The 7 Habits of Highly Ineffective People
From author Russell Blake:
Why do some succeed, but most fail? Is it random chance, or is there more to it? Are there habits that successful people have, that their less successful brethren don’t? Sure. There are countless books on the topic. They involve things like being driven, focused, organized, hard working, etc.
So that’s not what this blog’s about. Instead, I thought I’d list the seven habits of highly ineffective people – people who don’t seem to accomplish nearly what their successful peers do, no matter the timing, or the industry. I’m using self-publishing as an example, but these are constants in any industry.
. . . .
3) Treat your muse as though it were an uncontrollable force of nature, like rain or snow. Completely outside of your ability to make it dance for you. Another aspect of this odd view is that everyone’s different, and not everyone can be creative on command, or work up the motivation to write on a regular schedule. Tell that to the countless Hollywood script writers, journalists, ad copy and web content creators who do in fact create to a schedule in order to be paid. There’s a word for those who can’t master their muse: Unemployed, at least if they’re writers. Or broke, if you prefer brevity.
. . . .
5) Have no consistency to your work. Jump around a lot of different genres and ignore what’s working. Keep your readers guessing what your next one’s going to be about, how long or short it will be, when it will be released, or even whether there will be a next one. The ineffective seem to mistake the liberty to fail in multiple genres or form factors with freedom of expression. They ignore the avisos to stick to your knitting, preferring to write whatever their illusive and mercurial muse dictates. Generally to empty seats. A good warning sign is if you’re asking questions like, “Why don’t my short stories sell?” or “Who says you have to do a series to make a decent living at this?” on author forums.
Link to the rest at Russell Blake and thanks to Eric for the tip.
, Amazon will pay Passive Guy a small affiliate commission on any of your purchases. 
To quote the Sage, Dan Dewitt:
“Why can’t we just accept that all of us do things differently, and that there are no real rules in writing?”
Exactly. I think I’ve lost more time and productivity to beating myself up for not following the “rules” than I have to simply ignoring them.
The work ethic is hard to get around. “Ass-in-chair-writing-to-finished-manuscript” is pretty much a prerequisite at having any chance at being successful.
Sure, but the only one who can pass judgment on your work ethic is you. It’s a losing battle to look to validation from someone else for your work habits.
*1 Joe.
I figured my name would eventually be mentioned in a thread about ineffective people, but not in a positive way.
I will give Blake a lot credit for saying this:
So, he’s separated himself from most of the other writers we’ve seen who do believe that their way is The Way.
I’m not arguing a way.
I’m listing commonalities of highly ineffective people, who happen to be writers.
If that’s a way, it’s like saying I’m arguing for being effective, which I’ll happily agree with.
Do you follow those principles?
THEN IT’S YOUR WAY.
Which, by the by, has absolutely no impact on this discussion. Literally none.
This is goddamn hilarious. I compliment a guy, and he can’t argue enough.
I did notice that you edited out your direct reference to me, thereby making me look like crazy person, which I’m fine with. But you could at least acknowledge that you jumped the gun. But then I noticed, and correct me if I’m wrong, that you amended your blog to take a passive swipe at people who may have the gall to disagree with you. Seriously?
To summarize Dan:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3fvfsT3LNNM
*Warning, contains profanity.*
Groan.
I haven’t modified my blog. I’ve been too busy over here explaining myself and trying to smooth your feathers.
I have been known to argue just for the hell of it, though.
In case you haven’t noticed. Comes from having a lot of siblings. Or not breastfeeding enough. Quien sabe?
Despite the carefully-cultivated tough guy image, you’re not very good at it.
NINJA EDIT:
“Oh, you didn’t edit your blog? Sorry about that. MY MISTAKE.”
Gosh, that was just so darn difficult and non-manly of me.
Hold on a sec. Over on your blog, you just posted: “To be clear, I’m not saying my way is the only way …”
Good grief, pick a lane.
Ah, do you mean I posted a response to one of my comments?
Yes, I do that.
If you read my blog, you’ll see that I always temper my counsel by saying that there are multiple ways to skin a cat – but this is the one that has worked best for me, and is obviously the one I think is best.
Jesus Christ. You told me that you’re not arguing “a way.”
Then you referred to it as “your way.”
And, yes, I already know that you won’t understand what I’m saying here.
Success to me means a body of work. Sure some of mine may never see daylight, but that’s a choice I’ve made. And a good one. You wouldn’t want to see my baby-steps novels.
My body of work will be published works, some small press, some indie. That’s enough of a work ethic, sandwiched into the rest of my life, to suit me just fine.
Exactly.
Rules are, there are no rules.
Tried to visit. I got a pop-up I couldn’t seem to dismiss without subscribing to Blake’s mailing list.
I was already skeptical. I like Shantnu’s quote from Dan.
Success means something different to each of us.
