# Connecting with Readers



## JStoudt (Jul 23, 2014)

I'm a new writer with a rough manuscript to his name trying to figure out the next step to go along with editing. Truthfully I know that even if I polish the heck out of this book and release it there won't be any success unless I reach an audience. I've been listening to a podcast where they constantly reiterate that you need an audience before you publish, but I'm struggling with how to find and connect to readers without any work to show. Perhaps it is too early for me to think about this and I should focus more on my writing, but I thought I would ask the community what ways you all connect to your readers and how you started out. Any advice would be much appreciated.


----------



## InstituteMan (Jul 23, 2014)

Well, I am just a guy who writes stuff, so I may not know anything, but I am kind of sort of trying to do this.

First, not that I am awash in readers or anything, but I have just started a blog (see signature line). Nothing big, but something that can be found and that I can grow as I figure out that medium. I am on Twitter, again without much notice as of yet (but still early days there too). I view that as infrastructure that will not be needed for awhile, but that has to be in place if I am to have a chance of success eventually.

Second, I am beginning to submit to journals, any journal with more readers than the like 4 people who have visited the blog so far. I am more interested in getting in front of eyeballs than getting paid or getting in a prestigious spot.

Third, if I am ultimately self-publishing (and who knows, maybe I will get the ever so rare publishing contract and a hefty advance -- but probably not), I have resolved to put my stuff out there regardless. Even a slow or no seller is another opportunity for someone to notice me and start the process.

Fourth, I am keeping my day job.

Good luck. Does the podcast in question have any suggestions? Do you have any thoughts? I, for one, would love to hear any and all ideas.


----------



## popsprocket (Jul 23, 2014)

Depends on what the podcast means by 'audience'. All (most) books have some kind of audience, as evidenced by the fact that people still buy and read them.


----------



## thepancreas11 (Jul 23, 2014)

The quality of your writing will determine whether or not it gets picked up because quality writing always has an audience. You can make anything work with enough literary duct tape and perhaps the occasional chisel.

I haven't read any of your stuff yet, though I'm intrigued. I'm willing to bet that you have a considerable amount of drive having put together a manuscript, so you'd be likely to take advice to heart with the best intentions. I would try to read as many pieces as you can, here. The WF offers such a diverse subject span that you're bound to get a notion of what works and what doesn't work for you. You'll also notice which stories get the most play from critics and commenters alike, which should give you some indication of the nature of readability.


----------



## dale (Jul 24, 2014)

good writer's never write for the reader. they edit for the reader.


----------



## qwertyman (Jul 24, 2014)

dale said:


> good writer's never write for the reader. they edit for the reader.



EH! Elucidate.


----------



## aj47 (Jul 24, 2014)

I'm not dale but I agree.  When you first put stuff out there, you're doing it for whatever reason.  When you go back to revise and edit, you're trying to shape what you wrote into something people want to read.  Whether you're trimming literary fat or adding more substance, you're doing it with the reader in mind.


----------



## qwertyman (Jul 24, 2014)

astroannie said:


> I'm not dale but I agree.  When you first put stuff out there, you're doing it for whatever reason.When you go back to revise and edit, you're trying to shape what you wrote into something people want to read...



How does that qualify you as a good writer?

More to the point, why can't you be a good writer if you write for the reader from first draft?

Absolute tosh!


----------



## Plasticweld (Jul 24, 2014)

While I am not much of a writer, I am a very good story teller.  From my perspective

You are at a party, there are a couple of people around you and share a short but funny joke.  They enjoy the joke and move in a little closer.  You start with the second joke, a little more complex a little more detail.  They like it, lean in and instead of one or two people listening there are now four or five. 

You now start a funny story, not joke but a detailed story. You gained their trust and their interest enough to sit through the details of the story to get to the punch line. If you had started out and not gained their confidence with the short jokes and punch lines, they would have little interest to hear the longer story. 


To the writer, (I will insult a few here) who says write for themselves. "  _This is pure BS_."  They would be the person standing at the party in the corner talking to themselves.  If you have the best joke, the best story to share but no one is listening and your talking to yourself.  "What good is it?"

Writers are entertainers  You have to work at gaining the trust of reader, to wade through pages of detail to sometimes get to the real story.  It is up to you to deliver or you will find yourself talking in the corner all by yourself. 

