April 29, 2013 · 10:00 am

Review: ParaNorman

I wasn’t planning on reviewing movies: a lot of people do that, and do it really well, and I just don’t watch enough TV to keep up any sort of pace. But I just watched “ParaNorman,” and wowza.

Long review short:

  • If you are an adult who loves stop-motion or just really fantastic visuals,…
  • If you are an adult who has always loved quirky kids’ movies,…
  • If you are interested in supernatural tropes and twists on your expectations,…
  • If you are a parent of a child who is bullied, or who you think may be acting as a bully, you and your child…
  • If you are a parent of an older-age kid who fits in one of the above categories, you and your child …
  • If you’ve always been or are the parent of a kid who likes movies that might be a little bit scary for other kids, …

…Watch “ParaNorman.”

I wish this movie had made a bigger splash when it came out. After hearing it was stop-motion from the guys who did “Coraline,” I was interested, but none of the ads made me actually want to see it. For one thing, they seemed to focus a lot on ghosts and “talking to the dead.” And overall the ads didn’t seem to have a clear idea of what it was.

Ghosts are in the movie, and talking to the dead is significant, but you know what 90% of the movie is? Zombies. Funny zombies, scary zombies, bad b-movie zombies, regular people that are pretty much zombies because they’re kinda dumb…

It’s a movie about Norman, a kid who can talk to/see the dead, but no one in town believes him and he’s bullied and teased by pretty much everyone. Except then it turns out that the town legend about cursed pilgrims and a witch is, um, actually true. Oops! And Norman is the only one who can rescue them, but he’s a little fuzzy on the “how” part of that. It takes awhile for him to work it out, and he does, in a better-than-the-grown-ups solution he decides upon all by himself. He makes a lot of friends in the process, and most of the townspeople realize how stupid they’ve been (and the rest deny it).

And did I mention it is visually stunning? There were times I wanted to pause the movie just to look at all the detail. I can’t believe this was claymation/stop-motion. I mean, it’s nothing like “Wallace & Grommet,” and those are some incredible movies. I wish I could see the set and the props up close. It would be an amazing miniatures display!

For some of the supernatural elements, they’ve overlaid some light CGI. It’s not distracting, but is really excellent at emphasizing the “otherness” of the spooky bits. And it was great! Drool-worthy.

If you’re still on the fence about “ParaNorman,” (or you’re just looking for other good stuff) consider this list. If you’ve liked something else here, odds are good you’ll like “ParaNorman,” too.

“The Graveyard Book,” book by Neil Gaiman
“Coraline,” by Neil Gaiman (book or movie. Personally I found the movie a lot scarier).
“The Corpse Bride,” movie by Tim Burton
“The Nightmare Before Christmas,” by Tim Burton
“Frankenweenie,” by Tim Burton (my goodness, can you imagine how epic it would be if you got Neil Gaiman together with Tim Burton?! Minds would explode)
“Anya’s Ghost,” comic by Vera Brosgol
“Monster House,” movie directed by Gil Kenan

Leave a comment

Filed under Reviews

Tagged as , , , , ,

April 25, 2013 · 10:00 am

The Meaninglessness of Happiness

Last year, for her birthday, I gave my mom a copy of “The Happiness Project.” It was one of those gifts I hoped she might enjoy…and that she’d read quickly and pass on to me. (I’m still waiting. Drat.) So I haven’t actually gotten to read it yet, but it’s a really brilliant concept that can be a little tricky to understand: if happiness is fleeting, how do we make ourselves more happy?

“Happiness Project” author tried a different set of suggested ideas for a month each: a year of happiness, if you will. I wish I could get that book to find out how it turned out (except I do know she’s doing quite well as an author, so I imagine that gives her some happiness now, too).

I read two articles on happiness this week that reminded me of that book.

First, The Atlantic posted “There’s More to Life Than Being Happy.”

It says pretty much what it sounds like, but I think it suffers from a lack of clarity in the word “happiness.” I mean, there are different kinds of happiness. There’s the “oh yay I found my lost sock!” happiness; there’s “hurray I’ve been cleared of all charges!” happiness; there’s “I got the big-screen TV I wanted on sale!” happiness; and there’s “I won a Pulitzer/Nobel Peace Prize/best thing ever” happiness.

