# Has anyone ever been easily published?



## Cat Laurelle

I'm not talking about self-publishing.


----------



## Sam

If getting published was easy, everyone would be published.


----------



## starseed

LOL exactly. I think it's meant to be a long hard road that only the dedicated and strong are willing to walk...

The only "easy" sounding publishing story I've ever heard was Stephanie Meyer *twilight*. If I recall correctly she was published not long after she wrote the book.


----------



## Foxee

What are you considering 'published' for this question? I was published 'easily' in my local newspaper and pretty easily (only one rejection) in an Australian magazine. This may not be what you want to know about, though.


----------



## philistine

I received notice of my first publication about a fortnight ago. It was the third story I had ever written, and looking back, it was still sticky with the glue of an amateur. I'd say that came easily in the sense that I hadn't been writing for long, and that I've never applied myself consistently (I still haven't). This was in an American anthology, and not particularly well known, so I'm not sure if that qualifies as being _really_ published.


----------



## Tiamat

For anyone looking for easy markets, check out:  Inwood Indiana and The WiFiles. 

If you get rejected by either of these (particularly WiFiles), perhaps you should consider finding another creative outlet.


----------



## HooktonFonnix

I think the kind of 'easy' you're asking about is reserved for well-known celebrities. While I'm skeptical that people like Snooki actually sat down and wrote a word that went into 'their' books, I'm sure the editors had a heck of a time getting them ready for publication. For everyone else, it's going to be a long, difficult road.


----------



## garza

Like Fxoee my start was with the local newspapers. The Daily Herald published the first article I took them. That was in the Fall of 1954. You offer the right product to the right market and a sale is assured.

Think of the process as a ladder. Once you get your foot firmly on the bottom rung all you have to do is climb. 

That's non-fiction. Starting with the local newspapers can lead you into all sorts of writing - the non-fiction field is vast - but not necessarily into fiction. Whether you can convert a start in non-fiction into successful publication in fiction I don't know. 

If your first love is writing without regard to what kind of writing, and you want to avoid at all costs having to go out and look for a job, then non-fiction is the way to go for easy publication.

That is, provided you can write well enough and are willing to put in the time and effort required to research and write what a publisher wants.


----------



## sunaynaprasad

One book I wrote got accepted by American Book, but then they rejected it later.


----------



## Robdemanc

I think even though JK Rowling got twelve or so rejections, Harry Potter was still her first book she submitted.  So if you forget the years and years she spent writing, and the 12 rejections, she still got published with her first completed novel.


----------



## philistine

Robdemanc said:


> I think even though JK Rowling got twelve or so rejections, Harry Potter was still her first book she submitted.  So if you forget the years and years she spent writing, and the 12 rejections, she still got published with her first completed novel.



I can't remember where I read it, though I'm sure I read that she had just over a hundred rejections for her manuscript, before it was eventually given a chance.

It still stands, mind.


----------



## Cefor

Aww, Harry Potter was going to be _my _example!

Short answer to that question though is: no.

We should be glad it's not easy, though. 'Cause otherwise, when someone says "What do you do?" and you respond with "I'm a writer/author/poet", they'd simply shrug and walk away.


----------



## philistine

Cefor said:


> Aww, Harry Potter was going to be _my _example!
> 
> Short answer to that question though is: no.
> 
> We should be glad it's not easy, though. 'Cause otherwise,* when someone says "What do you do?" and you respond with "I'm a writer/author/poet", they'd simply shrug and walk away.*



That's the usual _savoir-faire_ anyway. ffended:


----------



## Cefor

philistine said:


> That's the usual _savoir-faire_ anyway. ffended:



Then they need a good slap, and it alerts you to the rabble who you do not want to associate with in any case. Plebeian fools.


----------



## wyf

garza said:


> You offer the right product to the right market and a sale is assured.



This is mostly true. The difficulty these days can be figuring out what the right product is.



Cefor said:


> We should be glad it's not easy, though. 'Cause otherwise, when someone says "What do you do?" and you respond with "I'm a writer/author/poet", they'd simply shrug and walk away.




This is true too. If its too easy its not worth having. I got my writing into print really easily by accident. I met a guy at a party who worked for a mens magazine and I joked about how rubbish the writing was and how all the letters were obviously made up. A week later I was writing up to 50% of the copy for crap money and no credits. The best and worst 2 years of my life.

It gave me the last laugh when anybody asked me what I did, though. They never shrugged and walked away when I told them "I write porn".

As for getting anything I'm proud of published... much harder work.


----------



## philistine

Cefor said:


> Then they need a good slap, and it alerts you to the rabble who you do not want to associate with in any case. Plebeian fools.



Well, I don't go around advertising the fact. Writing, as many will agree, is very much a solitary endeavour. If people ask, then I'll tell, trying my hardest not to get too enthusiastic. 

You do get the occasional, 'ah, okay' though. It's similar to be a struggling musician or artist.


----------



## Cefor

philistine said:


> Well, I don't go around advertising the fact. Writing, as many will agree, is very much a solitary endeavour. If people ask, then I'll tell, trying my hardest not to get too enthusiastic.
> 
> You do get the occasional, 'ah, okay' though. It's similar to be a struggling musician or artist.



