Jeffrey David Payne's Blog: The Not-A-Blog Blog
January 9, 2012
Why I Don't Have a Blog
Every now and then someone asks me why I don't have a blog.
I usually give a sheepish answer, my own long winded version of 'meh' as the kids say. Sometimes they push a little harder and remind me that all the big writers have blogs these days and are active on Twitter. Everyone who knows me knows that I work in technology, that I'm no luddite, so what could possibly be my excuse for going silent in the blogosphere, twitterverse, etc?
The honest answer is that I've tried a few times and it didn't take. Part of it's a time thing: between day job, writing "the next book" and being a father, my time is limited. The other part, and perhaps the bigger factor in my reasoning, is that I don't like doing anything just for marketing or PR purposes. I'm certainly not saying that every author who blogs or Tweets does it solely for promotion, not in the least. It just doesn't come natural to me, so when I do it, I feel a bit like PT Barnum. I also don't think a verbose online persona fits with the kind of books I write and with my personality, for reasons I'll soon enumerate.
For openers, were I to blog, I'd have to blog about something, you know, like a topic. Let's run through the options:
A) Myself: I could always just blog about me, but frankly, I find myself a very boring subject and can't quite bring myself to believe anyone would care. They might care, someday, when Orson Wells rolls out the standard rich and famous contract for me and my furry friends, but until that day comes - if it ever comes - I really doubt that total strangers would care about my quest for the perfect sourdough, vacation pictures or my addiction to Breaking Bad.
B) Writing: In my situation this seems like the most plausible option, and I certainly have opinions on writing, indie publishing, and so on; but I'd just be joining the echo chamber here. Kristine Rusch, her hubby Dean Wesley Smith, Sarah Hoyt, The Passive Voice Blog, J.A. Konrath, and many others have this area well covered. I could probably contribute a few unique ideas to that world, but my share of that Venn diagram would be pretty scant.
C) Politics: If I wrote non-fiction, the obvious topic would be my chosen subject matter. If I wrote history books, I could blog about history. If I wrote about business, I could blog about business. You get the idea. And in the non-fiction world, your job as a writer is essentially to build yourself up as an expert on something and I think the authors-must-blog rule is more rigid there. The closest thing I have to a subject matter in the fiction world is politics and economics. Let's set aside the fact that I write YA books (for now) and the problem of getting that audience interested in things like signing statements and bond spreads. Were I to blog about politics, I'd be stepping into an even bigger echo chamber, and although I think I have a unique political perspective (I'm a libertarian who can't stand Ayn Rand), I think writing an overtly political blog would polarize or confuse my readers and drag me into flame wars and other forms of cybernetic nastiness -- all assuming I could attract readers to the blog in the first place. I think I'd be boxing myself into a corner and when I started writing non-political novels, the brand of political loudmouth would taint them. It's like when Glenn Beck writes novels and makes movies: sure, the rabid group of people aligned with his politics support what he's doing, but to the rest of us it just seems weird, and a little sad.
Now that we've dispensed with the topics and debunked them all, that leaves us with some other reasons, all of which are variations on what kind of relationship authors should have with reviewers and readers. This has come under some scrutiny lately on Goodreads after some authors (and even an agent) started commenting on reviews, specifically Kira's review of Tempest by Julie Cross.
This dust up was just one example of situations where an author does something impulsive and foolish on social media, and subsequently gets clobbered. I've worked professionally in Internet technology for over a decade and have seen this kind of thing play out over and over again. Frankly, I have a healthy fear of angry readers/reviewers/commenters and they have to be treated with respect -- like electricity or fire. Whether you think you're being treated fairly or not, as an author you keep your mouth shut or you're asking for trouble.
Goodreads has been very kind to me so far. I think I've dodged a bullet when I see what some other authors have gone through. The reviews of Far From the War have been overwhelmingly positive and even the bad reviews have been fair. But you never really know how you'll respond to bad reviews until you're put in that situation.
My expectations going in were low so when the odd mixed review came in, I was cool with it. I knew I'd written an odd book that wouldn't be for everybody. Some might not like it for the politics. Some might not like for the style. Some might not like for no discernible reason. No biggie. Nobody has to justify their dislike or how they express it to me.