It turns out that the “TV-level” type of happiness–happiness related to food or things, the kind of happiness we can be sold in a 30-second Super Bowl commercial–is very fleeting. We get used to it, we get over it, there’s something newer to be excited about. But I think that’s pretty intuitive. I mean, you can’t just keep big-screen-TVing your way to happiness, right?

And then there’s the other kind of happiness, the kind promoted by Viktor Frankl, the psychologist in the article, talks about. That might be better called “contentment.” It’s happiness achieved through purpose and meaning. And the things that give us happiness that way aren’t always happy-producing. I mean, you can love your pets/spouse/kids/job and they can still drive you absolutely crazy, right?  Right.

The other article, “Happiness Inc” in the New York Times, talks a little more about the science of happiness research. Which in and of itself is pretty fascinating. Did you know that for the longest time, psychologists never studied “normal” people: they only bothered to research people with obvious issues. But without studying “regular” folks, how would you know what was truly aberrant?

Similarly, it’s taken psychologists a long time to get around to studying happiness. The thing known as “hedonic adaptation” is that big-screen-TV-effect I mentioned earlier.

Personally, I don’t go much for that kind of happiness. I think I’m just not wired that way. I mean, yes, I can admire a big screen TV or a fancy car with the best of them, and I’ve been known to heartily enjoy some chocolate, but I think my life is very much grounded on things that provide meaning. In fact, I don’t think I could try to live “without meaning,” if  wanted to. I look for meaning all the time. Meaning is why I write. Why I edit. Heck, it’s why I’m blogging right now (because I might as well send these thoughts to an audience somewhere. I’d be thinking them anyway.)

How important is meaning to your happiness? Could you be happy without it?

5 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Tagged as , ,

April 23, 2013 · 8:08 pm

Proper Motivation: Why Write a Book?

I was browsing a freelancer forum to find editing gigs, when I stumbled upon this post (name and site withheld to protect the guilty):

“I have written a novel and it came around 36,000 words.

To get published, a novel should have 60,000 words atleast and I fell short of words.

Now, I need someone who can write those additional words without actually disturbing the usual flow and without making it boring.

Most importantly it should be finished in a week.”

For this work, the job poster was offering $50-150.

My reaction:

Obviously, I didn’t apply for the job. (And I was gratified to see that the two people who HAD bid on it were asking thousands of dollars. At least they had some sense!)

But that job posting made me think about why people write books (I mean, why would you write a book and then not finish it and yet still want it finished? I was so perplexed).

I came up with three broad reasons:

  1. You’ve always wanted to write a book, and there’s a story inside you that you just HAVE to get out.
  2. You have a business of some kind and think writing a book would give you prestige, attention, sales, etc.
  3. You’re under the assumption that writing a book is really easy and you’ll get published and make a lot of money.

Yes, I put the above job posting in the third category. I don’t have a lot of advice for that guy. I mean, best of luck, I guess, but if you can’t do the right research or sit down to write your own work, well, there’s not much I can tell you, is there?

I do have things to say to those other two categories.

Now, if you’re a No. 2, you’re easy: best of luck to you. I don’t think it’s really the most productive way to sell a thing, and I personally hate reading your books, but I hope it works out for you. (How-to business books seem especially prone to being this sort; nothing really to tell me, just a lot of salesy jargon, typically unsupported by any actual facts besides your personal experience.) Not my bag, but apparently someone is buying them, so I guess that’s fine if you want to devote a lot of energy to a side project like a book.

If you’re a No. 1 (and I think most fiction writers are), there is a whole cavalcade of advice books out there for you. How to get published, what to do, what sells, who to talk to, etc. etc. etc. amen. (I’ve reviewed some of them). Depending on the book, they’ll help you write, help you edit, tell you how to get published traditionally, or try to convert you from a No. 1 into a No. 2, with the book the centerpiece of the thing you’re selling. And I guess that’s great for some people. But I’m just not wired that way.

I mean, don’t get me wrong: I would LOVE for something I have written to take off. But if it means quitting my day job, gallivanting around the country, shilling to different people and always talking about myself… well, that’s not why I wrote a book. I wrote a book because I wanted to tell a story.**

Sometimes it’s easy to lose sight of that, but that’s the original motive. It’s what I am trying to focus on every time I sit down to my laptop. If that means I don’t get to be a best seller…well, I’ll have to come to grips with that.

Why did you write and why do you want to get published?

**Some of those advice books insist that you can’t hold on to this idea if you want to be a publishing success. I think they are dead-wrong, but I don’t yet have the personal proof to come right out and say so.