That’s odd. I just hit the “X” and it went away.
Ah. My pop-up had no ‘X.’
That Russell Blake is a smart guy with an amazing work ethic. I remember reading a year or so ago when he announced that he was going to do such-and-so and write a certain number of books. I thought he was a bit puffed up (and a little crazy to put himself on such a schedule). But here he is having written all those books and voila… he is indeed a big success story.
I tell people that I have a thousand ideas for stories, and a lot of genres that interest me (sci-fi, thrillers, mysteries, shorts). So why NOT pick the one that is most lucrative, and stick to it? At least for a while. Once you get that living wage set up, you can branch out and follow your muse… while also attending to your bread-and-butter writing.
The trouble can be knowing how long to stick to it, and when to try something else.
What if you’ve got a series, but it never took off? Should you keep going on that, or try something else? What if that one doesn’t take? And then on top of all that you run into the possibility of having too many choices for readers, if you’re ever lucky enough to get any.
Tricky stuff. Russell mentions below those that have switched and found success, but I think there are many that haven’t.
Does that mean it doesn’t work? Well gosh, it’s just hard to say what does and what doesn’t, and also, let’s not forget time.
Something you had out for years could just magically take off. Happens quite frequently. So maybe you’re doing things right already, but others just haven’t noticed yet, perhaps even with all your marketing. Tricky stuff.
My approach is to give it five books.
If after five books, you haven’t found an audience, and you’ve intelligently marketed and promoted, move on.
That’s just me. And five is not a magical number. Could be six.
For many, that’s about a year’s production. For Holly and Elle, it was about 10 books, I think, but about a year.
The point is that the market will determine whether your books fit what it wants or not, and you want to try to avoid pouring more time into a hole that’s going nowhere.
OK, this brings up a good point about finding the niche genre that is successful for a writer. Of course if you find a genre that works keep on doing what works. But, let’s say you write in a YA Fantasy genre, and the book doesn’t move. Do you write a second, third book in that genre? You switch to Sci-Fi and the new book dies as well. Do you continue or switch genre again? Do you keep with one genre and beat it to death with no results, or sample different genres?
I personally would write a series, and if the series gets no traction, press on. After a reasonable length of time, which for me, would be a year, assuming I could get 5 books out in that year.
If you start a series, keep going. Don’t write anything else, for goodness sake!
Which is why I wrote a dystopian novella between books 6 and 7 and I’m within a week of finishing a novel between books 7 and 8.
Sorry. I have thoughts. This is not just a business, it’s also art. Money is nice but I worked in television with a gun to my head the entire time. I get to write what I choose now. If it doesn’t sell, I’m still proud of the choices I make. I still believe I said something important.
That’s a really nice measure of success, Barbara.
Also: totes agree, obvs.
Back in January I revised and pubbed a fantasy novella I’d first written back in 2001. It “desk-drawered” for a dozen years before I finally decided to get it out there, for good or ill.
Sadly, it hasn’t sold for squat, although it got some initial good reviews. But as you say, I’d rather publish it and be proud of it, than never let it see the light of the day because it somehow falls outside of my “brand”.
Barbara: You can define success as breathing, which is fine by me. But for the purposes of my list and my blog, which is about the business of selling books, having words that don’t have specific meanings attached doesn’t improve clarity. I use the word success within the context of my blog as: making tons of money as an author. Others obviously define success as being a parent, or beating their migraine, or hitting publish, or feeling a certain way. All good, but not particularly useful in defining what I’m actually talking about. Sorry if that wasn’t evident.
Writing is certainly, or can be, art. Being commercially successful selling one’s art is anything but. My blog is directed at those interested in being commercially successful, not at feeling self-actualized for having written something.
We agree on the series thing. With one huge caveat: Pay attention to the results you’re getting, and if it’s not selling, switch to something else. Elle Casey did that. Holly Ward did that. Plenty of other friends of mine did that. They persevere long enough to get a large body of work out, and if the readers don’t buy it, they switch gears to something more viable. Smart, that.
I have a Writers Guild of America award next to me. I was one of the youngest headwriters in the history of daytime television. I agree I am a total slacker compared to you, Holly Ward and Elle Casey.
Barbara, it’s not whether you’re a slacker or not. It’s that your personal definition of success, or your awards, have little or nothing to do with my blog topic.
Nicely said!
Will: The pop up menu can be closed by clicking on the X in the upper right hand corner. While I celebrate skepticism, dismissal without actually reading what one is dismissing isn’t skepticism.
Shantnu: These habits are really for any career. If you want to be highly ineffective at most things, by all means, follow them. Doesn’t matter whether you’re writing, or whatever else. I underscore that point in the blog.
