Year: 2013 (page 61 of 66)

I am a fan of Stephen Blackmoore. I also consider myself his friend, even though he keeps taking restraining orders out on me — seriously, now I have to stay 603 miles away from him at all times, which will make the next WorldCon very awkward. WHATEVER. I dug the hell out of his first novel, City of the Lost, but for me, Dead Things is an epic favorite — I don’t read fast, but this book was like a gun pressed to the back of my head and I read the hell out of it in very short order. I loved it. So will you. Let Herr Doktor Blackmoore tell you all about it.

TELL US ABOUT YOURSELF: WHO THE HELL ARE YOU?

I am a sparkly unicorn who grants wishes and frolics in the… Wait.  Where am I?

Oh.  OH.  Sorry.  That’s, uh, that’s for something different.

I’m an author.  I write books.  There’s CITY OF THE LOST, about an undead thug who gets caught up in a hunt for the item that raised him from the dead.  KHAN OF MARS, which comes out later this year, set in the 1930’s pulp adventure world of the role-playing game SPIRIT OF THE CENTURY, about a hyper-intelligent gorilla fighting for freedom on the red planet.  My newest book, DEAD THINGS.  I also write short stories and co-host the bi-monthly lit event Noir At The Bar L.A. and run a true-crime blog called L.A. Noir.

I’m kinda all over the place.

GIVE US THE 140-CHARACTER STORY PITCH:

DEAD THINGS is an urban fantasy novel about a necromancer who comes home after 15 years to solve his sister’s murder to find it’s a trap.

WHERE DOES THIS STORY COME FROM?

The protagonist of DEAD THINGS, Eric Carter, is a necromancer, a rarity among mages.  He sees the dead, talks to them, makes them do what he wants.  It gives him a perspective on life and death that a lot of people don’t have.  It’s isolating for him in a lot of ways.

Carter disappears from his old life leaving behind a lot of resentment, anger and confusion.  And when he comes back fifteen years later to deal with his sister’s murder he finds himself having to deal with the fallout of his decisions.  His old friends don’t know how to handle him and he doesn’t know how to handle his friends.  It’s not easy for him.

Between that and his abilities with the dead a lot of the book is about ghosts.  Ghosts of dead people, ghosts of dead relationships, ghosts of the way things were and aren’t anymore.

And for me that’s the core of the story; disconnecting yourself from your life and the challenges of trying to come back to it.  That doesn’t always work.  People change.  Sometimes it’s the people you thought you knew.  Sometimes it’s yourself.

We’ve all done it at one point or another.  It’s part of growing and defining your own life, whether you do it at eighteen, thirty or sixty.  And there’s always fallout from those actions. Carter’s forced to confront the choices he’s made and the consequences of his decisions.  A lot of the story comes from examining what kind of awkward homecoming that might be like.

HOW IS THIS A STORY ONLY YOU COULD’VE WRITTEN?

A lot of writing is about choices.  Which words to use, which ones to leave out, what plot points to emphasize, that sort of thing.  All of those together, and a dozen other things, contribute to a writer’s voice.  I’d like to think that I bring something unique in terms of style to the stories I write.  Another writer would have made different choices, focused on different things.  I’m sure, hell, I know, that someone else could have written Eric Carter’s story.  But it wouldn’t have been this one.

WHAT WAS THE HARDEST THING ABOUT WRITING DEAD THINGS?

Making the character of Eric Carter unique and not a rehash of Joe Sunday, the protagonist of CITY OF THE LOST.

Though it’s set in the same world as CITY OF THE LOST, DEAD THINGS is a very different book.  The protagonists are very different people.  How they view the world and their place in it and the challenges they face are about as far removed from each other as it’s possible to be.  In CITY Joe Sunday is trying to adjust to a sudden new world that he’s been thrust into.

But with Carter, it’s coming back to a world that he thought he knew.  Sunday’s very much a fish out of water character, and Carter is more of a guide.  He knows his world, or at least he thinks he does.