4 Comments

Filed under Publishing, writing

Tagged as , ,

April 18, 2013 · 10:00 am

The “Easy Path To Publishing” Myth

Since I’ve begun this blog and been contemplating self-publishing, I’ve read a lot–articles, blog posts, books–about “how” to do it. Some of these have been intensely practical how-to guides; some have purported to tell “the way” to do it, with the insinuation that if you follow these steps exactly, presto! your book will be a hit.

I’ve read a lot, and I think it’s time to blow the whistle: that ain’t the truth of it.

Rather, I contend, even amidst this publishing revolution, no one–not the Big Six publishers, not the editors, not readers, not how-to-get-published writers, and certainly not Susie-Q author–has a damned clue of what makes one book a success while the other oozes.

Sure, we have some rough ideas: well-edited copy, a nice book cover, a smattering of time spent on social media, an interesting story idea, write in a popular and accessible genre. But, it seems to me, you can have all of those things AND work your butt off AND spend a bunch of money on supposed aids to success and still not have it take off.

I don’t say this to disappoint you.

In fact, I find this liberating.

Because if the common thread in self-publishing success stories (read Hugh Howey’s excellent piece on his success here, or this short article about yet another rise-from-obscurity author here) is a random blessing from the universe, the pressure is off! I don’t have to follow the rigorous social media schedules, or do the 50-states-book-tour, or dress up in zany costumes. In fact, it almost seems that the opposite is more effective: work on something you love, even if it is sort of crazy (maybe especially so), and just send it out into the universe. Maybe it’ll pick up steam. Maybe it won’t. But you don’t have to stress and labor and allow yourself to work until you hate yourself and your work.

Isn’t that a revolutionary idea? If no one knows exactly how the magic happens, then you are free to find the magic that works for you!

There’s no 12-step plan. There’s just you, your stories you want to tell, and the universe.

Good luck.

4 Comments

Filed under Publishing

Tagged as , , , ,

April 16, 2013 · 10:00 am

Review: APE: Author, Publisher, Entrepreneur. How to Publish a Book.

APE: Author, Publisher, Entrepreneur. How to Publish a BookAPE: Author, Publisher, Entrepreneur. How to Publish a Book by Guy Kawasaki

My rating: 3 of 5 stars

APE is a very intense look at how to publish a book. It’s great in that it goes through a lot of detail; it’s also overwhelming in that it has a lot of detail. This is definitely more of a desk reference (though the authors provide a digital format so you can receive up-to-date changes). It’s certainly ambitious, and that may be its downfall.

The lead author, Guy Kawasaki, came out of the development community. Perhaps because of this Silicon Valley aura, he is extremely matter-of-fact (even in political jokes). This might turn some readers off. His advice, as helpful as it most certainly could be, might also feel more like a straitjacket than a hug sometimes; there’s just so much to take in.

APE analyzes the “how to” of being an Author, Publisher, and Entrepreneur (ie. seller of your book). The landscape is certainly dynamic right now, and Kawasaki claims to offer a comprehensive look. He definitely covers a lot, but I have my doubts over the comprehensiveness of his information; at times, his book reads like an advertisement for certain products. That maybe should be expected of one of the early Apple gurus, but it can be a bit much.

If his personality is anything like his writing voice, he is naturally dynamic, energetic, and constantly trying new experiences. If you’re like most fiction writers, you’re probably not very much like that. Because of that difference in personality, this book can be a challenge. The information is most definitely helpful, but the bam-pow that’s-a-fact presentation might be overwhelming to a reader. (I had to come back and reread several times, because wading through all those lists just didn’t hold my interest.)

I think it’s worth picking up if you are 100% serious and dedicated to the idea of selling your book, even if that means spending a great deal of time and money to do so (with a slight emphasis on nonfiction/self-help types of books that Kawasaki has had experience with personally). I am confident that emulating Kawasaki would get you that result. But that approach isn’t for everyone. There are other, more basic, primers out there. Choose the one that is the best fit for you and your book.

View all my reviews

Leave a comment

Filed under Reviews

Video

If You’ve Never Failed…

Found this excellent motivational video.

Channel Dory from Finding Nemo and just keep moving forward to your goals.

(I’ll have to remember to take my own advice!)

