The Key Conditions for Reader Suspense Part 2: Character

In the last part in this series we discussed the idea that readers don’t want your characters to be happy. They want them to hunted, stressed, threatened, freaked, and nigh unto some horrible fate for 90% of the novel. At that point, after all that trouble, readers want the characters to pull victory out of the jaws of defeat, exhale a big sigh of relief, and enjoy a Slurpee . . . until the next book in the series.

All through the big worry, readers don’t want to know what WILL happen. They want to know or suspect what MIGHT happen and HOPE and FEAR about those possibilities. And then they want a cathartic resolution of all that hope and fear, all that dramatic tension they have felt.

But our readers won’t hope and fear for just anyone. They will only hope and fear for those characters who evoke sympathy and interest. And so the second set of Pareto factors focus on the things, the conditions, that do this. 

Pareto Factor 1: Troubles

Sympathy starts when we see someone in trouble. That’s not the only thing that’s required. Some people who are in terrible trouble only evoke pity or even antipathy. So there’s more to this than trouble, but trouble is where sympathy starts. So what kind of trouble are we talking about? I like the categories James Scott Bell uses. We feel sympathy for people who are:

  • In jeopardy or experiencing hardship
  • Are underdogs
  • Are vulnerable

When someone is in jeopardy, it means some significant aspect of their happiness is being threatened. Hum, sounds suspiciously like the first type of story problem I discussed in the last post, doesn’t it? That’s because it is. We have sympathy for people who are being threatened with death, slavery, drudgery, etc. We’re just wired for it. Likewise, we feel for someone experiencing a hardship. And a “hardship” is simply someone having to deal with a lack, the second type of problem we discussed. So we begin to evoke reader sympathy by just giving our characters significant problems to deal with.

And you can pile the problems on so that not only does our hero have to deal with the central problem of the story, but maybe he’s also broke and has nothing but one box of macaroni and cheese in the cupboard, or his car just got repossessed, or he’s just been dumped by his girlfriend, or he and his daughter are estranged because his ex-wife is pouring poison in her ear, or he breaks his arm, or he works in an awful job.

Do you remember Peter Parker in Spiderman 2? He gets fired from his pizza job, has no money, is losing his girl. Lots of hardship. And lots of reader sympathy.

But giving characters problems is not quite enough. Because if you recall, the readers want to fear for our characters. Nobody fears too much for someone else if we know that they can easily resolve any threat or hardship that comes their way. And so we need to stack the odds against the character. They need to be underdogs.

This means that the opposition starts off two steps ahead. It means they have more power, more resources, or more information. This is why strong antagonists make strong stories—they help the reader to fear for our protagonists.

Who worries about a Superman who is a hunk of burning love? Nobody. Unless he’s actually Clark Kent in other matters and stands to lose something like Lois. Or, when he is Superman, someone hangs kryptonite around his neck and turns him into a dweeb.

In this same vein, our characters need to be vulnerable. This means they can be squashed at any time. They can be shot, killed, ruined. Until the very end, the reader must know the characters can lose big. In the previous post, I said that problems have to be hard to solve, otherwise readers don’t worry. The things that make problems hard to solve are character limitations, ongoing and increasing troubles, conflicts, and surprises. All of those factors make characters vulnerable as well.

So, threaten your characters will all sorts of things, give them hardships, make them vulnerable underdogs, and we’ll feel sympathy for them.

Or will we?

There are some characters with problems who we don’t want to root for. Instead, we hope they fail. Villains, for example, have problems, but we root against them with vigor. In our minds, these folks deserve to fail. So you can’t rely on problem alone. There’s another quality that your characters must evoke if we’re going to hope and fear for them.

That other quality is deservingness.

Pareto Factor 2: Deservingness (likeability)

All of us have an automatic scale of justice inside of us. We can’t turn it off. Nor can we ignore it. It’s very simple. If someone’s bad outweighs their good, then we think they don’t deserve good things. Conversely, if someone’s good outweighs their bad, we think they should be happy.

Don’t believe me? Fine, let’s test it.

A boy breaks his arm and he whines, whines, whines about it all day long. Tells his teachers he can’t do his school work because of it. Mopes at home in front of the TV. Steals his sister’s money to buy candy because he has this awful injury and he deserves it. Maybe he makes all his friends listen to him talk about how hard it is, and he just goes on and on and on.

You know exactly what you’re thinking. You know exactly how much sympathy you have for him, which is none.

Another boy has a broken arm. But this one doesn’t whine. In fact, when his dad falls ill, he goes out and with the one good arm, and in pain, mucks out the horse stalls. He does this because his dad was going to lose his job if he didn’t. Then the boy comes back in and cleans himself up and doesn’t say a thing.

You like that second boy? You want good things for him?

Of course, you do.

Problems aren’t enough. They’re only half the equation. For us to root for someone, we have to feel they’re deserving. Or if you like the term better, you can say they need to be “likeable.”

So what makes someone deserving or likeable?

That’s going to be slightly different for each person because our moral codes are all slightly different. If you feel it’s a sin to kill animals, you might feel conflicted reading a story about a rancher who needs to get his cattle to slaughter. If you feel unions do nothing but harm, you might throw down a book that’s about a union boss trying to force a corporation into compliance. Nevertheless, there are many virtues and vices that people hold in common. Usually, we feel people are deserving if they weigh more on the one side of the table below than they do the other. 

Deserving / Likeable Not Deserving / Unlikeable
  • Unselfish, do nice things for others
  • Stand up for little guy
  • Funny
  • Sacrifice for someone else
  • Good-humored, don’t take themselves too seriously
  • Courageous
  • Hard-working
  • Actively trying to fix their own problems
  • Hopeful
  • Etc.
  • Selfish
  • Bully others
  • Dull
  • Whining
  • Cowardly
  • Take themselves too seriously
  • Sanctimonious and self-righteous
  • Lazy, only want to snivel or groan about their problems
  • Sad sacks
  • Etc.

We tend to like people more who show the characteristics on the left side. We tend to dislike people who show the characteristics on the right side.

Notice, a lot of this has to do with motive. In many instances it isn’t just the act that decides us for or against someone. It’s the act + the reason why they did it. Let’s go back to that example of the kid with the broken arm that mucked out the horse stall. We’ll love him if he made that sacrifice out of selflessness. We’ll feel something different if he does it only because it allows him to hide his and his father’s crime (maybe they killed someone and have temporarily stashed the body in the barn under the muck in a stall).

Furthermore, while we need to make the characters we want our readers to root for deserving, this doesn’t mean they have to be paragons of virtue. Remember that deservingness is weighed on a scale. Just as long as the characters tip the scales one way, we will feel they’re deserving. On the other hand, if they cross the line the other way, we’ll turn against them.

For example, let’s say your lead character is a thief who steals money from retired folks. But in your story she’s trying to save a kid from being kidnapped and sold into the sex slave trade. Yeah, our character may be a thief, but what she’s doing outweighs the bad, and we’re going to root for her.

Now let’s make our lead a child molester. He’s trying to capture a brutal drug cartel murderer who has just escaped prison. Along the way he has his way with a few children.

Who are you rooting for this time?

Yeah, me too. I hope the murderer finds the child molester and offs him. Or at least alerts the authorities to his crime and ties him up in a neat package for them to pick up.

So you don’t have to have perfect people as your leads. In fact, it’s sometimes more interesting to have someone with foibles just like the rest of us. But when those foibles turn into things we find despicable, we’ll turn against those characters.

And vice versa. For those of you who have read or watched Pride & Prejudice, did you notice how you rooted against Mr. Darcy when we interpreted his actions as smug condescension? The moment he changed, and we learned of it, we cheered for him. It was all a matter of deservingness.  

If we want to hope and fear for our characters, they need troubles. But they also need to weigh in on the deserving side of our scale of justice. When they do, they become admirable, likeable, heroic.

In fact, heroes, the ones that make us stand up and cheer, are those people that put their own happiness at risk to do the “right” thing. They’re the very embodiment of deservingness.

So make your characters admirable in some way, if only just a little bit.

For more on the topic of deservingness, read How Inequity and Deservingness Propel Readers Through Story.

Still, we’re not done yet. We might have characters who are completely deserving, but they are so boring we can’t muster any interest in them. And that brings us to the third Pareto factor.

Pareto Factor 3: Interest

We want to hope and fear for a character for 90% of the novel. But will you stick around if the characters are utterly boring? Probably not. So you want to make your characters interesting. Heck, sometimes we don’t need much of a problem, but will read about someone just because they’re so dang interesting. Character interest is a key factor in a reader’s enjoyment of your story. It one of the things that produces the biggest bang for the buck.

The question is: what makes a character interesting? The answer: the same things that make real people interesting.

You’ll want to make your own list of things that make people interestings because what rocks you might not rock me, but I’ll share the types of things that spark my interest in other people below.

Your characters don’t have to exhibit all of the traits listed, but you might want to think of giving them at least one or three of them.

Power

People who have power draw our interest. That power may be one of many varieties:

  • Wealth. They might be super rich like Bill Gates or Warren Buffett or the Queen. They may drive the coolest cars and have the most luxurious houses or clothing.
  • Position. Someone in a powerful position like the CEO of a big company, the general of an army, or the leader of some gang. But it doesn’t have to be huge. A single cop draws attention. As does an IRS agent on your doorstep. The foreman of a crew has some power. The character might not even be the one to hold the reins of power but be a spouse or counselor of someone else who does.
  • Physical strength. They may be fast or strong or just huge individuals. Maybe they have been trained to be deadly weapons or at least use them.

Ability

People with extraordinary skills or talents draw our interest. It’s why, in fantasies, we’re so interested in those that can actually practice magic. In fact, ability is a type of power. And just like those with the other types of power, these folks evoke wonder, respect, and sometimes awe.

