The Englishman in paperback - nearly!

Yes, you read it correctly, The Englishman is very, very nearly out in paperback.

When I received the proof copy in the post last Thursday, I felt quite emotional. This is the first time one of my novels is in proper print, ink on paper, and the feeling of holding my own written words in my hands (or arms, I was hugging the book at this point!) was overwhelming.

When, later, I spoke with Big Sis over Skype about how proud I felt about the book, but also silly for being so emotional (I was again pressing the novel to my chest), she very wisely said, 'Of course you feel like that! You're realising your dreams!'

I've been thinking about her comment since, whilst dealing with some last minute issues with the printed copy. Those words have given me strength and a belief that I am indeed doing the right thing.

Once the small hitches have been ironed out, I'll be able to give you a final publishing date. Hold the front page!

For those of you who can't wait for the paperback copy, The Englishman is already available on Kindle. Just click on picture below.

A-Z Blogging Challenge: I is for Independent Publishing

My theme: Writing and the business of writing.

[I know, I know, I'm running a day late again! Please be patient, I shall attempt to catch up soon.]

Before the ebook revolution, the only route writers (like me) had for getting their work published was through an agent and a publisher. If your book sold a certain amount of copies (I guess 1,000 would be a good number for a first book), the publisher would buy the author's next book. If the first book didn't sell well, the author would be dropped first by the publisher and then by the agent. (Unless the book won an award, in which case sales would be boosted anyway.) In a worst case scenario, a first novel might not even make enough money to cover the advance which the agent had negotiated for the author. If you happened to be that poor author, you'd pretty well know your career as a writer was over. No-one in the business would touch an author who'd lost a publisher money.

If a writer didn't want to go the traditional route (or had lost all hope after having received enough rejection letters to paper the walls of the office), there was an option to self-publish. This used to be called, rather nastily by the establishment, Vanity Publishing. There were a few presses who'd charge thousands of pounds / dollars, promise editorial and marketing support, and produce a (often an inferior looking) book. I'm sure there were some successful vanity books out there, but I wager that most of the copies produced ended up in the authors' garages and cellars.

When Kindle, iPads and other reading devices came onto the market, and Amazon et al established their publishing platforms, many authors realised they could get their books straight to readers with a much smaller investment. With Amazon and Smashwords, authors also got a larger share (up to 70%) of the book than with a traditional publisher. Suddenly self-publishing became Independent Publishing and authors began making money without the help of the 'old' establishment.

Finally last year, the success of 50 Shades of Grey really made the traditional publishers and agents take notice. They began to sign up authors who'd made money out of their ebooks. It's strange how a few spondoolies make people change their minds about something as unspeakable as Vanity Publishing?

Today more and more ebooks are being read and published. Digital book sales continue to grow rapidly each year, as does the number of Independent Authors who are making good money out of their writing. Some of these writers are declining offers from agents and publishing houses, preferring to remain in full control of their careers. They can decide what to write, how the cover looks, how much to charge for their books and how many titles to publish each year. At the same time they get to keep a larger proportion of their book sales.

If your books sell well, why would you need a second and third layer between you and your readers?

As the balance of power in the industry shifts, what happens to the writers? Are Independent Authors leaving themselves unprotected, since they're not receiving the technical and legal knowledge agents usually provide? Or the moral support they give their authors? Or are these just fabricated reasons to make money from an author?

There are now so-called 'hybrid' agents and publishers who take on just the physical book rights of an Indy Author, while the digital rights remain with the writer. This, as I discussed before in my post under agents, is the ideal situation; an almost 'eating your cake and having it' -scenario for a writer.

Many members of the one-year-old Alliance Independent Authors believe that the future is going to be very bright indeed. As the organisation grows, it also gains more power. In the various ALLi forums, there's talk of establishing a quality mark of some sort, as well as discussions on whether Indy Writers should be included in the annual awards circuit. At the moment independently published books do not qualify for literary awards like The Booker or The Costa.

I'm not sure I wish to write off agents and publishers quite yet. At the same time I am really, really enjoying being my own master. (See that fence?)

