Negative Reviews: Are they Always Negative?

My Suspense/Thriller Writers group on Facebook is discussing the postive aspects of negative reviews this week, and Roni Gehlke left a comment that’s worth passing along.  Roni wrote:
 
As a reviewer and a writer I have to say that there are all kinds of ways people can give you a negative review. As a writer I don’t mind hearing people give me constructive criticism, especially if they know what they are taking about. After ten years I’ve developed a thick skin, at least I hope I have. I still get disappointed when I hear someone didn’t like what I wrote, but as long as there are others who do, I push forward.

I cannot abide by people who just appear to be mean spirited, though.

For example, I have a favorite author who is constantly getting bashed on Amazon. It isn’t that she is a bad writer, obviously l like her and she’s been around for over 30 years writing novels. I believe there are some people who don’t like her style because they don’t hold the same values she does and because of that they criticize everything she writes. Sometimes I have to ask whether these people have even read the book or are just writing a bad review to be mean.

This particular author writes contemporary western cowboy romance novels, about strong alpha men and virginal women. Just because one believes that there are no longer virgins in the world and strong alpha males are bruits doesn’t mean that the stories are bad.

Because you don’t agree with the author’s topic of writing is no reason to give a bad review. If you don’t like gay books or ménage books, don’t read them and don’t force you’re values on those who enjoy them. When bad reviews are written for this reason it is unfair to the author and unfair to those who may wish to read the book but then follow the advise of the reviewer and don’t.

Since I started reviewing books I work carefully to check out all angles of a novel. If the subject matter offends me, and little usually does, I won’t read it or review it. Why waste my time or the readers who may follow my advice.

If the book has fatal flaws like grammar errors, even I as a novice can find, then I might mention it and shave off a few points of the end score, but it doesn’t mean it will get a bad review either. If the story has a good theme, well thought out characters and in the case of suspense and thrillers, keeps me reading until the very last page it will get high scores from me.

One final note: I read an author’s blog a few months back where she was very upset that she had received bad reviews on one of her books. This is a tough industry. People give bad reviews in ignorance, in spite and just because they can. Authors spend a lot of time and put a lot of themselves into their work. The first few bad reviews may sting, but keep in mind that you will always get bad reviews before you will get good ones. More people will complain then praise. It is just a fact of life. Try to look at the bad reviews as a learning experience of what people don’t want to see, balance it with the good reviews of what people do want to see and get right back in front of that computer and start again. If you are lucky enough to get published, that says everything right there.

Happy writing.

If you are a fan of romance and happy endings, check out Roni’s Blog: Romance Books Scene.

On Writing “Shadows”

My guest today is Joan De La Haye, author of Shadows and co-founder of Rebel e Publishers. Joan writes:

I started writing Shadows a few years ago. I was in the middle of editing and finishing off another book, which is now collecting dust in the back of a drawer, when the idea for Shadows hit me. In fact it did hit me, in the middle of the night, in the guise of a very freaky nightmare.

I decided that since it frightened me, it probably would also frighten others. I couldn’t go back to sleep so poured a glass of wine, switched on my old computer and started writing a story that seemed to come from somewhere else. It was one of those rare moments when the muse strikes and there’s just no arguing with her or in this case him. The story just flowed out of my fingers and onto the keyboard.

I spent a year working on the first draft. This time I took Stephen King’s advice and wrote with the door tightly shut. I’d made the mistake with my previous book, the one that’s collecting dust, and allowed too many people to influence it. As a result it ended up not being my book.

The first draft was only Sarah’s story and written from her perspective. It ended up being way too short, so I added Kevin’s story and tied them together. They fitted together seamlessly, but there was still something missing from the story. I couldn’t figure out what it was until I sent it off to a local publisher. The submissions editor loved it, but said that it was too short and she then suggested that I added some additional scenes.

The additions she suggested were all great and incredibly helpful, but she also got me thinking about another side. One I hadn’t even thought about. Carol’s story was written in a matter of days. I couldn’t focus on anything else until her story was written. Shadows became the interwoven story of three very flawed individuals struggling with their own demons.

I re-submitted it to the local publisher, who then unfortunately didn’t like the extra scenes that they’d requested. It wasn’t what they’d wanted. It took a year from my original submission to the day the publisher passed on Shadows.