I tried to keep Carter different from Sunday by focusing on Carter’s relationships and his character more than I did Sunday’s.  It’s a much more emotional and character driven book.  I think it worked.  Guess we’ll find out.

WHAT DID YOU LEARN WRITING DEAD THINGS?

That writing a book is something I can repeat and do it on a deadline.

I’ve looked at my writing career, though it’s new enough that calling it a career feels pretentious I don’t know what else to call it, as a series of stepping stones.  I always want to be moving.  I don’t want to do anything that isn’t going to lead me to something else.

The first novel I ever wrote was a weird, little mess for NANOWRIMO back in 2002 to prove to myself that I could do it.  After that I focused on writing and publishing short stories, get my name out there, get some bullets on the resume.  I didn’t try to tackle anything longer for a few years.  Then I wrote CITY OF THE LOST, sold that and jumped onto DEAD THINGS.

I’m proud of CITY OF THE LOST.  I think it’s a good book.  I wanted to make sure that DEAD THINGS was, if not better, at least as good and yet different enough that it stood out.

Up until the point that I turned the book in I wasn’t entirely sure I could do that.  NANOWRIMO notwithstanding (and I don’t really count it) I had never written a book with a deadline.  I was playing with things that I hadn’t really done before, digging into some emotional territory that wasn’t always fun to write, dealing with the pressure of knowing that I could completely blow it.

Now that the book is making its way into people’s hands I’m fairly confident that I pulled it off.  Knowing that I can do that gives me something to hang onto when I run into a rough spot and start believing that I can’t.  I have proof that I can.

WHAT DO YOU LOVE ABOUT DEAD THINGS?

That Eric Carter is a fuck up.

It’s not that Carter’s incompetent, it’s that he makes bad choices because of flawed assumptions.  You know, like we all do.  He set in motion a series of events based on what he thought people needed and when he comes back into the life he left behind he’s still operating as though everything should be the same and it isn’t.

I don’t like characters who can’t fail.  Superman holds no appeal for me.  Indiana Jones is more my speed.  Watch Raiders of The Lost Ark and you’ll see just how much of a failure as a hero Indiana Jones is.  He screws up just about everything he tries to do in that movie.  Loses the gold idol, burns down Marian’s bar, gets her killed (not really, but he doesn’t know that) and ultimately loses the Ark.  He’s a fuck up.  he just looks good doing it.

That kind of character is much more interesting to me and I tried to put that sort of limitation into Carter.

WHAT WOULD YOU DO DIFFERENTLY NEXT TIME?

Well, I’m about to do a next time.  The sequel to DEAD THINGS, BROKEN SOULS, is due to be delivered in July for a 2014 release.  DEAD THINGS was written during nights and weekends because of my day job.  This time I’m going to try to carve out a couple weeks off the day job and go somewhere I can’t be interrupted.  I don’t know if it will help, since I have an enormous capacity for distraction, but I’m hoping to find out.

Also, the outline for BROKEN SOULS is slightly more comprehensive than the one for DEAD THINGS.  The DEAD THINGS outline started something like, “Stuff happens and then this thing over here and then…” eventually getting into the actual plot.  I didn’t really have a beginning in mind.

This one is a lot more locked down, which on the one hand should make things easier and on the other, as I write it, I realize that it might be a little too tight.  I’m curious to see how far away I diverge from the outline with the finished book.

GIVE US YOUR FAVORITE PARAGRAPH FROM THE STORY:

I don’t have a favorite paragraph, but I do have a favorite line.  “Death keeps her promises.”

WHAT’S NEXT FOR YOU AS A STORYTELLER?

I’m working on BROKEN SOULS at the moment and then I have the next one in the series, HUNGRY GHOSTS, along with a couple of short stories I need to do and, depending on how things shake out, some gaming work that I can’t really talk about, yet.

I’m hoping to branch out into some other directions this year and try my hand at a comic script, maybe a screenplay, two things I’ve never tried before.  I don’t really expect much to come of them other than getting used to the form and use them to jump toward other things.

Like I said, they’re all stepping stones.

