Archive for the ‘authors are crazy’ Category

Stages of Production

Saturday, June 18th, 2011

I see the words “editing” being thrown around in talks about self-published books–or, more specifically, what they often lack. In one of the many other roles that I have played, I’ve watched production go on from…from…what is that phrase? From root to nut? From shell to scone? Something like that. I’ve worked in a zero-error tolerance environment, and so I have some idea how these things are done.

In any event, there is no need for self-published authors to say that they can’t produce at traditionally-published quality.

There are a lot of different kinds of editing. One person usually does not do them all in traditional publishing. This is not because there are very few people who are competent at all kinds of editing (although, let’s face it, that is also true). It is because different kinds of editing require you to think with different parts of your brain, and so you cannot do them all at once.

So, a brief overview of the stages of production, after the author has finished a draft of the work.

1. Substantive/big-picture editing: Focuses on pacing, story arc, character arc. The substantive editor reads the story and makes comments as a whole about ways to tighten it, to make the characters more sympathetic, to make the ending more climactic, your hero more heroic. All that good stuff.

2. Line-editing. At this stage, the line-editor goes through and cleans up inconsistencies, tightens language, nitpicks at awkward sentences, points out when sentences do not mean what you think they mean. If a chapter ending could be heightened for effect, she will tell you.

(As a general rule, in my experience these two phases are rarely experienced as distinct entities: while phase one generally focuses on overall story arc, the editor will still write “awkward” if she sees an awkward sentence; likewise, if in phase two the editor still feels like you need to make the heroine more sympathetic, she’ll push you on that. But this is the main thrust of it.)

These are distinct passes because if you are rewriting (not cleaning up, but actually writing new scenes or changing old ones dramatically) after phase one, there’s no point in nitpicking material that will disappear.

These days, both these phases are done on computer, so the author finishes line-editing her manuscript and you have a big file.

3. Copy-editing. This is where someone really steps in and tries to catch errors. The big ones are continuity errors: is the horse a stallion, a gelding, or a mare? What color is it? How many hands high? Does this remain consistent through the book? If it’s Tuesday today, tomorrow must be Wednesday, and so they should not be observing the Sabbath. If he went away five years ago, and she’s been out for two years, they couldn’t have met in her first Season. If his book was named A Gentleman’s Practical Guide to Chastity in Chapter One it can’t be A Practical Gentleman’s Guide to Chastity in Chapter Eight.

These errors are really, really hard to catch. You have to make a list of everything, and every time you run into something, you have to go and check on your list to see if it is true.

A good copy-edit stage also contains a good bit of fact-checking. “Actually,” the copy editor might say, “June 22 1841 was a new moon. Change to June 14th?”

If you write historicals, you may want to have someone who is doing historical nitpicking–possibly in addition to a regular copy-editor, so that they can tell you that “fantasy” was not used in that sense until 1915.

Along the way, the copy-editor also makes things consistent stylistically, and corrects typographical and grammatical errors. But because she is checking for overall consistency, it is insane–INSANE–to expect this person to catch all errors. Especially because the next stage in production is:

4. Incorporation. The author needs to look over and respond to the copy-edits. Sometimes she’ll stet a change. Sometimes the copy-editor will ask for advice and she’ll have to respond. In any event, what you get out of this is a document listing the changes that need to be made to the manuscript. Now someone needs to make those changes.

That person is an incorporator. It sounds like it is a mindless, meaningless job, just entering changes that someone else has suggested. It is not. Incorporation introduces errors. You need to make a change, and then look to make sure that you haven’t introduced an error with that change. In any reasonably sized manuscript, you will have introduced errors. You just will. There’s no two ways about it.

That brings us to:

5. The proofreader(s). The proofreader now reads the manuscript very closely for typographical and grammatical errors. She might catch continuity errors, but she’s mostly focused on typos. She notes all that she finds.

She’s human, and so she doesn’t find them all.