Needless to say I was devastated. I’ve never been very good in handling rejection. What I did to get over the rejection can be found on Pat’s other blog: Book Marketing Floozy.

See also: Pat Bertram Introduces Jack, the Torment Demon from Shadows by Joan De La Haye

A Stranger on My Own Blog

Sometimes I get to feeling like a stranger on my own blog. I know I’ve told you several times before that I’m going to reclaim it for myself, but I keep meeting fascinating people who have more interesting things to say than I do, so I invite them to write a guest post. Sometimes I don’t even know how fascinating the people are! I met Vince Gotera on Facebook when I added my Suspense/Thriller Writers group to his index of Creative Writing Sites on Facebook, and we struck up a sporadic conversation. (Actually, I think sporadic is being generous.) The upshot of the deal was that he would write an article for me about an editor’s pet peeves. How was I to know that Vince is the editor of  the prestigious North American Review, the longest literary magazine in the U.S.? Actually, I should have known the magazine was a big deal — with Google, there is no excuse not do one’s homework. Still, it makes me seem as if I’m way more savvy than I really am. If you haven’t already, be sure to check out Vince’s bloggery, “Submitting to Literary Magazines 101: Professionalism.” And don’t forget to read the comments. Vince was a perfect guest, responding to everyone who commented. Even more thrilling, this is just the first installment of a three-part series.

I’m doing it again — aren’t I? — talking about other people instead of myself. But I don’t know what to say anymore. When I first began this blog, I gave writing tips and suggestions, then somewhere along the way it began to seem presumptuous. Who was I to tell anyone how to write? Two hundred rejections is not an indication of a great writer! At least it’s not an indication of a writer who follows the rules she’s propagating. Then I got the idea that I should write that which only I can write. Again, a presumptuous idea. But I did talk of my WIP (poor stalled creature that it is) until I found a publisher who loved my books More Deaths Than One and A Spark of Heavenly Fire. Then I started promoting. Or at least talking about it. I don’t have a clue how to get from here to selling the thousands of books I should be/could be selling.

Which leaves me to talk about . . .

I don’t know. At least I don’t have to figure it out for a while. Joan De La Haye is going to be stopping by here on May 5th as part of her blog tour. Then Steven Clark Bradley will be here shortly after that talking about the importance of perseverance in writing.

Meantime, I started a new blog — one just for me. I liked the idea of the WordPress P2 theme, (sort of a Twittery thing) and had to try it out. Stop  by and say hi! Talking about presumptuous — I call my new blog The Mind of Pat Bertram. Sheesh. As if anyone cares what goes on inside my head.

add to del.icio.us : Add to Blinkslist : add to furl : Digg it : add to ma.gnolia : Stumble It! : add to simpy : seed the vine : : : TailRank : post to facebook

Submitting to Literary Magazines 101: Professionalism

I am truly honored to have Vince Gotera as my guest today. Vince writes poems and stories, as well as the occasional creative nonfiction. His books include the three poetry collections Fighting Kite, Ghost Wars, and Dragonfly, as well as the critical study Radical Visions: Poetry by Vietnam Veterans. Vince serves as Editor of the North American Review, originally established in 1815, the longest-lived literary magazine in the US. He has been a Professor of English at the University of Northern Iowa since 1995. He earned an MFA in poetry writing and a PhD in English from Indiana University. Vince’s blog is The Man with the Blue Guitar. Gotera writes:

In a couple of days, I will be starting my tenth year as Editor of the North American Review — a tremendous privilege and honor since the NAR is the longest-lived literary magazine in the US, originally established in 1815.

About a year and a half ago, in a Facebook group titled “MFA in Creative Writing,” as part of an online discussion of editing and publishing, I dashed off an impromptu list of my pet peeves as NAR poetry editor. This list quickly took on a life of its own and was re-run on at least one other writerly blog and perhaps others. (As the movie Dorothy said of the Munchkins in Oz, blogs “come and go so quickly” so I can’t be certain how widespread the list “viraled,” so to speak.)

