the mid 1700s. It took the form of a series of letters, as writers had not yet envisaged the concept of the prose narrator as a character in its own right, or even as a disembodied omniscient authorial voice. The letters were a clever device, taking the reader inside the thoughts and feelings of different characters. This allowed for intimate first person narratives, from different view points. It was entirely new, or 'novel'.
Today we retain the name, but the form itself is no longer ground breaking, or even 'novel'.
There has been a lot of discussion recently, some of it on this blog, about dwindling book sales, and 'discoverability' for authors, and how they can attract more readers. But perhaps the real problem lies, not with the proliferation of authors, or the failing quality of writing, or that people are no longer reading, but with the form itself.
Has the novel had its day? And would that matter?
We can access stories from other sources - films, television, games, the media - but these are not the same as novels which go into more depth. Through the medium of stories, the best novels offer us insights into contemporary life and morals, and hence ourselves. Think of any great novel - Of Mice and Men, To Kill a Mockingbird, Moby Dick, Dickens, Hardy - not only were they instrumental in changing opinions at the time, but they provided a record of society and how people were thinking at the time they were written.
Which brings us back to Samuel Pepys, whose diaries tell us about his daily life in the 1600s - no different to a modern blog. Perhaps we have come full circle, and the reason new novelists are struggling to break into the market is that the novel form has outlived its popularity.

Postscript
No sooner had I finished writing this post than I came across an article about "embracing the artistic potential of social media". Really? Here it is:

"David Mitchell To Put Next Work On Twitter
"Cloud Atlas author David Mitchell is to publish his next work on Twitter. The British writer has penned a short story, titled The Right Sort, in 140-character instalments. It will be serialised in clusters of about 20 tweets at a time over the next seven days. In total there will be 280 Tweets.
But while embracing the artistic potential of social media, Mitchell himself is not a tweeter and had to open a Twitter account for the project."

The end of the novel as we know it? Sigh. Sometimes I would prefer not to be tuned into the current zeitgeist, but then that is the job of an author.
Or is it?

Authors vs Publishers

These days publishers seem to be attracting a lot of adverse criticism. This could be due to growing numbers of self-published authors expressing their disappointment with traditional publishing houses who have rejected their work. But this week even the Society of Authors have thrown their august weight behind the attack. "Traditional Publishing Is 'No Longer Fair Or Sustainable', Says Society Of Authors."

I have the utmost respect for the Society of Authors who have offered me invaluable support on more than one occasion. When I was an agentless author, the Society acted promptly and expertly to protect the interests of a vulnerable member. For that I will always remain in their debt. But it does strike me as more than coincidence that they should throw their weight behind the anti-publishers lobby after they began accepting self-published authors as members. Fair enough, they want to support the views of self-published authors, but isn't this a little one-sided? 

So I'd like to set the record straight, if I may, by putting the case for the much-criticised publisher. 

Not only am I (apparently) in the top 10% or so of authors because I earn a very decent living from writing fiction, but I am - oh heresy! - very happy indeed with my publisher. Yes, I could gripe about a long list of things he doesn't do. I have been known to dash off the occasional stroppy email to him. But we resolve our occasional differences because producing a book is a team effort, where we work together to our mutual benefit. Yes, I'm making a handsome income from my writing, but I work hard to earn my living. And yes, my publisher is also making a lot of money from my books. 

You might think that because I write the books, I alone should benefit from the proceeds. But writing is all I do. The list of what my publisher does do for me is huge, as is the list of what he pays for. He provides me with: a topnotch editor, proof readers, an efficient production manager whose serenity under pressure is second to none, a production team, jacket designer, sales team, publicist, distributor, ISBN numbers, ebooks everywhere around the world. He sells the rights and has my books translated into French, German, Italian, Turkish, published with Harper Collins in the US, published in audio, large print... 

Do I need to go on, when the point is surely made? If I were to deal with all those areas myself it would be a full-time job for about six people, each with various areas of expertise. And some of what my publisher does, like the sales of foreign rights, I don't believe I could even begin to tackle for myself. 