The skills and abilities you’re interested in may differ from mine, but we are fascinated by those who can do things well or have some gift. Maybe they are expert at selling, or making money, or framing a house, or painting, or doing gymnastics, or reading, or hacking into computers, or skydiving, or firing weapons, or riding horses, or hunting, or getting people to like them, or making pancakes, or a thousand other things. Maybe, like Edna Mode in The Incredibles, they have the ability to design amazing super-hero outfits.

Even though your characters have limitations that prevent them from immediately solving the problem they face, you can still give them some kind of an ability that makes them admirable to us. Some gift or talent. And maybe it helps them solve the problem in the end.

Extraordinariness

People who are uncommon in some way draw our interest. In fact, if you think about those with power and ability, you see that they possess this quality as well. However, you don’t always need power and ability to be extraordinary.

Maybe you’re a normal guy in an extraordinary job. You’re a CIA officer, a smuggler, or a spy. Maybe you raise wolves or are a bounty hunter. Or you hunt bears with a pack of dogs and a horse. Or maybe you have some other uncommon hobby.

You might argue that these are special skills. They are. But who says my categories can’t overlap? Still they don’t have to be extraordinary in that way. Maybe you simply have extraordinary experience. You fought in a war, escaped prison, were a bank robber at one time. Or maybe you’re just outrageous, bizarre, eccentric, odd, or have some exaggerated quirk.

Maybe you’re a loud-talker, a mumbler, a guy who takes his three parrots with him where ever he goes, a farmer who loves pies. Maybe you’re super thin. Or a cab driver with glasses so thick his passengers immediately wonder if they’ll arrive alive. Maybe you have squeaky shoes. Or are always dressed to the nines and smell of lemons. Maybe you’re one of these people that walk around in their sleep or hold loud conversations with ghosts. Or you’re a coffee freak and drink a pint of black mud each day. Maybe you just have an uncommon name like the folks in the Netherlands who surname is, no lie, Born Naked.

Sometimes these extraordinary things affect the plot. Sometimes they don’t. The point is that the extraordinary captures our attention. When you’re inventing your characters, add something extraordinary. You’ll be surprised at how much more interesting they are to you.  

Beauty

People who are beautiful capture our attention. In movies we see a million bits of information at once. We can see the beauty and respond. But we can’t do that in text. And so we have to evoke the image of beauty in the reader’s mind. A few key details and the way others react to them should be enough.

Now you might think beauty is a superficial method for generating interest, but I think it’s a manifestation of something else more fundamental. If you think about a lot of the interest factors we’ve discussed so far–having special power, wealth, ability, or beauty–they all have a common element running through them. That element is wish-fulfillment.

Wish-fulfillment

We cannot help but be interested in characters who are, do, or have things we want. In fact, this is one of the main draws of fiction–experiencing something wonderful or cool, even if it’s vicariously. Phyllis Pianka states this so well in How to Write Romances: 

“You cannot write an engrossing romance novel until you create a heroine the reader wants to identify with and a hero the reader can fall in love with . . . they are idealized; the heroine is someone women would like to emulate: nicer, prettier, thinner, more intelligent, though not necessarily all of those things. She will have a flaw but it will be a minor one . . . the hero is the ideal lover and husband and father . . . Above all, he must be the man with whom every woman would like to fall in love [bold font added for emphasis]” (30).

A lead you’d like to be like in some way. A hero you could fall in love with. Or at least feel attracted to. Remember, readers are hoping and fearing for the characters. How can readers hope for a woman to enter a committed relationship if the readers feel the man is completely unattractive, physically or emotionally? How can we males root for the man if we feel the same about the female character? It doesn’t mean they have to be perfect. Wish-fulfillment, like many things in writing, slides along a scale. But we’ll be more interested as readers the more we can participate in the same attraction and desire.

Someone might be thinking this is just for love stories, but that couldn’t be farther from the truth. What’s one of the reasons why James Bond and all the other action heroes are so popular? Among other things, it’s because so many of us would love to live the adventures those heroes do. We would love to be the types of guys who know how to fight like Jack Reacher and get to use all the high-tech the gizmos and drive the deluxe cars. How many YA stories are about characters finding fairies or dragons or aliens? How much of fantasy is about having the powers magic grants? Wouldn’t it be cool! Of course. That’s wish-fulfillment.

So when developing a character, we can think of things we’d like to be, do, or have and give those things, or the opportunity for them, to our characters. Make them admirable or desireable in some way. Of course, this doesn’t mean you can’t give your characters flaws, or that you can’t write about someone we wouldn’t want to be like. Our readers don’t have to want to be like our characters in every way, but a little bit of wish-fulfillment helps. It’s something to consider.

Also, as with anything, what’s desireable to you might not be what’s desireable to me. Maybe I’m interested in anyone who has served in the armed forces or lives with some kind of risk and adventure. Maybe you can’t stand that and are enthralled instead with horses. Maybe you’d like to fly airplanes, but I’d love to fly dragons. One guy is drawn to those with happy marriages full of laughter. Another is drawn to the freedom of single life. You write your stories, and I’ll write mine. But we can both make our characters more interesting by adding, when it fits, some element of wish-fulfillment.

Humor

We love humor. Love to laugh. And so anytime you can create a character that does this to the audience, they will be interested in them. It might be our characters have witty lines or comments. Maybe they’re humorous types or find themselves in humorous situations. 

One note. Don’t make the mistake of thinking that making a character interesting will make them deserving or admirable. Humor, just like beauty, can be given to characters we root against. Maybe the character is funny, but it’s a cruel funny. Maybe the character is mind-stealing beautiful, but they use their beauty for terrible purposes. Sympathy and interest are different things.

Danger

Anyone who poses a threat demands our interest. This is one of the reasons why Darth Vader is so interesting. Criminals present threats of all sorts, which is why we’re always interested in them. Recall, however, that many aspects of happiness can be threatened. It doesn’t have to be a threat to life, limb, or property. For example, someone may threaten my relationship to my wife or my belonging to a group or community.

We’re also interested in those who are in danger. This ties back to the first story element of problem. In fact, the problem might be so interesting and threatening that we could cast anyone in the role and readers would go along with them. Do you really remember the leads in Jurassic Park, for instance? There’s nothing fundamentally wrong with a plain vanilla character. In fact, that might be exactly what your story needs. However, I would still see if it doesn’t improve things to make your character interesting outside the context of the story problem. If you do, you just might end up with an Indiana Jones.

Secrets

We love mysteries. And so sometimes it’s wonderful to give characters secrets. It might be they present a bit of danger or have something to hide as Aragorn does when we first meet him in The Lord of the Rings. Or maybe they have a past they don’t like to talk about. Either way, we love to wonder about them and then have our questions answered in surprising ways. We like it even better when these secrets affect the deservingness of the character or our understanding of the situation the character faces.

Surprise

We are intrigued by characters who play against type, if only a little. So maybe you have a plumber who quotes Shakespeare or William Blake to his customers. Maybe you have a mixed martial arts fighter who is a woman with three kids. Maybe the hero has a fear of spiders. Or the villain is a magnificent artist or tends lovingly to his bees or his daughter. Maybe the super rich businessman secretly goes to poor neighborhoods to find folks to help. Maybe the bearded and tattooed biker carries around a Book of Mormon and reads it during quiet moments. Maybe, like Michael in the series Burn Notice, the super spy loves yogurt. Anything that runs against, or just doesn’t fit, our expectations of the type. This includes motives  as well as external character tags.

Cast Variety

Finally, because we almost always deal with a cast of people in our stories, we need to make sure they’re interesting as a group. You will increase reader interest if you give each character some memorable and interesting trait, but you’ll get the most bang for the buck if you make those traits different.

For example, let’s say you have a team of characters who need to go behind enemy lines to find and dismantle a radar station. If every one of those team members is exactly the same–all wise-cracking blond farm boys from Oklahoma–we might find it funny and odd at first, but it will soon lose its appeal as they all say and do the same things. Compare this to a group where one is a silent-but-deadly farmer, another is a metaphysical mechanic, a third is a short woman’s man, the fourth is a wise-cracking American Indian. Maybe one joined the ARMY because he’s got first person shooter games dancing in his eyes, another because his father was a military man, another is there to conduct some kind of criminal heist, the fourth because he’s poor and needed help getting through college and supporting his wife and kid.

I know, I know, you women are probably saying the tall blond farm boys might not be all that bad. But after you finish oogling them, think of this: your readers might not all be into farm boys. Did you ever wonder why boy bands have a variety of types–the serious one, the good one, the bad one, the cutie? It’s because it broadens the appeal to a wider audience.

But it goes beyond that. Variety also avoids the problem of diminishing marginal utility. This is simply the idea that the more you experience something, the less power each experience provides. For example, the first time you hear a great joke it may be gut-busting funny. By the time you’ve heard it ten times the joke has probably lost its appeal. Imagine eating a meal that’s nothing but salmon or broccoli or fried okra or ice cream. Eventually, after twenty dishes of cheese, you will go blind. The same thing occurs with characters. This is why it’s always more powerful to have one villain instead of a hundred of them. One wise-cracking American Indian is awesome. Fifteen of them only water down the effect so that none of them are as powerful as the one could be all by herself.

And it doesn’t end there. There’s an even more important reason for giving your cast variety: it opens up possiblity for more conflict, surprise, and story. Maybe one of the lead’s team members turns traitor. Maybe one of the bad guys is thinking about doing his boss in. With some variety, you can not only write about the main problem, but you also add in subplots–a love story or a redemption plot. And both can complicate the central problem.

Vareity adds interest. Develop your characters–the major, minor, and bit roles, folks that help our lead and others who hinder or oppose them–but also develop them with an eye towards the effect of the cast as a whole.