Dead Things (Feb 5th): Amazon / B&N / Indiebound

Read the first chapter here.

site: stephenblackmoore.com

Twitter: @stephenblackmoore

If you care about this in the context of children’s books (at which point I must assume you’re like, eight years old and probably don’t belong here anyway): the following post has a spoiler warning for Jon Klassen’s I Want My Hat Back and its follow-up, This Is Not My Hat.

Kay?

Kay.

So.

Rob Donoghue sent me the first “hat” book, and it is easily my favorite book to read to my son. Further, B-Dub likes it, too. When he wants it, he makes growling noises and taps his head, or calls out any of the animals within (a particular favorite is turtle, or “toor-tull”).

Yesterday, I poked through Barnes & Noble (hey, look, physical bookstores still exist! even though this one was phasing out of existence even as I walked through it, the air shimmering and revealing a panoply of retail possibilities — Panera, Old Navy, Coldstone Creamery, Big Dan Don’s Buttplug Bonanzaporium) and I found the sequel, This Is Not My Hat.

I read it.

And I realized:

The two books are essentially the same.

They tell the story of a most ungracious hat thievery, in which one small animal steals the tiny hat of a larger animal. In the first book, a rabbit steals that from a bear. In the second book, a little fish steals the hat off a much larger fish.

In both books, the big animal discovers what has happened and, despite being a bit big and doofy, eventually tracks down the hat thief and… well, it is implied that the bigger creature eats the smaller creature in order to regain the precious and titular hat.

Here’s where a critical storytelling lesson lies:

In the first book, the bear is the protagonist. The bear’s hat has been stolen.

In the second book, the tiny fish is the protagonist. The tiny fish has stolen a hat.

First book, we side with the victim.

Second book, we side with the thief.

We read the first book, and we feel for the bear. When he finally goes ahead and eats the rabbit and reclaims his hat, there is a moment if triumph (if a triumph of some black humor) because: YAY BEAR HAS HIS HAT BACK.

We read the second book, and we feel for the tiny fish. The tiny fish gives all his reasons for having stolen the hat. The tiny fish believes he has gotten away with, erm, clean fins, as it were. When the big fish finally tracks down the tiny fish and eats him to reclaim the hat, there is a moment of horror because: OH GOD THE TINY FISH IS (probably) DEAD.

Same story.

But a shift in perspective wildly alters our perception of that story.

From triumph, to revulsion.

From a tale of a dumb bear reclaiming his beloved hat…

…to the tale of a tiny delusional hat-thief getting his brutal comeuppance.

The lesson is, of course, that a simple shift in perspective changes so much in a story. Use a shift of perspective in fiction — and, perhaps, in life — to deepen the complexity of the story and to gain fresh understanding. Ignore this shift to keep things more narratively monochromatic. Further, it’s a lesson that few antagonists believe themselves evil: the tiny fish does not steal the hat because he is evil but rather because he is selfish and is able to delude himself about that selfishness. He has his reasons. He is, as are most antagonists, the hero of his own story.

For a kid’s book, it’s powerful stuff.

Maybe too powerful right now for B-Dub, who is not even two years old —

But powerful, just the same.

You want steampunk? We got steampunk. Here’s James Blaylock — one of steampunk’s first team — talking about his newest, The Aylesford Skull.

Tell Us About Yourself: Who The Hell Are You?

I’m a writer who sold his first short story in 1976, titled “Red Planet,” about a young man on a Greyhound bus in the Midwest who thinks he’s traveling to Mars, but perhaps is confusing Mars with the red agate marble in his pocket Since then I’ve published about 25 novels and short story collections and a heap of essays, introductions, and other short pieces. I won the World Fantasy Award twice, for my short stories “Paper Dragons” and “Thirteen Phantasms,” and the Philip K. Dick Memorial award in 1986 for my Steampunk novel Homunculus. That was still a couple of years before K. W. Jeter would coin the term. My books are translated in 15 foreign countries. My most recently published book is titled Zeuglodon, The True Adventures of Kathleen Perkins, Cryptozoologist. I recently sold a short novel titled The Pagan Goddess to Subterranean Press. I’ve lived in California all my life. Married for 40 years. Two sons. Dog named Pippi. Tortoise named Ollie. Readers can check out my website at jamespblaylock.com.

