Tuesday, 30 August 2011

Good news and bad...

The good news is that I got another review for "The Docks", a good four stars courtesy of the Gathering Leaves blog

"I definitely recommend The Docks for a fast, entertaining read!"
Gathering Leaves (full review)

My new author website is up: http://www.vhfolland.com/, leaving only Fire Season's site to be reskinned, and I have a lot of promotion set up for September, including a sequel to The Docks.

The bad news is really bad: There's a problem with the Amazon.com listing for The Docks and it can't currently be purchased from there. I have flagged this up with Amazon and am waiting to hear back.

Meanwhile, if you would like to get a copy, please use:

Update (9.30pm): I raised this with Amazon at 16:00, who responded and unfortunately made the problem worse. They are now showing a listing for the book in print, and not Kindle. The book does not exist in print, making the listing nonsense (and any copies sold through it pirated). It still can't be purchased. It will be 24 hours before they give me another update.

The only way I can think to fix it is to pull the listing and republish, but that takes it down for a day or so and takes it off Amazon.co.uk and Amazon.de where the book is still live. My main advertising feature is on the 1st September.

I've already lost sales from today's review, and had complaints about the listing. I would like to apologise to any readers inconvenienced by this, and confirm that I am trying to get this fixed as quickly as possible.

For anyone curious about the issue, here's the side-by-side screenshots:

Amazon Before and After

Any advice on what might be causing it or how to get it fixed would be welcome.

Update (1.45am): Amazon said it is fixed, but one look at the listing says it isn't, so I've batted it back to them. I will republish tomorrow AM if it isn't fixed by then. Once again, my apologies.

Tuesday, 23 August 2011

Conflict of Interest rewrite

I took a risk at the start of the month, pulling an edited and ready-to-be-released version of Conflict of Interest back because I had a sudden idea. Yesterday I showed the first revised draft of the new version to the beta readers. They like it. Specifically, from the feedback I got, they liked it enough to read in one sitting and forgot to eat their pringles while reading.

Looks like the risk paid off.

Going from 'good' to 'gripping' makes it worth the delay and rewrite. It will be a while yet before it is ready to come out (Q3 instead of August) but I'm a lot happier with it.

The slightly embarrassing thing is that the sample I released last month is part of the book that hit the cutting room floor. Please look at it as bonus content.

I'd also like to say thanks to Marvin on Goodreads for his review of The Docks:
"the days of Dashiell Hammett and Mickey Spillane which is a big compliment. Those guys knew how to mix character development and action together and so does V. H. Folland." - Marvin, Goodreads (read full review)

Being compared to either of those authors, I regard as a very big compliment. Thanks!

Friday, 19 August 2011

New websites & Riot Relief

A small marketing update. Rather than the basic website (a Google site) that is currently up, a set of new sites under the VHFolland.com URL are being put up.
The first two are now live:
Fire Season and my own site will be moving under this setup soon. As always feedback would be welcome.


On the topic of riot relief, the Reeves family have set up a fund to rebuild the Reeves corner area. It isn't just their own 150 year old business, but all the small businesses and houses that were affected (twenty-eight families lost their homes and possessions).

The fund accepts Paypal, as well as credit cards or cheques. For anyone who pledged to Mark Thompson's campaign, this is where you can redeem the pledge.

Rebuild Reeves Corner

Friday, 12 August 2011

A general update and appeal

I haven't posted here, or much anywhere else, this week. For those of you following events in London, you can probably guess why. The end of the week was spent cleaning up the fallout, something which has been delayed by the fact that many sites are still crime scenes or outright unsafe.

If you would like to help, please view #riotcleanup or follow @riotcleanup for details of planned cleanups.For more ongoing relief efforts, the Evening Standard has details here.

An Appeal

Which brings me to a local tragedy: the destruction of Reeves Corner and House of Reeves. Founded in 1867, the House of Reeves store has been a landmark in Croydon for longer than living memory, run by five generations of the same family. It was completely destroyed on Monday night by the looters.

More than simply a landmark, House of Reeves is a thriving business and local employer. When the flats above the shops by Reeves Corner were caught in the blaze, people lost their homes and possessions as well as their livelihoods.

Sign my pledge at PledgeBank
A pledgebank account has been set up by blogger Mark Thompson, which is open to anyone who wants to pledge. Click the button below for details.

If you can help, please do. Pledges can be made worldwide. (Pledge to Reeves)

Tuesday, 2 August 2011

Pen names

One of the most common questions that comes up is about the use of pennames. Recently, the arguments over the use of real names on Google+ and Facebook which include several authors losing profiles because they are listed under their pennames, have really brought attention to this.

Several people assume that aliases or pennames must be used to be evasive or commit fraud, and yet this is not the case at all. This is a brief summary of some of the reasons why authors may use a penname, and a few known examples.

Ghost writing or work for hire, I am leaving off this: in those cases the author has taken the decision to write work that will be released under someone else's name, where they often surrender most or all rights and may not receive royalties. This is not the same as a conscious choice to use a penname: where the author retains rights, is still the author and if the book reverts it falls back under their control.

That said, on to pennames.

Genre
Unfortunately there is a perception that men write thrillers and action, while women write romance. This can lead writers to adopt an alternate gender penname for marketing purposes. A modern example is Jessica Stirling, the Scottish romance author.

Some female authors use initials, because there is a common belief that boys don't read books by female authors e.g. J.K. Rowling who was allegedly told by her publisher that "Boys don't read books by women".



The idea that female authors need to disguise their gender is an old one: Currer Bell's Jane Eyre is one example. Charlotte Bronte and her sisters desired privacy, and also felt that critics rarely judged women writers by the same standards as men, so adopted indeterminate pennames. George Elliot (Mary Ann Evans) had similar reasons.