During next week's London Book Fair, ALLi Founder and Director, Orna Ross, is speaking at Digital Minds Conference and other LBF seminars, and an ALLi guide to publishing services is also going to be launched.

A-Z Blogging Challenge: B is for Blogging

Should writer's blog?

When I started blogging three years ago, I did it purely as an experiment and because I like writing, whether an article for a magazine, a blog or a novel.

I also knew that blogging can be a very good way for a writer to build a platform, to get your name out there. It can also provide a support network, and build friendships. If writing is your day job, it can be a very lonely profession.

Recently, however, many people in the blogosphere and even in the publishing industry, are doubting whether blogging is good for authors. Shouldn't a writer put all his or her energies into producing the thing they want to to produce, ie books, rather than blog posts?

I've noticed that there's also a school of thought where if you are a non-fiction writer, setting up and keeping an informative blog on your specialist subject is almost a must, whereas for fiction writers it might be more of a distraction to have to keep up blogging as well as 'proper' writing. There's an excellent recent blog post about this on Joanna Penn's blog, The Creative Penn.

Personally, I know I wouldn't be the writer I am today if it wasn't for this blog.

Firstly, my first published novel, The Englishman (which incidentally is on a short free promotion at the moment), was born out of a set of blog posts I started writing here (remember How I Came to be in England?).

Secondly, I've made numerous friends since I started blogging. These online readers and fellows writers have spurred me on in ways I could not have imagined before I started writing a blog. You guys gave me confidence to finish The Englishman, as well as to bring out my other two novels, Coffee and Vodka and The Red King of Helsinki.

Thirdly, I have learned a huge amount about publishing, book marketing, and - yes- writing through having this blog and reading other blogs.

Lastly, writing a blog has taught me discipline in writing. For instance this A-Z Challenge is just what the doctor ordered for me right now. With all of my completed books out, I literally need a kick up the preverbal to get me going on a sequel. (Not telling you which book will have a sequel yet…it'll be a surprise!)

So, for me as a writer, blogging is a must.

A-Z Blogging Challenge: A is for Agents

I've thought hard about what theme I should have for this, my first A-Z Blogging Challenge and decided that since all of my completed novels are now out, I should write about the business of writing and publishing. 

A 'Guide to writing' or 'Helena's Writing Life', if you like.

Sooo, on this April Fools' Day, I am going to talk about Agents. (Seriously, not in jest, although the temptation is huge....)

When, a few years ago (hmm...try ten years - how time flies!) I took my MA in Creative Writing at Bath Spa University, (more about this on a later post under 'M'), it was a fact universally acknowledged that you could not be a proper writer, or a published writer, without having a Literary Agent. Getting accepted into the golden stable of an Agent, however, was harder than getting a publisher to publish your work. And most publishers wouldn't even consider your submission if you didn't have a literary agent on your side. 

The job of the literary agent, we were told, was to sell your book to publishers. They would only take you on if they knew they could do this - or as it's called in the industry lingo, 'place your book'. I have lost count of the amount of agents who have told me in letters and emails that they like my writing ('I love your work', 'you have talent', 'you can write'), but that they just couldn't see where to place it. Of course there are several examples of famous writers who struggled to get and agent or a publisher, and went on to sell millions of copies when someone finally believed in their of work. (JK Rowling with Harry Potter and lately E L James with 50 Shades). 

Agents' letters

But times have since changed. 

Today there are several commentators, such as the successful writer, Sean Wesley Smith who believe agents are rapidly becoming extinct as a literary species. Why should you, argues Sean, give your hard earned 15% to someone who is just, figuratively speaking, sitting in your basement, living off your hard work, when you can get your book to market, and straight into a reader's lap without so much as a wink in the direction of the said agent. 

But there are others who feel that an agent still has a place in the physical publishing world. 

Take the author of Wool, Hugh Howie. Hugh self-published Wool in a series of free-standing e-novellas, and when the books became best-sellers online, was contacted by several agents. Reluctant at first, he did sign with an agent (on his terms), and with her help managed to get a unique publishing deal with Simon & Schuster which excluded the e-book rights to Wool. This deal is a first of its kind and something which most independent publishers/authors dream of as the ultimate goal. 