Give Us The 140-Character Pitch:

Quick-moving plot, river pirates, graves robbed, magically altered skulls, kidnappings, explosions, many strange occurrences, a certain amount of eating.

Where Does This Story Come From?

I’ve been publishing stories about the characters that inhabit The Aylesford Skull (so to speak) since 1978, when Unearth magazine published my story “The Ape-box Affair,” the first domestic Steampunk publication, hence my being referred to as the Grandfather of Steampunk. (Actually there are three Grandfathers, Tim Powers and K. W. Jeter included. I got in first only because it’s quicker to write a publish a short story. Both Tim and K.W. were writing novels at the time.) I prefer Godfather or Grand Vizier or High Priest or something. “Grandfather” needlessly makes me feel older than I am. Anyway, The Aylesford Skull is my fifth novel involving these characters, so its origins in that sense are decades old. The concept of the story, however, came out of my fascination with so-called Japanese Magic Mirrors (also arguably Chinese Magic Mirrors) that were exceedingly cool objects, which seemed to people to be authentically magic. I believe that they probably were magic a few centuries ago, before magic packed its bags and left town.

How Is This A Story Only You Could’ve Written?

I’m not certain how, but I’m certain that it is (unless we’re talking about the infamous roomful of monkeys with typewriters). Bruce Sterling once said that my work had a “refreshing natural lunacy,” and Robin McKinley, in what was no doubt meant as a positive statement, wrote, “No one should be spared the unique perversity of Jim Blaylock’s world view.”

What Was The Hardest Thing About Writing The Aylesford Skull?

The constant research was difficult, or at least time consuming. There was a ton of it necessary in the beginning, when I was working simply to envision the book and the characters, but the real work came when I was writing. I found myself checking any of a hundred different sources on every page that I wrote, and to make matters worse, one thing would inevitably lead to another. I’d start out reading about hops growing in Kent, England, for example, which would lead me to pieces about oast houses, which would remind me of a scene in The Pickwick Papers that I’d best reread, etc. I can’t tell you how much I learned about coal dust, for example, while I was working on the book (utterly useless knowledge in my daily life, I’m happy to say). Also, I’m anxious to get the language “right.” I want it to sound authentic in some sense of the term, not inaccessibly antique, but not characteristically modern, either. I wanted to fool the reader into hearing a novel that I might have written if I were alive in the 19^th Century. I constantly read Victorian novels, or modern works set in that time period, just to keep my ear in tune. It’s shocking how often I checked useful dictionaries in order to avoid anachronism or to understand idioms or scientific words of that strange age. I was surprised to discover that “dirigible,” for example, was very new in 1883. If the book were set in 1880 I’d have stuck with “airship” or “air vessel.” I often found myself checking The Dictionary of the Vulgar Tongue in order to find a nifty word or phrase, and then rechecking it in the Oxford Universal Dictionary on Historical Principles in the interests of accuracy, and then deciding against using it altogether because I didn’t like the sound of it or because it was too obscure or show-offy. That sort of thing could waste a good five minutes or more, and the result was that it would take twice as long to write the day’s thousand-words as it would have taken me to write two thousand words of a contemporary novel set in California. That being said, it was a great deal of fun.

What Did You Learn Writing The Aylesford Skull?

I learned something that I already knew but that I often forget: that the best stuff in any of my stories and novels flies into my head out of nowhere during the act of writing, and that I have to trust to the language and the muses and not to a lot of pre-thinking. Conversely, much of that cool, flying stuff ultimately can’t be used, because it simply doesn’t fit. There’s a constant interplay of momentary inspiration and rational assessment.

What Do You Love About The Aylesford Skull?

I’m very fond of some of the smaller characters, who began as bit players and then developed into very much more. That’s related to what I was just talking about – part of the very real magic of writerly invention when all cylinders are firing.

What Don’t You Like About It?