In any case, here (officially) is the precise text of that offhand list, originally written on 29 August 2007:

Okay … for me, the “turn-off” is different for each poem I ultimately reject. Here are a few immediate turn-offs, in no particular order:

• Botched ending … forced, too explanatory, too “universalized”
• Clumsy use of form … for example, if sonnet or sestina, etc.
• Slow getting going … should rock from first line down
• Too much full rhyme … I prefer slant rhyme
• Uninformed line breaks … be aware of lineation effects
• Abstract or image-less … unless experimental
• Superficial topic or handling
• Obviously unaware of poetic tradition(s)
• Cover letter explains poem … inexperienced submitter
• Poem sent with vita or résumé … very inexperienced submitter
• Says “copyright …” … does writer think I’ll steal the poem?
• Centered lines … unless important for theme
• Badly edited … errors, typos, grammar, etc.
• Font too small … many editors are older and have old eyes
• Monotype font or font too fancy … hard to read quickly
• Pseudonyms … let’s back up our writing with our names, ppl
• Handwritten … usually from prisoners, though I’ve accepted poems by prisoners.

There are other turn-offs but that’s all I can think of at the moment.

I do want to say that I don’t just drop the poem. My eyes touch every word. I read very quickly and wait for the poem to say, “whoa, you’re reading too fast.”

I also want to say that not every poem we take is already “perfect.” if a poem has something good going for it but has errors or whatever, we are willing to work with the poet in the proof stage. Not full workshop of course … that would be inappropriate … but suggestions and queries. In the long run, though, the writer’s in charge, of course.

Well, I’m grateful Pat has offered me a slot here as guest blogger. I would like to use this opportunity to expand on and clarify some of the items in that offhand list above. And maybe, if she’ll allow me, devote some later guest blogging slots to other pet peeves.

Today, I want to address professionalism in submitting to literary magazines. Five items above plus one other are germane. What I will say below about these six items are part of what many people — both writers and editors — refer to as “unwritten rules.” Oh, incidentally, what I’ll say below pertains directly to poetry, but of course writers of other ilk are welcome to adjust my advice for their own genre(s).

(1) The Cover Letter. Many writers don’t include a cover letter at all. The reasoning, I suppose, is that the editor will of course know why the poems are coming to the magazine. That’s okay, but I personally like to get cover letters because I think they’re polite. If they’re handwritten and say something like “Some poems for the magazine,” that would be fine. Our grandmothers told us we should send nice notes, and that’s what the cover letter should be. Sorry if I seem fussy here; I just think the transaction between the writer and the editor should be civil and friendly. A cover letter certainly can dispose me favorably (a little) toward the submission. Especially if a cover letter is fun or entertaining.

But … don’t try to impress me in your cover letter. Don’t tell me you were published here or there. Or that you have published so many books blah blah blah. When I see that in a cover letter, I don’t read it. For me, the poem and only the poem can get itself into the magazine.

Definitely do not explain the poem in your cover letter. As an editor, I’m trying to gauge how readers will understand the poem, and I don’t really care how you read your poem. Or what you meant. Or what poetic form or style you used. If the poem can’t “say” all that for itself, it’s not getting into the NAR.

It’s a good idea to list in the cover letter the titles of the 3 to 6 poems you’re sending. This will make our lives easier should your cover letter get separated from the poems. Not likely to happen but it could.

(2) Résumés and Vitas. Sometimes writers who know the cover-letter pitfalls listed above will instead send a list of publication credits. From my point of view, that’s equally annoying. Actually, more so, because it’s not as friendly as an actual letter.

What ever you do, never send a résumé or a vita; that really smacks of inexperience. Of not knowing the “unwritten rules.” There may be fields or disciplines in which one sends a vita with a submission, but not in the literary magazine world. Sending a résumé or a vita could possibly dispose me against your work. What I mean is that your poems will have to work that much harder to catch my attention. It could happen … the poems could be so good that they make me overlook the résumé faux pas but that would be a rare occurrence indeed. It’s never happened, actually, in my twenty years of poetry editing.

(3) Copyright. The experienced writer should be aware of how copyright law works: that as soon as you write something, you own its copyright; in other words, you only have to show that you wrote something and when to defend your copyright. Inexperienced writers, on the other hand, will sometimes fear that their poems are leaving their hands and could be stolen by someone at a magazine. So they will include a copyright notice on the poem itself.