No, really. That’s the way it is. In any manuscript of reasonable length, one person cannot–CAN NOT–find all the errors in it. More importantly, most people are more susceptible to missing certain kinds of errors. Me, I will miss a he/she swap 90% of the time. I’m just not good at catching those. But I’m great at subject-verb agreement.

And so that brings us to:

Step 6: Incorporation.

Step 7: Evaluation. If  a proofreader found a great many mistakes, you probably need to go back through for a second proofing pass. So you might have to go to Step 5 and Step 6 again. If it’s really bad–or you want to be really darned certain–you may have to do this three or four times.

Step 8: Formatting: you put your file in the final format, whether typesetting or epub or mobi.

Step 9: Final-pass proofing. Because you need to proof your formatting. At this stage, you’re looking for both typographical and formatting errors. If you’re indenting paragraphs 0.5 inches for the first five pages, don’t start indenting them 1 inch thereafter; that’s annoying. When you formatted, did someone hit a stray key at the wrong time and introduce a “B” in the middle of the word? Did the conversion process spit out garbage halfway through the file?

You need to proof every format. EVERY ONE. On more than one device.

So there you have it. Those are the steps you need to take to produce a professional-quality book.

Yes, I’m serious about that. So every time I see people say, “I hired an editor but there are still typos in my book,” I always want to sit them down and say, “Yes, but what kind of editor did you hire? And how many typos were there to start with?” Because editors are not magic people who wave wands and fix a book instantly: you can’t hire one person to do everything, and especially not all in one pass.

It’s not always the editor who’s at fault if typos still remain–it’s the process.

I know this sounds daunting. In fact, I’m fairly certain that traditional publishing doesn’t go through these steps. I’m betting that most of them don’t proof their e-formats beyond a quick once-over.

That just means that you, the self-publisher, can do better. So when people ask me, “who was your editor?” it’s the wrong question. The right question is: “What was your process, and who assisted you?”

There were six people besides myself who participated in production of my novella, not counting beta-reads from friends. (I acted as incorporator.) I assumed at every stage of the game that everyone I hired was fallible (they are!) including myself (I am!) and checked and double-checked and triple-checked everything.

When it comes to production, good people help. Good processes trump.

(In the height of irony, I screwed up the steps originally and had to clean it up.)

Math proves my inevitable victory

Sunday, April 3rd, 2011

Now, you may have noticed that Julie James and I have had a friendly partnership in DA BWAHA–I help her get votes, she helps me get votes. It was nice while it lasted. But now we’re forced into head-to-head competition, in this the final round of DA BWAHA.

(Someone tell me: How did I get into the final round of DA BWAHA? Oh–it’s because you all voted for me! Thank you!)

Now, I have to admit to some trepidation about this particular opponent. Not only is Julie James nice, and not only is her book funny and smart and sexy all at once, but gosh darn it, she is a machine. Let me give you some idea of how machine like she is. She won Round 1 by 500 votes, Round 2 by 280 votes, Round 3 by 410 votes, Round 4 by 251 votes, and Round 5 by 123 votes. I stand in awe–those are some seriously impressive vote tallies.

Let me give you some idea of how not-machine like I am. I squeaked by a win in Round 1 by 3 votes. I managed to get Round 2 to 113 votes. Round 3 was another squeaker–18 votes total–and Round 4 I won by 113 votes. Round 5 was 21. In other words, my best winning margin is less than Julie James’s worst winning margin.

Humph. Most people will say that things look grim for our hero. (That’s me, in case you’re wondering.) But why be deterred by ordinary things like facts, when I can prove that I will win by mathematics?

Behold and weep! These are my win margins:

You see? How else can you explain this data, except with some sinusoidal function? It must be!

Now let’s take a look at Julie James’s winning margins:

Holy cow! What looked like rampant winning is actually a trend that will end in loss and gnashing of teeth!

Take a look at what they look like together:

Come on, guys. Can you argue with math? Really, can you?