Can’t think of anything, and if I could, I’d quite likely keep it to myself. Reminds me of one of my favorite bits from Laurence Sterne’s Tristram Shandy: “A dwarf who carries a standard along to measure his own size is a dwarf in more articles than one.”

Give Us Your Favorite Paragraph From The Story:

This one is completely impossible. Here’s a paragraph that I like, however:

Wise reeled away. His senses were uncannily sharp in that

moment; he heard the rain beating on the deck and hissing on the

hot iron of the oven, and he smelled the rain and the river, and saw

with particular clarity the lights winking along the far shore. He

felt the railing in the small of his back, and he heard what sounded

to him like the murmuring of the Thames flowing in its bed toward

the sea, its waters unsettled and agitated by the incoming tide. He

found himself teetering backward, his weight levering him over

the railing – the brief sensation of falling and of the dark waters

mercifully closing over him as he drowned in his own blood.

What’s Next For You As A Storyteller?

I’ve got two novel proposals in the works – one Steampunk and one not. Also I’ve promised to write a couple of short stories. That should fill up a couple of years of my writing life. More of the same after that, as long as my brain doesn’t lose air pressure like an old tire.

The Aylesford Skull: Amazon / B&N / Indiebound

Is live.

Click here to go ask me questions.

Anything at all! Er, hence the name. AMA.

Ask. Me. Anything.

I’ll pop back in later to answer them.

Er, at Reddit, not here.

Because, y’know.

Reddit.

AMA.

And so forth.

Now fly, you fools!

I think I bummed some folks out last week with my “hard truths about writing and publishing” post. The goal, of course, was not to send you under your desk, blubbering into a bottle of cheap vodka while warming yourself by the fires of your burning manuscript, but rather, to present the sometimes harsh realities that you will need to overcome.

Or, as I am wont to put it, it was to teach you to harden the fuck up, Care Bear.

Just the same, I’d like to now apply the ice pack to your bruised cheek.

For all the seeming hopelessness of the publishing industry and one’s entry into (or around) it, it’s actually not at all hopeless. Difficult is not the same thing as hopeless, nor should we assume that “difficult” translates to “so hard it’s not worth doing.”

If you want to be a writer, fuck anybody who tells you differently:

It’s worth doing.

Not just because of some namby-pamby selfish “Waah it’s what I want” tantrum but rather, because stories make the world go around. Because stories can change us — both the reader and the writer. Because writing is everywhere: nearly anything that’s ever happened has happened because someone wrote some shit down. And also —

BECAUSE FUCK YEAH, WRITERS.

So, that being said, I’d like to note that (in the voice of the get-rich-quick infomercial), you too can make money at writing. No, seriously. I’m not fucking around. We writers like to go on and on about how it’s a poor man’s game and writing is a thankless job and here we are eating ramen noodles out of a hobo’s codpiece and we have the same hourly rate as those poor bastards who built the Pyramids, blah blah blah. But that’s just melodrama because, hey, we writers trend toward it like drunks veering toward the nearest bar. (Conflict is our bread and butter, after all.)

In terms of making money as a writer, I do all right. In fact, I’m doing better every year.

And I think you can, too.

And so, I figure, it’s time for some general tips on not just being a writer but, rather, being a professional writer. Further, being a professional writer who can do more than just buy an annual steak dinner with your earnings.

Here we go.

Speed: Learn to write with some zip in your fingers. A thousand words per hour is a good base level and not at all difficult to achieve.

Competency: It should go without saying that being a professional writer requires being a writer and storyteller of some competency. Some “full-time” jobs allow you to train a skill whilst on the job, whether we’re talking about mastering Excel or artificially inseminating cranky ostriches. Writing is unfortunately not like that. Which then leads to…

Time: Learning to write well and with some speed means this takes time. Do not expect to be one of those “overnight successes,” a creature as rare as a Bigfoot riding a unicorn on a saddle made of leprechaun leather. A writer’s so-called “overnight success” is just the tip of the iceberg exposed, while the rest of the writer’s time and effort and narrative R&D exist in a massive glacial mountain beneath the darkened waters. Just because the writer appeared on the world’s radar doesn’t mean that poor fucker hasn’t been working his fingers bloody for quite some time.