This is quite an insult. An arrogant one. First, this practice suggests that you think your work is so good that the editor or some other staff member will, instead of publishing your work, be driven to steal it. Second, this tells us you think we are thieves. Do you think this makes us friendly to your poem?

There are how-to articles and books out there that say put a copyright notice on your piece. That is old advice for an older time and is no longer necessary in today’s copyright environment. So just resist doing it. Your chances of getting published will increase. What I mean is that the poem will have a chance of a better reading without a copyright notice.

(4) Fonts. Something that we see quite often is a poem that has been printed out in 9- or 10-point font. Sometimes even smaller. I’m not really sure why people do this. Perhaps they’re trying to save postage. Or they want to squish their entire poem onto a single sheet. Who knows?

Look at it this way. When you are interviewing for a job, do you make it difficult for the interviewer? Or annoying? Do you dress in garish colors that make it hard for the interviewer to look at you directly? Do you whisper your answers to the interviewer’s questions so that you can almost not be heard?

What you do with fonts can be equally deleterious. Let’s face it, editors are writers who have some mileage on them; and that mileage takes years. So quite often, an editor will be someone with older eyes. How do you think the miniature font you’ve used to get your poem all on one sheet will be received by that editor with the graduated bifocals or trifocals? There is no problem with having continuation pages. In fact, when I send out poems, I use 14-point Times to make sure they are readable by all.

Speaking of Times font: I would dissuade you from using a typewriter font like Courier. Those are harder to read than Times or Palatino or Georgia or some other standard non-typewriter font. Remember that the editor must read quickly. For example, at the NAR, we read 7,000-10,000 poems a year. If the poem is hard to read fast, there’s a possibility it may not be read at all. Ditto with fancy curlicue or script fonts. Hard to read. Bad. Also sans serif fonts like Helvetica. A little easier to read but not as easy to read as Times. You may think Times is boring but it could help you get published.

(5) Pictures. No. Very bad. No pictures with poems. Even if you’re sending an ekphrastic poem — one based on a painting or a sculpture, for example. The enclosed or attached picture is a definite tip-off that the writer is inexperienced. An ekphrastic poem has to be good enough to stand on its own without the visual image next to it. In a blog, including a picture next to a poem is a plus. In a submission, BIG minus. Just say no.

(6) Pen Names. This last one is not the same kind of no-no as those above; it is not patently a bad idea. Nevertheless, it is still a no-no (at least for me). Pseudonyms were important to publish in previous decades for many reasons; one of these is that women or minorities had a harder time getting their work accepted without a “good old boy” name. This situation has changed, however, and people who use pseudonyms often do so now for romantic reasons. Or because they feel their poems are somehow NSFW (“not safe for work,” as we sometimes say in Internet slang).

A pen name some poet might think romantic, like “Valentine Lovesmith” or “Genevieve Queensryche,” is just straight-out silly; the real name of an American 19th-century romance writer, Mrs. E.D.E.N. Southworth (Emma Dorothy Eliza Nevitte), helped to make her a bestselling success story, but taking on a name like that won’t work today. I feel writers should stand by their own names; their poems should carry the weight and significance of their real names. Not all editors will probably agree with me on this, but I suspect a majority of them will.

Okay, that’s it for now. I hope you will see the sense of these “unwritten rules.” Basically, for me, it’s about friendliness and civility, again. Editors are your friends. They want to publish your work. They want to discover the next great poet. So make the submission easy for editors, professional, and your poems will be able to shine on their own as they should. Good luck with your writing and with your submissions.

add to del.icio.us : Add to Blinkslist : add to furl : Digg it : add to ma.gnolia : Stumble It! : add to simpy : seed the vine : : : TailRank : post to facebook

I Enjoy Keeping Men Up Late at Night!

A couple of days ago I received an email from Aaron Lazar, author of Tremolo: Cry of the Loon. He said: “I started A Spark of Heavenly Fire last night and am HOOKED, big time! I read 100 pages (usually I fall asleep when reading in bed after a few pages) and dreamed about it all night. Wonderful! Can’t wait to read more, Pat. You’ve got a winner here.” Today he wrote: “Read another hundred pages last night. I’m mad with you! I didn’t get enough shut eye! HAAAAA!”

I do enjoy keeping men up late at night! I like keeping women up late at night, too. During all these years of wondering what it would be like to have people read my published novels, this is one aspect I never took into consideration — how wonderful it would feel to know that I am keeping people up past their bedtime so they could read a few more pages. Such an awesome power!