Okay. Maybe you can. But would you want to? If basic math fails us, the sun won’t shine, the earth won’t spin, and e-books will be priced higher than the paper version. A vote for Courtney Milan’s Trial by Desire is a vote for the inevitable order of the universe as we know it. A vote for Julie James’s Something About You is a vote for chaos and economic destruction. Vote for Julie James if you don’t like gravity.

Otherwise, vote for math, happiness, and Courtney Milan.

Vote here: http://dabwaha.com/2011/04/championship-round/.

P.S. This entry is 100% totally completely serious, and I mean it. Really. I mean, who scoffs at math?

Final Four in #dabwaha

Saturday, April 2nd, 2011

So once again, Trial by Desire is up in DA BWAHA. It’s up against Jaci Burton’s novella, “No Strings Attached,” which has been a regular steamroller in DA BWAHA–so if you are so inclined, go vote for it!

You’ll notice that the second fight in DA BWAHA is Julie James’s SOMETHING ABOUT YOU against Nalini Singh’s Archangel’s Kiss. They’re both excellent books, but I have to admit to a soft spot for SOMETHING ABOUT YOU, where the heroine is a lawyer. Aw, lawyers. They’re so cute and cuddly! Seriously, I really love that book, and if you do too (or if you can’t choose between Nalini and Julie James), vote for her!

As a sweetener for that last race, I have the following to offer: if SOMETHING ABOUT YOU wins, Mr. Milan will review it. Here. On this blog.

Note: I only have his promise to review it, not his promise to review it in a timely manner. But yes, for the very first time, Mr. Milan could review a book not written by Courtney. How can you say no?

#dabwaha, now with extra bribery!

Wednesday, March 23rd, 2011

So we interrupt those boring posts about books and publishing and pricing and stuff to bring you what really matters…. the third round of #dabwaha! The field of Hellagood Authors has been narrowed from 8 to … 2. And the two who are remaining are Courtney Milan and Loretta Chase.

Say what? Let’s see. There’s Loretta Chase, author of LORD OF SCOUNDRELS, only the best romance novel of all time, and there’s Courtney Milan.

As far as I can tell, I just need to resort to outright bribery. So here’s the bribe I’m offering: if by some miracle I advance to the next round, I’ll give you a scene that I wrote. Which scene, you ask?

Well, sometimes, when I’m trying to flesh out key pieces of backstory–when I need to know what happened and who said what, so that I know what those people are thinking about today–I write out scenes. Just so I know what happened.

It just so happens that I have a scene sitting on my hard drive. It’s a scene between Smite Turner and Richard Dalrymple, when they were both 15 years old. It’s written from Richard’s point of view.

Question: How do I know they were both 15 years old? Well, because the scene takes place on their mutual birthday.

Did you know that Smite and Richard shared a birthday? There are two other things that are revealed in this scene (besides the fact that they share a birthday).

These things aren’t spoilery things (I wouldn’t give out spoilery things). But they are interesting facts. And I think both of them shed a lot of light on Smite. And Richard. So… if you want it, you know what you have to do: basically convince everyone you know with an IP address to go vote in DABWAHA for TRIAL BY DESIRE.

And now, #dabwaha Round 2…

Thursday, March 17th, 2011

*Thump.*

That’s the sound of my suitcases hitting the ground. It also means that I have my trusty laptop back.

*squirnch*

That’s the sound of me hugging it tightly. Oh, sweet sweet Internet addiction, how I missed you!

In any event, those who read the last blogpost know that I was out of town sans laptop for the last round of #dabwaha, which I now know stands for “Dear Author Bitchery Writing Award for Hellagood Authors.” 64 books entered. 32 have been eliminated, in one foul swoop. And…gulp… one of those books was not mine.

Yes, you read that right. Through a combination of luck, pity votes (because I was out of twitter range), and, apparently, hard campaigning by Angela James and some notable others, I squeaked out a narrow victory against Sherry Thomas. How narrow was this narrow victory? The margin was 3 votes cast out of 754 votes total.

Thank you, any and all of you who voted for my book, because 3 votes is a total squeaker, and I would never have made it without you. Really.