No, Really, I Mean It: This can be a slow process. It was about a ten year journey to go from “freshly-minted, ruddy-cheeked penmonkey” to “battle-hardened full-timer with stories wound into his bloody beard-tangle.” Be ready to invest the time and effort.

Per Word: The base level professional rate for a writer is five cents a word. This number hasn’t changed for the last twenty years — a troubling lack of  development there, but it is what it is and we’re just going to have to work with it.

Average Novel Advance: That’s around $5000. If we are to assume that the average novel length is around 80,000 words, then a novel earns at a slighter higher rate than what I noted above — a bit over $0.06 / word.

Hourly Rate: If you combine all the above, what you find is that writing 1000 competent words per hour at that base level rate earns you around $50-60 per hour before editing. (Editing dings that a little, though the more competent a writer you are, the less editing will cut into your time. Though no matter how competent you become, editing should never equal zero-percent of your time. You are not perfect. Good editors are like gold. Shut up and take your medicine.)

$41,600: That is your magic number. It is an annual salary. It is not a rich person’s annual salary. But it’s comfortable enough. At fifty dollars an hour, that requires you to work 16 hours a week. This is, of course, overly simplistic. It does not factor in editing, marketing, blogging, tweeting, drinking, flagellating yourself, masturbating, or general pantsless mayhem. But, given that the average workweek is 40 hours, devoting 16 hours to only writing leaves you with 24 hours in the week that can go toward all that other authorial twaddle.

Behold, The Novelist: That 16 hours a week translates roughly to 16,000 words per week. Which translates to five weeks worth of work to get the first draft of an 80,000 word novel complete. (Yes, this is easier said than done. We’re talking perfect world scenario, here, but one that becomes more achievable with an increase in those two fundamentals mentioned earlier: time and competency.) This translates to ten novels a year. Which is ridiculous and you’re not going to do it. You probably can’t write that many a year, and you almost certainly cannot sell that many a year. Which puts our annual salary in a bit of a bind, doesn’t it?

The Language Of Investments: A bit of a sidetrack, for a moment, so bear with me. It’s a little stodgy to use the word investment, but fuck it, it works, and we use the words that work because WE ARE WRITER, HEAR US ROAR OR MAYBE WATCH US WRITE I DUNNO YOU SHUT YOUR GODDAMN WORD-FACE. One’s writing career — the efforts, the time, the stories themselves, and the writer that culminates through all of that — should be seen as an investment. Pay in early, it yields bigger as time goes on. You will earn more as time goes on and as you become more capable — and as you produce more work and gain more audience and garner new contacts in your industry. It’s like a role-playing game. You eventually level up and gain weapons like THE BATTLE-SCYTHE OF STRUNK-WHITE (+2 against stylistic errors).

Diversify Your Portfolio: Okay, back to the problem at hand, which is that writing ten novels a year is not sustainable, nor particularly marketable — but, by the same token, that old-school “write one book a year” is problematic in that it doesn’t get us to our target salary. What this means is you should be prepared to write across a variety of media and platforms. Train yourself to write comics, games, television shows, films, articles, VCR repair manuals, whatever. The value here is that income arrives from multiple sources and that should any one source dry up, you have others on which you may depend.

The Danger of Self-Publishing: Self-publishing is all risk. You put something “out there,” it may earn you anywhere from, ohh, zero dollars to eleven-billionty dollars. Publishing through a traditional publisher offers a reduced royalty but a stable advance — meaning, you’ll earn your five grand or more regardless of whether you ever sell a single copy. Certainly you’ll find those who have made serious bank off of self-publishing, but the nature of the risk (i.e. the chance to earn very little at all) means it’s not a stable path toward the annual salary. This is a “slow and steady win the race” post, not a “fingers crossed let’s jump out of the plane and build our parachute on the way down” post.