To everyone: In general, as I make painfully clear in my blog, while everyone’s journey is different, there are very obvious similarities between the numerous high-selling indie authors I’ve interviewed/am friends with. Or more specifically, observing the much larger pool of those who aren’t successful (success in this case not redefining the word to mean whatever one likes, but rather, earning bucketloads of money from being an author), there tend to be equally clear similarities. Which I list.
I’m not arguing the merits to writing and publishing for self-actualization. I don’t like to fall into the trap of arguing what “success” means, because it’s a swamp, and the dialogue quickly moves from the habits of ineffective people, to why you’re successful if you feel a certain way, or believe you are, or aren’t dead, or whatever. I’m very clear on what I mean when I say successful, and arguing semantics is really just changing the discussion to “why being unsuccessful as defined in the blog isn’t bad” – which I believe I list as one of the habits of highly ineffective people. Go figure.
I’m quite sure not everyone will agree with the list, because they’ll see their own habits on it, and rush to defend them rather than understanding their habits are limiting their chances. That’s human nature. To commiserate with those who share one’s beliefs, to defend them no matter what the personal cost or in face of all evidence to the contrary, etc. Self-publishing is akin to religion for these folks, and as with all metaphysical beliefs, one can’t argue logic with the faithful who know their truth in spite of a dearth of proof.
I offer my thoughts in the blog not to reach them, because they’re unreachable. Rather, I offer my opinions to those who are searching for ways to improve.
Well, as to Dan, he went from giving you credit to thinking you’re a dick in record time.
And you apparently didn’t actually understand what Will said. But great point anyway!
Before you get all gruff again, I don’t even remember who I said that quote about, but it sure as Hell wasn’t you. It was no doubt geared toward one of those My Way is the Only Way bloggers.
Put the cup down, Dan. Coffee is for closers.
I’m afraid that I don’t get the reference.
Alec Baldwin’s Glengarry speech. Probably on YouTube.
http://youtu.be/8kZg_ALxEz0
(Warning: NSFW language)
I googled that, but I have no idea what it actually means in the context of this discussion.
My takeaway from RB’s comment. Funny that Baldwin’s character’s name is Blake…
So you’re saying he’s not a fan of mine?
That’s the best scene in any movie, anywhere.
Mamet, right?
Genius.
So if I disagree with you, I am ineffective and unsuccessful?
If you take any random bunch of “successful” people, you will find a lot of similarities between them. But that doesn’t mean the success was caused by those similarities.
The reason we are skeptical is because we have heard this same advice a million times before by the business gurus trying to sell their get rich books. It even has a name: Survivorship bias (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias).
All the successful writers I know read this blog. Maybe PG has psychic powers that boosts our writing skills? OMG, I should totally blog about that.
Well, Shantu, if you take the time to look at my older blogs, you’ll find my advice was exactly the same when I was selling literally dozens of books per month.
So while I’m more than familiar with survivorship bias, and appreciate the helpful links if I weren’t, it doesn’t apply here, so you can scratch that one off your list.
I’d argue that if the successful all share common traits, so saying, “Maybe it’s not those qualities” isn’t helpful to me in predicting anything. Sure, maybe they all lack the habits of ineffective people through random chance. That’s a perfectly fine theory. Just not one that is useful.
I have no idea whether you are ineffective or unsuccessful. If so, sorry to hear it. If not, good on you.
But to your question, your success or lack of it probably has nothing to do with your agreement with my nuggets of wisdom. Or it might have everything to do with it. How would I know?
Hey, all the successful people I know don’t have the traits I list. Maybe you know tons who do. Then follow their advice. As to me, I’ll follow my own counsel, one bit of which is to limit your web time, as it’s antipodal to attaining success.
At least you managed to spend a bit of your valuable web time wrongly insulting people, and also ninja-editing and pretending that no one would a) notice, or b) bring it up.
Ninja editing?
You mean where you edit your comments in the 29 minutes and 59 seconds given to do so?
I wasn’t aware that had a name. Ninja. I see. I think of it as editing your comments after going back and reading them. But I suppose if you have a hammer, everything looks like nails.
No, Russ, ninja-editing in the sense that you removed several sentences where you directly (and for no reason) insulted me, and then removed them without so much as a, “My, bad. I misunderstood.”
Congrats on your financial success, and you may have a lot of good to say about this business, but I’ll never bother listening to it, because more effective advice is available from better people than you.
I’m not impressed by you at all. What a chump.
Well, let’s see.
I posted that I would consider the merits of someone’s counsel on how to approach the career of selling books in light of their actual success in selling books, and then thought better of it, because apparently, there is a large audience that believes that one’s actual abilities to sell books shouldn’t come into play when evaluating their counsel or statements, and so removed it. I could put it back if you like.
I thought it mean spirited on reconsideration, because I realized that you might not sell a lot of books, and thus might be offended by it. Regrettably, I’ve never read you, so I’m not familiar with your work, but I didn’t want to take the chance.