Leave a comment

April 13, 2013 · 9:00 am
April 11, 2013 · 10:00 am

A Family In Isolation

I found this incredible article on April 1 and assumed it was an April Fool’s joke. But it’s real; the Smithsonian isn’t really known for pulling legs, and besides, the article was originally published in January.

In 1978, a team of geologists discovered a family of 5 that had been living in complete isolation more than 150 miles from any civilization for 40 years. Here’s the article. Read it, it’s fantastic.

It’s hard to imagine what that would be like. This is not “Little House on the Prairie” isolation: this is “if you can’t grow it or make it, you don’t have it” isolation. This is “our best entertainment is telling each other our dreams” isolation.

I found it very inspiring and enlightening. What does all that isolation do to a person? I think it’s fascinating the way each of the family m

embers responded to their discovery of other people. Fear, initially. Gradual acceptance. Then variations: stubborn refusal; stoic interest; awe.

The discussions of the differences in language were really interesting, too. The daughters had invented a singsong way of speaking that the geologists found difficult to understand; they didn’t really need anyone but their parents and brother to understand them anyway, so they never adopted a “grown-up” tone.

I think these kinds of amazing true stories are important to read because they can inform so much of our writing. For example, I think it would have helped Hugh Howey write his descriptions of feral children or the man alone in the silo. In short, they wouldn’t be speaking with the strangers, or maybe at all. Maybe they’d have their own languages. There’d be a lot more fear. There would be more unusual ways of coping.

The Point Cabrillo Lighthouse. Image from KelleyHouseMuseum.org

I’ve found stories of isolation compelling since I visited the Cabrillo National Monument and lighthouse in San Diego a few years ago. The museum there explained what lighthouse work was like at the time: a family lived in the lighthouse, visiting the small city of San Diego only every few weeks for supplies, a long two-day journey. They were otherwise alone, and had to rely on their ability to collect rainwater and provide their own entertainment. (Clearly they were often bored; so many things in that house were “decorated” with seashells!)

Even more interesting? The lighthouse assistant–often a woman–lived alone, in a small house nearby. While she was in training to take over the lighthouse in an emergency or possibly in the future, she did not eat or interact with the family. Her isolation was even greater than that of the lighthouse keeper, a man who could at least rely on his family to be there for him.

What inspires you?

Leave a comment

Filed under writing

Tagged as , , ,

April 9, 2013 · 10:00 am

Managing Expectations

Last week was pretty exciting, for several reasons. One was that a fellow writer I had met at a conference contacted me to ask if she could submit my novel, Undead Rising, to a publisher for consideration. I was over the moon!

She had only heard me talk about it–I’d given my standard description: a zombie novel for adults where the reader could “Decide Your Destiny” by making choices along the way, a gamebook (a genre best known by the Choose Your Own Adventure novels). She thought that sounded awesome, but I had sent her my sample pages just to be sure she really wanted to submit it; I didn’t want her to submit something she couldn’t really vouch for.

She looked over the sample… and it was not what she had expected.

She said:

It wasn’t quite what I was expecting from an adult version of CYA. (sic)  It was fun because it reminded me of the books I used to read when I was younger but I think that is my roadblock; it’s too much like the young books (except for the work references and swearing, it feels written for a pre-teen audience).  … I liked the story and I still LOVE the concept – I just don’t think this would fit with [publisher].

Ouch.

But it was actually okay. I felt a little over my head with the whole situation, so while it was exciting and a good experience, I think she was right to turn it down if she didn’t feel like it wasn’t the right fit. Better to get out of it quickly, before I got my hopes too high.

The thing is, I don’t necessarily disagree with any of her comments. In fact, some of what she said is exactly why I think my story is great. It relies heavily on nostalgia from the original Choose-Your-Own-Adventure novels (which were originally published in the 1970s). It would be appropriate for readers from about 15-up (but I still think it’s “adult”). It’s not horror; it’s humor.

It’s left me wondering if I need to tweak my pitch a little. How can I get across a sense of what this book really is? I still think most people would love it and that it would do well as a print book (I’m less certain about how a choice-based book would do on a ereader. More research to do).

Sometimes, looking at the list of genres, it’s very challenging to pick exactly where your book fits (particularly for one like this, that has some crossover elements). How did you find your category?

4 Comments

Filed under Publishing, writing

Tagged as , , , , , ,

April 6, 2013 · 10:26 am

Lessons in Companionship

I’ve been playing BioShock: Infinite since it came out last Tuesday, and it is phenomenal. It is beautiful, challenging, has a great story, excellent mechanics, and pretty much makes me want to spend all my time there.