In November, I posted a bloggery, “What If People Like My Books?” I had been so focused on getting published, that for some reason until then it never occurred to me to wonder what it would be like if people actually enjoyed my novels. After 200 rejections, I was poised to deal with more of the same, but so far I have received only positive feedback. It’s an incredibly affirming experience to have people peek into your mind, to become intimately involved with your creation, and to get what you’re saying. So much of me is in the books that I thought I would feel exposed, but I don’t for the simple reason that the books no longer belong to me. They belong to anyone who reads and enjoys them.

Wanda H. wrote:  “I’ve now read both books! They were both spellbinding and kept me engrossed until I finished. It was hard to put them down to sleep and not to pick them up again in the morning and instead go and do things.

My favorite is A Spark of Heavenly Fire. I love the characters and the action and the . . .  well, everything. But it only edges out More Deaths Than One by a bit.

I now see what you mean about an unnamed genre. Kind of a big picture conspiracy, behind the scenes machinations and how that affects the little guy (or gal) on the street. You did such a terrific job. I know you’re going to enjoy tremendous success not only with these books but also with the books you’ve yet to write.

Anyway, just to gush a little more…. I love your work! You rock!”

Sheila Deeth, who won the first autographed copy of my book because of her wonderfully imaginative entry for my More Deaths Than One Contest, wrote an incredible review of the book.  She starts out: The first three pages of “More Deaths than One” have to constitute a serious contender for the best opening scene of a novel. Two main characters are introduced, a garrulous waitress and a taciturn hot-chocolate customer. They meet. She talks, a lot. He reads the paper. “And Lydia Loretta Stark was dead. Again.” With two such immediately real and appealing characters, and a line like that, I’d challenge anyone not to want to keep turning the pages. more  . . .

So . . . what if people like my books? I feel honored, and if truth be told, a bit humbled.

add to del.icio.us : Add to Blinkslist : add to furl : Digg it : add to ma.gnolia : Stumble It! : add to simpy : seed the vine : : : TailRank : post to facebook

My First Review!!!!!!!

Steven Clark  Bradley, author of Patriot Acts, has written such a marvelous review of my novel More Deaths Than One, that I can’t keep it to myself. I want to shout it to the world! I knew it would be a good review, because several days ago he messaged me on Facebook. This is a transcript of our conversation:

Steven: (4/19/09 10:37 pm) Hi Pat, I wanted to let you know that I am deeply into your book and it is fantastic. You have a great hook, at least it certainly hooked me! You have a natural talent. I usually read a book really quickly when I am going to post it and review it, but your book has my total attention and it reads very well. If you can get a large number of people to know of it, I know you could have a best seller there. Once again, free of flattery, you are one of the smartest writers I have met. I promise, you’ll love what I write about More Deaths Than One.

Pat: (4/20/09 11:51 am) What a wonderful thing to say! I am thrilled you like More Deaths Than One. You’re one of the very few people who have started reading it, so your encouragement is much appreciated.

The question that has haunted me for months is how do I get a large number of people to know of the book. Perhaps someday I will find the answer. Your review will help, that’s for sure!

Steven: (4/20/09 12:14 pm) The only word that comes to mind is Superb! I read until 1:00 Am last night and forced myself to go to bed! Great work!

I think your characters are so interesting and human. I feel I know them well now. Could we call it “What about Bob?” ;>) you’re a really great writer and no reason why you cannot sell thousands of books.

Steven: (4/22/09 1:21 am) Hi Pat, Sorry I have not written, but I have been busy finishing one great novel . . . written by you! I have already posted a review for your novel. I have not read a book that enjoyable in a very long time. You are a natural. I hope you like what I wrote and every word is the truth. I am happy to be your first posted review on Amazon. That gave me great pleasure. Have a great night and thank you for allowing me to share in the mind of Pat Bertram.

Pat: (4/22/09 12:17 pm) Steven, I am sitting here trying to figure out how to thank you for the fantastic review and the wonderful presentation on your blog, but  am touched beyond words. Still, you deserve the words: thank you. Your review was so well done that even I am now anxious to read More Deaths Than One!