God, yes. I still hate to admit what I'm wanting to do with my life... though it is becoming easier. I backed out of my university application two years ago in Computer Games Programming, fast track to a lot of money if I was good at it... and decided to go and do English at A-Level in order to do something of that ilk at university instead. The past two years have had their ups and their downs... a lot of downs. But, with the chance to go and write for three years in my Creative and Professional Writing course, I can't be happier. Hard to admit to people that that's what I'm doing in life, sometimes. But hey, why not?

Plus, as a struggling writer, I won't be paying back my debts. Then I hit the jackpot and they go away really fast. At least, that's the plan.


----------



## shadowwalker

When one considers all that goes into it before even sending the first query - no. No one is easily published.


----------



## wyf

philistine said:


> It's similar to be a struggling musician or artist.



I think people have more respect for musos and artists -  they have a 'skill' in the eyes of the beholder. Writing is just something anyone can do, right?


----------



## philistine

wyf said:


> I think people have more respect for musos and artists -  they have a 'skill' in the eyes of the beholder. Writing is just something anyone can do, right?



Well, I was, and currently am, an artist, as well as a writer. When you mention you paint, the person's eyes rather light up, or they immediately brand you as an 'arty-farty' tosser. It's quite a sliding scale. 

I'd agree with that though. Quite literally anyone can write, whereas it takes some effort and commitment to learn to paint, even in an amateur fashion.


----------



## Kevin

philistine said:


> That's the usual _savoir-faire_ anyway. ffended:


 Just make sh** up. "I'm a producer.... Huh? Oh, we're making an independant film....why  yes , I _might_ be able to get you an audition, I guess...  Well of course. He's sort of a friend of mine.... Mh-hmm.  Photos.  Do you have any pictures?..."


----------



## Kevin

philistine;1535569
 Quite literally anyone can write said:
			
		

> Oh boy, eh...care to make retraction? haha (you might want to duck)


----------



## Ditch

I spray painted a girls phone number on a huge, city water tank next to a major freeway that said, "For a good time call" once.

It stayed there for months, was probably a best seller as billboards go.


----------



## philistine

Kevin said:


> Oh boy, eh...care to make retraction? haha (you might want to duck)



I simply mean to say anyone can pick up a pen and paper, and begin to write something. The vast majority of people read, at least on a seldom, if not regular basis- so it means they have _some_ idea where to start.

I remember speaking to someone who thought that with oils, you simply just squirted them onto a pallet and you were good to go. Not quite.


----------



## Kyle R

wyf said:


> I think people have more respect for musos and artists - they have a 'skill' in the eyes of the beholder. Writing is just something anyone can do, right?



They each have their own challenges.

I spent a few years performing as a singer/guitarist in bars and cafes. Learning to play the guitar was challenging for me, but only in the first year. After that, the physical aspect of it became easy. Everything past that point was just a matter of creativity.

Contrarily, I've been at writing for nearly six years and I feel like I'm only now breaking out of the "amateur" ranks.

So, at least for me, writing--or more specifically, writing good, publishable work--is definately not something anybody can do. It's learnable, yes, but it requires mental dexterity, just as playing an instrument requires physical dexterity.

I can see why some people would think that writing is easy. But ask them, "Where's your best-selling novel, then?" and see what excuses they come up with.


----------



## Kevin

philistine said:


> I simply mean to say anyone can pick up a pen and paper, and begin to write something. The vast majority of people read, at least on a seldom, if not regular basis- so it means they have _some_ idea where to start.
> 
> I remember speaking to someone who thought that with oils, you simply just squirted them onto a pallet and you were good to go. Not quite.


 I know many people who have not read a book since _Dick and Jane._ Losers, and successful people. It could be that your perspective is changed. You've painted so long you can't even remember your old(young) , first timer, self.  I could say that anyone can apply crap on a surface, whether it's  curse words on a bathroom stall with a pencil, or a finger painting out of feces. Voila. Art.


----------



## Kyle R

To elaborate on my above post, I think the reason writing is difficult is because there's less of a distinction when it comes to what defines excellence in the craft.

With guitar, or drums, there are specific things to learn. Chords, scales, rhythms, hand/finger/wrist techniques. If you can do these things, you're clearly skilled.

With writing, things are more undefined and subjective.

I spent, and I still spend, the majority of my time trying to figure out what defines good writing, and often I stumble down the wrong routes, then absorb more time trying to find my way back again.

It's like navigating a misty forest. The trails seem to wander in every direction. There's no distinct "put the ball in the hoop" or "knock the puck into the net". A good sentence to one person is a crappy sentence to another.

It's intellectual gymnastics to me. I've pulled many brain-muscles just trying not to fall down.


----------



## JosephB

I studied painting in college before switching to design. I've played guitar since I was 13, performed and written music. I've done a fair amount of writing -- some of it professional copywriting. I'm not sure why anyone bothers to try and compare them or say which is harder or easier etc. etc. All three take different skills and talents -- and there's a boatload of subjectivity in saying what's good and what isn't. What's the point?