Still… some part of me wishes that I had tied Sherry, instead of winning. In part, this is because I really loved His at Night, and while I don’t like losing (competitive, can’t help it, sorry), I’m pissed that His at Night didn’t get farther. But in larger part this is because in Round 2, I’m up against Joanna Bourne’s The Forbidden Rose.

Joanna Bourne is a giant. She wins, like, everything–polls, the RITA, Christmas, boxing matches… you name it, she wins it. As she should, because she is a genius. The only hope that either Sherry or I had of toppling her would have been if we had tied, and petitioned the Powers that Be to let us continue as an ungainly juggernaut-amalgam of our two books: His at Desire, the story of Lord Vere’s forbidden love with Lady Kathleen, who is rescuing Ellisande’s aunt from Lord Harcroft, with nothing to aid her but a skittish horse and a travel guide to Corfu.

You would read that book, right? You would totally read that book, and you would totally vote for it over Joanna Bourne’s book.

But, alas. Here I am, pitted against Joanna Bourne. There’s nothing to do to try to get ahead except trash talk. Except…here’s the thing. Have any of you ever tried trash-talking against Joanna Bourne? She’s kind of intimidating. I can try the whole “your mother smelled of elderberries” thing but she would probably just nod complacently and say, “I think you mean gooseberries. Elderberries, as I’m sure you know, are….” And you would blush and nod your head and say, “Oh, of course, I totally knew that. Right. Yeah.”

Trash talking Joanna Bourne feels kind of like trash talking Einstein. Everything you say looks petty, and it just makes you look bad. It’s like she won’t stoop to my level or something. But I’m not going to let that stop me.

Joanna Bourne, you will regret the day that you ever wrote a fabulous book that lots of people loved! You’ll regret it bitterly.

When the voting opens, this post will update with a Proper Link and everything. UPDATED: Proper link to vote for yours truly, and thereby squelch the polite, brilliant, amazing behemoth that is Joanna Bourne: http://dabwaha.com/2011/03/vote-here-2011-round-2-set-1/

The Kool-Aid I drink

Wednesday, February 16th, 2011

As a general rule, I try not to drink Kool-Aid in publishing. I don’t believe there is any one way to do things; everyone who’s found success has walked a different path, and whenever someone tells me “EVERYONE SHOULD DO IT THIS WAY!” I raise an eyebrow and think, really? Depending on which beverage vendor you choose, you can have your flavor: traditional publishing is dying, books will become advertisements with pretty graphics, or traditional publishing is on its way to becoming a lean, mean dynamo, but before that can happen, zombie pirates will eat our brains. Some say you should never self-publish because it’ll destroy your chances at a career in traditional publishing. Some say you should never traditionally publish because the evil overlords will steal your back-breaking labor for their own profit.

I dunno about any of that. I figure that any way authors can make money works for me.

But amidst a great deal of negative news, there is one kind of Kool-Aid I will happily imbibe, and today, I feel like drinking it.

I believe in books. And stories. I believe that most people are really good people. I firmly believe that in the years to come, people will continue to want to read. I don’t think that the business of telling stories will disappear anytime soon. If I wanted to, I could believe in doom and/or gloom. But no–sorry–I love books too much.

And so if there’s any Kool-Aid I drink, it’s the one that says that stories are magic and that they’ll be around for longer than I will.

*raises glass*

Accuracy, believability, and the modern reader

Sunday, May 23rd, 2010

I am in the very, very tentative stages of writing my fourth book. As in, I am working on the second scene as we speak. (I have written more than that, but I am going back to the second scene and adding in detail.)

This book is taking place in a tiny village in England. It is not some made-up hamlet; it is an actual village. In any event, the hero–who was born in this tiny village, but who has been surrounded by the hubbub of London and other, louder places for the last two decades–is standing in the middle of the Market Place, and observing to himself that nothing has changed. Part of his observation includes him making a mental wager with himself that the market stalls–big heavy benches made of wood, with tile roofs overhead–haven’t changed since medieval times.

