Ashlyn Forge's Blog: Toys and Soldiers Series Production

First, let it be known, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I have done like for like in the past. So I'm no like for like virgin. Just letting everyone know...I'm no prude. I've 'hit' da.

That being said, like mine I'll like yours is a pretty common thing now.

So here is my confession: it's been about a good year since I've liked for like. It was a brief experiment and you know...it was awkward. Why? Because I never intended to visit that page and at random times when one popped up in my feed, if it wasn't interesting, I'd either unfollow it (without unliking it. Which keeps it in bounds, right?) or remove my like because it wasn't for me.

Here is the thing about likes: doing like for like makes those likes lose some of the luster. I've just crossed my 1,000 like on my fan page, and I have no idea how. In fact, sometimes I fear posting because I worry that poor b*stard will realize their mistake and the jig will be up.

And then I started thinking about it, asking myself WHY. Why did I get likes without giving likes back? Sure, I have liked other pages that I thought were cute or interesting, but not as a like for like trade. So why?

I'm not particularly pleasant.

Though I am at times humorous, it usually ends strange (truly strange).

My fan page posts aren't that frequent.

Basically...I'm not cool.

And then it occurred to me, the one thing that like for like actually robs authors of...presence. It makes us not 'there'. Look at a like for like thread and you see a wall of strangers. I hardly recognize the majority of them. That's because they actively go on the thread (and others) and rack up likes. Now, this fluffing of the features makes it seem as though the author has a lot of fans. And of course, there's always the off chance that one of these random hands reaching over to cup you might actually be attached to someone who might like you for your mind--and is not just in it to get touched back.

That's not always the case.

Presence. If people know you, they'll like you. If you interact with them, they won't mace you on sight. If you get involved in the forums, actively making topics and interacting with others, they'll actually lay hands on you and it won't be all awkward and 'wrong' feeling.

So while I admit, I'm no like for like innocent, (I had a rough patch when I started out and might have touched a few buttons that I probably shouldn't have.) I do think it's possible to get those likes by just letting people get to know you. Tell others what you write. Share your current WIP and how it's going. Have a rough scene that's giving you trouble? Why not whine about it and let others whine about theirs? Get involved. Climb in there and introduce yourself a bit before you start copping a feel, hoping for one in return.

Sure, you might not get as many likes, but chances are, the ones you do get, are the ones who'll likely check in on you now and then, and MIGHT go the extra mile by actually remembering who the hell you are.

 

Lately, it seems that people are coming to a shocking revelation...writing's hard. It's not only hard, but it's almost shameful.

Both of these facts are true, and both are all right.

I'm not a very tactful person. In fact, I'm 100% sure that my personality alone is a big turn off for many. Here's another problem, I don't play around. If I ever play your game, it's because I'm making fun of you.

Writing's supposed to be hard. It's supposed to be tough, and our continued demands that it be easier is the beginning of the end.

I feel like I've just run a marathon nonstop for hours. My vision blurred for a bit, but I kept fighting and I kept going, and then when I finally finish, I'm pretty sure I didn't win, maybe I came in like 100th out of 102. I look around me and see everyone holding out their hands for a gold medal. And we all get one. And we're not allowed to complain about it, lest we be known as 'bullies' for challenging the insanity.

Everyone's a writer...only, we're not. Do I consider myself a writer? No. Writers are successful; even indie writers can be 'very' successful. I do consider myself a go-getter. I value every bit of the pain and suffering it took to make a book, but I'm not in any way going to say people should make it easier. I will say that I hate how easy it is. It makes me doubt myself and my own work. Especially when I crack open a 'bestseller' and see a work of 'fiction' that seems written by a 4th grader and edited with crayons and bubblegum.

It hurts.

Writing is hard, writing is tough. From getting the words onto the page, to making the plot stick, to luring unsuspecting readers off the beaten path and leaping out in front of them begging, "hey, wanna read my book? Come on...read it. Please, please. Come on, read it."

It's supposed to make you better, those blows you get to the ego, yes, they feel like a sock of rocks coming right at your face, but they are supposed to make writers better.

The most harmful thing you can do to ANY writer is to tell them what they want to hear, just because you can't be bothered to break their hearts.

Toughen up, 'writers'. This isn't for the faint of heart...hell, most writers don't even make it out alive.