----------



## garza

Kyle - Please allow me to disagree. Good writing and bad writing are as easily recognised as good guitar playing and bad guitar playing. 

Allow me to give you an example. Some years ago I read _Dune_ by Frank Herbert. I'm not a science fiction fan but I read the book because of an article about how Herbert came to write it, and discovered that Herbert was a first rate writer. Though the story did not interest me, the writing did. Recently in a used book shop I found _Dune: The Butlerian Jihad_ by Brian Herbert and Kevin J. Anderson. Brian Herbert is Frank Herbert's son. When I picked up the book all that caught my eye was 'Dune' and I did not notice that Frank Herbert was not the author. I knew that he had written sequels to the original _Dune_ and I assumed this was one, thus proving that we must never assume.

The book is unreadable. It is, however, a hardback and heavy, and is serving as a doorstop so the five Belize dollars I paid for it did not go entirely to waste.

If you have access to both the original _Dune_ and this one, read a slice from each - say ten or 15 pages. You'll see the difference.


----------



## Kyle R

JosephB said:


> I'm not sure why anyone bothers to try and compare them or say which is harder or easier etc. etc. All three take different skills and talents -- and there's a boatload of subjectivity in saying what's good and what isn't. What's the point?



Well, I was responding to the opinion Wyf cited (not necessarily her own, but one that some seem to have) that writing requires no talent/skill, and that "Anyone can do it."



			
				garza said:
			
		

> Kyle - Please allow me to disagree. Good writing and bad writing are as easily recognised as good guitar playing and bad guitar playing.



I agree, they often are recognizable (to some degree).

But most bad guitarists are aware of what they need to fix to improve. Many writers, however, may be aware they need to improve, but not know what needs fixing, or how to do it.

The craft of writing seems less defined and more abstract, and open to varying degrees of interpretation (I consider Stephanie Meyer a good writer, some consider her atrocious). That's what makes it so hard, in my opinion.


----------



## HooktonFonnix

garza said:


> Kyle - Please allow me to disagree. Good writing and bad writing are as easily recognised as good guitar playing and bad guitar playing.
> 
> Allow me to give you an example. Some years ago I read _Dune_ by Frank Herbert. I'm not a science fiction fan but I read the book because of an article about how Herbert came to write it, and discovered that Herbert was a first rate writer. Though the story did not interest me, the writing did. Recently in a used book shop I found _Dune: The Butlerian Jihad_ by Brian Herbert and Kevin J. Anderson. Brian Herbert is Frank Herbert's son. When I picked up the book all that caught my eye was 'Dune' and I did not notice that Frank Herbert was not the author. I knew that he had written sequels to the original _Dune_ and I assumed this was one, thus proving that we must never assume.
> 
> The book is unreadable. It is, however, a hardback and heavy, and is serving as a doorstop so the five Belize dollars I paid for it did not go entirely to waste.
> 
> If you have access to both the original _Dune_ and this one, read a slice from each - say ten or 15 pages. You'll see the difference.



Hmm, that's interesting. I have a copy of Dune laying around somewhere, I'll have to dig it out and pay attention to his writing style a little more.

As an interesting side note, Frank Herbert is from my hometown. Hopefully there's something in the water....


----------



## JosephB

KyleColorado said:


> But most bad guitarists are aware of what they need to fix to improve.



There are delusional people who seem utterly incapable of evaluating their own talent or level skill in all the arts -- guitar included. So many people want to play guitar and become rock stars. That’s why holding an audition for a guitarist is such a painful experience. In my experience, many don't know. They have enough of the mechanics down to fool themselves and their friends -- but they have zero finesse. Many couldn't pick a note out by ear if their lives depended on it.

But even that pales in comparison to trying out singers. You have to believe the worst of the caterwaulers have never heard a recording of their own voice.

As a whole, I think any mention of pursuing the arts is met with a degree of skepticism – and kind of an “Oh, no another person who thinks he can…” I’m guilty of it myself.


----------



## wyf

JosephB said:


> There are delusional people who seem utterly incapable of evaluating their own talent or level skill in all the arts -- guitar included.



You only havbe to listen tothe delusional people sining in the early rounds of x factor to se the truth of that.


----------



## shadowwalker

People in the "arts" may or may not be aware of their deficiencies (just watch American Idol) and may or may not know how to fix them. And even those who have mastered the basics and are supposedly ready to move on with the creativity (that point where one knows when to appropriately and effectively break the rules), may not be up to the task _or_ the subjectivity of the audience may not appreciate when they do (see the early history of Impressionists and/or comments made about Picasso's work).


----------



## JosephB

wyf said:


> You only havbe to listen tothe delusional people sining in the early rounds of x factor to se the truth of that.



I've never seen that. But I have seen the opening rounds of American  Idol. I thought it would be good for laugh, but to me it's painful to  watch -- and I feel really awful for the people who are so bad and don't  know it. I think there's something sort of wrong about putting people  like that on display just to make them look foolish.


----------



## Cefor

KyleColorado said:


> The craft of writing seems less defined and more abstract, and open to varying degrees of interpretation (I consider Stephanie Meyer a good writer, some consider her atrocious). That's what makes it so hard, in my opinion.