The Self-Pub Numbers: Self-pub advocates speak of the Amazon 70/30 royalty split (70% to the author) as the golden reason to self-publish. That rate is notable, considering traditional publishing royalties are less than the reverse of that (meaning, sub-30%). But, that percentage isn’t everything: 70% of $100 is worse than 25% of $1000. E-books as your only vector of sales is doable, but risky — physical books are still over half the sales. Trad-pub gets you there and on bookshelves, and as such, royalty isn’t everything. I can keep 100% of my royalties if I sell out of my garage, but one assumes I’m only going to end up selling to squirrels and hobos that way.

And Yet, Here I Am Telling You To Self-Publish: Behold, the hybrid approach that I often tout as being the best way forward for the average penmonkey: yes, I think you should try traditional publishing first (for a number of reasons). But I also think you should self-publish on the side. Self-publishing is great for stories too risky to entice a traditional publisher. Short story collection? Novella? Serialized content? Insane manifesto? Transmedia smut pamphlets? Living memes that can reprogram the human brain with but the push of a button? Point is, that royalty rate I note is indeed still a good one, so this will let you take advantage of it without relying entirely upon it. Use the self-pub environment as an experimental laboratory.

On Writing For Free: Writers, like hikers, can die from exposure. Writing for free has value but you have to have to be able to see that value and ensure that it’s not a meaningless risk: anyone who asks you to work for them and promises exposure is whistling lies through their asshole. As I have said before, if you’re going to be exposed, expose yourself: control the message and the release. When in doubt: don’t write for free.

Attitude: It’s worth noting that your attitude through all this is very important. Writer’s block doesn’t exist, but general malaise and depression and disinterest do, and those must be combated. Further, you gotta treat this like work. Meaning, like a job. Few people let life get in the way of their work and yet so many wannabe professional writers let life get in the way of their writing — treat it like a career, not a hobby, not a creative pursuit, not an obsession. If you treat it like a career, it will eventually yield the fruits of a career.

ABW, Always Be Writing: All of this only works if you write a whole lot. Like, all the fucking time. And when you’re not writing you’re performing tasks that are in support of your writing (which is the basis of the entire career). You descend every day into the word-arena and kick a whole lotta ass while you’re in there. Some days you lose the battle, but over time, you win more and more. You’re painting with shotguns. You’re taking multiple-shots-at-goal.

Always. Be. Writing.

…

And that’s it. Time, effort, competency, instinct, diversity. Not easy to do, but also not as impossible as many would have you believe. You want to be a paid professional writer — full-time, not starving or pooping in a tin-pail like some weirdo in a barn — then it’s totally doable.

Now get back to work, penmonkey.

Asking for blurbs is, for me anyway, a very uncomfortable thing. You’re often asking peers or even your own authorial heroes to carve out precious time to write you what amounts to marketing copy. I have to blacken my Shame Sensors with the heel of a heavy boot just to get up the gumption to ask another author for a blurb. (Further, I’ll be asking for blurbs very very soon on my YA book, which is already making me itchy because I always feel like such an ass.)

I am now in the weird position of having authors ask me for blurbs.

This is totally fine and further, a totally awesome problem to have.

I have blurbed books gleefully and will continue to do so because YAY BOOKS.

Just the same, here are a few tips. Ready? Here we go.

When you email someone, be polite.

Use words like, “please,” and “thank you.”

Do not write an email that sounds like it assumes the blurb is forthcoming.

Or, worse, like they owe it to you.

That’s not to say you have to slather up the potential blurber’s nether-anatomy.

Just be polite.

Understand it is a favor of time and effort and act accordingly.

Do not be a human spam-bot. Be a fountain, not a drain.

Mass mails are not a good way to ask. Neither are public social media channels.

Finally, when the potential blurber gets back to you and says, I can’t or won’t do that, sorry, good luck, your response shouldn’t be a two-word:

“Why not?”

Because when you ask that, you’re going to get a less-than-pleasant response.

I don’t mean to put anyone off of asking me or asking any author.

But a modicum of politeness and grace goes a long, long way in this industry.

PLEASE THANKS BYEBYE.

*runs off to psyche self up to send out mails that ask for blurbs aaaauuugh*