For non-gamers, BioShock Infinite is the third in a series of dystopian first-person shooter (or FPS) games, where you play as the shooter–basically, you are the main character. (Here’s my quick explanation from before the game came out). In this story, you are a mysterious guy sent to retrieve a girl, Elizabeth, from a sky-city. It’s 1912 and everything has a bit of a steampunk vibe. You get guns to shoot bad guys with and superpowers to help you interact with this city.

I’m only about halfway through, so I’m not sure how it’s going to end, but this game is already standing out for me, all because of Elizabeth.

Elizabeth is a sassy character who is NOT afraid to beat you over the head with a heavy physics book.

She is hands-down the BEST companion I have ever seen in a video game. And maybe in a TV show. And she’s one of the best I’ve ever seen in a book, too, (excepting maybe The Lord of the Rings, because hobbits).

Compared to the other media, video games have a few extra challenges with their companions: they have to not get killed in combat; they have to have a bunch of replies/interactions depending on what the player does; and they have to be able to keep up (any gamer can tell you horror stories about glitches where they have “lost” a companion character because the game warped them ahead or behind, and they had to go back and start from a save point to try to recover them. It’s not fun).

Not only does Elizabeth manage to do all of these things well, she’s got serious personality. And she’s genuinely helpful. And, above all, she is not a damsel in distress (though she does start out locked in a tower and you have to rescue her). Check out that video if you want to see the problems with ladies trapped in towers: it can get ugly.

But no; though you do start out as Elizabeth’s rescuer, she later chooses to stay with you. (She might later choose to stab the player in the back, for all I know. We’ll find out!) This completely changes the dynamic! Now she’s not just a helpless girl following her big, heavily armed hero around because she has to: she made a choice.

Woah.

And then here’s where she really starts to be cooler than many TV companion characters (I’m looking at you, Doctor Who)–she’s not helpless. She has at least three sets of abilities that help you BOTH get through the game. Unlike other games where the companion character is really just something for the character to lug around from place to place (*ahem* Rose Tyler***; *ahem*Princess Peach; *ahem* 007 Goldeneye’s Natalya), you could not survive this game without Elizabeth.

Sure, she needs you; but you need her, too.

I’m not going to go too much into her powers (because, spoilers!), but Elizabeth provides a potent lesson for other game designers and writers in general: your supporting characters need to be fully developed characters in their own right.

Things I can tell you about Elizabeth:

  • She has three extremely helpful abilities.
  • She’s missing part of her little finger on her right hand. (Mysterious!)
  • She wants to go to Paris, France.
  • She enjoys painting and reading.
  • She was locked in a tower for most of her life.
  • She has a joie de vive about her, but can be a little naive.
  • She’s certainly intelligent, like, quantum physics intelligent.
  • She can fight back.
  • If you leave her alone, she’ll explore and interact with her environment, showcasing her creativity.
  • She doesn’t very much approve of your character’s morality, but she’s willing to go along with you if it’ll benefit her.

Wow. I’m only maybe halfway through the game! There’s a lot more I can learn, plus some of her abilities are growing to change with the flow of the game. I think I know more about Elizabeth than I know about my playable character.

She’s incredible. Props to 2K for creating such a fantastic character.

Other people: Be more like this. It makes me more interested in the story and more invested in your creation.

***I’ve only watched about half of the Rose Tyler episodes. Yes, I know, I’m behind. So I admit she might get better, but so far? She doesn’t really contribute much.

4 Comments

Filed under Feminism, video games

Tagged as , , , , ,

April 4, 2013 · 10:00 am

Secrets to Hugh Howey’s Success

As I read the “Wool Omnibus,” I couldn’t help but wonder: why this book? What magic made this series the breakout self-publishing success that is redefining what it means to be a self-published author? What is generating all this crazy buzz?

This may upset some readers, but I don’t think it was anything actually about the book. In fact, I thought the book was just OK. Maybe it’s just that I’ve read a lot of dystopian fiction, but nothing about “Wool” seemed inherently revolutionary. The first novella was good, but the stories in the “Wastelands” anthology were just as good or better. (If you like dystopias but haven’t read “Wastelands,” go. Do it. It’ll knock your socks off and give you chills.)

The covers of his books aren’t that great, despite all the advice on the internet telling you that it’s vital.