This is going to be interesting, Kyle... Why exactly do you consider Meyer a good writer? I could show you a lot of examples that prove otherwise... or at least that she should not have been published when she was.



JosephB said:


> I've never seen that. But I have seen the opening rounds of American Idol. I thought it would be good for laugh, but to me it's painful to watch -- and I feel really awful for the people who are so bad and don't know it. I think there's something sort of wrong about putting people like that on display just to make them look foolish.



It's entertainment... and as with all reality TV, the level of entertainment has to increase each time them show the same thing, otherwise no one will watch the subsequent versions of it... you see one you've seen them all. The trouble with X Factor and Britain's Got Talent, Pop Idol, etc. is that they all depend upon the comedic aspect from the idiots who think they can sing. Before you get to audition before the judges, you have to audition for the producers of the show. It's all pretty much rigged.


----------



## JosephB

Cefor said:


> It's entertainment... and as with all reality TV, the level of entertainment has to increase each time them show the same thing, otherwise no one will watch the subsequent versions of it... you see one you've seen them all.



Sure. I hate most reality TV. I know people go into it willingly and some people manage to get something out of their 15 minutes, but I don't think most appreciate the extent to which they'll be manipulated and subsequently ridiculed. To me it's painful and embarrassing to watch. I can't understand why people want to see that. (Well, I guess I do, but that's another subject.)

But like Mencken said, "No one ever went broke underestimating the taste of the American public." (Insert your country -- where applicable.)


----------



## Cefor

JosephB said:


> Sure. I hate most reality TV. I know people go into it willingly and some people manage to get something out of their 15 minutes, but I don't think most appreciate the extent to which they'll be manipulated and subsequently ridiculed. To me it's painful and embarrassing to watch. I can't understand why people want to see that. (Well, I guess I do, but that's another subject.)
> 
> But like Mencken said, "No one ever went broke underestimating the taste of the American public." (Insert your country -- where applicable.)



What's depressing is that for these talent shows... the ones who become famous, or infamous in a lot of cases, are often the bad acts. This is all wrong. Which is why 'The Voice' is such a great change for these shows, where the judges don't see the contestant before they accept them, and each one is selected from a candidate pool who was pre-vetted as a decent singer anyway, none are inserted because they are bad, anyway.

It indeed is another subject which we could rant about for hours, probably. The things some people do for fame... so, I'm going to go finish writing my best seller, 'kay?


----------



## JosephB

Cefor said:


> The things some people do for fame... so, I'm going to go finish writing my best seller, 'kay?



I think the idea is, become famous -- then "write" the best seller. 

Or write a children's book. Every woman celebrity who manages to have a baby (or pick up one in Africa) thinks she's qualified to write one.


----------



## Kyle R

Cefor said:


> This is going to be interesting, Kyle... Why exactly do you consider Meyer a good writer? I could show you a lot of examples that prove otherwise... or at least that she should not have been published when she was.



It's one of those "how you look at it" arguments that we've been over on these forums before.

Some have quoted her sentences as proof that she's a bad writer.

I believe they are missing the bigger picture (intentionally, or perhaps otherwise): she's one of the most successful writers in the world, with fans who are quite literally ravenous over her writing. 

Quoting Larry Brooks' "six core competencies of successful writing", we have:

- Concept
- Character
- Theme
- Story Structure
- Scene Execution
- Writing Voice

Those who are criticizing her prose are, in essence, saying "Look, she's got a bad writing voice. That means she's a bad writer."

There's a lot more to being a writer than that one singular aspect. Look at James Patterson. I consider him to have a weak writing voice, too. But he made over eighty million dollars last year alone. 

Clearly the standards of writers and the standards of readers are different. Writers seem look at mechanics to define a good writer. Readers seem to care more about the story, and are even willing to overlook faulty mechanics.

Why? I believe it's because readers are searching intensely for something to connect to. 

I consider it similar to a basketball player who may be awkward at dribbling, but everytime he shoots, he scores. Is that player good, or bad?

(The dribbling is an analogy for prose writing. The scoring is an analogy for creating a satisfying emotional experience in the reader.)

I'd call such a player "Good." Maybe his dribbling is sometimes atrocious and he looks like a fool doing it, but as long as he wins games, that's the only thing that really matters.

Reminds me of Reggie Miller. He was just some lanky guy who ran around shooting three pointers all the time. Some people hated him because they didn't consider him a "good" player (myself included). But in the end all that mattered was that he scored.

Ideally a writer should be great at prose, too, I definately agree with that one. Meyer is nowhere on my list of authors whom I enjoy reading or admire.

But I disagree with anyone who calls her a bad writer. Her success and fanbase alone disproves it. The emotional element of her storytelling is where she shines, and she blows many writers out of the water in regards to how viscerally her writing affects her readers.

If you talk to her fans, as I have, they literally go ape-shit over her writing. They can't sleep, can't eat, can't do anything except keep reading. That's how immersive her writing is.

I personally would LOVE to be able to have my writing achieve a similar effect on my readers. That's not something anyone can do.