If I a telling a story, I pay attention to how people are reacting to what I am saying, I can edit on the spot and tailor the  story to the people listening.  I can tell the same story 5 different ways if I want and include enough references so that those listening feel like they have some connection  to the story. 


I am sure you can see the parallels between story telling and writing as they are not really that different.

qwertyman and I are on the same page here.   The worst story in the world can not be edited into something someone will enjoy.  The best joke, the best story can always be cleaned up and tailored to the listener.   It is all about the story and the first draft


----------



## garza (Jul 24, 2014)

Dale is correct. For the reader, good writing is the result of good editing. The writer may internally edit as he or she goes along, often not fully conscious of the alternatives being considered, so that a physical first draft is the product of editing that happens in the mind, perhaps the sub-conscious, of the writer. Or the first draft may be so scratched over as to be almost obliterated by changes made in subsequent editing. Either way, it's the editing that results in a final product that is attractive for the reader.

See *this demonstration* of how skillful editing turns rough first thoughts into polished poetry we still admire after two hundred years.


----------



## qwertyman (Jul 24, 2014)

garza said:


> Dale is correct. For the reader, good writing is the result of good editing...



I doubt if anybody would dispute that.  The implication only bad writer's write for the reader is tosh.


----------



## garza (Jul 24, 2014)

Oh, I didn't catch that implication. 

I've made a good living writing for the reader. Does that make me a bad writer? My strong suspicion is that Stephen King writes for the reader, and he has made far more than a good living doing it. I personally don't care for his stories, but that's because I have no interest in the genre. Horror fans rate him as a very good writer, indeed. The popularity of his books and of the movies made from his books proves that.


----------



## InstituteMan (Jul 24, 2014)

Well, I certainly agree with the notion that the best way to create an audience is to write something of sufficient quality to merit an audience. I took JStoudt's question to be more along the lines of 'how the heck do I find people who want to buy this thing that I am writing?' That has to start with making the thing you are writing worth buying, of course, but it can't end there.

I don't think making the thing your writing good, or even great, is enough to make any money off of your writing on its own, if that is your objective (and it happily isn't for everyone). There are many people on these forums, 7 or so on this very thread, who write as well as some folks I have read with publishing contracts and at least modest royalty checks. Writing is a profession where many are called but few are chosen, and the only way to have any chance at being chosen is to give people an opportunity to choose you by being 'out there.' Where 'out there' is will depend upon what you are writing.


----------



## Schrody (Jul 24, 2014)

dale said:


> good writer's never write for the reader. they edit for the reader.



Oh Dale, you're so right. That's what I always say


----------



## Bishop (Jul 24, 2014)

Plasticweld said:


> To the writer, (I will insult a few here) who says write for themselves. "  _This is pure BS_."  They would be the person standing at the party in the corner talking to themselves.  If you have the best joke, the best story to share but no one is listening and your talking to yourself.  "What good is it?"



While you didn't insult me, I do disagree. And I also believe your metaphor is flawed. Writing is not just a means of communicating. It's also a release. Why do people write in diaries? No one wants anyone else to read their diaries, but they still write in them. They're writing for themselves. Because no one else should/would, or at least is not intended to read it.

The same can be said for my fiction. Sure, I love to share it with anyone who wants to read it. But that's not why I write it. I write it because I want to shape my worlds, exercise my mind, sharpen a talent, and sometimes just to pass the time at work. The idea of "writing for yourself" is not the mental masturbation that people often make it out to be. It's the idea that you don't care what anyone else thinks, don't care what anyone else wants, you write what you want, write it how you want, and if people don't like it then they can just not read it.

When I started on this forum I was determined to get published. You might even see some of my early posts still floating around where it's all I talked about, being published someday. But after writing two books and actually sharpening my skill to a level that I have some pride in, I've stopped caring about that. I just write, period. I've got some decent stuff, and I love to share it whenever people ask for it, but I don't push it out the door, I don't market it, and I really have only been editing it for the sake of sharpening my skills, not even for others to look at. The metaphor, then, places me as the guy in the corner talking to myself. But that's not really true. It makes the implication that people who take on a craft or art or hobby must share it with the world. Maybe I've got a great joke, but it's only funny to me? Or maybe I don't want to share it because it's about Jack's massive forehead pimple and I'm laughing in my own head, but if I said it out loud, it'd be rude? Or, maybe I'm just listening to other people's jokes, enjoying them.