So yes, you could say my publisher makes money out of 'my' books, and in a way you would be right. But that is a gross misrepresentation of what really happens. Because I only write the books; my publisher does everything else. And, let's face it, writing the books is the fun part!

Who really has the best of the deal? 

The Decline in Authors' Income

This week we read that the average income for authors has declined. A typical author now earns around £11,000, not a living wage. At different times blame for authors' declining remuneration has been thrown at the reading public, television, teachers, the end of the net book agreement, Waterstones undermining independent bookshops, amazon ousting physical bookstores, charity shops - but perhaps the problem now lies not with readers but with writers themselves. 

The number of readers may be fairly steady (in our obsession with writers has anyone researched this?) What is clear is that the number of writers has grown hugely. These days it seems that everyone wants to be published - traditionally published, self-published, hybrid, any which way published. Agents are inundated with manuscripts flooding in from hordes of talented hopefuls. Creative writing courses are proliferating. 

There must be a limit to the number of authors the reading public can support, and perhaps we have reached it.

Then there is the vexed question of quality. Of course not every traditionally published book is any good, and there are many brilliant writers who self-publish because they are unable to find a publishing house prepared to invest in them. Some self-published writers are very successful. I have no problem with them per se. But the traditional model did impose a strict limit on the number of books it was feasible to publish each year. With self publication, there is no restraint. Anyone can upload a manuscript and be a 'published author'. If enough people are 'published', the title becomes meaningless. 

Most of us are able to speak. We don't all believe we should therefore be recognised as orators. In the same way, literacy doesn't automatically guarantee the ability to write a book. A vast number of people have confided to me their ambition to become authors. They are just waiting to think of an idea so they can write their book. This attitude concerns me deeply. F Scott FitzGerald said, 'You don't write because you want to say something, you write because you have something to say.' It's a crucial distinction. Authors are not merely people who can write. The talent to write well is a prerequisite of being an author. But to define authors as people who write is a misrepresentation. 

Authors are story tellers. That is what authors do. Writing is the medium. In an illiterate society, authors are the people spinning tales out loud, because they have stories to tell. Authors in ancient civilisations were the creators of myths, weavers of legends that were told in verse, which allows an oral tradition to be passed on more easily from generation to generation. 

This year I'm very very grateful not to fall into the category of a "typical author", but next year, who knows? As an author currently earning a comfortable living from writing fiction, I can only hope that more people take time off from writing to read more... and hopefully to keep buying my books!

Radio interviews

In common with other authors, I often receive invitations to visit radio stations to give live interviews. Over the years I’ve visited radio studios all around the UK as far afield as Newcastle and Sussex, Manchester and Kent, Merseyside and Bristol.
In a live interview you hope to achieve a fleeting but intense chemistry between presenter and interviewee, as your words are broadcast on the airwaves to tens or sometimes hundreds of thousands of people. Meanwhile, you perch on a chair in a small room chatting with a single presenter. Experience helps. Beyond that, in common with everything else an author does, the key to a good interview lies in the preparation. One sneaky advantage of radio interviews is that your audience can’t see you glancing at notes. You can scribble a few points on the back of an envelope – not that I would ever do such a thing, of course! – without anyone knowing. Yet however much preparation you do in advance you need to be able to think on your feet, because there are always unexpected questions. In a live interview, you can’t afford to get flummoxed.
Most of the presenters I’ve met have been enthusiastic readers of the crime genre, but even with presenters who don’t read crime novels, the genre is so fascinating that there is always plenty to talk about. Apart from your own experience of writing, there are areas like research, plotting, character, the appeal of the genre, morality, violence... the list goes on. In fact, it’s very easy to become so involved in a discussion, you lose sight of your reason for giving the interview in the first place. This could be promoting a new book, or an upcoming event. It’s important to retain a good balance between following your predetermined agenda and simply enjoying the discussion.
 I’ve thoroughly enjoyed all of my interviews so far. It’s always slightly disappointing when the half hour or so comes to an end. So if any radio presenter chances to read this, please feel free to contact me on http://leighrussell.co.uk I’d love to join you for a chat!
 STOP DEAD, the fifth in the Geraldine Steel series, is out in print this May. COLD SACRIFICE, the first in the Ian Peterson series, is published as an ebook in June, in print September.