So, no offense, but I think anyone who bashes Stephanie Meyer is simply not grasping the most important element that defines a good writer: how much your readers enjoy your stories.


----------



## shadowwalker

I have to agree with Kyle. I haven't read any of her books, but readers are definitely more concerned with story than mechanics. If the story, the characters, the plot entice the reader, they will buy. Being a good storyteller is much more important to readers than being a good 'writer'. It's great if an author can be good at both, but what it comes down to is story. Story trumps all.

To be honest, I'm a little uncomfortable with bashing any writer overall. We can point out areas of a book that we don't personally like, of course - but particularly when the writer is successful, saying they're just an overall terrible writer kind of implies a judgment of all the people who bought their books. Just because other people like what we may hate doesn't mean they're wrong or stupid, but that's the implication. Not really a good attitude to have toward readers. JMHO


----------



## Gamer_2k4

JosephB said:


> As a whole, I think any mention of pursuing the arts is met with a degree of skepticism – and kind of an “Oh, no another person who thinks he can…” I’m guilty of it myself.



I'm guilty of that skepticism and proud of it.  Someone's going to write a novel? They and everyone else.  I'll care when it's finished, not before.

Of course, I'm that way with everything.  Don't tell me about the diet you're going on.  Show me that you've lost 20 pounds.  Don't make New Year's resolutions.  Just change what you want to change, and I'm sure I'll notice it after.  Talk is cheap, and frankly, I'm not interested in it.



KyleColorado said:


> So, no offense, but I think anyone who bashes Stephanie Meyer is simply not grasping the most important element that defines a good writer: how much your readers enjoy your stories.



Taste is subjective.  Mechanics aren't.



shadowwalker said:


> but particularly when the writer is successful, saying they're just an overall terrible writer kind of implies a judgment of all the people who bought their books.



I'm very comfortable making that judgment of the Twilight crowd.


----------



## shadowwalker

Gamer_2k4 said:


> I'm very comfortable making that judgment of the Twilight crowd.



As long as you realize that that 'crowd' may well include your own readers, now or in the future. I dislike mass judgements, period. I mean, what makes me an expert on what people should like?


----------



## JosephB

Gamer_2k4 said:


> I'm guilty of that skepticism and proud of it.



I’m not proud of it. Any knucklehead can be dismissive without good reason or evidence. Big deal.


----------



## Gamer_2k4

shadowwalker said:


> As long as you realize that that 'crowd' may well include your own readers, now or in the future.



I hope they aren't.  If the "teenage girl" mindset is a factor in my book's enjoyability (regardless if those people are teenagers OR girls), I've done something terribly wrong.

You have to understand that I'm not doing this for the money.  I don't care how much my book makes, because I never expected to make anything at all.  I'd rather write something meritorious than popular, and honestly, if the Twilight crowd likes my book, they're liking it for all the wrong reasons - ones I never intended to convey in the first place.



JosephB said:


> I’m not proud of it. Any knucklehead can be dismissive without good reason or evidence. Big deal.



My reason is the lack of a reason, if that makes sense.  If you give me a reason to be impressed, good for you.  If not, why shouldn't I be dismissive?

If everyone did what they said they would do, I wouldn't be this cynical.  However, the fact remains that talking the talk is FAR easier than walking the walk, and words without deeds deserve dismissal.


----------



## Kyle R

Gamer_2k4 said:


> Taste is subjective. Mechanics aren't.



That's true.

But with regards to Meyer, here's the way I see it: She's a good storyteller. Her sentences may be amateurish at times (overuse of hyphens, excessive adjectives, "purple" dialogue, et cetera), but her writing is intense, emotional, compelling. Her characters are undeniably unique and memorable.

The good qualities of her storytelling far outweigh the superficial errors.


----------



## JosephB

Gamer_2k4 said:


> If you give me a reason to be impressed, good for you.  If not, why shouldn't I be dismissive?



Nothing can be gained by being dismissive. If I haven’t heard someone play, or seen a painting or read a single word, then there’s no good reason to jump to the conclusion they aren’t any good or have nothing to offer. So I try to get past my initial skepticism and hear people out. Talk may be cheap, but you never know when you might learn something or make a worthwhile connection. Regardless, being automatically skeptical or dismissive is nothing to be "proud of." That's seems more like arrogance to me.


----------



## Gamer_2k4

It's not arrogance, because I hold myself to the same standards.  I didn't tell anyone about my WIP, for example, until I came across this forum full of other writers (and by that point I had already written 150,000 words or so).  But I still don't say a word about it to the average person, even now that my first draft is done, because I believe that until some authority has validated it (in this case, a publisher), it's not worth anything.  Just like anyone can talk about a story they plan to write, any person with a draft can talk about how they're going to get published.  Until they actually do (and until I actually do), it's not worth considering.

I already called myself cynical for having that viewpoint, but I'll repeat it here.  I'm cynical.  I admit it.  Talk of "what I want to do" or "what I'm going to do" is just talk about what you HAVEN'T done, and I can't justify being enthusiastic about something that ISN'T.