This is worthy of a sideline explanation: To publish printed books takes time and money, as opposed to e-publishing which on the face of it doesn't cost a bean. Not counting all the costs of editing, cover design, online advertising, and the time and effort the author puts into both the writing and the marketing.  So, when an author has already done all the hard work of getting the e-book out, why should a publisher sweep in and take a large percentage of the e-book sales as well as of the physical book sales, which is the part he'll make an actual investment in?

But I wonder if Howie would've got the book deal he really wanted without the help of his agent Kristin Nelson? I somehow doubt it.

So, although a writer no longer needs an agent to publish and make money out of his/her e-books, I personally think in the traditional publishing world a (good) agent still has an important role to play.

This, of course, may change in the blink of an eye. But then, that's today's publishing industry for you!

I hope you enjoyed this first post in April's blogging challenge. Tomorrow I'll be writing a post on the subject of 'Blogging - should writers blog or not?'

E-books in bookshops - whatever next?

 

There's much consternation in the press this morning following Waterstone's deal with Amazon to sell Kindle and e-books in their stores. Much 'Deal with the devil' kind of comments have been banded about, but I have to say that I don’t understand why there isn't more of this kind of co-operation between physical bookshops and e-book retailers/publishers. 

Obviously Amazon is a major player in the industry and as such has a somewhat tainted history in trying to dominate the market, but considering the business models which have to be forced for the future, this kind of joint venture has to be tried.

During my time at England's Lane Books, I became convinced that physical book retailers are the shop window for both e-books and p-books. Everyone seems to love bookshops. If I'd had a pound every time some-one said they loved the shop, I'd be very rich indeed. Well, wealthy enough to be able to open a bookshop myself...

But I digress. People who read books like to browse, especially in independent little shops where some-one has made an eclectic and informed choice of which books to stock, (which doesn't necessarily include books with the largest marketing budgets behind them). In bookshops readers can discover new titles, new authors, or new genres. It's where you can discuss books to your heart's content and get advice on what to buy that 15-year-old nephew who needs encouragement to read. Or the 45-year-old aunt who reads avidly and has every book ever published on her book shelf. At England's Lane Books we had many variations on these customer requests and we loved recommending books for 'difficult' people. 

Also publishers (and agents) know that book shops are invaluable spaces for what is now being called 'discoverability' of books; and authors know there isn't a better person to recommend their book, and generate a word-of-mouth snowballing effect for their sales, than a bookseller.

Of course Amazon could be aiming to swallow Waterstones up, and this is a risk Mr Daunt of Waterstones seems willing to take. Personally I think he had to do something: falling sales of physical books in contrast to the increase in the sales in e-books makes it hard for any bookseller of p-books. Plus the efforts of the retailer to bring their own e-reader to the market have failed – possibly due to time and cost issues.

In the US, Barnes and Noble (with the help of a cash boost of $300 million from Microsoft) are developing their Nook e-reader so that customers can download book reviews from a code in the shop, and then choose to either buy the hard copy or the e-copy. It remains to be seen if this kind of product will eventually bring enough cash to the retailer to keep the bookshops open.

By the way, the view that by inviting Amazon into Waterstones, the book retailer will introduce more readers to e-books is in my view frankly silly. It smacks of ostrich-like attitude where if you ignore a new development, it won't affect you.

That aside, it’ll be very interesting to see how this new Amazon/Waterstones venture will work out. I for one am hoping it’ll be a success, and that it proves to be a model small independent shops could follow. What’s to stop Apple co-operating  with physical bookshops? Imagine if you could walk into somewhere like England’s Lane Books and using your iPad or iPhone, scan QR codes off the book, read the reviews, discuss the book with staff and ultimately download the e-book (or even better, get a buy one get one free deal) in the shop. 

Many customers already use bookshops to discover new titles, only to leave the shop to download e-book later – or buy it online at a cheaper price at Amazon. Why not give the reader license to do this and get a cut out of the sales you’ve generated at the same time. It's the customer behaviour that's important - the publishing industry will ignore it at its peril.