Radio Interview

I enjoyed chatting to Danny Smith at Radio Verulam 92.6 FM. If you'd like to hear the interview, you can listen again on the Radio Verulam website. Tuesday 19th March 5.30 pm. Hope you find it interesting.

print book and e-book - partnership or competition?

In the light of recent news about e-books on amazon (see post below) can anyone tell me why Waterstones is complicit in the disappearance of the printed book?
Nothing is ever achieved by being defeatist. Trends are not inevitable.
With passion and hard work, the printed book can survive alongside its electronic partner - yes, partner, not competitor. Why not, when ebooks are attracting more people to read? Waterstones have a responsibility to readers and authors who want to see them come out fighting in defense of physical books. There is no one else who can do this on a significant scale (with no disrespect intended to the fantastic dedicated smaller chains and independent bookshops).
Read about "Waterstones Faulty Logic" on Book2Book (booktrade.info site)
http://www.booktrade.info/index.php/showarticle/42274/nl
Think about stores like Ottakars, morphed into Waterstones. Think about Borders, morphed into Primark. Then think.
And in the meantime, two of my titles are on offer on amazon kindle, one on the Summer Kindle Reading Marathon.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Death-Geraldine-Steel-Mystery-ebook/dp/B0071CQV8U/pocketessentials
Most sales of my books are online. I have nothing to gain from the survival of bookshops, but I passionately believe that we all have a lot to lose.

Is this sane?

Why would anyone (in his right mind) bother to devote so much time and energy to boosting his own ego by adulating himself under multiple false identities?
The time would surely be better spent working to improve the writing he publishes under his own name.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/aug/05/nick-cohen-cheating-authors-journalists
The more I think about it, the stupider it seems. Work on your own writing, whatever your real name is, and get yourself some genuine admirers. If you can't, maybe it's time to stop writing?

Waterstones New Non-Events

I have received several courteous and reassuring emails from James Daunt.  Either he has been disingenuous in his communications with me, or he genuinely does not understand the nature of signings in bookshops for authors who do not have huge marketing machinery behind them.
He gave me his personal assurance that none of my events would be cancelled. Well, two have been cancelled this week, although I have also received three invitations to sign in other stores. Some of the events that are still being honoured are going ahead as agreed. Others have imposed a 90 minute limit. Why on earth would any author travel for an hour to spend 90 minutes in a book store where he might typically expect to sign a dozen books in that time? It is not worth anyone's while to hold an event like that. These events would only be viable for a well known author, who is heavily marketed, or a celebrity. Less well known authors will be forced to cancel any event that entails travelling any distance, and staying overnight.
Waterstones may claim they are not cancelling events, but they are making it impossible for authors to attend them.
Where we do turn up, can we seriously expect to be frog marched out of the store at the end of 90 minutes? How different all this is from the welcome bookshops  used to give authors! 
One of my local stores, where I have signed many times, told me yesterday, "We know we always sell loads when you're in store, but we're not sure if we're allowed to have any more events." Reality check, Waterstones, you are a SHOP. Why on earth would you want to reject a successful sales strategy? On what planet does that even begin to make sense? Only a planet that values celebrity over talent. Because this is not about improving sales figures.  People buy books by famous authors like J K Rowling and P D James regardless of whether they meet the authors. Their appearance in bookshops is essential, creating a much needed buzz about the stores, in a mutual promotion exercise.  But the real boost in sales comes from hard working dedicated authors who give up their time to mingle with customers, recommending books, including their own of course, and encouraging people to buy more books in physical stores. And those are the authors this new policy is excluding.
What can we do, other than stay at home building an online presence, and buy a kindle, or a kobo.