My point is that writers don't have to be 'entertainers' we can just be writers. We can have no intention of entertaining others, but still write to become a better writer.

As for the OP; I agree with Pancreas. Your submissions to publishers are often weighed with how well the publisher thinks they can sell the book, not how many facebook fans you already have.


----------



## dale (Jul 24, 2014)

maybe using the phrase "good writers never" wasn't exactly the proper way to say it. to me, it's the difference between artistic expression and mechanical writing. i know there are good mechanical writers out there. but i can't see real artistic expression ever being written, painted, or sculpted or whatever simply with the viewers appreciation in mind. that would be like the difference between a color by numbers painting and a van gogh. a person may paint a color by numbers painting very well, but it's not true art.


----------



## qwertyman (Jul 24, 2014)

If you seek publication, and I don’t mean self-publishing, I refer to the traditional method of attracting an agent.  Your script needs to be commercial.  Agents and Publishers are in business.

If, like Bishop, you are writing for yourself carry on regardless.

Only 8% of the initial two-book deals offered to writers see a financial return for the publisher. Can the author write decent prose, does he have a story to tell and is there a recognisable market?  Way down the list comes, does the author have a social network of followers. Unless you are a Beckam or a Beatle, it’s small beer (qwerty looks at watch)…which reminds me.


----------



## garza (Jul 24, 2014)

Dale - I don't know what 'mechanical writing' is. Perhaps you would classify all non-fiction as 'mechanical'. I've made my way in the world writing non-fiction, and if that's what you mean by 'mechanical' it's perfectly all right with me if the only alternative is 'artistic' which is something I have nothing to do with. 'Creative,' yes, up to a point. 'Artistic,' never. 

If non-fiction is not what you mean by 'mechanical writing,' could you please explain what you do mean?


----------



## JStoudt (Jul 24, 2014)

Thanks for all the discussion everyone. I'm finding it very helpful. My initial question was pretty much as InstituteMan had interpreted in that I was wonder how you all find and connect to the people who will eventually be willing to buy and read your work. The podcast I was referring to is called the 'Self Publishing Podcast' and they recommend starting a blog and creating a 'list' as two things almost any new author should try to do. In regards to Dale's comment, I did find that I wrote my manuscript entirely for myself. Now that I'm editing it I keep face-palming as I read back some of the things I thought were so great when I wrote them. In college I had to take a technical writing class where we absolutely needed to tailor everything to the reader. My far fetched hope in writing my book was that there would be enough people out there like me who would get the same enjoyment out of reading my book as I have in writing it.


----------



## dale (Jul 24, 2014)

garza said:


> Dale - I don't know what 'mechanical writing' is. Perhaps you would classify all non-fiction as 'mechanical'. I've made my way in the world writing non-fiction, and if that's what you mean by 'mechanical' it's perfectly all right with me if the only alternative is 'artistic' which is something I have nothing to do with. 'Creative,' yes, up to a point. 'Artistic,' never.
> 
> If non-fiction is not what you mean by 'mechanical writing,' could you please explain what you do mean?



non-fiction would be mechanical writing. i have nothing against mechanical writing. i've done it myself in the past, and i felt i was a decent
  mechanical writer. but as far as artistic writing, i just don't think writing for the reader is art. art is an expression of ego or "the soul", and to sit down and think.."hmmmm...what would the reader want me to write?"...just doesn't fit my personal definition of art in literature or prose or whatever you wanna call it. although i want readers, as many of them as i can get, to be honest....to me, the reader is incidental to the writing itself, in terms of it's creation.


----------



## Morkonan (Jul 24, 2014)

dale said:


> non-fiction would be mechanical writing. i have nothing against mechanical writing. i've done it myself in the past, and i felt i was a decent
> mechanical writer. but as far as artistic writing, i just don't think writing for the reader is art. art is an expression of ego or "the soul", and to sit down and think.."hmmmm...what would the reader want me to write?"...just doesn't fit my personal definition of art in literature or prose or whatever you wanna call it. although i want readers, as many of them as i can get, to be honest....to me, the reader is incidental to the writing itself, in terms of it's creation.