Steven’s review: More Death’s Than One

add to del.icio.us : Add to Blinkslist : add to furl : Digg it : add to ma.gnolia : Stumble It! : add to simpy : seed the vine : : : TailRank : post to facebook

Developing A Smell-O-Meter: How Do You Tell If What You’ve Written Is Good?

I’m participating in an interesting discussion on Facebook today about  . . . you guessed it! Developing A Smell-O-Meter: How Do You Tell If What You’ve Written Is Good? It’s a topic I’ve been considering a lot now that my books are released and feedback is trickling back to me. I always knew A Spark of Heavenly Fire was good – even when it was bad, I knew it was good. I can’t tell you how I know – probably that smell-o-meter. Or perhaps an ingrained feeling for the flow of a story. That belief kept me going through multiple rewrites and hundreds of rejections. It’s nice to know that agents and publishers do not know what individual readers like. Today, Malcolm R. Campbell, author of The Sun Singer, left me a message on my facebook wall: I just finished reading A SPARK OF HEAVENLY FIRE. When I stay up past my bedtime multiple nights in a row just to read a little bit more, I know I’ve found a winner of a book. Darned good, Pat.

On the other hand, I never got a sense of More Deaths Than One. Even after all the rewrites, it just didn’t seem to be as good as I wanted it to be. I entered it into a contest on Gather.com eighteen months ago, where the first chapter was posted for people to vote on. Lazarus Barnhill, author of The Mecine People and Lacey Took a Holiday, was impressed with that first chapter of More Deaths Than One, and he eventually became one of the book’s first readers. When he finished it, I asked if he was disappointed in the book. He said no and gave a little laugh. When I finally got up the nerve to ask why the laugh, and he said, “I laughed because anyone who knows anything about writing would know how good it is.”

So, apparently my smell-o-meter works only half the time.

As for telling if sentences, words, paragraphs, scenes are any good, it’s mostly a matter of reading them, changing a word, reading them again, changing another word until the piece flows. If the words flow and if the story flows (and if  the story is worth telling), you don’t need a smell-o-meter. It will be good.

add to del.icio.us : Add to Blinkslist : add to furl : Digg it : add to ma.gnolia : Stumble It! : add to simpy : seed the vine : : : TailRank : post to facebook

Goddess of Poetry: Patricia Smith

On March 31st Bruce DeSilva, the writing coach at The Associated Press in New York City, posted one of my book trailers on his Facebook profile. He prefaced it with: Check out the trailer for the new book by Facebook goddess Pat Bertram.

I shot back a thank you, with a wry: goddess? I thought the rest of our email conversation noteworthy, and I wanted to share it with you.

Bruce: “The Goddess” is what I call my wife, the poet Patricia Smith. I do NOT throw the term around loosely.

Pat: I am honored. Actually, I was honored even before your explanation, and now even more so.

Bruce: If you want to see Patricia in action — she’s truly incredible — go to this URL and look at the great video. It’s the Borders “poetry open door” site. Believe me, you’ll be very glad you did. http://www.bordersmedia.com/odp/smith.asp

Pat: You’re right, Patricia is incredible. I always thought of poetry as quiet, visual. But hearing and seeing it spoken turns it into something different — something alive, dynamic. I never realized that before.

Bruce: Poetry was originally meant to be spoken out loud. Academics took it over and turned it into something dusty and stuffy. But poets like Patricia are taking it back to its roots and, in the process, getting it a wider audience. Yet Patricia’s work not only works on the stage but on the page. She works not only in free verse but in form, producing great sonnets, sestinas, crowns, etc. She’s a four-time National Poetry Slam champion, but she’s also National Poetry Series winner and a National Book Award finalist. Yes, I’m very proud of her.

Pat: You’re proud of her? I couldn’t tell.

Bruce: There’s another series of videos scheduled to be put up on the site soon, and I’m thrilled that the filmaker, Anthony Tedesco, who had me man a second camera, gave me a camera credit on it.

So, as Bruce said, check out the video of Patricia Smith reading her poetry. You will be glad you did. Border’s Open-Door Poetry site.

add to del.icio.us : Add to Blinkslist : add to furl : Digg it : add to ma.gnolia : Stumble It! : add to simpy : seed the vine : : : TailRank : post to facebook

Conversation With Marshall Karp, Author of Flipping Out

Marshall Karp, the author of Flipping Out, is an award winning former advertising executive, a playwright, a screenwriter, and a novelist. He has also written, produced, and executive produced TV shows for all the major networks.  