Characters you want to hope and fear for

Our readers want to hope and fear for our characters. They want to feel sympathy. But they also want to be delighted and awed by them. They want to feel admiration for them. They want to laugh at and with them. These are some of the key joys of the experience they come to us for.

The way we deliver this is by giving our characters troubles, letting them demonstrate they deserve to be rooted for, and making them interesting.

But we’re not done yet. Right now we’ve only talked about the problem and the character. That’s just the beginning. Remember, readers want to hope and fear and then feel a cathartic release. But you can’t feel catharsis if your worries don’t build up to a certain point, if they aren’t extended.

Form follows function.

Think about the itch deep down in your cast that builds and builds and builds over days. It’s amazing when you finally scratch it. Think about the time you couldn’t drink or eat for a day or two and how hungry or thirsty you were. Think about how good it felt to finally satisfy that tension. The experience of eating after a fast is so different from the one when you eat when you’re still mostly full.

You need to make your readers hungry for a release. They want to be hungry. And that takes time. So while a six-hundred word piece of flash fiction can evoke some emotion, it’s nothing compared to the emotion and experience a 100,000 word novel can deliver. Because 100,000 word novels allow you to build the reader’s hunger, their tension, their hope and fear, to a sharp point.

You build this tension with plot. And that will be the next post in the series.

In the meantime, if you think of other things that make characters interesting or sympathetic, specific examples of the factors I’ve talked about, or have questions, please post them in the comments.

More great reading

A lot of the factors listed above that make characters interesting have to do with them being larger than life. If you want to read more on this, Orson Scott Card devotes a whole chapter to it in his wonderful book Characters & Viewpoint.

For those interested in exploring the factors that lead to sympathy, let me recommend Adam Smith’s The Theory of Moral Sentiments. That link will take you the wiki about the book. At the bottom of that wiki are links to the actual text.

Parts in the The Key Conditions for Reader Suspense Series

  1. Scene  (coming soon)
  2. Development Tips
Share

Similar Posts

  • |

    Amazon vs Macmillan = Big River Fighting to be Big Banana

    Here’s what this brouhaha is all about

    Amazon wants to try to replicate with digital books what Apple has done with digital music. So what has Apple done?

    According to Cnet’s “iTunes reps 1 in every 4 songs“:

    “iTunes-purchased songs now account for 25 percent of the overall music market–both physical and digital–in the U.S., says an NPD Group report released Tuesday.”

    That may not seem like a market leader position, but in the comments one person pointed out the following.

    “35% of the music sales are digital (there’s some conversion where 1 CD = 11 or 12 individual digital downloads). Apple owns 70% of the digital market. 70% of the 35% ~ 25%. So Apple has a 25% share of all music sales.”

    Whoa, Nellie. That there’s what we call a cash cow. Moo-la, Baby, Moo-LA! And this becomes even more significant when you consider the fact that many think the digital part of music sales is only going to grow and grow.

    According to the same set of data, TheStreet.com’s  “iTunes, Wal-Mart Dominate Music Sales” reports:

    Amazon accounts for only 8% of that market .

    How did Apple get the head lock on such a huge portion of the digital market? It appears it has to do with the fact that Apple was first to market with a good MP3 player solution, linked that to its iTunes store, and then bundled the software in such a way as to drive and then keep people coming back to iTunes. Here are a couple of articles. I’m sure we could google dozens more.

    Amazon (and many others) are forecasting digital books to become a very large part of book sales. Amazon wants to be the big banana in that space. Well, it can’t be (drum roll) the big Apple now can it?

    But what does this have to do with publishers?

    Big Banana’s Problem

    Amazon cannot become the big banana if nobody buys its stuff because consumers feel it’s priced too high.

    So why don’t they just price it low?

    Ah, there’s the peel.

    In this new proposed arrangement, Amazon cedes a huge portion of its pricing control to the publisher.

    But Apple’s doing that with its iPad.

    It is. However, Apple already has a model and ability to sell. I think Amazon wants to make sure it keeps the low-price position because this is one of the key reasons people go to Amazon. Amazon pulls online book customers in because (listed in what I estimate is importance):

    1. The new books are usually cheaper and if you really want a low price you can buy them used
    2. Amazon provide long tail stock (what book can’t you get out there?)
    3. It’s easy to type in a title and find out more info about the book (first chapters, user ratings, etc.)
    4. Completing the sales transaction is a snap 

    I’m assuming Amazon is worried that if it allows publishers to price their ebooks higher, then they lose one of their MAIN draws. And therefore their ability to become Big Banana.

    The Existing Supply Chain Model

    Right now you have these distribution or supply chains:

    • Publisher  –> Wholesaler  –> Retailer –> Consumer
    • Publisher  –> Retailer –> Consumer
    • Publisher  –> Consumer

    All of them exist side-by-side. For example, Scholastic will sell books via a Barnes & Noble retailer, but they’ll also sell direct via their school book program. You can get SERVANT at Barnes & Noble or you can get it directly from Macmillan here.

    Why have the middlemen?

    Because middlemen bring the cost of purchasing a book WAY down. Some people don’t think that. All they see is that the retailer buys the book wholesale and then jacks up the price.

    But imagine there were no Wal-Marts, Smith’s grocery, or any other kinds of stores. As a consumer you would have to go to farmer Bill for milk, travel 10 miles to farmer Jane for corn, travel another 10 miles to farmer gill for eggs, and on and on and on for the hundreds and thousands of different products we buy. Furthermore, because middlemen bring the products all together each producer has more incentive to compete on quality, value, and price.

    Middlemen SAVE consumers huge amounts of time and money. That’s why we’ll always have them with us even though producers may still sell direct at the same time.  And that’s why we’re willing to pay the little bit they ask for what they do.

    Price/Volume/Profit Control

    There are two keys to making all of this middlemen business work.

    First, usually only the two parties involved in any transaction control the terms of that transaction. So the publisher and wholesaler agree on a price for their transaction. The wholesaler than makes a separate agreement with the retailer. Finally, the retailer is free to make a separate agreement with the consumer. In each transaction the seller gets to control price, cut deals for high volume purchases, and, therefore control its profit.

    In all cases you negotiate a price/volume mix that’s good for both parties. Sometimes this includes a flat price. Sometimes it includes price deductions for larger volumes.  But in all cases it gives the producer something to count on. If a customer wants a lot of product, great, we’ll sell it to you for X price and make Z profit. If you want less, fine, we’ll sell it for Y and make Q profit.

    Second, wholesalers and retailers want to control costs. They need to be able to turn around and sell your product for some profit. If you sell your stuff to someone else for a humongous discount, then that allows their competitor to charge less and potentially shift volume to them. So buyers will often try to get commitments that you aren’t going to screw them somewhere else. And sellers who value long-term relationships are willing to make such commitments.

    So here’s business as it is today. A retail bookseller (Amazon, B&N, etc.) pays a fixed wholesale price for the book to the publisher. The bookseller might negotiate wholesale price breaks at different quantity levels with the publisher, but that’s a wholesale price/volume agreement that ensures certain profit levels for the publisher. As for the retailer, they maintain a different price/volume/profit control on their end with the consumers, fiddling with volume/price mixes that make sense to them. In this situation BOTH the publisher and the retailer maintain price/volume/profit control.

    What do you want to be–the Marketplace or the Seller?

    But this new percent-of-retail scheme decouples price from volume and forces the publisher or retailer to lose control of profit. Either Amazon or the publisher has to GIVE UP price/volume/profit control with their set of buyers.

    If Amazon gets control, then it can set the retail price however it wants REGARDLESS of volume. In this situation, because wholesale price is pegged to retail price via the %, this means Amazon would dictate the wholesale price to the publisher without any regard to volume. This takes price/volume/profit control away from the publishers, putting them at the mercy of the retailer’s whims.

    Scary, a total shift in the way they’re doing business. Publishers would have to budget for the worst case scenario–the lowest the retailer might charge.

    However, that’s NOT what happened. In this current deal Amazon ceded its control to Macmillan, saying, okay publisher YOU set the price for my customers. This isn’t foreign to Amazon. They do this right now with used book sellers. Those folks set their own price and Amazon acts as the market place. And once Amazon says “we’re the marketplace, not the seller” then they step right out of the “hey, you’re charging too much” equation. So nobody would yell at Amazon for this move. Well, some folks would, but they’d soon figure it out. For example, nobody yells at Amazon now when used book vendors want to charge $99 for a trashy paperback. Everyone gets that Amazon is just the marketplace just as they get that Ebay is the market place.

    However, in this case Amazon did want to retain some control. They said, let’s set a range of prices that are acceptable. You can charge $5.99 to $9.99 but no more or less. This would allow the publisher to sell a book for more money when it’s initially released and gradually drop the price as time goes on until we get the bargain basement price of the remainder tables. The articles I linked to in the original blog discuss this common selling practice.

    Macmillan said, the miminum is great, but we actually want to start higher–$14.99.

    Amazon said, no way, Dude. And the battle was on.

    Magic $9.99?

    But why? Why did Amazon insist on that maximum? Why not just do what they already do with used book sellers and step away completely from controlling price? Wouldn’t they WANT to make more money with higher prices anyway?

    Again, price directly affects volume sold which affects profit. But in this case, it’s not as much about profit but volume and market share.

    The only reason that makes sense to me is what I discussed at the beginning of the article–Amazon wants to dominate the digital book space as Apples does iTunes, and they feel the must keep prices low to continue to get people coming to their Kindle store and growing their customer base.  They’re hoping to spank the competition in this segment by being big first and getting all the volume–it’s the old five yards and a cloud of dust.

    Big Banana. Kind of like Wal-Mart is in its segment. Kind of like Microsoft is in theirs. Kind of like Apple is with digital music.

