Could Anything Self-Published Be Worse Than This?

One of the big arguments against self-publishing is the idea that publishers perform a valuable service for readers by sifting through dreck. Supposedly, they only publish the best of what's available.

Uh, not always.

Another argument is that self-published work isn't always edited as well as it should be. The big publishers have fabulous editors working for them, and these magicians can turn a rough manuscript into a gem. Fair enough. I have the rough manuscripts to prove that!

Uh, sometimes but not always.

And finally, it has been said that NY publishing is better than self-publishing will ever be, because the people in NY really know what the rest of us want to read.

Uh, no. Not always.

Case in point:

A big New York publisher sent me a beautiful hardback book to review. The blurb by R.L. Stine said, "Here's a book that truly deserves to be called horrifying..."

Boy, he hit the nail on the head. I want to shake that man's hand. He tells it like it is. Notice that he didn't say, "This is a fabulous book and you have to read it!"

The accompanying press release calls the book "disturbing." Gotcha. There's another truth teller at work.

Here's the plot in a nutshell: Scientists use DNA sequencing to create a new breed of serial killer. When these monsters escape, it's a battle of wits with a special ops soldier who's tasked with rounding them up.

Fair enough. Sounds interesting, no? In fact, I'd love to read a book about that. A good book. This might even be the one, except...I put it down after the opening scene describing in detail how these little monsters brutalized women. Ugly, ugly stuff.

By page 17, they've progressed to flaying other boys, but still...that was given short shrift.

Today I got an email from the publicist for this book. She asked me what I intended to do with it. I wanted to say, "I don't believe in burning books but for this one I'll make an exception."

Instead, I said, "Well, R.L. Stine was right. Lord love him, and this book isn't my cup of tea. I think it's best that I don't review it."

(And in my head, I thought: Thank God. I'm not that sick or perverted. Not yet.)

To me, reading is and will always be a pleasurable experience. Therefore, I'll take a pass on images I don't want implanted in my little pea brain. Particularly if their only purpose is shock value.

I doubt that anything self-published could be worse than this dreck.

So what do YOU think? Have you read/bought any mainstream books lately that you wish you could have burned? That had no redeeming value? Or that relied on gratuitous sex or violence as a hook?

Do the folks in NY really know what all of us want to read?

What Published Authors Do That Non-Published Authors Won't

In a few minutes, I'll leave to teach a class called "The Practical Guide to Getting Published." I'm all prepared except for changing out of my jeans. I have this nifty 14-page handout with all sorts of resources, and I have tons of stories.

I tell all my students this: "You might not like what I have to say, you might disagree with what I have to say, but please know, that what I tell you is the truth according to my experience or the truth as I've heard it from other authors." I say this because invariably someone will argue with me. They will explain to me very patiently that they don't need to worry about grammar because an editor will do that. Or that they aren't concerned about word length in a book or article because that's the editor's job. Or that their book is different from every book that's ever been published, so the "rules" don't apply. Or that they intend to self-publish and, therefore, using a style manual isn't necessary--and besides, they can't afford a good proofreader. Or that their mother/sister/brother/in-laws/high school teacher told them their book was worthy of publication, so surely it is.

And they might all be right.

It's just that, in my experience, authors who get published:

1. Learn the rules of grammar and usage. (Come on, people. Mastering comma placement is NOT that difficult. I suggest you get a copy of Eats, Shoots and Leaves at the very least.)
2. Look stuff up all the time in a style manual. (For example, I get confused as to whether "was" or "were" is appropriate when there are conditional circumstances which must be considered. So, I'm always looking that up.)
3. Spell-check and rigorously edit their own work. (And often submit their work to other authors/friends to help them proofread. Many published writers belong to critique groups and welcome criticism. Sometimes they just swap stuff back and forth between good friends like Shirley Damsgaard and I do.)
4. Understand word counts and adhere to them. (MS Word has a function in the tools area which gives you word count. That's close enough. No one would quibble with whether a word like "get-together" counts as two or one of its kind.)
5. Read about their intended markets and submit work that fits within listed guidelines.

But then, what do I know?

Why You Need an Agent--and Query Letters that Worked--Part I

I promised to write about agents, so here I go.

Let's start with the four ways for getting an agent that I personally know work:*

1. Pitch an agent at a writers' conference--meet the agent face-to-face and tell him/her about your book. SleuthFest is a great writers' conference for this. So's Crime Bake. Why? They offer face time with agents. You will need to craft your pitch so you can say it in your sleep. Try it on several friends and watch their reactions. Do they smile? Do their eyes light up? Remember that agents expect you to be nervous. Heck, they've done this before. And be prepared to send at least 50 pages of your work-in-progress. Better yet, finish your book first. If you're writing fiction, they've been pitched by dozens of folks who never finish their manuscripts. So be prepared--have yours done.

2. Pitch an agent online. In this age of Internet, this is a great way to get a speedy response. Use a guide to agents such as the excellent one by Jeff Herman. Go to Predators and Editors athttp://anotherealm.com/prededitors/ Join the Guppies--which is a special interest group for not-yet-published authors who are members of Sisters in Crime. (You must be a SinC member first, then you pay a small fee to join Guppies.) The Guppies have a list of editors they'll share. Or use the Writers Market guide to editors. Make a list of those who will accept online queries. Then, work your list.

3. Get a referal from an author. This is the hardest of the the opportunities. If you haven't already published a book, haven't established yourself as a professional, it can be very tricky for another author to recommend you. After all, she or he will be sharing an important asset--the name and contact info for his/her agent. So don't count on this method. And never, ever just walk up to an author cold and ask for this info. That's rude.

4. Send a query packet or query letter to an agent--cold turkey. It can work. But to do a good job you need to write a GREAT query letter. There are examples at Gumbo Writers. Check them out at http://www.gumbowriters.com/

* I have friends who have used these methods or I have tried them myself.