Just a note:

I happen to disagree a bit with the idea that there is little "art" in non-fiction writing. I've had to do a bit of technical writing, even some things that would qualify as "non-fiction" and there is an "artistic" side to it, when you're allowed certain creative freedoms. While every word may not be full of artistic expression, navigating ones own ideas and those that are required to be present and organizing and presenting them in an intuitive manner for the Reader can be artistically fulfilling.

For instance, let's say I was writing a history book. (Or, perhaps you're writing one!) Your objective is to "teach history", but you're given your own lead in regards to how you do that. Well, don't you think you'd come up with some interesting ways to approach that? Do you think that implementing those ideas would have artistic merits and benefits for you? Would you not feel satisfaction at seeing your work, well done, and successful for its intended use?

To me, there's no such thing as "art as an expression of the ego or the soul", but I can see an artist viewing their own work in that way and placing such an importance on it. Instead, I prefer my own definition which, loosely, is "Art is the purposeful creation of something by an Artist in order to communicate something to the consumer that is more than the sum of its parts."


----------



## dale (Jul 24, 2014)

Morkonan said:


> "Art is the purposeful creation of something by an Artist in order to communicate something to the consumer that is more than the sum of its parts."


sometimes i wish i could more see it this way. i probably wouldn't have the horrible torment of writer's block i do so often.


----------



## InstituteMan (Jul 24, 2014)

Maybe my standards are too low, but I think there is a lot of artistry even in mundane non-fiction. Granted, the line between art and craft is sometimes thin (and I know which side of the line garza, for one, prefers), but I recognize some reporters as better at their craft/art than others, even if they all are doing an admirable job of reporting. In my own dreadfully written field of law, I am often shocked by the unexpected gems of artistry(or perhaps craft) I find in unexpected places.

On the other hand, I have seen some dreadfully mechanical fiction, or even poetry.


----------



## Morkonan (Jul 24, 2014)

dale said:


> sometimes i wish i could more see it this way. i probably wouldn't have the horrible torment of writer's block i do so often.



Just be thankful that you wish to engage in such a difficult activity! Imagine it - You're taking words and crafting them in such a way to communicate more than just the words, if only read in the order your present them, would have said in the first place! It boggles the mind... But, how many times have you, and I, read a passage written with skill that caused something to emerge from us that was more than the simple communications contained within those few words?

It's magic.  

Visual artists, sculptors, composers and musicians, all artists... These are the standards that much of their "Art" aspires to. Those who deal with the written word can aspire to no less, in my opinion.


----------



## garza (Jul 24, 2014)

Dale -I don't agree that the term, 'Mechanical writing,' should be applied to  all non-fiction. That makes it sound as though a robot with no feeling  for the subject has been at work. 

Look up Mark Danner's article 'The Truth of El Mozote' in _The New Yorker, _6/12/93. It's good, straightforward, accurate journalism. Then ask yourself, is that mechanical writing? Do you get the impression that a robot with no feeling for the people in the village wrote the article? 

Are all editorial essays mechanical writing? Do newspapers and broadcasters use computer generated essays?


----------



## ppsage (Jul 24, 2014)

I have my own ideas about what art is, which I'm sure nobody cares much for, and which would anyway call for the literary artist to practice a craft, so in my opinion very little writing which is successful can be _mechanical _(whatever that means) but rather ... crafty. I guess. The process of writing, whether fiction or non-fiction or some hermaphroditic monstrosity (poetry? journalism?) is always that of discovering one suitable word after another, which requires inspiration and self-knowledge and discipline and practice and craft. A person who'd call non-fiction writing--even journalism--mechanical, has perhaps not made any sustained attempt to write in those areas. One exception I might make is for screen-writing, which does seem somewhat mechanized, in an attempt to facilitate collaboration. At least that's what I gather from those propounding it here.

RE the OP: Isn't the idea that one might create a useful _connected_ audience, in any reasonable length of time, without also getting a bunch of writing out there by whatever means possible, a sort of fantasy? I'm trying to visualize this... _Okay, as soon as enough of you all beg for it, I'm going to give you something to read? _​Most authors seem to build audience over years and decades, kind of serendipitously and with lots of struggle up front. A couple per decade have meteoric rises, not however, I think, based on preformed audience connections.