    And they obviously think $9.99 is the magic number to keep the customers pouring into their Kindle e-book world.

    ebooks cost nothing and my grandma plays in the NBA

    Isn’t $9.99 a good price for the publisher? I mean, heck, ebooks don’t use any paper, so they cost next to nothing to make, right?

    Um, no.

    The answer’s “no” because paper is only a part of the cost. And I’m not talking about the cost of the person who takes the Word document and converts it into PDF or Kindle or whatever the ebook format is. My kid could do that for twenty bucks.

    Every product is a mix of fixed costs that don’t change with the volume you produce and variable costs which do vary. Rent, electricity, buildings, equipment, editorial, art, design, author advances, marketing, etc.–all these things can be fixed costs. It doesn’t matter if you make one book or one million. You still have the same rent, same fixed cost for artwork, same cost for editors.  

    So how big are those fixed costs? Based on the blogs I linked to in the original article (and if I read them correctly), the fixed costs are estimated somewhere between $7,000 and $20,000 per book. But those numbers aren’t hard numbers. For example, books that have bigger author royalities and bigger marketing budgets are going to cost more. Furthermore, because those numbers don’t have any details backing them up, I’m leery of trusting them.

    But we can look at something that is public knowledge to see how this works. For example, Stephenie Meyer got $750,000 for Twilight. Most authors do NOT get that. Most get a $5,000 – $7,000 advance per book. Still it shows the fixed costs can be quite large. Meyer’s advance was a huge fixed cost that needed to be covered by each book her publisher sold.

    If they sold only one book, they’d have to have charged $750,000 for it just to cover that one cost. Do you know anyone willing to pay that for a book? No. So they priced it, hoping to sell thousands. If they were to sell 750,000 copies, then that advance only cost $1 per copy. If they were to sell 1.5 million copies, then it would be .50 cents per book. The more books they sell, the smaller the fixed cost per book. Of course, that’s just one fixed  cost! You need to add all the others in (marketing must have been very large as well). Furthermore, Meyer is THE best seller. The vast majority of authors don’t sell anything that comes close. Yes, they have smaller advances and marketing budgets. But you get the idea–fixed costs matter!

    So all these people saying that since no paper is involved ebooks should cost nothing are ignoring fixed costs. In fact, according to some sources, printing, paper, and shipping only account for 10-20% of the cost of most books. I don’t know if that’s an average at all volume levels. Again, there was nothing to back up those claims. But if it’s accurate, you can see the arguments demanding ebooks be sold for next to nothing become silly at best.

    The fact is that the publisher needs to cover those fixed costs. If you were the publisher, how would you do it? Would you price hardbacks to cover fixed + variable + profit? And then price paperbacks and ebooks at variable + profit? Probably not. Hardbacks are already pushing the price limits for consumers. I think you’d want to spread those fixed costs around. If anything, you might try to cover a higher portion of the fixed costs with the paperback and ebooks.

    My inner accountant is screaming for real data to crunch and display in a spreadsheet, but I don’t have any actual actual price/volume/profit matrices. What I can say is that paper has NEVER been the only cost. For midlist authors I suspect it’s probably the smaller portion of the cost of each indivudal book. Publishers must price the books and move the necessary volume to cover fixed costs + variable costs + some profit. And so it’s only reasonable to expect that ebooks be priced to do that.

    What’s the best for you, dear reader?

    I don’t know which specific potential leader will end up providing better prices, reading devices, services, etc. in the long run. Is that Amazon, Apple, Barnes & Noble? A whole bunch of retailers? Who knows?

    What I do know is that it’s good to have a number of companies competing for the customer’s dollars. My vote is with having lots of retailers. If Amazon can sell a significantly larger number of ebooks with their pricing, then publishers, authors, and readers all win. If they can’t, then it becomes a win-lose.  And the publishers and authors will be on the lookout for a way to improve the situation by seeking out other distribution channels.

    Edit for Macmillan Announcement

    2/4/2010 4:05 PM

    It appears Macmillan and Amazon have come to an agreement.

    Notice Macmillan CEO claims this new agreement will result in them making LESS money than they do with ebooks currently. But it provides a reliable and rational market. I think what he’s saying is that this allows publishers more predictability, even if it comes at a price.

    From what I understand Amazon currently pays 50% of suggested retail price for an ebook. The publisher sets the SRP (you see it on the book often), but Amazon has full control to charge whatever it wants to the customer. Here are the numbers for SERVANT.

    • SRP = $25.99
    • Amazon pays the publisher 50% of $25.99 = $13 for each copy of SERVANT they sell
    • If they sell it for $9.99 they lose $9.99 – $13 = $(3.01) per book
    • If they sell for $14 (about what they’ve been listing it for, the make $14 – $13 = $1 per book

    Under the new deal the publiser sets the SRP and the consumer price. On each sale Amazon gets 30%, the publisher 70%. Here are the number for SERVANT under this scenario.

    • SRP = $25.99
    • Publisher sells ebook for $14
    • Amazon pays the publisher nothing until the sale.
    • Amazon earns $14 x 30% = $4.2. This is MORE than they are making under the current system.
    • Publisher earns $14 x 70% = $9.8. This means the publisher earns $(3.20) less, just as claimed, under the system they WANTED versus the existing method

    So why earn less? As Macmillan says in the announcement above, they’re willing to take less to have a more rational and stable market for ebooks

    Over the last few years we have been deeply concerned about the pricing of electronic books. That pricing, combined with the traditional business model we were using, was creating a market that we believe was fundamentally unbalanced. In the last three weeks, from a standing start we have moved to a new business model. We will make less money on the sale of e books, but we will have a stable and rational market. To repeat myself from last Sunday’ s letter, we will now have a business model that will ensure our intellectual property will be available digitally through many channels, at a price that is both fair to the consumer and that allows those who create and publish it to be fairly compensated.

    We have also started discussions with all our other partners in the digital book world. While there is still lots of work to be done, they have all agreed to move to the agency model.

    So this is how all ebooks will work with Macmillan going forward. I’m betting most or all the other publishers will follow suit.

    I think this is good news for readers, publishers, and retailers. Readers get it for less than hardcover. It will be at the higher end of the range settled with Amazon (I think it was $5.99 – $14.99) unless the publisher decides to run discounts as they do with many blockbusters now in hardback. But the price will drop as time goes on. I imagine when they release the paperback for a book, they’ll have to drop it for certain. And when books go to the remainder tables, they’ll drop again. I can see old ebooks or promotions costing $5.99 – $9.99, new ones $14.00.

    BTW, the standard now for many authors is to be paid 15% royalty of the SRP on ebooks up to a maximum of 40-50% of the net amount publishers get from the retailer (btw, contracts stipulate different royalty rates for ebooks, hardback, mass market, etc.). Something the industry is considering, as mentioned in Sargent’s letter, is setting a % rate of the amount received by Macmillan from Amazon. So instead of paying authors 15% royalty on the SRP, new contracts will likely pay authors 20 -25% of the 70% the publisher receives as royalty. You can do the math. It’s very clear this new deal doesn’t earn the author more per book. 

    Hopefully, then, we’ll simply sell a heck of a lot more copies. One glitch in all this is the fact that publishers haven’t really been setting prices with consumers. That’s been the retailer’s job. And so they’ll probably have a learning curve trying to get the prices right in the beginning. Or maybe not. We’ll have to see.

    Edit to answer Jason_Young @ 2

    2/5/2010

    Your point is, hey, if they have three products (hardback, paperback, and ebook) to spread the fixed costs across, then should that allow them to drop the price of all three products? $100 / 2 = $50. $100 / 3 = $33.3. Have I got the question right?

    FIXED COSTS AND VOLUME

    If so, then the answer is it all depends on the relationship between volume and fixed costs. It always depends on that relationship. In fact, that 20% figure may or may not be accurate because . . . it all depends on volume and fixed costs. Both of which can change.

    Let’s take a totally FABRICATED and SIMPLIFIED situation to see how it works.

    Fixed costs: $10,000
    Variable costs hardback (paper, printing, binding, etc.): $3

    Cost per book by volume printed.
    Printed / Cost per Book / Variable as %
    1 / $10,003 / 0.03%
    1,000 / $1,003 / 0.3%
    5,000 / $5 / 60%
    10,000 / $4 / 75%
    20,000 / $3.50 / 86%
    50,000 / $3.20 / 94%

    Now remember: printing has fixed and variable costs as well. But I’m going to say the printing’s all variable to keep this manageable. And that you sell every book you print (something that never happens). The thing to see here is that when you keep fixed costs constant and increase the volume printed, then the fixed cost amount and % per book goes down. Conversely, variable costs become a larger and larger portion of each unit’s cost. Remember, however, that often fixed costs go up when you plan on printing significatly more books (Twilight etc.) But given a set budget for a book, you want to sell as much as you can.

    VARIABLES CHANGE

    So your argument is that when ebooks come along, the fixed costs have already been covered by the hardbacks and papers, cause they’re all still priced the same and the variable and fixed costs haven’t gone up that much since two or three years ago.

    Here’s some of the assumptions you’ve made that might be false:

    1. Fixed and variable costs haven’t gone up
    2. Publishers are selling the same number of copies per book as they were in the past
    3. Ebooks aren’t cannibalizing sales of hardcopies

    The truth may be that costs have gone up and that books aren’t selling as many copies in their various formats as they used to. But even if both of things have not happened, why should we suppose that ebooks don’t cannibalize hardcopy sales, dropping the volumes and, therefore, increasing the cost per hardcopy? Or that they won’t cannibalize even more in the future as ebook readers become better and better.

    On the revenue end, you’re also assuming publishers are selling books for the same prices they were in the past. SRP may be high, but have you noticed the prices on new books on Amazon and other outlets? My $25.99 SRP book came out and sold for $17. It sold for $15 and change before release! And I’m not a big name they’re trying to drive volume to. This is newbie no-name they’re having to discount.