I further was under the mistaken impression that because the editing clock gives you 29 minutes to edit, that meant the comment wasn’t visible for that time. It’s unclear. I now understand that not to be the case.
Whether or not you listen to my advice or read my blogs is of absolutely no consequence to me. I gain nothing either way. I’m not selling any books on how to be a successful anything. So it has no impact on me, positive or negative.
Sorry for the confusion. And if it’s any consolation, I’m not impressed by me most of the time, either. You’re entitled to a full refund.
Awww, now you’re making me so sad.
It may be important to note that I never offered any counsel besides an old quote of mine (which I didn’t even post!) in which I said (paraphrasing), “Hey, everyone does everything differently.” So you’re wrong there.
It may also be important to note that YOU SAID THE SAME THING ON YOUR &^%$#@! POST, which I highlighted and gave you credit for.
Also, I find it precious that your defense is, “But I had no idea that the comment was actually visible! Because I’m never on the internets!” You’ve got to be kidding me at this point.
You know what a man does when he realizes he screwed up? He says, “Sorry about that. I totally misread what you were saying. Thanks for actually defending me.” But that ship has sailed.
Fonzie has an easier time admitting that he’s wrong than you do.
Dan, I took great pains to explain my thinking. I’m sorry you don’t grasp that I don’t spend hardly any time on this blog, thus didn’t immediately understand the purpose/meaning of the clock. I thought my explanation was clear. Apparently not.
I got that you were agreeing with me.
I think that if nothing else, this exchange should indicate why spending a lot of time on social media isn’t particularly productive in terms of being an effective author, or book seller. I’ve neither edited or written anything that makes me money, nor sold any books, which is why it’s ineffective.
Although I have managed to make a host of new friends.
Look on the bright side: You got several days’ worth of chest-thumping in, so your weekend’s free.
See? The internet’s great!
Also, you’re so full of crap about not knowing how a blog works. It’s pathetic.
Your comment goes up as soon as you hit the submit button, unless it is your first comment ever on TPV, in which case it appears after going through PG’s moderation queue. An edited version goes up on TPV as soon as you hit save. Anyone who has subscribed to the comments on a post receives the first, unedited version and does not receive the edited version.
FYI
Ah.
I figured that out after about 10 minutes. Trial by fire.
Gracias.
Yeah, I didn’t have an ‘X,’ like I mentioned. Probably a browser issue, is my guess. It’s kind of amazing how quickly you dismissed it as a failing on my part through your passive aggression. Good golly.
Sure, that’s one way to measure it. There are lots of others.
I use it as: being proud to have my name on the cover or company associated with it.
Not passive at all.
I find arguments that divert the discussion from the topic at hand, which are the habits of the unsuccessful, to the parsing of the term successful, diversionary. I find them that way because the ensuing discussion of what 10,000 people personally define for themselves as success has zero relevance to the topic. Thus, it’s off-topic. And as such, a time suck from the actual topic, which is the habits of ineffective people.
You can define success for yourself as petting a kitty, or flying a kite with your kid, or having the strength of will to wake up every morning. All good. But how is that relevant to the topic?
It isn’t.
Hence my dismissal thereof.
Ah. Just regular aggressive, then? Interesting.
I’ve always found that the companies that offer the best customer experience examine the experiences customers are having–especially when it’s not ideal, or the one they’re meant to have–and figure out what was behind it, and how to improve it.
That’s probably true, and one of the reasons I track the percentage of negative reviews on my books. If they fall outside of my genre average, I look hard at them and see if there’s a pattern – something they call out, be it editing, style, a trope they dislike, the ending, whatever.
Fortunately, so far I fare better than most, with several thousand reviews. So the customer’s not having a poor experience that I can tell.
I’m not selling anything on my blog or with my comments, so I don’t feel any need to censor myself because X people like my message or Y dislike my style. Some will like me, some will hate me, and that’s fine. But you won’t walk away wondering where I stand on a topic. For better of worse.
I’m not arguing the merits to writing and publishing for self-actualization. I don’t like to fall into the trap of arguing what “success” means, because it’s a swamp, and the dialogue quickly moves from the habits of ineffective people, to why you’re successful if you feel a certain way, or believe you are, or aren’t dead, or whatever.
You always say you don’t like to argue that particular point, and yet it’s your most perennial subject, time and time again. You have a pretty long track record of stating very abrasively that the one true definition of success is only your definition, and just caustically shutting down anybody who might be pleased to measure their success in smaller increments, or by other milestones.
It makes people think you’re extremely unpleasant, which I’m sure you don’t care about, but don’t act surprised when people roll their eyes every time you start banging the same old drum.
Libbie, one group that feels it’s really important to use the word success without any real definition, insists upon diverting every discussion from one of the topic, to that of what the definition of success is.
They generally appear whenever success as I have defined it is used as a benchmark of a particular approach’s merits.