Shotgun, meet my big toe...

So there is this new thing going around where readers are giving authors 1-star reviews, and authors are calling people's houses. It's gotten so bad that Goodreads has started deleting and disclaiming, going so far as to remind authors 'don't respond to reviews.'

Because I'm writing this, I am sure I might end up with some 1-star reviews for the hell of it. Although I want to stand beside my fellow-authors in this, I can't. Listen, people say nasty things, nasty awful things, but here's the problem, on the internet, an author can make a poor (lasting) impression nearly each and every single day.

A reader throwing their weight around might have little to no consequence, an author doing it is pretty much the beginning of the end. Now that authors have to also market and promote, it's of course easy to get carried away.

Here are some facts:
1. writing a book is a big endeavor, it can take anything from months to years
2. making a book is rather costly, both in time and money
3. writing, publishing (traditional or self) is DIFFICULT, laboring work
4. this all means nothing to a reader who will devour your months, years, decades of hard work in a matter of days (or hours), and move on to the next. Some might belch out a praise or two as they walk on by, some might take a shit, either way, that's the way it goes.

Simply put, a reader cannot appreciate what goes into a book, and you shouldn't ask them to. Even if a book is personal to you, that's not their problem. Many readers will still decide for themselves if they want to read your books, many won't, but again, that is how it goes.

Do we want poor reviews, hell no, do we want to be treated with respect, hell yes. Is it going to happen? Probably not.

But 'attacking' people who hate your work, calling them 'bullies' is insane, and don't get me wrong, people have made lists called 'author should be raped in jail.' Firstly, WOW. Secondly, these people don't care how you feel and going ape shit on them isn't going to make the situation better.

When you send a book out there, you are entering into a relationship with the reading world. You'll have your ups and your downs. When it's good, it's good, and when it's bad, it's bad. But no one is immune to the sudden mood swings because let's face it, you've just entered into a relationship with a fickle bitch, and you knew she was a fickle bitch from the start.

Enjoy it when she puts out, but when she tells you to go fuck yourself, well, just suck it up and walk it off. There's no hand holding in this world, not for anyone, for any artist, EVER. Consider it a rite of passage and when the time comes, shrug your shoulders and keep going.

Recently I've gotten my first 1-star review. I think I handled it pretty well. I was too stunned at first to respond or even feel anything. Then the next day, I woke up, and did what any other rational writer would do. I deleted myself from every single writing related group, unfriended some writer friends, hung up my hat, and vowed to call it quits with this writing shite.

Let me explain how I suddenly came to this very VERY reasonable conclusion. The time, effort, and everything else that went into these books, isn't what mattered the most, but the fact that I really thought I had a good book to share with people. I don't want to sell anything subpar, so if I've come this far and this is the best I can do, then there would be no reason to go on. From the get-go, I've second guessed, worried about my work. Maybe all compliments were just flukes, and boom, finally a 1-star review to shed light on it all, I'm a hack after all. So call it a day. Only... here's the thing, it's all about the power of one.

Namely, one 4-star review from a very reputable and well-established review site compared to a very strangely worded 1-star review from someone who not only finished the book, but called the premiss wonderful.

The best part about getting this 1-star review was that I signed up for MANY more review sites, because hey, it's not like I have anything to fear now that I've already been punched in the proverbial nuts. I've said vet your betas, vet your editors, now vet your reviews to see which give you the feedback you need (even the bad ones might teach you a lot) because some people have their personal hang-ups that they might bring to the table. Sometimes it could just be a bad fit.

I've since emailed the reviewer to thank her, and she told me that if there were revisions in the book then she'd want to read it again. Apparently, her view of a 1-star review differs greatly from my own.

Bottomline, don't let good reviews or bad reviews go to your head. The thing that matters the most is to look within for the validation you need. Leaving something as fragile as your confidence to the mercy of others is careless and ill-advised.

While I will continue to make some tweaks and changes here and there for In Liam's Wake until its final publication, I have now learned that I need to have more faith in my own work. Because the only 'one' with the true power to make any of that matter, is me.

I have recently completed the final draft of 'In Liam's Wake', with 'From Johann to Tannenbaum' at the editor's and along the way, the journey to self-publishing it hasn't been an easy one for a number of reasons.