    What I expect has happened over the last five years is this. Costs have risen. Hardbacks are already pushing the limits on price. Furthermore, sellers and consumers are asking for more and more discounts. Paperbacks still haven’t crossed the $9.99, but there’s still pressure to keep them low. Ebooks are adding revenue, but a significant portion of that comes at the expense of hardcopies. So it changes the mix of products sold. It doesn’t simply open up a whole new stream of untapped cash. Because of this, ebooks allow the publisher another method to earn profit that’s getting squeezed away.

    PRODUCT MIXES AND CONTRIBUTION MARGINS

    The best way to look at this is to look at the cost in two ways. One way is to allocate fixed costs and get a price per unit. But if you look at it only that way, you can make a number of bad judgments on the value or price of a product. This happens because of that relationship between fixed costs and volume. So you also want to look at the contribution margin of each product. And, in fact, this is a better way of judging the profitability of an item.

    In this method you lump all the fixed costs together and then examine each unit of the different products (hard, soft, ebook) only by its variable cost versus revenue to see if each unit sold is contributing something above its variable cost towards the fixed costs. Then you estimate the volume you expect (hope) to sell at given prices and try to price them all in a way that will move enough volume of each type of product to cover fixed costs and provide some profit.

    So you don’t consider each product type individually. You look at the MIX of product and the MIX of contribution margins. And you work it so that together the MIX of products covers costs and earns you a profit. And gets enough volume to keep your author a going concern, growing his numbers so he becomes more profitable as time goes on.

    Edit for Modesitt’s insight

    2/6/2010

    Please check out this blog by L.E. Modesitt, Jr. “Why Amazon and Some Readers are Wrong”

    Second, what’s been overlooked is the fact that a tremendous number of book titles actually lose money. Depending on the publisher and the year, that can range from as little as 30% of all titles published to more than 60%. That means that successful books not only have to cover their own production costs but the losses from unsuccessful books if the publisher is to remain in business.

    Third, hardcover sales of successful books effectively subsidize paperbacks or less successful books. Ten-dollar Kindle books would have created price pressures that would either reduce the sales of hardcovers or replace them with e-books, and as more adaptable e-book reading devices become available, that would reduce overall revenues even more than would $15 e-books. This, in turn, would reduce the ability of publishers to try “new” authors and approaches, and would likely result in more “mass” entertainment and less diversity in a field that is already having trouble publishing books for limited audiences.

    Just in case you didn’t connect it to the discussion above. A HUGE cost that needs to be covered by the contribution margins of the successful books are the fixed AND variable costs of each book that fails to contribute enough segment margin (the contribution margin of a segment of your business, in this case a book in its various formats) to pay for itself.  Look at Modesitt’s percentages of books that lose the publisher money. Think about that. For the publisher to continue to bring in new authors who might not sell well in the beginning but have great potential in the long run to sell well, they have to cover the “start up” costs of those authors.

    He makes a lot of other important points. It’s a good read.  And it all plugs into the fixed costs, volume, price, contribution margin equations.

    Share
  • |

    JB Speculates: eBooks, Book Contracts, Agents, and Libraries

    I’ve looked in the crystal ball I hide under my desk and caught a glimpse of what ebooks will change in the next few years. Specifically I saw what will happen to:

    • Book Contracts
    • Literary Agents
    • eBook Aggregators and Libraries

    After showing me the vision, the ball thanked me for shopping at Walmart. Weird.

    PRINT ONLY CONTRACTS

    The only reason to have a print publisher is to get distribution you cannot obtain on your own, or to get it more cheaply than it would cost you if you tried to get it on your own. That’s it. Now, it’s true publishers have excellent art departments and story editors. But you can contract out cover art, copy editing, formatting, and even story editing yourself.

    Distribution is the main thing publishers offer that you can’t get anywhere else.

    BTW, when I’m talking about distribution, I’m talking mostly about getting the books out to places people can see and purchase them. For example, publishers can get your book into hundreds or thousands of books stores all at the same time–Barnes & Noble, Hastings, Walmart, Costco, indie book stores, airport book stores, grocery stores, drug stores, etc. Publishers can get you display in those stores so consumers see your book. One form of that are the racks and new book displays. Another is one that Scholastic does so well, i.e. displaying and selling titles in tens of thousands of classrooms with its book catalogs. A single author just can’t do that. 

    It’s also true publishers can convince some platform venues, that would never look at a self-pubbed author, to spotlight your book.  For example, it’s unlikely a self-published author will be able to convince Booklist, Publishers Weekly, and Library Journal, which have huge platform for library book purchasers, to review a book.  But publishers have no problem getting their stuff in there. Likewise, it’s often much easier for publishers to get endorsements from other authors or people with platform than it is for a single author.  Of course, there are so many places that have some kind of platform, that publishers don’t have a lock on them all, e.g. Goodreads and Amazon reader reviews.  But for the sake of simplicity, let’s just look at the distribution end.  

    Because 90% of book sales are still hardcopy, the only way to have HUGE sales numbers, right now, is through a print publisher. I’m talking about the numbers you see in the Publishers Weekly top selling books, where you have to sell at least 100k copies in hard back, 500k copies in mass market, to even make the list.

    Publisher’s lock on this ability will erode. We can see signs of this in the USA Today Top 150 already. I consider this to be the most accurate picture of what truly is selling the most. Here’s why. And ebooks are starting to be the best selling format for a number of books. On that list, they add up sales of a title in all formats and then list the best-selling format. So when you see an (E) at the end of the listing, you know it’s selling more ebooks than any other format. E’s are starting to pop up all over and we’re still in the early adopter stage for ebooks and ereaders.

    So what does this mean?

    If I put on my author business slacks (why does it always have to be hats we change?), I’d be crazy to turn down a publisher that wanted to offer me monster distribution. A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. You offer me $500k now, I’m taking the money and running all the way to the bank and then the $6.99 Indian all-you-can-eat buffet.

    Of course, I’m not likely to get that kind of an offer. We new writers are more likely to get an offer for, what were Hines’ numbers? $6k – $12k? And for that the publisher will want all our ebook rights and will tie them up for years and years and years. And then they’ll try to give us a fraction of what we could get selling directly. Furthermore, they don’t provide such books the same push to garner platform spotlight. They don’t spend the money to give them the prime display in bookstores. This means the difference between what they bring to the table for us smaller authors and what we can do on our own is much less. And the ebook has narrowed that even further.

    How much further? Well, how many books would you have to sell to make that advance of $6k – $12k? If you’re selling your books for $2.99 for the Kindle, you get about $2.00 a book. That means you’d have to sell 3k-6k copies of an ebook to earn as much as that average advance. 

    Do you think you can sell 3k – 6k copies of an ebook at $2.99?

    Some authors will be able to do this. Some won’t. If you wanted to do that in three years, you’d have to sell about 150-350 books per month. For a more in depth comparison between traditional publishing and self-publshing ebooks, see Dean Smith’s blog on cash flow.  

    Maybe you don’t think you can make those numbers. But maybe you can. The point is that if you think you can, then you can make as much on your own as you can with a publisher. This means there is absolutely no financial reason on earth to take the publisher’s deal. None. Now, if you have non-financial reasons, that’s another thing, but when looking at dollars and cents, it’s fairly clear the publisher’s ability to put you into their distribution channels isn’t worth what it will cost you. Especially since the ebook is forever and may keep selling for years to come AND because the market for ebooks is still in the early adopter phase–it’s only going to grow massively over these next years.

    But this doesn’t mean paper publishing is dead. It’s not. Nor will it be for some time. Just because SOME authors can make as much in the ebook market on their own as they can with a publisher through their distribution channels doesn’t mean all of them can. Furthermore, publishers with distribution have something to offer even those who successfully publish ebooks themselves.

    Let’s say you have an ebook series that starts to sell well for you, 1,000 per month. That’s $2k per month, $24k per year. If a publisher wanted to buy the rights to that from me, they would have to pay me MORE than $70k as an advance. MORE. Because I can make that on my own in three years selling it myself. In fact, since ebooks are forever, I have to look at the present value of all of those years of sales. That income stream is going to be a LOT MORE than $70k, even if we think sales will taper off after five or six years.

    How many big publishers are going to want to pay that?

    Probably none. Or, at least, I suspect those deals will be few and far between. But there is money to be made in paper, even if that market is shrinking. There will be some smaller publishers who, for the right price, will offer paper distribution. And if they can get me distribution that I couldn’t get myself for paper, or do it at a lower cost, then I’d want to sell them paper rights. Why not?

    And so what I see in the crystal ball are some authors, the ones who do well selling ebooks, being able to sign contracts with publishers that sell paper rights only. I know the big publishers probably won’t go for that in the near term, but smaller publishers will see the value and step up to the plate.

    AGENTS

    What about agents? Are they going to die?

    I think if we remember that literary agents are SALES agents, then their future becomes clear. The only reason to get a sales agent is because doing so makes my property worth more (same reason for getting a publisher, btw). If, by letting them focus on sales and letting me focus on getting more product out the door, I make more money than I would if I tried to do BOTH the selling and the producing, then I want an agent.

    I want to sell as many rights as I can to as many people as possible–gaming, film, audio, foreign, merchandise, etc. I’d be a fool to say, well, no, I’ve got this little ebook gig going. I’m not going to sell any of these many other rights to anybody. No, I’m just going to let them sit in my basket and earn me nothing. Let them go to waste.

    !?

    A good agent should be able to sell more than I could on my own because they have a better ability to reach AND close editors AND other people that are in the market for purchasing rights to my property. They’ll also allow me to sell more because all the time I would have spent selling, I can now use to create more product. So not only do I have more books, and therefore rights, to sell, I can hopefully sell them for a better price and terms than I could on my own.