----------



## dale (Jul 24, 2014)

garza said:


> Dale -I don't agree that the term, 'Mechanical writing,' should be applied to  all non-fiction. That makes it sound as though a robot with no feeling  for the subject has been at work.
> 
> Look up Mark Danner's article 'The Truth of El Mozote' in _The New Yorker, _6/12/93. It's good, straightforward, accurate journalism. Then ask yourself, is that mechanical writing? Do you get the impression that a robot with no feeling for the people in the village wrote the article?
> 
> Are all editorial essays mechanical writing? Do newspapers and broadcasters use computer generated essays?



 lol. i'm not sure if i'd consider journalism 100% non-fiction. much of it is ego-driven propaganda. but anyway, the whole thread kind of got me to thinking a bit about it all. maybe i was a bit hasty from the very 1st comment i made. because i got to thinking about some of the really prosy romantic letters and emails i've written, and by my own definition, they were very "artistic", but they were also written for the reader. i could also place my own notions of "writing for the muse" as "writing for the reader", in an abstract kind of way. so yeah. it's not as all cut and dried as i 1st implied it to be.


----------



## TKent (Jul 24, 2014)

Thanks for pointing this out InstituteMan.  I just read your beautifully written blog post:  _A name to call yourself_.  I am so glad I took the time to check it out.



InstituteMan said:


> First, not that I am awash in readers or anything, but I have just started a blog (see signature line). Nothing big, but something that can be found and that I can grow as I figure out that medium



Sorry if that was off topic.


----------



## InstituteMan (Jul 24, 2014)

TKent said:


> Thanks for pointing this out InstituteMan.  I just read your beautifully written blog post:  _A name to call yourself_.  I am so glad I took the time to check it out.
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry if that was off topic.



Thank you, T!


----------



## JStoudt (Jul 24, 2014)

ppsage said:


> RE the OP: Isn't the idea that one might create a useful _connected_ audience, in any reasonable length of time, without also getting a bunch of writing out there by whatever means possible, a sort of fantasy? I'm trying to visualize this... _Okay, as soon as enough of you all beg for it, I'm going to give you something to read? _​Most authors seem to build audience over years and decades, kind of serendipitously and with lots of struggle up front. A couple per decade have meteoric rises, not however, I think, based on preformed audience connections.



I think you're absolutely right about this. An audience for your writing isn't going to appear out of nowhere. I know building a good base of readers is going to take time and lots of effort. But where does it all start exactly? Do you begin building your audience after you release your first work or is there a way to begin connecting with readers while you're still preparing to release? Should I even be thinking about how to market my book before it's fully edited? I guess I'd just like to know how others in my position proceeded.


----------



## InstituteMan (Jul 24, 2014)

JStoudt said:


> I think you're absolutely right about this. An audience for your writing isn't going to appear out of nowhere. I know building a good base of readers is going to take time and lots of effort. But where does it all start exactly? Do you begin building your audience after you release your first work or is there a way to begin connecting with readers while you're still preparing to release? Should I even be thinking about how to market my book before it's fully edited? I guess I'd just like to know how others in my position proceeded.



I think the self employed (and I am one of them) would tell you that the only way to get an endeavor off the ground is a little bit at a time. Most new businesses fail in the first year, they say, and I suspect most of them fail because the owner gives up. Some businesses are ill-conceived and poorly executed, with no chance of succeeding, but even a well-conceived and flawlessly executed business can't succeed overnight, at least none I have been around. You just have to keep plugging away and getting better and building your reputation and your customers (clients, in my case). Then one day you wake up and realize that the existential dread of failure is gone, because things are working and you did it yourself and it is wonderful, for that brief moment, then you get back to work because you know the line between success and failure is so very thin. I can't imagine that writing is any different.


----------



## garza (Jul 24, 2014)

Dale - I am offended.