Where I almost got myself into trouble was that some people in my life didn't see it that way. I had people who'd seen some bad reviews of my work and wanted to mix it up with the reviewers. In one case, I had to beg my father in law to just leave it alone. No good will come from it, I told him, and it would only hurt me. They'd either figure out that you're related to me or assume you're a sock puppet and either way I'd get clobbered like a second rate Dan Krokos.
I doubt if I'd ever be riled up enough to break the cardinal rule of commenting on reviews, but a blog or an errant tweet could set off a similar chain of events. In all likelihood I'd end up writing something controversial about politics or writing or the publishing industry that draws heavy fire (again, assuming I had readers) and my skin just isn't that thick, and moreover, it would draw focus from what I'm really trying to do with my writing. I've learned to take time when I'm angry to try and understand the real reasons why and moderate how I express anger in such a way that my response is likely to have a productive outcome. Most often this involves me keeping my mouth shut.
So, basically, I'm a coward. Feels good to admit it.
Another unusual aspect of my situation is that the Far From the War series is for Young Adults, and while plenty of males have read the book, the vast majority of my readers are young women. By contrast, I am a middle aged bald guy. I don't have to be a father (which I am) to think that getting too chummy with my readers could seem a little creepy from 30,000 feet, even if it isn't in practice. Keeping my distance is my way of showing respect and observing what the British would call propriety. Perhaps this is an abundance of caution and I certainly don't ignore my readers when they contact me, but trading daily tweets, emails, and status updates with my readers given the demographics feels a little wrong to me. For someone like Hannah Moskowitz, it's a totally different story. She has a lot in common with her readers and it makes sense to be highly communicative and interactive with them. With me, not so much.
So there you have it, a blog post explaining why I don't blog. I would add that I'm not ideologically opposed to authors blogging, blogging in general, or even me blogging. If a day comes when readers start asking my about my life, about how the next book is coming, I might start blogging. But only if I think someone out there is dying to know that stuff. Until then, it's best I stay below the radar.
I usually give a sheepish answer, my own long winded version of 'meh' as the kids say. Sometimes they push a little harder and remind me that all the big writers have blogs these days and are active on Twitter. Everyone who knows me knows that I work in technology, that I'm no luddite, so what could possibly be my excuse for going silent in the blogosphere, twitterverse, etc?
The honest answer is that I've tried a few times and it didn't take. Part of it's a time thing: between day job, writing "the next book" and being a father, my time is limited. The other part, and perhaps the bigger factor in my reasoning, is that I don't like doing anything just for marketing or PR purposes. I'm certainly not saying that every author who blogs or Tweets does it solely for promotion, not in the least. It just doesn't come natural to me, so when I do it, I feel a bit like PT Barnum. I also don't think a verbose online persona fits with the kind of books I write and with my personality, for reasons I'll soon enumerate.
For openers, were I to blog, I'd have to blog about something, you know, like a topic. Let's run through the options:
A) Myself: I could always just blog about me, but frankly, I find myself a very boring subject and can't quite bring myself to believe anyone would care. They might care, someday, when Orson Wells rolls out the standard rich and famous contract for me and my furry friends, but until that day comes - if it ever comes - I really doubt that total strangers would care about my quest for the perfect sourdough, vacation pictures or my addiction to Breaking Bad.
B) Writing: In my situation this seems like the most plausible option, and I certainly have opinions on writing, indie publishing, and so on; but I'd just be joining the echo chamber here. Kristine Rusch, her hubby Dean Wesley Smith, Sarah Hoyt, The Passive Voice Blog, J.A. Konrath, and many others have this area well covered. I could probably contribute a few unique ideas to that world, but my share of that Venn diagram would be pretty scant.