Rules of Writing.
Rules? What rules?

Here is where the disillusion comes in. Many writers (arguably, all) have an author they either admire or hope to emulate, and not all writers follow traditional rules. So when you ask a question about a 'rule' for punctuation or grammar, five different people give you five differ answers and at least two people will say a quote from their own favorite author as if this is now a 'rule' because someone famous did it. It is not.

You are NOT Stephen King, JK Rowlings etc. etc. just because an author before you has done it, does not make it the norm.

One of the most dangerous things I think an author can do is compare themselves to these well established names. I feel uncomfortable when I ask a question and someone answers "Well, Tolkin did it."

It's one thing to be a big name and throw rules and caution to the wind. If you are a small time indie writer, you are best to keep your nose clean and learn the proper rules.

Indie Muggins
Sadly, due to the cost of self-publishing, many authors are forced to look for the most inexpensive route they can. Namely, with editors.

So let's say that editing costs 10 dollars. You only have 1 dollar. You pass up a 6 dollar editor even, and go to the one marked 1 dollar. Because that one is RIGHT in your price bracket. Hell, maybe you save for a bit and head for the 2 dollar editor. You get the editing done, you've paid then you get better at writing and look back and realize 'oh crap, that editor was awful'. You are out 1-2 dollars. Now imagine if this so-called editor does it to 100 people? or more. That's money in their pocket.

So what can you do? GET BETTER. The only way you can spot the phonies is if you are a better writer yourself. Read creative writing tutorials, critique fellow author's works, ask questions, get your ego bruised, but get it bruised OFTEN. Once you are better at punctuation and writing, you can spot the wannabes easier. It won't be perfect, but it'll help.

Regardless of which, don't give up. Indie authors are incredibly supportive of each other. If you ever feel overwhelmed or discouraged, seek out your own indie kind, and let them prop you up for a bit.

Good luck.

I believe in feedback, especially honest feedback for any author. Nothing does a disservice to an author more than fluff, glib 'it's good, really' feedback.

Just-to-be-nice feedback is utterly useless and is not only an insult to a writer's intelligence, but it's an affront.

Unless... you're a young writer. Despite my steady banging of the 'honest critique' drum, I don't believe that new writers should be critiqued and/or helped or 'molded' in any way.

Writing is about practice, and writing itself has a life cycle:

infancy: when every and anything we write looks good to us, but it's not what the rest of the world sees.

prospects (childhood): when we start to look for ways to improve.

potential (teenage): when we notice that something's wrong yet we can't fix it.

maturity (adulthood): where we not only know what's wrong, but we can fix some of it, or find someone else to do just that.

Recently I've tried giving honest feedback to new young writers, thinking that my little nuggets of information could be in some way useful. However, I realized something. To most young writers, criticism sure is a bunch of 'nuggets' alright. But not the sort that you would treasure.

Criticism at this stage sounds like just that, criticism. To some it's consider nitpicking, invasive, even rude. mostly it can wear on a new author's ego or self-confidence. Like anything in its infancy, rather than critique it or point out its flaws, it might be best to give excess praise to encourage a author to keep writing and growing.

Taking time out to rip a story apart (edit) and rewrite can be quite daunting and discouraging. The early stages of writing might be gritty and rough, but prolonged, unapologetic, exposure there will help a young author grow.

So youngens, just write your story. Keep writing till you're hollowed out... and once there's nothing left and you're ready to get the editing axe, look for 'critiques'.

[image error] Have you ever seen a blog with this title or someone advertising this. Who could resist clicking on that link? Know what, resist.

Turns out, nobody knows. The weird thing about writing is that there is no right or wrong way to write. THERE IS a right and wrong way to edit, however. I have encountered a pretty poorly edited book with a great plot behind it and a good pace. Then I see the opposite of the spectrum. Great many carefully laid words which say nothing.

The key was, plot. Or in simpler terms, a problem. By the first chapter or prologue if there is no problem, there simply is no story. It does not even have to be a big problem, it could be that the main character has run out of sugar, that doesn't matter, the point is, give the character a dragon to slay (metaphorically speaking). If you can do this, you are further along than most.


So no, this blog post won't teach you how to have a bestseller, but it will tell you what I've learned so far from reading manuscripts after manuscripts; no plot, no story, no dice. Give your MC a problem, because hey, even fairy tales had a problem.