----------



## dale (Jul 24, 2014)

garza said:


> Dale - I am offended.



seriously? don't be, if you are. i was mainly referring to cable news journalism such as cnn, fox, and msnbc and quite a few online journalism sources. 
when i said i wrote "mechanical writing" in the past? it was for one of those propagandist journalist sites. i could spin with the best of them. lol


----------



## David Gordon Burke (Jul 24, 2014)

I'm confused.  Was the podcast saying that you should write for an audience in an attempt to tell you to do your marketting in advance, create your audience and then write or....was it saying that you should have a certain audience in mind when you write?  I suspect it could be the latter.  In that case, the idea is to know what the fans of a particular genre o people of a particular interest are looking for in a book / novel of that nature.

As for building a market first and then writing for those people....good luck with that.  I have no idea how the social media phenom functions and can't get more than a few hundred  freaks together on twitter or facebook.  I do have an extensive following for my english classes but who knows if it is paying off in sales for those books.

I write (up til now) about dogs and animals.  The thing people want in that genre is EMOTION.  Identify what your reader wants and deliver.  

David Gordon Burke


----------



## Morkonan (Jul 24, 2014)

David Gordon Burke said:


> I'm confused.  Was the podcast saying that you should write for an audience in an attempt to tell you to do your marketting in advance, create your audience and then write or....was it saying that you should have a certain audience in mind when you write?  I suspect it could be the latter. ...



That's a good point.

At first, I thought it was about knowing your target audience. But, from the OP's post, it seemed that it was one of those "Social Networking" sort of posts that seem to crop up very frequently. Social Networking, putting a face out for your audience, engaging your audience and all that, is a very good way to encourage sales. At least, for many writers. I don't know if A-Listers need to do that sort of thing as much as the indies, but it certainly doesn't hurt anyone's sales chances.

There are guides galore for writers looking to generate audience interest in their work using social networking, various media, personal blogs and websites and other blood-sweat-and-tears approaches. (Probably, most of such encouraging submissions are backed by traditional publishers...) A google search will likely yield plenty of responses, since this is a very topical subject, especially amongst e-book indies and self-publishers.

If, however, we discover this is about writing for a target audience, I'll put my two cents in, later.


----------



## qwertyman (Jul 25, 2014)

Anyone here think Reynolds, Gainsborough, El Greco etc., painted what they wanted to paint? Likewise in my opinion a good writer should be able to write whatever he is asked to write and write it well.  

As for writing ‘art’…well, I’ll go to the foot of our stairs (not sure what that means but it seems appropriate). 

***

As we're back on the OP, here's a learning. I was talking to a successful playwright (stage and in this case,radio) and she said *always* the *first question* a commissioning agent asked after hearing her pitch was - 'Why now?'

For clarification, not 'Why pitch it to me now, whilst I'm at my daughter's christening.' But, 'what particular relevance does the idea you're pitching have to the social/political/fashion/pop/news story etc.  status quo, at this moment?'

She added this didn't apply to humour.


----------



## garza (Jul 25, 2014)

Dale - Yes. Seriously. From the age of 14 till now journalism, and the ethical practice of journalism, has been my life. I worked hard at being the best I could be, to report accurately and without bias, to tell what I saw in as impartial a manner as is humanly possible. That's a 60 year career. To have my life's work dismissed as 'ego-driven propaganda' is offensive.


----------



## dale (Jul 25, 2014)

garza said:


> Dale - Yes. Seriously. From the age of 14 till now journalism, and the ethical practice of journalism, has been my life. I worked hard at being the best I could be, to report accurately and without bias, to tell what I saw in as impartial a manner as is humanly possible. That's a 60 year career. To have my life's work dismissed as 'ego-driven propaganda' is offensive.



to be fair, i did say "much" of journalism was that, not all.


----------



## JStoudt (Jul 25, 2014)

David Gordon Burke said:


> I'm confused.  Was the podcast saying that you should write for an audience in an attempt to tell you to do your marketting in advance, create your audience and then write or....was it saying that you should have a certain audience in mind when you write?  I suspect it could be the latter.  In that case, the idea is to know what the fans of a particular genre o people of a particular interest are looking for in a book / novel of that nature.



From what I understood, they were actually saying to find readers via a blog in order to create a 'list' so that when you release your work you already have a core group of people who are willing to read and review. Their advice was to blog about the topic you are interested in and writing about. For them it was the horror genre and they advised for other horror writers to blog about things like The Walking Dead to connect with their audience. In theory it sounds plausible but I don't know if I'm willing to invest a lot of time into blogging over writing.