    I’d be a fool not to increase my revenue. I’d be a fool not to have a good agent.

    So as long as there are people who want to purchase these non-ebook rights, and an agent can make a sale I couldn’t or can make it for less than what it would cost me to do it on my own, then agents will be useful. Because of this, because we’ll always have more than ebook rights to sell, I don’t see a role for good agents ever going away.

    EBOOK AGGREGATORS & LIBRARIES

    When more and more people begin reading ebooks what happens to the libraries?

    Ebooks cost less. So a lower price per book would simply allow libraries to purchase more books and expand the collection. But wait, they don’t need rooms and rooms to hold all the paper. You can store the world’s library in one computer room. Shoot, this means that housing the collection on a server instead of on the shelves would cost less. This would allow for an even bigger collection. But why maintain a server and manage your own collection if you can network to the collection down the road?

    In fact, what if there were a mega service with millions of titles you could subscribe to? That would be even cheaper. Then you wouldn’t have to pay book purchasing agents or IT folks to keep your server running.

    Enter the ebook aggregators–the Netflixes of ebooks (I know somebody somewhere is working on this business plan; is it you?)

    I’m betting the whole library system goes national. I’m betting you’ll have some government aggregators, but they’ll probably be dwarfed by the private companies. You’d subscribe to the aggregator’s service just as you do Netflix today and many university libraries currently subscribe to electronic periodical collections.

    The aggregators will probably charge users as Netflix does for a certain number of books checked out at the same time. If a large entity like a library wanted to subscribe, I bet the aggregator would charge access to the collection based on number of users at the library. The library would pass some of that fee onto patrons. The rest of the fee would be paid by the community’s tax dollars, just as those tax dollars pay for the current collections. You might even have device manufacturers coupling subscriptions with purchase of the product as incentives to buy their devices.

    When the aggregators step in, we suddenly end up with a different mix of distribution channels that will coexist:

    1. Author –> ebook retailer (Amazon Kindle, B&N Nook, etc.) –> reader
    2. Author –> subscription aggregator –> reader
    3. Author –> subscription aggregator –> public and school libraries –> reader
    4. Author –> publisher –> subscription aggregator –> then option 2 or 3 above
    5. Author –> publisher –> current distribution channels

    Surprised by #5? Well, the current distribution channels are not going away until every book can be read on an ereader and everyone who reads has and wants to read on such a device. That’s going to take some time, if it happens at all.

    Why would readers buy individual titles ala distribution channel 1 above? Some people just want to own. Other readers will be happy to purchase the books because they don’t want to wait for a checkout slot to open up, e.g. I already have my allotted number of books checked out and I really want this one on hand all the time because it’s Suzie’s favorite. Other readers will want to customize a book with highlights, margin notes, links, etc. just as many of us like to mark up paper texts. We’ll need our own copy for that. Still, I think the bulk of reading will move to the subscriptions. For example, right now I purchase DVDs I love, even though I can get them from Netflix. But the number of DVD’s I own are a fraction of those I watch. Most TV and film I watch once and it goes back to Netflix until I want to see it again. And this checking out becomes even easier where there’s nothing physical to send through the mail.

    Please note: there will probably be some form of gatekeeping with the aggregators. I doubt they will carry every scrap of anything ever written. They’ll carry a lot of stuff, but not every written word. Furthermore, when you have hundreds of thousands of titles, you’ll need mechanisms for helping your subscribers find great content suited to their tastes. A lot of “people who read this read that,” review services, etc.–the next generation of Netflix recommendations, Goodreads reviews, and Pandora like tools. 

    Aggregators won’t be the only gatekeepers, however. The key is in getting notice. And there will be many places with platform that will be able to shine a spotlight on a book. Think about all the places you find out about movies today—radio movie programs, TV movie reviews, Rotten Tomatoes, Newspaper Reviews, Yahoo viewer and critic review summaries, Kids-in-mind, and on and on. Look at all the ways you find music. There will be just as many ways to find books.

    As far as paying authors, I suspect aggregators will pay authors each time a book is checked out, or, if it’s a must-have name author, they will pay to list the title plus a per use payment.

    So that’s the future I saw in my strange little ball. Feel free to comment or add your own thoughts.

    Share
  • |

    The book trade is a . . . trade

    James Dawson, YA author, feels it’s somehow wrong to hold back on cussing in his fiction. He wrote an article about this in the UK Guardian called “Why Teens in Books Can’t Swear.” He thinks it’s unrealistic. He thinks it’s about gate-keeper censorship. You know, parents wanting to steer their children towards certain experiences and away from others.  

    People.

    Dawson’s approach to the whole problem is wrong-headed. This isn’t about the virtues and vices of fiction. Or about gatekeepers, especially in today’s ebook world.  Or what experiences parents want to provide their children. And it’s not about art reflecting reality. Reality includes trips to the toilet, and yet we somehow fail to include realistic bum wiping in so many of our tales. Good heavens, have we betrayed our artistic integrity? No. We’ve just naturally chosen to include things that appeal to us and leave out others that don’t. Every book is an exercise in hundreds of such choices.

    The fact is that Dawson’s forgetting that a fundamental aspect of the book trade is the trade.  The buyer trades his or her money for a product (the book) that provides a service (the entertainment, thrills, chills, etc. of the reading experience) he or she values.  A customer preferring one kind of experience over another isn’t censorship (the horror, the horror).  It’s choice.  

    As an author, you make your offer. If folks like it, they buy it. If not, they don’t. Nobody owes you a purchase.

    This means that in any business, and selling fiction is a business, the most sensible way forward is to offer your intended buyers something they are likely to value.  Something they’re going to like.  Something they want.  If your buyer is thirsty and wants water, offer him a cold glass of water, not a waffle iron.  And if you can’t bear to develop anything but waffle irons, then, by all means, develop waffle irons.  Just make sure you offer them to the folks looking for . . . waffle irons. 

    This business of making offers also means that we package our products and services so that customers can easily tell what’s in the box. You don’t want someone to purchase your box thinking it contains breakfast cereal when in reality it’s a bunch of bolts.

    Yeah, writing is an art. But offering it in trade to others is also a basic economic act.

    Share
  • Generating Story 6: The Story Development Framework

    Folks, it’s been almost six months since I added anything to my series on how to get and develop killer story ideas.  There’s a reason it’s been so long—I’ve been heads-down trying to develop my own stories. 

    I have allotted myself only so much time for writing each day, and when things have to give, unfortunately, it’s my blog that goes first.  Actually, the social media goes first, which is why I have such a lame Facebook and Twitter presence. Of course, if anyone contacts me directly using the link in the sidebar or comments on a post, I always respond promptly.

    Anyway, I wish I had more time, but I do have a day job.  I also have wonderful wife and four daughters, and I simply can’t miss my opportunity to enjoy them while they’re here.  For example, we just did an eight-hour roundtrip trek out to Roosevelt, Utah to attend the commencement ceremonies of my daughter who is graduating with her Associates degree from one of the state universities one month before she receives her High School diploma.  Yes, you read that correctly.  It’s all part of the concurrent enrollment program we have that’s a godsend for those of us who live in rural areas.  That was also the day of my 23rd wedding anniversary to a most excellent and wonderful wife and mom, who would like to think of herself as a large cat, something like a jaguar, but who is more like a horse—sleek, beautiful, and good for something.  Nellie’s a rock. 

    So all that blather to say I haven’t had much time, but I am happy to announce I’ve got something for you today.  I think you will find quite helpful. 

    The Framework

    One of the problems new writers run into is that they don’t know where to start or how to proceed.  This is the same with any complex endeavor.  In my day job, I’ve been teaching some fairly complex things for a number of years, and I’ve found that when you give students a framework for learning, it makes everything SO MUCH EASIER.  Show them the forest first, then the trees.  When you give people a structure, a mental schema, it frees up their working memory so they don’t get overloaded. 

    But it’s useful for more than learning about something.  When we try to do something complex, it’s so much easier when we break the task down into its parts and outline clear objectives, guidelines, and tools for each part.

    I realized that I haven’t really done that here.  I’ve given the general framework for the three things you need to learn to write stories—(1) what stories do, (2) how they do it, and (3) how to develop them.  But I haven’t given one for development. So here it is.

    There are three parts to the framework:

    1. The development OBJECTIVES.
    2. The development PRINCIPLES for each objective.
    3. The development TOOLS you use to help you with each objective.

    Each post I’ve made about writing stories and each post I will make in the future will explain some part of the framework.  For example, the 27-part series Key Conditions for Suspense that I wrote for SFWA explains key principles and concepts for character, problem, and plot.  The post in this series on the Story Setup explains a tool that can be used to help you develop your story’s problem. And so on. What the framework should give you is a map, a guide to help you know what to do and how to do it.

    The Development Objectives

    Let’s start with the objectives. A story is made up of just a few main parts.  I’ve found I’m most productive when I keep the objectives for those parts foremost in my mind and when I keep the list of objectives simple.  Having too many objectives makes it almost impossible to move forward. Here are the objectives I have when I’m developing a story.

     

    Area Development Objectives
    GENERAL Make the story come alive in my own mind
    GENRE Define the overall type of story I want to write
    CHARACTER Develop characters who move and delight me
    SETTING Develop a setting that interests me and feels real
    PROBLEM Develop a story problem that I find compelling
    PLOT Help the reader hope and fear for my character
    TEXT Evoke the story in the reader’s mind

     

    Your job is to develop the story, making it come alive in your mind, then write it in a way that will evoke it in the reader’s mind. You do that by focusing on the objectives you see above.