Of course, we know that everything is about to change for him, when the heroine, who is very new, swans by.

But I wrote this line about the market stalls being medieval and then stopped. You see, to a modern reader–and especially to a modern American reader–I’m afraid that will come off as unbelievable at worst, or weird hyperbole at best. That’s because we are used to impermanence. Old houses are houses from the 1900s–maybe dating from the 1860s. There are old houses. Maybe, we understand old houses.

But market stalls? Those are flimsy things that get erected and then torn down the next day. They aren’t made to last ten years, let alone a hundred. It doesn’t make sense to a modern reader to have market stalls that have been there since medieval times.

The Medieval Shambles (photograph by Frank James Allen; now public domain)

But, in point of fact, these market stalls did date from medieval times. The medieval stalls were in use up until at least the early 1900s. Think about that: four hundred and fifty years of using the same market stalls.

My hero would have no way of actually dating the stalls. He’s not an expert in medieval construction. He can’t say “these date from the 1450s,” and it would be awkward authorial intervention if he did.

I thought about sliding this under the rug so it turns into “much older than I am” rather than “medieval stalls still in use.” But I think that the “medieval stalls still in use on a biweekly basis” captures the character of how slowly this little town changes in a way that “old” simply doesn’t. My heroine is not just jolting my hero out of his ways; she is unmooring him from traditions that are literally centuries old. Those centuries matter to the story, and the whole point (well, one of the whole points) of setting it in this village is to give my hero’s inertia mass.

And so my job as an author is to convey the reader into that moment, to make the reality feel natural instead of awkward. My job as an author is to make  the modern reader forget that she lives in a world where the things that she uses will be relegated to the junk heap after three or four years. My job as an author is to make the reader forget about a world that is IKEA-disposable–and to do it all so quietly that she doesn’t even notice it’s happening.

I do not yet know how to do this. Maybe I will figure it out before I reach the end of the book.

On Entitlement

Thursday, March 18th, 2010

I know. I still owe you the third part of my discussion about copyright and the internet. In my defense, I have to think to write it, and at this moment all spare brain cells (all three of them) are devoted to writing books. In the broader sense, this is good for me and you, but not so good for my discussion of copyright.

But I have something to say about entitlement, and I don’t even have to think about it to write it down, so here goes.

In the last handful of weeks, I saw an instance in which an agent accused a writer of “entitlement.” The agent in question is Lori Perkins; the post is here if you are interested. I mention this, but I don’t mean to single out Lori Perkins in this post as the sole source of bad behavior; there were a number of people who have done similar-ish things in the past that have grated on my nerves. This is just the one that pushed me over the edge.

In any event, in the post in question, this agent labeled a writer as “entitled” because he sent two polite inquiries about a partial sent out in July. One inquiry was sent in November, at which point he was told that he would get a response sometime in December. The second inquiry was sent in February.

“Entitlement” is one of those words that has a certain morality embedded in it by implication. That is, if you say someone is “entitled,” in modern times we mean “this person is acting as if they are owed something, when they in fact are not.” In other words, when we say someone is “entitled” we usually mean that they are falsely entitled. Leaving off that modifier in regular speech means that certain things often go unspoken. That is: if you say someone is “entitled” you should also explain what is false about their sense of entitlement. Because there is nothing blameworthy about someone acting as if they are owed something, when, in fact, they are owed something.

In this case, the gentleman in question had not heard anything on the pages he sent to the agent for over six months. He did not insist that the agent in question read them instantly; he asked instead for an update on his status, and was roundly berated for that. And I just want to take a step aback and say… wait, what? In what sense is a person ever not entitled to ask about partials sent at the request of an agent, and not answered? How is asking for a status update, in a polite manner, ever indicative of a false sense of entitlement? And what does it say about the agent in question, that she thinks that the author did not deserve even this bare courtesy?