----------



## Kyle R

I can understand that mindset, as long as it's not used to discourage others who may feel enthusiastic about their WIPs (or to devalue their efforts).


----------



## Sunny

Gamer_2k4 said:


> I'm very comfortable making that judgment of the Twilight crowd.


What a bold statement Gamer! Those books are the reason I started reading and writing! Judge all you want, but it doesn't make you any better than the rest of us in the lowly _Twilight crowd_!


----------



## Cefor

KyleColorado said:


> Quoting Larry Brooks' "six core competencies of successful writing", we have:
> 
> - Concept
> - Character
> - Theme
> - Story Structure
> - Scene Execution
> - Writing Voice
> 
> Those who are criticizing her prose are, in essence, saying "Look, she's got a bad writing voice. That means she's a bad writer."
> 
> But I disagree with anyone who calls her a bad writer. Her success and fanbase alone disproves it. The emotional element of her storytelling is where she shines, and she blows many writers out of the water in regards to how viscerally her writing affects her readers.
> 
> So, no offense, but I think anyone who bashes Stephanie Meyer is simply not grasping the most important element that defines a good writer: how much your readers enjoy your stories.



Well, her writing voice isn't the only thing I would criticise, honestly. I don't want to go into it too much, as there have been many discussions on this, and it's kind of off topic now, but basically the way she wrote was definitely not the only thing I didn't like. But, to put it out there, her other book, _The Host_, was better. If only for the premise. Twilight on the other hand... awful. I would have enjoyed the saga much more if the fourth book had actually had the huge battle at the end, instead of just whimpering away from it and petering out into a 'happily ever after'. Plus, it spawned Fifty Shades of Grey, and so should be condemned for that, too 

Although having masses of adoring fans is great... how much of that is the book and how much is the idea behind the book? That some insanely beautiful, immortal creature wants you so much he's prepared to go through agony every single day just to be with you? I think the young girls who read it fell in love with that more than anything. I'd have rather written a book they adored because the writing was great. And, it's more bashing Twilight than her, regardless of what I said haha. I don't think Twilight should have been published as it is though.


----------



## Cefor

Sunny said:


> What a bold statement Gamer! Those books are the reason I started reading and writing! Judge all you want, but it doesn't make you any better than the rest of us in the lowly _Twilight crowd_!



Sunny, please don't hate me for my comments 

I'd like to say that I read them all, so my criticism is based on my experience of it, not second-hand accounts


----------



## Sunny

Cefor said:


> Sunny, please don't hate me for my comments
> 
> I'd like to say that I read them all, so my criticism is based on my experience of it, not second-hand accounts


I don't hate you or your comments! 

You didn't say anything negative towards me. You voiced your opinion on a book that I love, and you don't care for it; a lot of people don't. 

I just don't like people making judgements against _me _because I happen to like something they don't. I happen to love Twilight, and yes, for some of the reasons you said. But, regardless of why I love it, and read them over and over because they make me happy, doesn't mean I'm some lowly _Twilighter _that doesn't measure up to the rest of the "oh-so-articulate" readers out there.


----------



## JosephB

Gamer_2k4 said:


> I already called myself cynical for having that viewpoint, but I'll repeat it here.  I'm cynical.  I admit it.  Talk of "what I want to do" or "what I'm going to do" is just talk about what you HAVEN'T done, and I can't justify being enthusiastic about something that ISN'T.



Cynicism is negativity for the sake of it. Even skepticism has its downside -- because there is an implied judgment and assumption that someone is blowing smoke. If someone tells me he’s writing a novel (or whatever) then I feel I should at least be neutral about it – if not “enthusiastic” -- and not make any assumptions one way or the other. What good does it do to assume the worst? It’s not always easy, and I don’t always manage to do it -- but it’s better to keep an open mind, in my opinion. I don't see that there's any compelling reason not to -- it's not like I'm going to be personally disappointed if someone doesn't finish his novel.


----------



## Cefor

Sunny said:


> I don't hate you or your comments!
> 
> You didn't say anything negative towards me. You voiced your opinion on a book that I love, and you don't care for it; a lot of people don't.
> 
> I just don't like people making judgements against _me _because I happen to like something they don't. I happen to love Twilight, and yes, for some of the reasons you said. But, regardless of why I love it, and read them over and over because they make me happy, doesn't mean I'm some lowly _Twilighter _that doesn't measure up to the rest of the "oh-so-articulate" readers out there.



Haha, good 

I just didn't want you to see my comment about the reason some female readers might like it as negative towards you  I'm glad you can stand against the opinion of people like me and still enjoy the book that you read. I get defensive of my favourite books, too


----------



## Sunny

Cefor said:


> Haha, good
> 
> I just didn't want you to see my comment about the reason some female readers might like it as negative towards you  I'm glad you can stand against the opinion of people like me and still enjoy the book that you read. I get defensive of my favourite books, too


Yah, I've had the argument on this forum with people too many times why I think her books are good. I won't do it anymore. 