Freelance
The problem about freelance and indie anything now a days is that it's too free. In the world of literature, it is basically anarchy, there is no set governing body (that I know of) which controls the flow of words going from a private author to the published world and sometimes that's alright, but usually it's not.

With any freelance work, the proof is in the pudding and you go into it a bit weary and mostly blind. The lessons you'll eventually learn will take you far, but you'll get more than enough scrapes and bumps along your path.

Here are the cautionary points:
Everyone's a professional editor
Actually, they're not, actually they are, actually, you don't know. Not until you've tried that editor out, and then after that, it's just a matter of waiting to see how it goes. But everyone and their mother seems to think they can edit.

You get what you pay for If you have the time and patience to put up with a poor situation, then by all means, endure. There's no shame in that. Any form of editing is better than nothing at all. But for the most part, when it comes to editors, maybe this once you should dig into your pockets.

Time is money
Rarely do editors give a flat rate (not that I have encountered anyhow), they charge based on time either per hour or per word. They will ask for a down payment before starting. Upon which time, they will give you a deadline. If my payment was on time I expect my end product to be on time as well. Of course, in life, things happen, and more so with a freelance editor because life can get in the way, but even if an editor cannot follow through on the promised date, they can at least give you proper notification ahead of time. Since the editor ultimately sets the return date, it doesn't seem plausible that they can't meet it.... or change it.

Watch your emails You can learn a lot about a potential editor from the emails alone. If the emails are slow to get back to you, the editor could have a heavy work load. If an editor cannot answer your email in full sentences (everything you've asked), then do you really want that person editing your story? If you feel like you're being disregarded before the project starts, it's rarely going to get better later on. If you are treated sub-par even before they get your money, how will you be treated after? If you get an editor who is so busy from hurrying to meet deadlines, consider just how much time is set aside for your manuscript when the time comes.

Reference, schmereference
Unless the referral is from someone you know, then it really has no meaning. Any referral can be written by a friend. A sample edit might be the best way to go. I have seen my own errors, or been told about them, but left them in the sample edit to see if editors would catch them all. Editors are people too, but if they didn't catch it, it would concern me.

The more the Merrier
Editing is a long drawn-out process which has several stages. You might want to consider more than one editor for different stages.

Development edit which concentrates on the structure of the story. Checking the story's viability. This is more comprehensive but it varies from editor to editor, just what they will do. Usually, a manuscript assessment accompanies the edit.
Content edit which concentrates on the contents and plot, consistency, clarity.
line edit this is about the grammar and style
proofread the final step before publication.

What to look for
Look for an editor who is not afraid to tell you like it is.

Expect to get back a good amount of markups.

Look for an editor who doesn't boast about being a nazi. Yes, we want someone strict, but not irresponsible.

Don't chose an editor who acts like they're doing you a favor. You're paying for a service, and you should get just that.

Don't ask the editor for any favors. he/she is doing this for work, and you should respect that.

What to avoid
Don't look for an editor who flatters your work. I'm not saying that your work isn't good, but that's not what you need, you need honest feedback and a solid critique.

Don't put up with editors who have no tact, or don't know how to word a critique so that it is constructive. Though you do go to an editor to essentially let that person rip you apart, they don't have to do it so crassly. Your money didn't come with sh*t, your finished product shouldn't either.

Surely, an editor above all others, would be a expert enough wordsmith to deliver honest feedback in a fair way. If not, you need a new editor.

Lastly, the entire thing is a process, so be patient and take it slow.

All forms of language are actually dialects, with a language being considered an official language when it has taken on some power. It takes on power by its users taking on power. It dies when its users die, etc.

Having a dystopian world, or any kind of world really, each group of characters should realistically speak in a pattern. It does not have to be a major change, but there needs to be a distinction.

The question is, write it as it's said which can be annoying to some readers, or simply 'mention' that an accent is in use. Of course, the register will help identify a dialect. i.e. saying 'it's such a bother' compared to 'what a pain in the ass'. Same meaning, different words.

So how important is a dialect to a world, and do readers favor it or hate it? And should it be used, to what extent?

I hope to give away both free bookmarks and free books before reaching the December 15th publication deadline. I want to have two giveaways, one in late summer or early fall, and then one in December.