So let’s start with the basics. No, you are not entitled to be a diva. You should not expect agents to drop everything to meet your every need, before you’re signed as a client–but we’re not talking about that kind of person. We’re talking about the average writer. We’re talking about someone perhaps like the gentleman featured on Lori Perkins’s blog, or maybe someone like you.

You wrote a book. You submitted it to an agent. Now you’re getting a little worried. Maybe your book isn’t there yet. Maybe your characterization is not zipping. Maybe your plot could be more original. Maybe your query letter has a howling clunker in it. Maybe it does. The last I checked, those things didn’t turn you into a piece of granite, unworthy of basic human civility. And an agent–a good agent–knows that even if this book isn’t there yet, you might move on to book #2 or #3 or #4, and one day, your book will be there. In any event, at a bare minimum, you are one of the very few people who had the courage and stamina to write a whole book.

You are entitled to someone who thinks of you as a potentially valuable asset, who starts off what might be a long, profitable relationship with a sense of professionalism and respect. It is not too much to ask that if an agent says she will get back to you in ten weeks, that at the end of ten weeks you can send a status update asking for more details. And if she responds, “I haven’t gotten to it yet; give me another month,” it is not completely beyond the pale to ask for another update several months later, and if that person fails to respond that time, to e-mail her boss to see if she is still around. You are entitled to civility and professionalism.

You get what you see with agents. If someone doesn’t treat writers with respect on her blog or on twitter, chances are she doesn’t magically morph into someone who treats her clients with respect once she signs them. And yes, you can tell. My agent? She respects writers–even the ones who aren’t there yet. You can tell from her blog, and the effort she goes through to educate people about the query process and the business of publishing. She’s not the only one. Take the late, lamented Miss Snark (aka Janet Reid, aka the Query Shark). She respects writers, too, and you can feel it, even though her tone is quite different. Nathan Bransford? Ditto. Jim McCarthy? You betcha.

Want to know how to judge an agent? Pay attention to how they make you feel as a writer. And anyone who makes you think you’re an insignificant worm, and you’re falsely entitled merely because you think you deserve common courtesy?

Run away. Run away now.

Because if there’s one thing you are entitled to, it is an agent who thinks you have something to offer her.

Bad Reviews & Libre Digital

Monday, March 1st, 2010

So Harlequin and Libre Digital spent the last week at the Tools of Change conference talking about the promotion they did with my debut novel, Proof by Seduction, on Living Social. I wasn’t there, but I’m told they highlighted positive quotes from people who read the book and loved it–a lot of anecdotal evidence, the kind that ought to give anyone a warm fuzzy feeling.

What they didn’t do was post slides with the negative reviews. I don’t know if they even mentioned them. [ETA: Angela James tells me that they did mention them.] But those negative reviews were very valuable for me as an author. Here; go read the full spectrum of reviews. They range from one extreme of hyperbole (“This is one of the best debut romance novels I’ve ever come across”) to the other (“This is the single most trashy novel I have ever subjected myself to”).

This is not going to be an “I am a delicate flower” post. It’s not going to be about my feelings at all. No matter what my feelings were about these reviews (and yes I read them all, because even though I am not a delicate flower, I am an antsy debut author who is searching for meaningful data in a world composed entirely of anecdote; and no, I did not ever respond to any of these, nor am I going to now), I realized something halfway through.

Many of the people they were offering my book to were not romance readers. They said so outright in their reviews. This was initially a source of consternation for me. But the non-romance readers split into two crowds. Half of them said, “I do not read romance, and this book did nothing to change my mind about that stance.” The other half said, “I do not read romance, but maybe I should reconsider, because this was a fun read.”

The number of those people who would have read my book had they not had it forcibly shoved down their throats? Zero. The negative reviews were a sign that my book was getting into the hands of a diverse population, not just the regular romance readers who were most likely to purchase my book. The only way for me to forgo those negative reviews would have been to make sure that my book just landed in the hands of the easy readers who already adore this particular type of historical romance. And while that would have been great for my authorial ego, in the long run, it probably wouldn’t have been great for growing my readership.