He seems like a pretty likable guy, but I’m sure there are lots of likeable authors that haven’t smashed all the records.

So what gives? How did Hugh Howey do it?

I don’t know for sure, having not met the guy–I read his blog and I have read several articles about him (including this one from the Wall Street Journal, where the graphic artist clearly did not bother actually reading the book)–but this is the impression I get:

  1. Story Raises Questions

    The  first story in what came to be the “Wool Omnibus” is a tightly written short story set in a world tantalizingly like our own. It inspires a lot of questions: How did they get there? Why all the mystery? Why did his wife die? Is the world really poisonous? Why would they do this to their people? What’s it like? How long have they been there?
    That’s a lot of questions for a first story, and it is very engaging. You’re hungry for more.

  2. It’s a Novella

    All those questions called out for answering, and, luckily, Howey didn’t write a whole novel: he just wrote a novella. So he decided to write other novellas to answer some of these questions (judging by the rest of the stories, he wasn’t all that sure what the answers were at first, either).
    But this novella model made it very easy for Howey to break his sales into different markets. Here, have the first story free. Want more? Oh, that’s $2.99. More again? Another $2.99, please. It’s very savvy marketing. Plus, because they were short, he could churn out more stories quickly, while he was still on the readers’ minds. Now he can continue selling or giving away the short stories AND can sell the Omnibus version–with a higher price tag (AND devoted fans can now buy it in print form, too!).
    (To be fair to Mr. Howey: I think his pricing structure is exceedingly fair to the reader. $2.99 isn’t a painful price point at all: he could have jacked the price up much higher. But he didn’t. And, I think, that turned out to be a great marketing move for him as well).

  3. eBooks

    All his stories were originally online-only. I can’t be sure, but I think he was predominantly selling via Amazon, too. This allowed his price point to be set so crazy low; have a very fast publishing turn-around time (less than 24 hours after he’d completed a book, it could be sold); he could skip all the traditional publishing steps; and it allowed him to interact with his fans directly.

  4. Blog

    I’ve only been following Mr. Howey’s success for a short time, but he is very active on his blog. He posts videos of his book launches. He engages directly with his readers, so they feel like they are part of the process. In fact, he credits readers with the reason there is more than one book at all. That’s pretty clever; now the reader is part of the process, he has partial ownership of the result. (Of course, this could have horribly backfired if the result was really poor, but as long as it was modestly good, Howey was golden here. And it is, so he is.)

  5. This Wasn’t His First Rodeo

    Howey had been through the publishing and self-publishing ranks before, so he knew what to expect. I think this made him more prepared when “Wool” started blowing up, because he’d been selling books online for awhile. This is also good for him now, because readers who liked “Wool” but had to wait for another section of the story could buy and read something else he had written in the meantime.

  6. NaNoWriMo

    Howey is a NaNoWriMo competitor, and that practice helped: all of his stories are penned very quickly, in marathon writing sessions. I think that agility is part of his success, and he couldn’t have attained that if he hadn’t been practiced in it already.

  7. He’s Got a Nice Wife

    The Wall Street Journal article up there notes that Howey’s wife is a psychologist. I’m gonna go out on a limb here and assume she makes decent, if not great, money, enough they can live on her income alone; for awhile, Howey was unemployed. When he did take a job, it was a 30-hour-a-week gig at a bookstore that allowed him more time to write. His wife is a nice lady; she tolerated and encouraged his writing addiction. Without the flexibility his wife (and her income) provided, I guarantee Howey could not have published his books and therefore been a success. She deserves some of the credit.

  8. He Got Lucky

    Honestly, luck and timing can’t be discounted. Howey started publishing “Wool” after “The Hunger Games” was a huge success and had whetted readers’ appetites for dystopias (some of us like dystopias all the time, but I realize I’m the minority here). Dystopias are a pretty small niche, too, so it was probably easier for randomly searching readers to find it (compared to, say, romance, which is a flooded genre). He was able to publish via Amazon, a format that is still evolving but flat-out didn’t exist even 5 years ago. He couldn’t have done it without the platform; I highly doubt his book would have been published at all, much less as a huge success, if he had had to go through the traditional publishing gauntlet.

Not everything on this list is replicable; I wouldn’t suggest trying to imitate Howey in hopes of seeing the same success. But it is helpful to keep an eye on the high-fliers as we develop our own paths.

3 Comments

Filed under writing

Tagged as , , , , ,