    Note that I do NOT develop these areas in any special order because ideas for any of the six parts could come at any time. And because I’m focused on the objectives, I don’t get trapped into activity for activity’s sake.  I don’t do character histories because a big name author said that’s what I should do.  I don’t do outlines because everyone I know does them.  I don’t do any activity just because it’s on some list.  I work to accomplish something.  And the things I want to accomplish are listed above.

    Development Principles & Concepts

    Once we know what we’re after, we need to understand the principles and concepts that will help us develop those things.  For example, what kinds of characters “move” and “delight”?  What makes a story problem “compelling”?  What makes readers hope and fear for a character?

    If I don’t understand the principles and concepts that underlie each of the objectives, I’m going to have a difficult time meeting that objective.  So let’s add in the key principles and concepts I’ve found that help me meet those objectives.   

    Area Development Objectives Development Principles & Concepts
    GENERAL     Make the story come alive in my own mind       Focus on developing the 6 core parts of story (genre, character, setting, problem, plot, text) in no special sequence
    Gather zing: use a drag net and hunt with a purpose
    Generate my own zing
    Develop in iterations
    Practice farmer’s faith
    Write what you care about and believe in: listen to your personal Spidey-sense
    Make enough time
    Relax and have fun
    GENRE Define the overall type of story I want to write Reader expectations
    Tropes and patterns
    CHARACTER Develop characters who move and delight me Sympathy
    Deservingness
    Interest
    Types and roles
    Cast sizing
    SETTING Develop a setting that interests me and feels real   How things work
    Telling details
    What’s necessary
    PROBLEM Develop a story problem that I find compelling Hope and fear
    The 3 main types of problems
    Character goals
    Opposition
    Problems that speak to the reader (theme)
    PLOT    Help the reader hope and fear for my character     Suspense
    Surprise
    Curiosity
    The 3 phases of a story’s problem structure
    The story cycle
    Patterns
    TEXT               Evoke the story in the reader’s mind           Telling to evoke
    Clarity
    Working memory limitations
    Stimulus-response order
    The story cycle
    Scenes and summary
    Point of view
    Beginnings & endings
    Poetic devices, Sound and rhythm
    Mechanics

     

    Now let’s see how I’d use the framework.  Let’s say I want to work on developing character.  Sometimes my drag net pulls in great character ideas without much effort on my part at all.  But sometimes what I drag in needs some development.  And sometimes I don’t have anything in my net at all and need to generate something from scratch. 

    When it’s time to develop character, I’ve found that if I focus on the key things that trigger my sympathy for someone, my feeling that they deserve reward or punishment, and my interest in them, it’s much easier to develop a character that rocks, one that moves and delights and thrills me.  It also helps me to think about the roles my characters play.  So I’ll apply the principles one way when developing a sidekick and another when developing a villain.  Finally, there are only so many words in a novel. I need to manage my stage time.  If I have too many characters, I might not have enough stage time to develop any story in a satisfactory way.  If I have too few, I might run into problems with structure and plot.

    Let’s say I want to work on my story problem.  Well, I’d focus on the things that make readers hope and fear for my character.  I’d brainstorm options for the three main story problem types.  I’d make sure my I knew what the goals were for my protagonist and antagonist.

    Do you see how this works?

    Once you get enough material developed in each of the story categories (character, setting, problem, plot, and text), the story will come alive in your mind.  And then it’s just a matter of finishing the text so that it evokes the story in the reader’s mind. 

    Some may wonder why I included text as part of development.  Don’t you develop the story first and then translate it to the text?  No.  A lot of development happens as you write the text.  For example, it’s hard for me to get my character’s voice and attitude without putting him or her on the page.  

    If you go back and look at the list again, you’ll see that the principles and concepts supporting the objectives for genre, character, setting, problem, plot, and text have a lot to do with how story works.  On the other hand, the principles supporting the general objective of having the story come to life in my own mind focus on how we develop stories.

    In this series, I’ve been focusing on the principles of how we develop stories.  But you’ll also want to continue to enlarge your understanding of how stories work.  For more on the principles for character, problem, and plot, see my 27-part series I wrote for SFWA on the Key Conditions for Suspense.

    Development Tools

    Now that we’ve identified what we’re supposed to develop and the principles that support those objectives, it’s helpful to see the different types of tools we can use to help us meet our objectives.

    A tool is just that—something we use to accomplish some objective.  Chimps use sticks to help them fish termites out of holes. Bakers use beaters to help them mix batters. Mechanics have tools to help them turn screws and nuts. Writers have tools to help them do what they need to do.

    I’ve listed the tools I’ve found useful. I know you may not know what a number of them are. That’s okay. In the series I’ll explain what each is and how to use it.  For now just look over the list.  And because I can’t figure out how to make my blankety-blank tables look snazzy with the WPress template and controls I have, I’ve provided a PDF of the framework here instead. Click on the link below to download it.

    John Brown’s Story Development Framework v2012-05-12

    Did you notice that for each set of tools I also list “Other . . .” That’s because there are many tools that authors find useful.  Try them.  Keep the ones you find productive and toss the rest.  This isn’t an exhaustive or mandatory list.

    And remember that the key thing isn’t the tool.  The objective is.  The tool is simply a means to help you meet the objective.  And so you don’t have to use all the tools.  You don’t have to use any of them.  Because the goal is NOT to use a tool.  The goal is to develop the story.

    For example, if you already have a rocking problem, there’s no need to use a tool to get one.  If you’re doing a character history and suddenly hit gold, you don’t have to finish all the prompts in your history document.  You don’t have to because this is NOT about filling out forms.  It’s about making the story come alive in your mind.  Sometimes you need only a little development to get the ideas, sometimes you need a lot.

    Bottom line: focus on the objectives.  Keep developing material until you have enough in each of area that the story is bucking and kicking in your hands.

    And, again, don’t worry about developing the objectives in a certain sequence because there isn’t a best sequence.  With one story you might start with a little character, then a bit of setting, then some text, then more character, then problem, then plot, the back to character, then setting again, then something else, a bit here, an idea there.  On another story you might start with a scrap of text or something somebody said and go to plot then character then genre and then back to each one again and again, building up line by line in some other way.

    There is no golden development sequence!  Just keep the objectives in mind, and keep your eyes open for ideas that you can use to meet each objective.

    Where to start

    Having laid the framework out, I know some might be wondering where to start, especially after I told you it didn’t matter where you started.  You’re wondering this because the fact is that it IS nice to have some guidance.

    And because it really doesn’t matter how you meet the objectives, and because most ideas come when you’re on the move, then there’s a great benefit in simply starting with any method you have at hand.  So let’s not fall prey to an attack of dithering brought on by option overload.  If you don’t know where to start, try this.

    1.    Take Stock

    First, identify a number of slots this week and next when you can work on your story. Try to get at least ten hours each week. You may find your slots in the morning, during breaks, at lunch, late at night.  Just find some times that work for you.

    When that first time slot comes, take stock of the ideas you have right now, the zing you’ve gathered or generated to this point, and make a rough summary.  Do you have any bits of character, problem, or plot?  Have you delved into your setting?  Do you have an idea of the story genre?  Do you have any inkling about the type of story this will be, e.g. is this going to be a story about cyber security, love, friendship, vampires, spies, World War 2, two old fisherman and the mafia?

    Summarize what you have in just one or two pages. Or maybe you only have one line. That’s okay too.  Write it down.

    2.    200 Words

    When you’ve finished step one, ask yourself what genre of story you’d like to write.  Maybe you have two or three genres you’re interested in.  Maybe you want to write some mix—a cowboy science fiction, an epic fantasy comedy, a romantic thriller.  Think about what kind of story you would like to read.  Think about the kind of characters, plots, and settings you enjoy.  The kind of experience you would love to have when reading.  Write two paragraphs summarizing your thoughts. 200 words or less.

    3.    ID Some Patterns

    Third, identify two or three other stories that are kind of like the one you think you might want to write.  Write the titles of these stories down even if they’re only vaguely in the ball park. Now answer these questions about them:

    1. Size

    • How many words or pages was in each book?
    • How many chapters?

    2. Characters

    • How many main characters did each have?
    • How many points of view?
    • What did you like about the characters?
    • What would you do different with the characters?

    3. Problem & Plot

    • What was the protagonist’s main problem?
    • What did the antagonist want?
    • What were the cool plot points or surprises?

    4. What else was cool about the story?

    Now go the extra mile and outline the plot in two pages or less.  Just do little bullet points.

    Did you get any ideas for your story from this?  Anything you want to copy or twist?  If so, write it down.

    4.    Go Zing Hunting

    Fourth, identify the main character, setting, problem, or plot ideas that are drawing your interest.  Decide to go hunt some zing with a purpose.  Pick one of the ideas you think will be a big part of the story, go to the library, and get some books on that thing.  Start with books for juveniles if they have them, then work into more hefty tomes.  Identify some documentaries or films on the subject.  Check them out.  Or get them on Netflix.  Read and watch, keeping your eye out for ideas that might work for your six core story objectives.

    Is there someone you can talk to who has first-hand experience with this thing?  If so, call or visit them and ask them some questions.

    Can you go experience it first hand?  If so, do it.

    Did you get any ideas for your story from this?  If so, big or small, write them down.

    5.    Review

    Fifth, review the zing you’ve captured to this point.  Note anything that pops out to you.  Can you write your story concept down yet (the character, the setting, the goal, and the main opposition and obstacle he or she will face)?  Give it a try.

    If not, no biggie.  Review the seven development objectives to fix them in your mind.

    6.    Generate Some Character and Problem

    Sixth, flip a coin.  Heads you’ll start generating character.  Tails you’ll start generating story problems.  Review the principles for the part of story the coin toss determined you’d work on, then begin generating as many options as possible for that part of story.