As a former bookseller and an economist, the Waterstone/Amazon deal makes sense to me.

The results are in!

Firstly, thank you to everyone who voted in my little e-book versus p-book survey! 


The reason I set up this poll was that I wanted to know how many of you read paper copes and how many have embraced the new digital form of reading. When I first posted the survey, it became immediately clear that many people wanted to vote both for e-books and traditional paper copies. I should have of course known this, since I'm a multi-user myself….but I thought I was a little weird. But it turns out that 90% of you are just like me!


This result can obviously not be taken as a reflection of the population at large - my poll is far too small for this. It can also be said that people who read blogs online are far more likely to also read fiction in the same way. Still, I think it's interesting to find that there are so few exclusively e-book or p-book readers amongst my sample.


As far as what kind of e-readers are popular within this sample, Kindle came out as the most used. Some 47% of you are reading Kindle as opposed to 26% iPad and 5% other e-readers. 


While I was waiting for the results of my survey, something fairly dramatic happened in the book trade. Yesterday Waterstones (a large book retailer in UK) announced that it was going to start selling Amazon products. 'The fox has been allowed into the chicken coop.' was one commentator's view of the deal, while Harry Wallop from The Telegraph wrote,


'What many people fail to realise is that the book market is not split down the middle between those who buy physical books and those who buy digital. Most digital purchasers still buy ink and paper books, especially when it comes to children’s books and history.'


This nicely echoes what I found in my survey. Now all we need to do is make sure e-books are sold in traditional bookshops. Easy peasy lemon squeezy? (More about this to follow) 

Please vote!

There's only 7 hours left to vote in my little poll (see right margin) on how you people read your fiction.

The publishing industry is going through major changes due to the digital age. One factor, which will determine the direction of the book world more than any, is in what form consumers are going to be reading in the future.

Is it a e-book or p-book? Or both?

Vote now! 

Digital - the new garlic bread?

It's an old joke, 'Garlic bread - it's the future.'

At the London Book Fair I sat through two seminars on the future of publishing. First one was a prediction for 2020 (=digital) and the second a discussion on what's free in the new digital age and where the money is going to be made.

Everyone agreed with the speakers of the first talk that digital is where we are heading (and fast), but where the large publishing houses thought they could make the money was unclear. As an aspiring novelist, I was scared to see people who'd been in the industry for decades looking at best confused and at worst defensive. It was clear that the members of the panel didn't know - or wouldn't say - what they intended to do about the digital revolution, how they plan to make money for authors or themselves, or how they would even survive. A question from the floor, 'Are publishers going to be needed in the future' was left largely unanswered. Another comment from the audience was, 'No-one has mentioned book sellers?' The answer to that was a dry, 'No.'

On Saturday there was an article in The Telegraph titled, 'Is the writing on the wall for books?' I started reading with great anticipation but soon realised it was merely a promotional piece for various e-books on the market and on how to get free downloads. It did have one piece of good news for old-fashioned books. Apparently they are a hard act to follow.

"The book is an exemplary example (sic) of good design, being robust enough to survive spilt cups of coffee, sun cream and sand, or being buried at the bottom of the briefcase or handbag, yet always ready for use."

The LBF panel of publishers cited examples from other industries struggling to adapt to the digital age: Newspapers give away issues, music artists make their money from performances (not cd's or downloads), in the TV and film industry piracy is a business model.

It occurred to me that books have other good features:

1. Books are generally only read once. It's not necessary to store them in the similar way as music or film on an ipod to be listened or watched over and over again by the same person.

2. Books are not current. They last forever, whereas yesterdays' newspaper is today's recycling (or should be).

3. Books are tactile - even paperbacks. They can be shown off on shelves and stroked.

I don't think it's wise to stare blindly at the horror stories from other related industries of moving to the digital age without considering the very unique aspects of the book. Surely the book as a form of communication is older and wiser than the rest of the field?

And no, I've never liked garlic bread much.