It just comes to different opinions. We're all different and enjoy a variety of things. I don't think any differently of anyone who doesn't enjoy the same things as me. I have many different tastes, in may different areas than so many other people. But, that doesn't mean I need to be lopped into some "group" of people that are somehow below others that don't enjoy what I do. Whether it being reading material, movies, music, food... whatever; the skies the limit. 

We're all who we are, and are entitled to like what we like, without judgements. 

But then, with that being said, I suppose those judgemental people are entitled to just that. Go through their lives judging others, when I wouldn't do so, myself. 

As I said, we're all different.


----------



## Cefor

Sunny said:


> Yah, I've had the argument on this forum with people too many times why I think her books are good. I won't do it anymore.
> 
> It just comes to different opinions. We're all different and enjoy a variety of things. I don't think any differently of anyone who doesn't enjoy the same things as me. I have many different tastes, in may different areas than so many other people. But, that doesn't mean I need to be lopped into some "group" of people that are somehow below others that don't enjoy what I do. Whether it being reading material, movies, music, food... whatever; the skies the limit.
> 
> We're all who we are, and are entitled to like what we like, without judgements.
> 
> But then, with that being said, I suppose those judgemental people are entitled to just that. Go through their lives judging others, when I wouldn't do so, myself.
> 
> As I said, we're all different.



Sometimes, if you pass judgement on someone you feel better for that 'forbidden' thing you do yourself. I've felt the need to say I don't like Twilight just because I'm a guy, but I've read them, if you see what I mean?

Ah well. Differences in opinion make life grand, don't you think? Mindless clones of just one mindset would be awful. It's not Nineteen Eighty-four, folks!


----------



## Sunny

Cefor said:


> Sometimes, if you pass judgement on someone you feel better for that 'forbidden' thing you do yourself. I've felt the need to say I don't like Twilight just because I'm a guy, but I've read them, if you see what I mean?
> 
> Ah well. Differences in opinion make life grand, don't you think? Mindless clones of just one mindset would be awful. It's not Nineteen Eighty-four, folks!


Lol.

Yup. And, I think you're with a lot of guys on that one. 

Guys are supposed to hate romance whether it be watching it in a chick-flick, reading it in a book, or watching a couple make out in public. All guys are supposed to gag and talk about how manly they are as they puff out their chests and pound their fists, making "WaAAaaahHHhhh" noises, right? LOL 

Just kidding, but I do think it's nice when a guy can like what he likes and be secure enough in who he is to admit it, not caring what others think. ;0)

I watched Twilight with my ex. He wanted to see what the big deal was; why I'd gone awol and why the housework wasn't done, and dinner wasn't made for the week it took me to finish the books! ;0) 

He watched with me, silent of course. I gave him the warning before hand. No eyes rolling, no snickering and no bad talking until it was over. lol ... it ended, and he said, "It wasn't so bad. That Edward guy wasn't that bad of an actor." 

Two days later, we're out with a bunch of friends. The guys start bashing Twilight, and us girls who loved it. Of course there was a lot of bantering and finger pointing, and guys in dog houses! lol ... My ex, of course, stated how stupid the movie was and it was torture the entire time that he was forced to watch it! Bah! as if. He had to be a guy, and say how terrible it was, just because he couldn't be all right with how he really thought about it in front of other guys. 

Strange.


----------



## Cefor

Sunny said:


> Lol.
> 
> Yup. And, I think you're with a lot of guys on that one.
> 
> Guys are supposed to hate romance whether it be watching it in a chick-flick, reading it in a book, or watching a couple make out in public. All guys are supposed to gag and talk about how manly they are as they puff out their chests and pound their fists, making "WaAAaaahHHhhh" noises, right? LOL
> 
> Just kidding, but I do think it's nice when a guy can like what he likes and be secure enough in who he is to admit it, not caring what others think. ;0)
> 
> I watched Twilight with my ex. He wanted to see what the big deal was; why I'd gone awol and why the housework wasn't done, and dinner wasn't made for the week it took me to finish the books! ;0)
> 
> He watched with me, silent of course. I gave him the warning before hand. No eyes rolling, no snickering and no bad talking until it was over. lol ... it ended, and he said, "It wasn't so bad. That Edward guy wasn't that bad of an actor."
> 
> Two days later, we're out with a bunch of friends. The guys start bashing Twilight, and us girls who loved it. Of course there was a lot of bantering and finger pointing, and guys in dog houses! lol ... My ex, of course, stated how stupid the movie was and it was torture the entire time that he was forced to watch it! Bah! as if. He had to be a guy, and say how terrible it was, just because he couldn't be all right with how he really thought about it in front of other guys.
> 
> Strange.



Lol!

I watch Rom Coms, cause they're often funny and/or have really hot actresses in them  and with reading it in a book? No issues with it, I just don't read books dedicated to romance. If it's an element in the story then sure, why not? Have you read the Earth's Children series by Jean M. Auel? That's got a lot of romance in it, but I love those books. Really awesome.

That whole "Waaaah" thing is orcs, Sunny. Men are not (all) orcs 

Oh, believe me, I've had my fair share of shtick because I do something counter to male-ness. I read for one thing, hah! I have maybe two mates who read for pleasure. Two or three who hate it. The rest are typically apathetic towards reading.