The topic inevitably shifts from the topic, to the meaning of the word.
I find that really irritating, because it’s always off point, never offers anything material to the discussion, and is, as far as I can tell, just a rhetorical tactic to change the subject to something that can’t be measured or qualified.
I am extremely precise with my definition of success in my blogs for that reason. For many, here, apparently, success is a word like “love.” It can mean many things to many people. Find. I’ll go with that.
Note that the blog title is the habits of ineffective people.
Now we can start a lengthy debate about the meaning of that term. Who wants to go first? “I’m effective if I feel I am.” “No, you’re effective if I’m listening, my attention being proof of your effectiveness.” “No, I’m effective if I can appreciate the beauty of a sunset.”
And so on.
I just find it so vapid. Sorry. There it is.
NINJA EDIT ALERT: I also don’t dismiss people measuring their success incrementally, or in the number of breaths they take, or their shoe size. They can do so however they like. I just get REALLY tired of a discussion about something like the habits of ineffective people being turned into a discussion of how we each of us, personally, measure success. It seems like a fabulous way to avoid discussing the actual topic, which to me feels completely rhetorically dishonest.
Make sense?
END NINJA EDITING ALERT
I’m not interested in having a lengthy debate with you. I’m just pointing out to you specifically why so many people find you so very unpleasant. Usually when people react negatively to the advice you give, it’s not because of the nature of the advice. It’s because of the nature of the advice-giver.
Make of that whatever you will.
I’ve found that some of my best advice was delivered by people I might not have liked much, and in a way that might have offended my delicate sensibilities.
Fortunately, I was able to see the value of the advice, rather than getting wrapped up in the tone of it.
Not everyone has that desire or ability. Fine with me. Their success is their business, not mine, so if they follow none of my advice, how am I harmed?
I’m not.
You actually did that in the part you deleted. You implied that unless I’ve sold millions of copies of my books, no one should pay attention to my “bromide.” Good God, are you one disingenuous guy.
Well, Dan, what I said was, if someone’s going to dispense advice on how to pursue being a commercially successful writer, you should take their bromides with skepticism and weigh the value of their advice against their success with their approach.
Is there some part of that you disagree with?
Nothing disingenuous about it. Simple skepticism. “Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proofs.”
Appears you’re still convinced I’m honing my ninja editing skills. That’ll teach me to try to be kinder and gentler on edit…
Yeah, the part about where I didn’t dispense any advice, jackass.
If you didn’t dispense any advice, then why are you now calling me names? Any logical person would conclude that if they didn’t actually advise, and my comment was directed at valuing advice, then it’s not germane.
Scratches head.
Sorry you’re so angry. I wasn’t trying to find new ways to anger people I don’t even know. But at least I haven’t lost that knack…
NINJA EDIT ALERT: I didn’t understand the purpose of the clock on the blog, as I’ve said repeatedly, but then again, I don’t spend a lot of time on blogs. To those that do, it probably seems unimaginable. I’m usually writing books, not commenting on blogs, so go figure. Believe what you like. You asked, I answered. Now you don’t like the answer. Fine.
END NINJA EDIT ALERT
Maybe, I don’t know, because you used my name, genius. The problem was 100% yours, and you can’t even cowboy up and admit it.
But you go on clutching your pearls pretending to wonder why I responded.
Edit here:
It’s cute how you hind behind the NINJA EDIT thing. It’s clear that you know how weak your arguments are.
And, in defense of my time on TPV, I spend most of my time on here arguing with a-holes like you who say a-hole things, because it helps to kill time at work.
That time’s coming to an end, as I’ll be writing full-time inside of two weeks. I know, I know, that means nothing until I sell a gajillion books. I hear you, Danger Russ.
Dan, you seem convinced that I’m singling you out for persecution. I don’t know you. I have no idea what you write, whether it’s any good or not, whether you sell boatloads or nothing, etc.
I’ve tried to explain my thinking as I wrote, then edited, and I’ve gone overboard, remaining civil, even as you work yourself into a vituperative frenzy, sure that I’ve maligned you, and that my inability to immediately grasp how the clock worked was a personal slight.
I’m not sure what you’re after. I removed the comment that could be interpreted as snarky. I did so during the time allocated for editing. I did so because I didn’t want to offend you, or anyone else, thinking I had time due to the clock.
I’m afraid there’s not a lot more I can add.
And, yet, due to your inability to handle something as complicated as a WordPress blog, people saw the comment. A normal human, after recognizing that, would have acknowledged it and clarified that they meant no harm. But you tripled down. Because you’re, well, you.
I couldn’t care less about what you said. You made me mad because you lack any kind of integrity and honor. If you had, this would’ve been smoothed over in a single sentence, and I’d be all like, “Hey, high five!”