----------



## JStoudt (Jul 25, 2014)

Morkonan said:


> That's a good point.
> 
> At first, I thought it was about knowing your target audience. But, from the OP's post, it seemed that it was one of those "Social Networking" sort of posts that seem to crop up very frequently. Social Networking, putting a face out for your audience, engaging your audience and all that, is a very good way to encourage sales. At least, for many writers. I don't know if A-Listers need to do that sort of thing as much as the indies, but it certainly doesn't hurt anyone's sales chances.
> 
> ...




Knowing your target audience goes along with my original question. For example, I would describe my book in the simplest of terms as X-men meets Fallout. When I wrote the rough draft it was basically written for me and a select few friends. Now that I'm editing, I'm more on the path to tailoring it to a specific audience. In order to do that effectively, it would help if I could connect to that audience in an attempt to find what style choices work and get a feel for how my style might be received. In doing so I would hope that the connections I make will help generate buzz so that I don't release to a chorus of crickets. So restructuring my original question, how do you identify and connect with your audience both to create a platform and gain input as to how to better tailor your book to them? Does that make any sense?


----------



## qwertyman (Jul 25, 2014)

JStoudt said:


> ... So restructuring my original question, how do you identify and connect with your audience both to create a platform and gain input as to how to better tailor your book to them? Does that make any sense?



It sounds to me as though you're looking for a formula. Don't get me wrong I can see a formulaic structure being successful. In fact, elsewhere on this forum, I mooted the possibility and the roof fell in.  Talk about a chorus of critics (sic)!

Nevertheless, tailoring a book to capture readers is hazardous as it promotes the danger of the tail wagging the dog.


----------



## ShadowEyes (Jul 25, 2014)

JStoudt said:


> I'm a new writer with a rough manuscript to his name trying to figure out the next step to go along with editing. Truthfully I know that even if I polish the heck out of this book and release it there won't be any success unless I reach an audience. I've been listening to a podcast where they constantly reiterate that you need an audience before you publish, but I'm struggling with how to find and connect to readers without any work to show. Perhaps it is too early for me to think about this and I should focus more on my writing, but I thought I would ask the community what ways you all connect to your readers and how you started out. Any advice would be much appreciated.



I'm sorry I'm just replying quickly from my phone on break. My first thought was... Why not try for an agent viz a viz a publishing house? I'll get back to this later, but if you can find someone who likes your work, you can rely on him or her for support, no? At least that's what Brandon Sanderson says to do in regards to feeing published. Might differ based on genre.


----------



## JStoudt (Jul 25, 2014)

qwertyman said:


> It sounds to me as though you're looking for a formula. Don't get me wrong I can see a formulaic structure being successful. In fact, elsewhere on this forum, I mooted the possibility and the roof fell in.  Talk about a chorus of critics (sic)!
> 
> Nevertheless, tailoring a book to capture readers is hazardous as it promotes the danger of the tail wagging the dog.



Well as an Engineering graduate I do loves me some formulas. But I was hoping more to see how others have gone about it. For someone who has no readers, I'm at a loss as to where I should start or what I should be doing. It seems to me that most are advocating the "If you build it they will come" approach and I have no problem with that because writing is what I love to do and I will happily continue to grind. On the other hand, if there is someone here who has had success with locating their audience and building a relationship with them I would love to hear about it. In my mind there is always something more you could be doing to be successful. I was thinking about joining a sci-fi or fantasy forum or starting a podcast with some friends to talk to people with similar interest and get some feedback. Obviously I can't promote anything because I haven't published yet but I have heard that writing is all about relationships and I have to admit I have few to no connections at this point.


----------



## bazz cargo (Jul 26, 2014)

The easiest way to shift books, be famous or infamous. If you can't stand the glare of publicity try knowing someone famous or infamous who will bat for you. 

The other way is to struggle mightily against the odds. 

Good luck.