C) Politics: If I wrote non-fiction, the obvious topic would be my chosen subject matter. If I wrote history books, I could blog about history. If I wrote about business, I could blog about business. You get the idea. And in the non-fiction world, your job as a writer is essentially to build yourself up as an expert on something and I think the authors-must-blog rule is more rigid there. The closest thing I have to a subject matter in the fiction world is politics and economics. Let's set aside the fact that I write YA books (for now) and the problem of getting that audience interested in things like signing statements and bond spreads. Were I to blog about politics, I'd be stepping into an even bigger echo chamber, and although I think I have a unique political perspective (I'm a libertarian who can't stand Ayn Rand), I think writing an overtly political blog would polarize or confuse my readers and drag me into flame wars and other forms of cybernetic nastiness -- all assuming I could attract readers to the blog in the first place. I think I'd be boxing myself into a corner and when I started writing non-political novels, the brand of political loudmouth would taint them. It's like when Glenn Beck writes novels and makes movies: sure, the rabid group of people aligned with his politics support what he's doing, but to the rest of us it just seems weird, and a little sad.
Now that we've dispensed with the topics and debunked them all, that leaves us with some other reasons, all of which are variations on what kind of relationship authors should have with reviewers and readers. This has come under some scrutiny lately on Goodreads after some authors (and even an agent) started commenting on reviews, specifically Kira's review of Tempest by Julie Cross.
This dust up was just one example of situations where an author does something impulsive and foolish on social media, and subsequently gets clobbered. I've worked professionally in Internet technology for over a decade and have seen this kind of thing play out over and over again. Frankly, I have a healthy fear of angry readers/reviewers/commenters and they have to be treated with respect -- like electricity or fire. Whether you think you're being treated fairly or not, as an author you keep your mouth shut or you're asking for trouble.
Goodreads has been very kind to me so far. I think I've dodged a bullet when I see what some other authors have gone through. The reviews of Far From the War have been overwhelmingly positive and even the bad reviews have been fair. But you never really know how you'll respond to bad reviews until you're put in that situation.
My expectations going in were low so when the odd mixed review came in, I was cool with it. I knew I'd written an odd book that wouldn't be for everybody. Some might not like it for the politics. Some might not like for the style. Some might not like for no discernible reason. No biggie. Nobody has to justify their dislike or how they express it to me.
Where I almost got myself into trouble was that some people in my life didn't see it that way. I had people who'd seen some bad reviews of my work and wanted to mix it up with the reviewers. In one case, I had to beg my father in law to just leave it alone. No good will come from it, I told him, and it would only hurt me. They'd either figure out that you're related to me or assume you're a sock puppet and either way I'd get clobbered like a second rate Dan Krokos.
I doubt if I'd ever be riled up enough to break the cardinal rule of commenting on reviews, but a blog or an errant tweet could set off a similar chain of events. In all likelihood I'd end up writing something controversial about politics or writing or the publishing industry that draws heavy fire (again, assuming I had readers) and my skin just isn't that thick, and moreover, it would draw focus from what I'm really trying to do with my writing. I've learned to take time when I'm angry to try and understand the real reasons why and moderate how I express anger in such a way that my response is likely to have a productive outcome. Most often this involves me keeping my mouth shut.
So, basically, I'm a coward. Feels good to admit it.
Another unusual aspect of my situation is that the Far From the War series is for Young Adults, and while plenty of males have read the book, the vast majority of my readers are young women. By contrast, I am a middle aged bald guy. I don't have to be a father (which I am) to think that getting too chummy with my readers could seem a little creepy from 30,000 feet, even if it isn't in practice. Keeping my distance is my way of showing respect and observing what the British would call propriety. Perhaps this is an abundance of caution and I certainly don't ignore my readers when they contact me, but trading daily tweets, emails, and status updates with my readers given the demographics feels a little wrong to me. For someone like Hannah Moskowitz, it's a totally different story. She has a lot in common with her readers and it makes sense to be highly communicative and interactive with them. With me, not so much.
So there you have it, a blog post explaining why I don't blog. I would add that I'm not ideologically opposed to authors blogging, blogging in general, or even me blogging. If a day comes when readers start asking my about my life, about how the next book is coming, I might start blogging. But only if I think someone out there is dying to know that stuff. Until then, it's best I stay below the radar.