Edited:
I just now realized this. There’s literally no way that you could’ve believed that you got that edit in before anyone saw it, because I replied to you using your own phrase (“As to Dan …”). Like I said, no integrity. We’ve been going at it for however long because you just can’t man up. My six-year-old would handle this better. Literally.
Dan, again, and I say this with all due respect, I’m not sure what I’m supposed to “man up” for. I wrote a comment that was live for, what, about 2 minutes, tops? Went and typed in two more comments. Went back and reread my original comment, thought it kind of harsh, and wanting to be my teddy bear soft self, edited it in the time I thought I had to do so without it being visible to the whole world.
You find it impossible to believe that the clock, and the visibility of posts, wouldn’t be self-evident to everyone. To whit, I have no way as a reader of knowing how long it takes for comments, like this one, to appear. No way of knowing whether or not there’s a delay, certainly as an infrequent user, until I’ve been on for awhile and figure it out. No way of knowing whether the comments that are appearing were written 2 seconds ago, or 10 minutes, or 30 minutes. After watching the stream, I get it. I didn’t.
Again, if I thought anyone had seen it, I wouldn’t have bothered editing it, because it would have been a lot less work to simply leave it there, go, yeah, I meant that you need to evaluate the quality of counsel based on who’s giving it, and moved on.
Instead, now, in like, 15 posts, I’ve bent over backward to explain myself, all the while you act like I pimp slapped your mom in front of you. I. Didn’t. I posted a comment you didn’t like, changed it almost immediately, and have now endured this harangue, which, frankly, is way out of proportion to anything I could have or would have said about you, even if I knew anything about you to dislike.
So don’t be offended if I don’t continue this. I’m not sure how I could “man up” any more than I have in god knows how many posts, but if that’s insufficient, than cross me off your Xmas list and have done with it, OK?
We have what I’d call a failure to communicate. Shame, that.
After seeing how you operate, I couldn’t be less surprised that you have no idea what I’m talking about. You’d rather argue over several points on which we apparently agree and adopt a breathless “Why, I never!” tone in every response (“But I clearly wasn’t talking to you, despite using your name!”). Christ.
Settle down Dan Dewitt, jeez. Why you going after this fella so hard? Sick of reading the PG comments and just coming up with your insults. What is the point in personal insults, baiting the guy when he’s falling over himself to conciliate.,
I was lured (so to speak) into writing a Western novella a few months ago, and while the deal I was writing it for fell through, I decided to just go ahead and pub it on my own. One would never think a Western by a guy who’d never written anything in that genre before would have any traction, but it’s handily outselling all my other books at the moment. Pity it is too short for me to justify “book” prices, but if I’d known then what I know now, I would have continued the story and released a longer book at a better price point.
So, sometimes, the whim can pay off.
If you haven’t figure out by now, for example, that inserting three chapters of cradle-to-present details about your hero, including a resume of all his military training, is going to have most readers bored to tears long before they get to your ‘story,’ it may not be possible to give you feedback, even if you have typed (in courier 12, double-spaced, but without errors) lots of pages and put them up on Amazon.
There ARE basic details of craft. Plot, character, theme, hook, conflict.
Don’t complain that no one, not even your closest and dearest, will buy your thirteenth ‘novel,’ after you’ve given them free versions of the previous twelve. Laudable effort, horrible aim.
Readers are forgiving, not stupid. If you can write, someone will read. If you are not selling after all that, it is highly possible you can’t write.
One of the things that gets lost in a lot of these posts is that not everyone has the same level of storytelling skill, much less craft skill.
My posts always assume that the authors I’m reaching have equivalent storytelling skill, and at least rudimentary grasp of craft.
All things being equal, though, that doesn’t mean they’ll all be equivalently effective. And effectiveness in the book selling business is measured in sales, nothing else.
That’s my point.
When I gave PG this tip, I expected it would bring a bevy of comments and I’m not disappointed. Although its a bit more negative than I had thought it would be
I found the list fairly accurate to what I’ve seen in life, but to each his own.
I’m also not too worried that Mr. Blake will be crushed by any of the strong comments against him. He’s too manly to cry in his beer over criticism. Besides, I don’t think he’ll tolerate watering down the booze.
No one to blame but him.
No need to even finish that sentence, because he’s clearly not.
Eric, I’m not stung by criticism at all. You have to have a thick skin.
What I’m amazed at is the number of comments that completely fail to address the habits, and instead argue over tone, or the meaning of success, or anything BUT those habits.
I’d expect that if you posted something like, “My favorite tequilas,” the ensuing threads would contain, well, a discussion of tequila. Not the meaning of the word favorite, or what “My” can mean, or whether your favorites are more meritorious than those of others, etc.
But my expectations are forever being changed.
Or what “way” can mean.
Wait, no one is that much of a pedant.
Russell, I’m glad to do my part to keep your expectations changing by pointing PG in your direction.