----------



## InstituteMan (Jul 26, 2014)

JStoudt said:


> Well as an Engineering graduate I do loves me some formulas. But I was hoping more to see how others have gone about it. For someone who has no readers, I'm at a loss as to where I should start or what I should be doing. It seems to me that most are advocating the "If you build it they will come" approach and I have no problem with that because writing is what I love to do and I will happily continue to grind. On the other hand, if there is someone here who has had success with locating their audience and building a relationship with them I would love to hear about it. In my mind there is always something more you could be doing to be successful. I was thinking about joining a sci-fi or fantasy forum or starting a podcast with some friends to talk to people with similar interest and get some feedback. Obviously I can't promote anything because I haven't published yet but I have heard that writing is all about relationships and I have to admit I have few to no connections at this point.



Once again, I am just a guy, but you are almost certainly going to release your first book to a world of people not buying it. I am not an engineer, but I was a physicist of sorts once. The business of writing is probabilistic, more like quantum mechanics than a mechanical/electrical/software/other system. My imperfect geeky analogy is to a crystal. In a crystal, each molecule (or atom or ion) has a state, but there is precious little to be reliably said about the state of any one molecule in the crystal. Even if we can observe the entire thing and say, yep, that's sucralose at 35 degrees, we don't know what is happening for the molecule at position x,y,z in the lattice.

To continue the geeky analogy, we know a lot about the overall industry of publishing and writing (although that may be changing), but what is happening for each individual writer and how those individuals can change how it is going is harder to know. As bazz wisely suggested:



bazz cargo said:


> The easiest way to shift books, be famous or infamous. If you can't stand the glare of publicity try knowing someone famous or infamous who will bat for you.
> 
> The other way is to struggle mightily against the odds.
> 
> Good luck.



Me, I just have to struggle against the odds. Good luck from me as well!


----------



## JStoudt (Jul 26, 2014)

InstituteMan said:


> Once again, I am just a guy, but you are almost certainly going to release your first book to a world of people not buying it. I am not an engineer, but I was a physicist of sorts once. The business of writing is probabilistic, more like quantum mechanics than a mechanical/electrical/software/other system. My imperfect geeky analogy is to a crystal. In a crystal, each molecule (or atom or ion) has a state, but there is precious little to be reliably said about the state of any one molecule in the crystal. Even if we can observe the entire thing and say, yep, that's sucralose at 35 degrees, we don't know what is happening for the molecule at position x,y,z in the lattice.
> 
> To continue the geeky analogy, we know a lot about the overall industry of publishing and writing (although that may be changing), but what is happening for each individual writer and how those individuals can change how it is going is harder to know.



Well I had to read it twice but I understand your analogy now. I appreciate you putting it into terms that both sides of my brain can handle. Basically I will have to continue to work despite no recognition in the hopes that it will fall into place one day. And so I will. That brings me to another question if you don't mind. I've asked this to a few friends as well and I think I pretty much know the answer, but I'll ask anyways.

As a writer I have several ideas for books but one stands out above the rest and I have put most of my time into it. I love to work on it and the manuscript I finished will be the first book in a five part series. My fear is that since it is my first serious work I am not that great of a writer yet that I am unable to do the idea justice. Still, I find myself wanting to work on this story over my others. Should I try to work on other stories and release them first to hone my skills for my "masterpiece" or is it worth trying to put this idea out there first even though it more than likely will fail?


----------



## InstituteMan (Jul 26, 2014)

JStoudt said:


> Well I had to read it twice but I understand your analogy now. I appreciate you putting it into terms that both sides of my brain can handle. Basically I will have to continue to work despite no recognition in the hopes that it will fall into place one day. And so I will. That brings me to another question if you don't mind. I've asked this to a few friends as well and I think I pretty much know the answer, but I'll ask anyways.
> 
> As a writer I have several ideas for books but one stands out above the rest and I have put most of my time into it. I love to work on it and the manuscript I finished will be the first book in a five part series. My fear is that since it is my first serious work I am not that great of a writer yet that I am unable to do the idea justice. Still, I find myself wanting to work on this story over my others. Should I try to work on other stories and release them first to hone my skills for my "masterpiece" or is it worth trying to put this idea out there first even though it more than likely will fail?



I think you have to write what moves you. That said, I have learned a lot by letting myself be moved to write smaller pieces, like for the LM competitions here. I would have gotten further on the books I am working on without the digressions, but the books will benefit from the skills I have developed with the shorter pieces.

You also have to accept that a future you will shake a head at what your current you is creating now.


----------