I'm surprised he said that about the first film. Would you also admit that the first film is awful?  The others are better... though I haven't seen Breaking Dawn.

But yeah, typical guy posturing. It's fun.

Lol


----------



## Sunny

Cefor said:


> Lol!
> 
> I watch Rom Coms, cause they're often funny and/or have really hot actresses in them  and with reading it in a book? No issues with it, I just don't read books dedicated to romance. If it's an element in the story then sure, why not? Have you read the Earth's Children series by Jean M. Auel? That's got a lot of romance in it, but I love those books. Really awesome.
> 
> That whole "Waaaah" thing is orcs, Sunny. Men are not (all) orcs
> 
> Oh, believe me, I've had my fair share of shtick because I do something counter to male-ness. I read for one thing, hah! I have maybe two mates who read for pleasure. Two or three who hate it. The rest are typically apathetic towards reading.
> 
> I'm surprised he said that about the first film. Would you also admit that the first film is awful?  The others are better... though I haven't seen Breaking Dawn.
> 
> But yeah, typical guy posturing. It's fun.
> 
> Lol


LMTO

T is for "tail" just so you know. 

And no, I haven't read those books, but if there is romance, then I'm sure to love them. 

Sorry, I'm not good with writing out sounds! ha ha... "Waahhhhhh" was supposed to be Tarzan, not orcs! LOL .... Oy, clearly if I intend to be a decent writer, I need to learn the simple task of writing out a sound. 

I admit the first film is not as great as the others. Although, I'll also say, then when it came out, I thought it was the best thing EVER! I watched that movie, and I'm not exadurating, probably 150 times! lol ... sad, I know. But I loved watching the characters I loved on screen. It saved me 2 days of reading, when I could just pop in the DVD and watch for 2 hours; get my Twilight fix that way.. ha ha.. 

Typical guy posturing, it fun-NY! : D


----------



## Cefor

Sunny said:


> LMTO
> 
> T is for "tail" just so you know.
> 
> And no, I haven't read those books, but if there is romance, then I'm sure to love them.
> 
> Sorry, I'm not good with writing out sounds! ha ha... "Waahhhhhh" was supposed to be Tarzan, not orcs! LOL .... Oy, clearly if I intend to be a decent writer, I need to learn the simple task of writing out a sound.
> 
> I admit the first film is not as great as the others. Although, I'll also say, then when it came out, I thought it was the best thing EVER! I watched that movie, and I'm not exadurating, probably 150 times! lol ... sad, I know. But I loved watching the characters I loved on screen. It saved me 2 days of reading, when I could just pop in the DVD and watch for 2 hours; get my Twilight fix that way.. ha ha..
> 
> Typical guy posturing, it fun-NY! : D



Oh, thanks for clearing that up... I was very confused for a second.

They're no PG-13, that's for certain... but yeah... you should read them 

Oooooh, okay, haha! Tarzan, huh? Well, he was probably the sort of guy who could read Twilight and get away with it. Onomatopoeia isn't often needed, so you'll be fine as a writer 

I've just realised we've kind of hijacked the thread here... okay, last comments: Glad you agree, and yeah I know plenty of people who felt the same way haha! I guess the closest thing I've got to that is the Harry Potter films; especially the later ones, they're awesome. But, my favourite books aren't films, yet!, so I can't do that 

Anyway... publishing... easy. No, it's not. But, someone has to try, don't they?


----------



## Andy Bowers

Soon, I don't think it will make any difference if books are traditionally published or selfpublished. EBooks sales percentage of increases are killing paperbacks and hard cover books  in the market, and while paperbacks (these include both self and traditionally published paperbacks) still are ahead in sales the gap is fast closing. Amazon has a neat program where they put a fund aside (several hundred thousand dollars) each quarter and authors publish their new books on the Kindle platform, and let people upload them for free. Each time your book is uploaded you get some percentage of the pot. Getting known as an author is the key to success. I have four books published by a traditional publisher. They didn't do well as his budget for promotion was small,so I published them on Kindle at 0.0 dollars (although not in the new program which requires the book not be published prior to getting into that program.)


----------



## CroZ

Yeah. There sure has.

I was listening to the radio a while ago and they were interviewing an American writer who signed with a publisher only a few weeks after finishing his first draft. He said he was staying down in Kerry (Ireland) where it rained for the full two weeks of his holiday. He decided to stay in and scribble up a fantasy story. Wrote the most typical fantasy story in the world. Actually, he said he just copied some of the other fantasy stories he read. Whoever it was that signed him, agent or publisher, loved it and took him straight away. 

After hearing this I decided to put my main projects on hold and focus on a typical fantasy story. So far the reactions have been far more positive. 80% of my email submissions have gotten positive replies, in that they either asked for sample chapters or want to see the full thing. These days I mainly send out some page teaser synopsis which most of them seem to love. The story couldn't be blander and more cliche if I called it Blandy Mc Bland goes to Blandy Land. Want to get published quick? Write a rip off. Twilight knock offs are in fashion this season. Tolkien rip-offs never go out of fashion, they just call them the fantasy genre these days.


----------