Now, no more time for reading blog comments. I need to finish my next book. I have so many more to write if I want to catch up with crazy folks like you. I’m still ramping up my daily output and this thread doesn’t help. How will I ever get it up to DWS speed with all these distractions?
Exactly. I’m back to work on editing. I’ve exhausted my allocation of bickering time for the day.
People generally agree on what tequila is. Few people agree on what ‘success’ is. You’d probably find much less disagreement if you just replaced ‘success’ with ‘selling a lot of books and making a lot of money’ whenever you want to use it.
Some people regard that as success, and are happy to write whatever sells in order to achieve it. Others would rather write what they want and live in a shack in the woods, and consider that ‘success’ so long as their books pay their bills.
I generally agree with your post, but, when I look at writers who’ve been successful for years by your definition, I often see them writing the twenty-seventh sequel to their first best-selling novel, because, even though they hate it, they’re too scared to do anything else because it might not sell. They may have a Ferrari and an estate in Hawaii, but they spend most of their time in their office doing something they hate.
I’d rather be successful in my own terms, even if that means I do have to live in that shack in the woods with only the bunnies and bears for company.
Edward, no question that material success in the book selling business can come at an artistic cost.
I also don’t know anyone making a fortune by penning stories whose miserable because they’re getting another million for penning the 27th sequel to their “He’s ex-CIA, in space, and THIS TIME IT’S PERSONAL!” That’s just me. Then again, I’m a whore, and I recognize I’m being paid to do something I like that most people don’t get paid for. That makes me the luckiest guy in the world, in my book.
Balancing what you want in terms of self-actualization by writing, vs. what it takes to sell tonnage of books, is a tough one. The only way I’ve found to make it all work for me is to divorce the business of selling books from the craft of writing, and treating the two as completely separate. I know that doesn’t work for everyone.
Actually, I’d say that those that seem to do best in this brave new world are extremely pragmatic about their work, write what their audiences want to read, treat it as a job with a production schedule and marketing/promotion discipline, and are extremely hard-charging in terms of their pursuit of commercial success, because they really want commercial success (that is, to be paid a lot for writing) more than just about anything.
What that says about those of us who sell a boatload of books is a different question, and certainly open to debate. I prefer self-publishing to being the employee of a traditional publisher, but if a huge offer came in, I’d probably become an employee. I’d like it a lot less, but I’d also pragmatically look at the pros and cons, and choke down the dislike, because in the end, managing the career of Me, Inc., is my job as CEO of the company, and the first imperative isn’t to ensure everyone’s as happy as they could be, but rather that Me, Inc. maximizes its profitability while it can.
I come from a business background, so my philosophy’s different, I suppose. But you’d be surprised how many top names share that perspective.
It’s all a trade-off.
Yeah, I think maybe that’s the crux of it. I think a lot of writers would find that idea rather . . . empty, for lack of a better word. I know I do.
It reminds me of what Capote said of Truman: “That’s not writing. That’s typing.”
On the other hand, had to leave for a while and then return, and then was able to actually access the post. It’s pretty much what I expected, and I think it’s cogent to a certain degree, but mostly in its own context and for its own definition of myriad terms, including (but not limited to) “success,” “commercial,” “muse,” and several others.
What I think is interesting is that it’s almost as though currently successful “self-publishing” (where “successful” equals selling lots of books) is almost eerily reminiscent of the old pulp days. From what I understand of those days, it became far easier to sell a book to publishers than it had been just a few years before, but publishers could afford to pay less because there was so much more available, which meant authors had to produce more content . . .
A lot of savvy authors took awesome advantage of that system. Chandler and Hammett came through that era. I’m sure there were other terrific writers, too, just as I’m sure there were a lot of other authors happy enough to keep producing, keep cashing checks, and shrug off much beyond both.
I come from a business background, too. But before that business background I came from an MFA background, so my perspective’s all shot to heck.
I think the other problem is that “commercial” is a genre every bit as much as it could be a measure of success. It’s mainly competent and accessible with short chapters to speed pacing, and somewhat formulaic (to your point: it’s about consistency. Don’t want to make readers guess). A couple years back there was mumbling of calling well-written commercial fiction “up-market,” because suddenly people felt the need to distinguish “well-written” from “commercial.”
One final note: I’m sure you know, but even signing a corporate contract doesn’t make authors “employee of a traditional publisher.” If a huge offer came in, you wouldn’t become an employee, because signing a corporate publishing contract isn’t signing an employment agreement. Even if you signed that contract, you wouldn’t get a salary, or benefits, or whatever else you can think of. It’s basically work-for-hire in retrospect.
Just wanted to clarify there.
True, you’d be a contractor, probably with an option contract wherein the publisher can cancel the contract whenever they like, or reject work and leave you up the river.
More to the point, you’d have others telling you what to write, how to write it, when to write it, etc.