Bertram: I enjoyed reading Flipping Out. I must admit, you do know how to turn a phrase. You have a marvelous ear for dialogue, and a knack for one-liners. One, especially, sticks out as being memorable. The cops, Mike Lomax and Terry Biggs, are ready to enter a house owned by a murdered celebrity. Terry looks up at the towering stucco columns and says, “Rather phallic. I think they’re art dicko.”

Marshall: Thank you for the kind words about my ear. That would be the left one. The right one is even more amazing. It can actually hear a tree falling in the forest even if I’m not there. Funny thing about art dicko. In my first draft, as they’re about to bust through the door, I wrote something that my editor felt was too close to what Terry had said the first time he saw that house. She told me to come up with something better. Who knew it would turn out to be one of the more memorable lines in the book. I just don’t want it on my tombstone. Marshall Karp, that guy who wrote art dicko.

Bertram: Is there anything in particular you’d like me to say my review of Flipping Out? Any particular passage you’re particularly proud of?

Marshall: Gosh, blurbers have asked me that, but never a reviewer. For sure, don’t mention art dicko. I wouldn’t want Terry’s lapse into sophomoric humor to define me. In fact, few lines from books do justice to the entire book, although an advance reviewer on Amazon picked up an exchange between Terry and Marilyn that tickled me.

My favorite reviews are those that capture what I hope to do best. My goal is to develop characters you just want to be with over and over again. Some authors have had success with worn down, burned out cynical cops, but I wanted real people. I hang out with real cops, and they are incredibly funny – in that business they have to be – it keeps them sane. So I made Mike and Terry human before I made them cops.

I write for people who want three-dimensional characters, real laugh-out-loud humor that is organic to the situation, and plot twists right up to the final pages. And while I make no guarantees, I’d say that a steady diet of my books can also help you lose weight, double your income, and improve your sex life.

I hope that helps.

Bertram: I’m going to use the last paragraph to finish of my review, if you don’t mind. It’s a great quote.

I am so sick of the stereotypical cynical, burned out cop that it’s refreshing to meet some fictional ones who aren’t.

Marshall: I’ve been reading some of your 100 word stories. They’re terrific. How do you do it? It’s an art form (literary form?) I had never heard of before. I was talking to JA Konrath today and saying that I’m not sure I know how to write a short story. I used to write 30-second commercials, but now I’m stuck in the long form. Plus once you wind me up, I tend to get going. That’s probably why my first book was 632 pages.

Bertram: I can’t write regular short stories, maybe because I don’t like to read them, but for some reason I can do the 100-word ones. They are called drabbles, and stemmed from sci-fi conventions where they developed from a novel writing contest.

With a drabble, you have to find the essence — which is why there are so few stories on my Mini Fiction blog. It’s hard to do. And then you have to have a beginning, a middle, an end and a change in the life of a character.

I think of it as a prose haiku.

Marshall: Well, you got me with prose haiku. Here’s an exercise I did at a conference. I don’t know if it fits the drabble parameters — the challenge was slightly different — but it’s only 95 words. So humor me, and tell me if you think it does.

When you work homicide in Southern California you see your fair share of dead celebrities, but this… this is the first one that ever really got to me.

There were deep ligature marks on his white skin, and his once perfect body had been gracelessly dragged to the side of his private pool and left to be further ravaged by an unwilling accomplice 93 million miles away.

“Who,” I sputtered, as the hot Pacific breeze greeted me with the aroma of my first morning cup of death, “who the hell would want to murder Shamu?”

Bertram: It is an excellent blurb that caught my attention, but it’s more of a scenario than a story.

We don’t know who Shamu is, so the last sentence isn’t much of a punch line. And drabbles seem to need a punch line at the end.

Marshall: Shamu is a pretty famous whale. You’re forgiven for not knowing. Damn those pop culture references. They don’t always work.

Bertram: Then I stand corrected. Your story works for a drabble. In fact, it’s very good. But use those extra five words to show that it’s a whale for us ignorant people. Thank you for talking to me. It’s been a pleasure.