If nobody hates your book, that means your book hasn’t found its way into the hands of enough new people. And, from an author’s point of view, that is never a good thing.

Subtle Nightmares

Wednesday, January 6th, 2010

There are some obvious nightmares: dreams where you’re chased by big monsters, or dreams where you wake up and someone is standing over you with a knife, or dreams where someone threatens to kill your puppy. For me, these dreams tend to be dark in tone and texture; they happen at night, and they’re often stripped of most of their colors, pulled down to a very basic color palette. (Those who say you can’t dream in color are simply wrong. I do dream in color, and sometimes color has been material to the unwinding of my dream.) You wake up from these dreams with a pounding heart, glad to be back in reality.

Then there are subtle nightmares. They start out like a regular dream: the full color spectrum. Nobody’s chasing me. Nobody’s threatening me or my loved ones. Instead, they start out so subtly normal that I think nothing of it. For instance, in one of my recurring subtle nightmares, I could be anywhere: walking through the town where I grew up, applying for a job, checking the mail. And then something happens: Maybe someone comes up to me and hands me a notice, or maybe it arrives in the mail, or maybe someone makes a phone call at the job where I’ve applied. For whatever reason, the nightmare part starts like this: “Well, Courtney, we just noticed that you never took the Public Health segment in high school. You’ll have to go back and finish it, or we’re going to rescind all your degrees.” And then, before I know what is happening, I’m being pushed back into high school, I’m turning seventeen again, I’m back among all those people, back when people cared more about the name on the jeans pocket than they did about what you might have to say…. NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!

I wake up, my heart pounding, glad to be back in reality where I desperately need to do laundry and I’ve still forgotten to pay that parking ticket, but by God, at least I don’t have to go back to high school. This is not very fun, as you can imagine. The subtle nightmares are in many ways more insidious, because they feel so much more real.

In any event, this is all by means of saying that in the last week or so, I’ve developed another subtle nightmare. And, yes, it will make you think I’m slightly neurotic as authors go, but hello. I should think you’d have figured that out by now. In any event, my agent, who is wonderful, has been sending me weekly sales reports gleaned from Bookscan. And those sales reports tell me how many copies of my book sold (although Bookscan is not complete, it is the only thing I have, and so I cling to it with irrational force) throughout the US. So far, the only reports I’ve gotten have been reports about the anthology–and I’ve been fairly blase about that in a sense, because it’s not one-hundred percent all the way mine. To be honest, most people bought it because it had the words “Mary Balogh” on the front, and I am totally cool with that.

But this… this one is all mine. And that makes it five hundred times scarier. In my subtle nightmare, I open my Bookscan report, and peer, frightened, at the number.

The number changes. Sometimes it is 6. Sometimes it is 7. It is never any greater than 8. And I say, “Wait. I bought every last mother-loving one of those copies!

So yes. That’s my current neurosis. I don’t see how authors back in the day survived, not knowing if anyone at all had purchased their book for months and months and months.

I sometimes think that these subtle nightmares are my subconscious’s way of making me feel good about reality by managing expectations. Yes, I may be behind at work; but hey, at least I don’t have to go back to high school! And yes, maybe I am getting far too angsty about meaningless numbers on Amazon–but at least more than 6 people will have bought my book (I hope–I actually will not see these magic numbers until, maybe, tomorrow, so there is one more evening of absolute neurotic panic).

In any event, if you bought my book, thank you for saving me from my worst neurosis. Thank you.


Courtney Milan’s Blog is proudly powered by WordPress
entries (RSS) and comments (RSS).
content © Courtney Milan, 2006-2009
author photo © Jovanka Novakovic | bauwerks.com
cover copyright © 2010 harlequin enterprises limited
cover art used by arrangement with harlequin enterprises limited. all rights reserved.
® and ™ are trademarks of harlequin enterprises limited and/or its affiliated companies, used under license
home \"home books \"books about \"about contact \"contact faqs \"faq articles \"articles