That’s a loss of freedom. However, at some point, you can make the decision to sell your freedom for a certain period – if it makes financial sense.
Self-publishing is clearly a return to the pulp days. A sea of inexpensive content. Good for readers who are willing to wade through it. Good for authors who catch an audience. A paradigm shift, but one in which trad publishing isn’t going away. They’re posting record profits. How can anyone believe they’re going away? I hear comparisons to horses and buggies all the time, but horse and buggy manufacturers weren’t posting record profits as their business evaporated, that I know of.
As to the “that’s not writing, that’s typing,” perspective, I think I might have been unclear. I’m not saying to remove your art or craft from your writing, I’m saying when you’re done writing, or are going to start writing, if you want to be successful at it in this environment, successful being defined as selling a boatload of books and earning a lot of money, then you need to do the job of an agent and publisher, too, who would ordinarily tell you what they want you to write next, and would be the ones you’d need to bounce ideas like changing genres or writing a novella instead of the next novel or whatever else you’re considering. They would also remind you of the realities of production schedules and the importance of meeting deadlines.
Whether you impose that discipline on yourself, or it comes from your marketing and production team, it needs to be there in this market, or you’re in trouble, IMO. That doesn’t mean that you have to write only billionaire raptor porn, but it does mean that you will likely find it a lot harder to shift units. And if you’re not shifting units, then you aren’t commercially successful (as I use the term, meaning, selling hundreds of thousands of units a year).
Which I would call ineffective, if your goal is to make good money from your writing. Hence the title of the blog.
The lesson here is, “Never compliment anyone.”
By the way, totally unrelated to this blog post/thread, but since you seem to be actively posting here and now…check your email, Dan.
I wonder if I can guess the topic?
This blog is so awesome.
Cue the song that saturates the Lego Movie: Everything is Awesome
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t6lHm-stXdM&feature=kp
Had to watch the movie half-dozen times with my 5 yr old. I hope the song gets stuck in your head too, Dan.
Oh man, this thread sucked me in again. Gotta get back to writing my book.
It really is. Today has been entertaining in ways I wasn’t expecting. Thanks Dan. :). Think you’ll ever write anythink that isn’t zombie?
Most definitely. Why do you ask?
I’m not into zombies but I really want to read a book by you after reading your comments here for over a year.
Ditto.
Jeez, I’ve gotten more laughs out of this commenting section than any PV article in a long time! You guys are entertaining, in a kind of ‘I-can’t-believe-this-is-happening-but-I-can’t-stop-watching’ kind of way.
I’ve certainly wasted enough time on this site today, and once again I’m reminded why I don’t subscribe to comments here anymore.
Anyway, Russ, good talk. No hard feelings.
Never.
Well, that was fun while it lasted. I was actually starting to get GoT levels of excited watching House of DeWitt and House of Blake go at it
Mud wrestling.
Live!
On The Passive Voice.
Who knew?
(Now back to work…)
#8 Highly ineffective people pick fights with dozens of perfectly nice people, on one of the most widely read blogs in the business, thus alienating hundreds of potential readers.
Too bad. I thought the initial post was pretty good.
Well played, Anne.
Oddly enough, Anne, so did I.
I spend the day writing, and miss all this. Darn.
Read the article. Read the first comments. Scrolled the he said/he saids. Done in 2 minutes. I’m feeling successfully effective.
Back to work.
Skimmed it. Take away: get your arse in a chair and write. If you don’t do that, you’ll be ineffective at producing any written content for public consumption (fit or not).
I’m not sure what all the other agony above is about.
That’s pretty much it, or at least a lot of it.
The rest is all sound and fury.
“not sure what all the other agony above is about.”
Me neither. But I tend to agree with Russell’s business minded approach to SP.
But he does seem to start trouble everywhere he goes.
Yeah, Anne. I just found another author to cross off my list of potential reads. No one tells me what I can or cannot write.
Maybe it’s time to take a break? I normally love your style but I think you got off on the wrong foot over here today.
Wait, what? What did he tell you you couldn’t write? Did I miss that? He basically said- WRITE! Right?
I decided to stop beating up on RB when I realized he was a (comparative) newbie. Very smart, but also very focused on his own goals and measures and desires. His experience (by choice) really doesn’t extend to anything else.
The great thing is: The people to whom his advice is most relevant will not be put off by it. They’ll be immediately jazzed by it, and it will inspire them to greater efforts. And his pedantic style is a part of what is so attractive about the way he presents his advice.
For that reason, I think he should keep it up for as long as he believes in it. (And as long as he’s willing to put up with the results of his insulting language.)
For the rest of us… we’ve heard it before, and if we have been around at all, we’ve tried it before. Probably in multiple ways. So if it doesn’t get you excited, just give it a pass. Move on to others who have more experience in what your goals are, or can see more nuance in how skills and talents and life interact.
Well said.