Security and Privacy
Some authors value their privacy highly, to the point where "the reclusive author" has become something of a stereotype. Nowadays, with social network, appearances and more, the use of a penname to further protect privacy is simply another step.

While Stephen King's Annie Wilkes may be fictional, there are stalkers, fan boys and obsessive individuals out there and it is a sad truth that more then one celebrity has been attacked or killed by them. Mercedes Lackey's essay "The Last Straw" highlights her experience with this risk. Some authors adopt a pen name in advance, to reduce the risk to themselves and their families should they become famous. Authors writing on controversial topics may adopt a pen name to try to avert an organised response to their publications. Many political authors use this to avoid their professional life being affected by their writing.

Professional concerns


Some writers need to seperate their writing and professional careers e.g. Trevanian who used multiple pennames both for this reason and to seperate the genres he wrote in.

There is the possibility that writing can impact on your day job, and not necessarily only if a story you release is controversial. People may not be happy if they look up their accountant or lawyer and the first thing they find is their novel writing career. Also, if people know you are a writer there can be problems in your day job, both with being taken seriously in a professional field and with running into co-workers who are fans of your work.

There is a further concern in that some writers may need to avoid being seen to represent their company, depending on what field they write in. e.g. Nevil Shute, an aeronautics engineer who wrote aviation novels. There may also be legal concerns. Several organisations, often government or regulatory ones, ban employees or sub-contractors from advertising products completely - e.g. The BBC is well known for taking a very strong line on this, and has apparently released people over the issue. In some cases contracts of this types mean that while an author can write a book under their own name they cannot promote it - and very few authors make enough to quit their day job.

Marketing


Some authors adopt pennames to seperate their genre: Hugh McCracken, well-known author of YA and child's fiction, writes his gritty crime thrillers under the name Alastair Kinnon. This stops YA readers accidentally picking up the more adult work. In the era of SEO (Search engine optimisation), this is even more important if you want readers to find your books quickly.

It can also be to prevent market saturation - Stephen King wrote several early books as Richard Bachman.

More unusual reasons:



Alastair MacLean wrote several books as Ian Stewart, not because of any further need for privacy or because the books were in a different genre, but to prove that fans were buying his books because of his writing and not his name.

There is also the other reason that had cropped up more recently, for an established author to adopt a penname but list the book as "Writing as" which is to do with book ordering. Some chains will order 10,000 of an author's first book. If they sell 9,000 they return the rest and then buy 9,000 of the author's next book. If they only sell 7,500 of that book, they will only order 7,500 of the third book and so on. By the third or fourth book this can really impact the author's sales, so some authors used pennames with "Writing as" as the computer ordering systems reads it as a new author, but their fans can still find it.

I documented my own encounter with yet another reason here. There are, I'm sure, many other reasons to use a penname but hopefully this gives a quick round up of the basics. There are also reasons not to use a penname, but I'll go into those in another article.

Do you use a penname? Have any other reasons I should include? Please have your say below:

Saturday, 30 July 2011

Conflict cover

A quick update or two. First, I just received a draft of the Conflict of Interest cover, once again produced by Razzle Dazzle Designs.

Any feedback would be welcome.

Also Fire Season will be up on Indie Spotlight today. Read the feature and article here.

And finally a slightly unexpected effect of D.A.Boulter's Indie/BBoS project was a sudden boost to The Docks, which briefly jumped to 37K in sales rank yesterday for the first time. The details can be found here: Kindleboards.

Of course, an endorsement like that gives me a lot to live up to with the next book. Better get back to work on "Conflict".

Wednesday, 27 July 2011

Give an indie book a chance?

If you pick an indie author's book up, what are the chances it will be good?

A few weeks back I took part in an experiment on the Kindleboards. D.A. Boulter volunteered to purchase up to 20 books with only one criteria: that the title hadn't sold anything on Amazon that month. I volunteered The Docks. The results are now in (full results here).

In total he picked up 15 books, and has read the first seven. In summary all were enjoyable reads, and only one was marked down for proofing and editing issues. He comments that

"‘Mountains of dreck’ may exist out there but, within this small sample of non-selling books, I didn’t find it."


It is a good point. I've heard people refer to self-publishing as "putting the slushpile online" but I have also encountered raw unedited slush. There are significant differences e.g. a surprising number of slushpile manuscripts are submitted with typos or gramatical errors (probably about 10% going by this post) because new authors assume - and sometimes state outright - that it is the job of the agent or editor to correct these errors. Most self-published authors I've encountered either self-edit or get a freelancer in to edit or proofread and acknowledge it is their responsibility. Authors who submit handwritten manuscripts to the slushpile are unlikely to e-publish.

Also, as these are ebooks, authors can withdraw and republish them if there is a major issue. This "second chance" could be seen as a trade-off for the lack of the initial editing and support of a traditional publishing house.

Now, the sample is slightly skewed: it drew from the authors on Kindleboards who are serious about their writing and presumably want to develop it enough that they have looked up a community and started discussing technique and writing with other authors. Second it asked the authors to submit their books. This narrows it down to authors who are prepared to admit to low sales, but are still confident that their book is good. On the other hand, by only taking books which had no sales that month, it was selecting against the bestsellers or higher ranked books which would be expected to be higher quality.

It may not be a purely scientific study, but it does show that there are some gems out there and that the odds of getting a decent read from a fairly random sampling are quite high (six in seven so far). User reviews are another guide: of the seven books that had reviews none had an average lower than four at the time of writing. Given that readers can view samples online it should be fairly easy to eliminate books that don't appeal.

So is it worth taking a chance on an indie book? So far it seems this would indicate yes.

I will end this by admitting my own bias here: he liked The Docks.