Marshall: And thank you for helping support my life of crime.

See also:
Titles: What Makes a Good One by Marshall Karp
Review of Flipping Out review by Pat Bertram
How to Do a Blog Tour by Marshall Karp

add to del.icio.us : Add to Blinkslist : add to furl : Digg it : add to ma.gnolia : Stumble It! : add to simpy : seed the vine : : : TailRank : post to facebook

Titles: What Makes a Good One

My guest today is Marshall Karp, an award winning former advertising executive, a playwright, a screenwriter, and a novelist. He has also written, produced, and executive produced TV shows for all the major networks. Karp tells us what makes a good title:

1. Short.

That’s my first thought.  Why?  Because your title is not just words.  It’s a major design element on your cover – often even more than the illustration.  And given the space limitations, the designer can do a lot more with one, two, or three words, than with ten.  Also, picture your cover reduced to a thumbnail on Amazon.  Too many words become unreadable.  That said, I think my title HOW TO EARN MILLIONS, LOSE WEIGHT, AND DEVELOP KILLER ABS WITHOUT WORKING, DIETING OR EXERCISING would sell a ton.  I just have to write the book.

2. Intriguing. 

I think it helps if your title makes prospective buyers wonder what that book might actually be about.  My first title, THE RABBIT FACTORY, is probably my best.  It just seemed to grab people.  And the chalk outline of a six-foot rabbit on the cover added to the mystery.  Note: a year before publication another author used the same title.  I was crushed, but my publisher told me that titles are copyrighted, and there are lots of duplicate titles. THE RABBIT FACTORY, he said, was too good to change. He was right.  The title definitely helped sell the book, both to the trade and to readers.

3. Not generic. 

My second book, BLOODTHIRSTY, is about murder by exsanguination.  I was so excited when I came up with a title that described the plot in one word that I never thought twice about it.  In hindsight, I should have.  Blood is a little — make that a lot — overused.  But the designer loved having a word that was loaded with visual possibilities.

4. It’s a title. It’s not the book.

The title does not have to communicate what the book is about.  It has to make the reader want to buy the book to find out what the book is about.  Sorry if that sounds like I’m talking down to you, but it’s a basic fact that I was late in learning, and still have trouble dealing with.

5. If you’re lucky, the title will keep on changing.

English is not the universal language.  So while THE RABBIT FACTORY is called THE RABBIT FACTORY in the UK and literally translated to IL MISTERO DEL CONIGLIO SCOMPARSO in Italy, it’s CARTOON in France, and in Dutch it’s loosely translated as FATAL ATTRACTION. 

My latest book is about a group of cop wives who are getting murdered.  They also have a house flipping business together, and my US publisher is very happy with the title FLIPPING OUT.  But my UK publisher said the Flipping part wouldn’t resonate.  I got in touch with my inner Agatha Christie and reluctantly offered up THE DEAD WIVES CLUB.  They loved it.

But months before either book was ready for market there was a lot of confusion among readers, booksellers, and reviewers.  Even when I tried to make it perfectly clear on my website that it was the same book, going by two different titles, people kept asking me how two different books could have the same synopsis?

Finally, my UK publisher agreed, and now, FLIPPING OUT is called FLIPPING OUT in the US and the UK.

6. The Airport Test.

Titles are very personal and intensely subjective.  It’s hard for an author to subtract his or her own investment in a title when making the final decision.  So try putting your prospective title to this test.

Narrow down your titles to a small handful.  Then find someone whose opinion you value and say this:  You’re in an airport. You have 30 seconds to buy a book.  If you saw this title, does it (a) intrigue you to want to learn more, or does it (b) just grab you?

You want a title where the respondent says (b).  Because the best thing a title can do is grab a reader in a way that makes her want to grab the book.

See also:
Review of Flipping Out
Conversation With Marshall Karp, Author of Flipping Out
How To Do a Blog Tour by Marshall Karp

One lucky commenter, chosen at random, will win a free copy of Flipping Out. If you do not win, click here for your consolation prize:
flipping cover[2] - online jigsaw puzzle - 40 pieces

add to del.icio.us : Add to Blinkslist : add to furl : Digg it : add to ma.gnolia : Stumble It! : add to simpy : seed the vine : : : TailRank : post to facebook