Society of Authors Workshop

Thank you to the authors who attended my workshop hosted by The Society of Authors this week. It was a privilege to share your combination of creativity and craft; thank you for contributing with such enthusiasm and good humour. What an eclectic and interesting group! The Society organiser was all set to take photos of the event but the discussion was so lively I completely forgot to ask her. Good luck with your writing!
To anyone on the waiting list - hopefully The Society will be contacting you soon with dates of further workshops so I hope to have an opportunity to meet you before too long!

The Goal Posts are Moving Again

The goal posts are moving again…

Once I would have grabbed at the chance of having a third novel published. With my first two titles still selling, am I becoming an established author, successful at last in my own small way? Dead End will soon be going to print, ready to hit the shelves next month. (What happened to the past six months? Publication date has been so far off for so long and now, suddenly, it’s almost here – How did that happen?)

When Cut Short was due for publication I remember being wildly excited. The whole episode felt like one huge party. It was such fun being a published author! To my surprise, the publication of Road Closed was, if anything, even more exciting. Now I was a real author with not one but two books to my name. (Is that the laughter of authors with multiple titles to their names?)

But with Dead End about to hit the shelves, everything feels different. It could be the after effects of pneumonia, but suddenly this author lark doesn’t seem like so much fun any more. Is it because third time around I know how much hard work lies ahead, with the publication of a new title? The promotion, book signings, talks, panels, interviews, and endless phone calls and emails… and the reviews! There have been 3 so far, all good, but that’s just the beginning…

I’m reminded of the Neil Sedaka song about missing the hungry years. The publication of Cut Short was such a thrill, but how can we measure success when the goal posts keep moving?

What has been your experience of publishing second and subsequent books? Did your excitement heighten or fade with each new title?

Pistols at Dawn

I'm back!
After cramming an impossible amount of work into a few days I've finished, and sent the MS for ROAD CLOSED back to my editor. I daresay there will be a little more tweaking, but I'm relieved to have reached this breathing space. I have a really busy weekend ahead, signing at Borders in WATFORD tomorrow, and WH Smith's in BRENT CROSS on Sunday and am booked to give two talks after school next week. Things are getting busy in the run up to Christmas. Once ROAD CLOSED is done but not yet dusted, I'll post the cover and see what you think.

I was quoted by Hugh Muir in the Guardian diary yesterday. Fame at last! I've been caught up in a spat between crime writers. It's not quite pistols at dawn but not far off (oh, these authors!) It's only a very short quotation from me, in the third paragraph, but still, I'll be getting hold of the paper for my scrapbook...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/global/2009/nov/19/hugh-muir-diary-climate-deniers

(I can't work out how to include a link - although I've done it before - so you will have to copy and paste the link onto your browser if you want to read it. Sorry!)

Finding a publisher

I promised to write about how I found a publisher. I’m afraid my account won’t be of practical help to aspiring authors as, due to my ignorance, I made just about every mistake possible in my attempt to find a publisher.

The reason I think my story is worth telling lies in its outcome. I found a publisher, and reinvented my life in my middle age (if I live a long life). And if I can succeed, why shouldn’t you?

For reasons I may retell in another post, I wrote a story. It was a little jumbled (more so than I realised – I hadn’t researched my market properly – mistake number one of many). Nevertheless, I thought my story was rather good so, without any expectations, I looked in the Writers and Artists Year Book, found three publishers who specialise in crime fiction, and sent off my manuscript.

I’m quite an impatient person. If I hadn’t received a positive response from any of them, I don’t know whether I would have sent the MS off to any more publishers or given up on the idea. I’d only sent it off on a whim.

Two weeks later I had a phone call from the wonderful woman who is now my publisher and, to cut this rambling tale short (!) three months later I signed a contract for three books in a series of crime thrillers.

It’s a long process, producing a book, and there were times when I thought it would never be published. But the process rolled on as planned – and now I’m an author.

I wrote somewhere that I fell into being an author as clueless as Alice when she fell down the rabbit hole . . .