    If you’re generating character ideas, list all the types of characters commonly associated with the big idea you’ve been researching.  Try to get at least ten on the list.  Maybe you’ll include some specific people you ran across in your research.  Then list a bunch of types of characters not commonly associated.  Maybe throw in a few people you know who might be fun to base a character on.  Identify characters from each list you think might enjoy writing.  Generate a few more.  Let’s say three.  Don’t be afraid to be wacky.  If you have to, include Chuck Norris as the last one.

    If you’re generating problem, list the threats, opportunities, and mysteries commonly associated with the topic you’ve been researching.  Get at least ten.  Make sure you include some big, significant ones that really speak to you.  If you’re going for comedy, add in some smaller ones.  Think of your favorite comedy show, e.g. Jerry Seinfeld, and ask the types of problems those characters might run into here.  Now list problems that are not commonly associated with this idea.  Try for at least ten.  Identify problems from both lists you think might be fun.  Generate three more.  Don’t afraid to be a bit wacky.

    Now switch.  If you did characters first, do problems and vice versa.

    Did you get any ideas for your story from this?  If so, write them down.

    7.    Generate Some Plot

    Finally, think about the type of problem your character is facing.  If you have a couple of problems you’re deciding between, or perhaps a story where a character has a couple of story lines (maybe an inner one and an external one), choose one to work with.  You can develop the others later.  

    Write up the character’s goal in 50 words or less.  Now list out the steps people like your character would usually take to solve the type of problem you are working with.  Try to avoid having your character do dumb things.  Let them be smart.  If you have no idea how anyone would go about solving that type of problem, go do some research.  Talk to someone who might know.

    Once you’ve sketched out those general steps, generate a list of at least 12 disadvantages, obstacles, conflicts, or surprises your character could run into that would make it really hard to solve the problem and reach his or her goal.  Some of the items on your list can be small; others might throw the character for a major loop.  Again, if you can’t think of any obstacles or quickly run out of ideas, go do some research.  Talk to someone who might know.

    Now look at this from the antagonist’s point of view.  What’s his goal?  Write up the antagonist’s goal in 50 words or less.  What are some common steps a smart and determined (maybe ruthless) person like your antagonist would take to go about removing the problem the hero is causing? 

    Did you get any ideas for your story from this?  If so, write them down.

    And Now?

    At this point, you should be well into the development of your story.  It’s up to you how to proceed.  Maybe you want to write an exploratory draft of a few chapters to get the character’s voice and start defining the setting.  Maybe you’ve discovered you need to research a bit about something specific like sharks or Cessna airplanes or the tactics of Napoleonic armies.  Or maybe you feel it’s time to sketch out a general outline of the plot.  Or maybe you want to review the principles and concepts of one of the story parts.  Or maybe it’s not that at all.  Maybe you want to watch or read some stories in your genre to see how they did it.  There are a lot of things you could do.

    Pick something and do it.  There’s great power in simply getting to work.  Continue to develop the various parts of your story.  And if you feel ready to start writing a draft, then start writing the draft, even if you peter out after only one scene. 

    Remember the objectives.  Keep working on them.  Sooner or later, I guarantee you, the story will open its eyes and look up at you.  It will not come to you fully fleshed out.  But you’ll have enough to switch your focus to drafting.

    When I get to that point and my mind is juiced with some interesting characters in an interesting and compelling situation, I usually capture the essence of the story by writing some form of the Story Setup.  Then I write a simple working outline, which is nothing more than a bullet point sketch of how my character runs into his problem, his response, some of the obstacles he faces, and the results of that action, which leads to trouble, which leads to more action, etc.  It also includes the same for my antagonist.  This is story cycle stuff.  I might include a few key details I need for the scenes I’m listing out.  Or not.  Furthermore, I might be able to envision the whole thing at this point and write an outline that reflects that.  Or I might see only the first few scenes clearly and have to be satisfied with a general sketch of what happens later.  That’s not a big deal because development continues as you’re drafting.  The key is that the story is alive in my mind, and I know in general what it’s about and where I’m going.  It’s enough to begin.  And so I begin to write chapter one (if I haven’t written it already).

    Good luck!

    In the next post I’m going to explain how to generate your own zing using Creative Q&A.  Hopefully, I’ll get to it before another six months has passed :O

    For more in this series, see How to Get and Develop Story Ideas

    Share
  • SODG out to first round of possible blurbers

    “Blurbers” is so much more fun than “endorsers.” Stacy has sent the manuscript of Servant of a Dark God out to the first round of people who said they would give the story a go. If they find they’re in the audience, they’ll write up a blurb for it. This is all in preparation for the launch meeting in December when my editors go to bat for me and sell the book to the salespeople inside Tor.

    While I hope the potential blurbers will all find themselves in the story’s audience, I do not assume it’s a given. If they’re not, I’m still a happy man (although a bit disappointed). There are many wildly successful tales that I myself am not in the audience for.

    I expect we’ll get reactions back in a month or two. I’ll post here the results.

    I can’t remember the last time I was this anxious. Yesterday I read Scott Card’s review of K.J. Parker’s stuff.  All his business about great writers. And I’m thinking, holy heck. I’m a nothing. Just a little dude with this nothing book. And then I thought, what if none of these readers find they’re in the audience for the book? It’s one thing to send out a manuscript. You can always change, improve. But this is it. This is the book. It either soars or plops in the mud.

    But then I read Mette Ivie Harrison’s first article on writing for IGMS and thought—you know what, I tell the stories I tell. While others may aspire to “greatness,” that’s not something I care to strive for. I want to write stories that entertain and move. And while I can learn how to write and tell better stories, they’re always going to be John Brown stories. If they plop, they plop. And I just have to forget all the greatness-everybody-must-love-me nonsense and write John Brown

    I met Mette at Card’s boot camp in 2002. We’ve read each other’s manuscripts every once in a while. I respect her ideas, loved MIra, Mirror, and am grateful for that article. If you’re a writer, I recommend it to you highly.

    Share
  • Indie Thoughts: Lessons from Heather Justesen

    From Heather Justesen, who writes clean romance.

    Two years ago I was working full-time for peanuts (seriously, it didn’t even cover the mortgage–and we didn’t live in a palace.) I quit to write full-time before I went completely insane. By December 2012 I had replaced my c-store income. By April 2013 I earned enough to pay ALL of our bills. Since then I’ve been the primary wage earner for our family, allowing my husband to close the business that was sucking all of the life out of him, and for us to move halfway across the country. He does bring in some money still, but even in my worst month we can pay all of the bills from my writing income. I’ve sold (real sales, not counting freebies) over 60K books in the past eighteen months. I’ve got audiobooks for most of my indie titles and I’m starting to see sales into bookstores. I would have to have one heck of an offer to even consider a traditional publisher’s contract. I’m very happy the way things are.

    * * * *

    Kevin, don’t lose hope. I have books that sell in the single digits every single month despite great reviews. And I have books in a different genre that sell really well every month (not blockbuster well, not top 100 well, but enough for us to get by on.) I didn’t do it with the first or second book, or the fourth book, I had nine books out before I started to make pay-the-bills money, and most of the money, even now that I have 18, comes from a single series. The others make very little [emphasis added]. Maybe give the genre a twist and try something a little different, but still in your general area of interest. Try a different genre that interests you, or just hang on and keep writing. Get feedback, learn more, and keep working at it. I wrote for nearly a decade before I had a book good enough to be in print (before Kindle really took off, or I had enough trust in myself to go it alone, so it was with a small press.) This is a craft, you can’t learn it overnight and success rarely comes overnight[emphasis added].

    Having three books out making six figures a month is crazy good, and definitely not the norm, and yeah those kinds of numbers can be discouraging, but a lot of the other stories here show that it can come. Most people who persevere eventually start to make decent money in indie publishing if they’re doing everything else right. Your covers are pretty good, so try changing up the descriptions and see if that helps. And keep writing.

    More on The Passive Voice.

    A series, lots of product, and an audience that has been under-served for years.

    Share

15 Comments

  1. Awesome post! Just awesome.

    I really hope that you’re planning on turning all of this into a book when you’re through. These posts are informative, brief, and get right to the center of the parts of the craft that people really have to study and practice to improve.

    I’ve been taking all your posts and trying to practice what you’re preaching in the two projects I’m working on now, and I’m definitely seeing results. My wife, who hates the one story (she’s far far from the target audience), has reluctantly admitted that she can see a drastic improvement from the stories I wrote previous to practicing these things. Thanks, John!

  2. Was going to add cast variety to another post in the series but decided it went best here. That’s been added.

  3. I really appreciate these posts. Your presentation at LTUE earlier this year gave me the biggest boost I’ve ever had, and I’ve found that all your advice just makes so much sense. It makes me excited to write.

  4. Wow, this post is crazy thorough! Awesome piece, John! I can’t wait for Part 3 (if there is one)

  5. Jenga,

    Glad it’s helpful. Part 3 IS coming. See the On Writing section for a list of all planned in this series.

  6. Thank you for this post, John. Your insights on writing are always amazingly useful. I’ve learned more about the art of writing from your LTUE video and blog posts than I’ve learned from any half a dozen how-to-write books.

    If I didn’t want to see more of your fiction, I would cast my vote to see you write a how-to book of your own. I’d buy one in a heartbeat.

  7. Dannyboy,

    Good. Some day there will be a how to. Or a series of more useful videos. But I’m thinking I’ll have a much better and more useful perspective after book 8 or 9 than I will now. So I’ll share what I know and learn as I go until that time. Keep writing!

  8. Nice instruction John. Keep up the good work. I refer people to your site all the time just because of your tight focus on principals of story telling.

  9. Yeah, I appreciated the simplicity at which you approach story telling. It reminds me of a quote which says “Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication” (Leonardo de Vinci, in John Cook, comp., The Book of Positive Quatations, 2nd Ed. (1993), 262).

Comments are closed.