Do you 'do' audio books?

"I don't do audio books," the woman said in a tone of voice implying audio books were a scourge on humanity. Even my sainted mother, who has macular degeneration, considers audio books as selling out. She intends to hang in with large-print books as long as she can.

Audio books have been around a lot longer than I've been listening to them.  I used to listen to NPR shows like "Morning Edition" and "All Things Considered" because it made more sense to listen to news than music or books for my job as the chief information officer at a university. Then I got a new job, one with a longer commute, one that didn't require being up-to-date on current/world events. That's when I decided to listen to audio books instead. Now, I'm not saying the NPR news shows don't have value--they do. But as a writer of fiction, the more books I can know by reading them or listening to them, the better for me.

I didn't say anything to the woman who doesn't do audio books in defense of them. If you knew her, you'd know it was a hopeless cause trying to convince her otherwise. (She doesn't do Harry Potters books either.) Let's hope she doesn't do blogs.

I don't know about you, but there are only 24 hours in my day. I have a full-time job. I have two blogs--this one and an opera blog. I have WIPs and books I'm polishing to shop. I review live opera events on a regular basis--which involves traveling out of town. I can't afford to not to use every means at my disposal to expose myself to other books.

The value of audio books

By listening to audio books during my commute, I'm taking in roughly 25 more books a year than without listening to them. That's a significantly higher level of exposure to other writers' work. I'm hearing how other writers:

• use exposition, flashback, description
• develop character through dialogue
• build arcs for their characters as well as arcs for the book
• end chapters on hooks
• sustain suspense and elevate stakes

What novels and story collections have I listened to in the last year?

Here's a few titles off the top of my head:

• Drama city by George Pelecanos
• The year of secret assignments by Jaclyn Moriarty
• Man gone down by Michael Thomas
• The other Boleyn girl by Philippa Gregory,
• Ghost a novel by Alan P. Lightman
• The senator's wife by Sue Miller
• Life of Pi by Yann Martel
• The beautiful miscellaneous by Dominic Smith
• Our story begins [new and selected stories] by Tobias Wolff,
• People of the book by Geraldine Brooks
• Blasphemy by Douglas Preston
• Water for elephants by Sara Gruen
• All we ever wanted was everything by Janelle Brown
• Walking in circles before lying down by Merrill Markoe
• True evil by Greg Iles
• Run the risk by Scott Frost
• Last night at the Lobster Stewart O'Nan
• The invention of everything else by Samantha Hunt
• The time traveler's wife a novel by Audrey Niffenegger
• Fired up by Jayne Ann Krentz
• Oh, my stars by Lorna Landvik



my current audio book

• Castle in the Forest by Norman Mailer

Right now I am listening to In the moon of red ponies by James Lee Burke. It's so well done, I don't want to turn off the engine. Instead I linger at my destination a little longer just to hear more. The narrator is gifted--one of the best I've heard--bringing out all the nuances in Burke's writing.

The downside of audio books

The only downside is that I can't say I read the books, strictly speaking. "I heard that book," sounds dumb. So, I say I listened or was exposed to them.

The bottom line? I have the potential to be a richer writer, not to mention, better read, because of audio books. I do them and plan to keep doing them, thank you very much.

Writers beware . . .

This isn't a post about disreputable agents or scammy vanity presses. No, what I'm warning you against, fellow writer, is a more dangerous entity than simply a bad agent or a pay-to-publish outfit masquerading as a legitimate publisher.

I'm talking about über-bossy writers. Have you encountered the know-it-all-writer before? Maybe in a forum or some kind of online writing community? (They love to hang out online.)

These super-bossy author-wannabes have an answer for everything: how to write, word choice, diction, what your query letter should be like, what should and shouldn't be in a synopsis. They always relay this information with the utmost confidence. They never temper their advice with phrases such as, "you might consider," or "it's only my opinion."

Instead, they dole out the advice like gravy at a firehouse turkey supper, using phrases like, "don't ever," "you better," "change," "fix," often with a snide, superior tone.

Once in their childhood someone must have told these bossmeisters, "You're not the boss of me." And they were so taken aback, they set about being the boss of everyone else as an adult.

Through the creative writing program at Wilkes University, I met many published authors and few of them ever forced their opinions on your writing. If you define successful writers as published ones, then these successful writers were more likely to use inquiry than directive to allow you to discover the strongest answer or direction.

A lifelong reader, once I decided to pursue creative writing, I wanted to succeed. So badly, at times, I put myself in a position to be bossed around in a few writing forums. I wanted to tell them to take their bad advice and shove it up their arses, but I didn't.

I wish I were more of a vigilante by nature, but my sense of  justice isn't that refined. When I encounter bossy writers in forums, generally I avoid them rather than confronting them. Then I go write a piece on my writing blog about how destructive those bossy know-it-alls can be and that less experienced writers who are eager for information should steer clear of them like cruise ships heading for icebergs.

Bertrand Russell said, "The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people are so full of doubt."

Avoid the cocksure types. Turn to those instead who encourage you to develop your own faculties and judgment as a writer rather than relying on theirs.

Now, I have not personally been impacted by a bossy writer type lately--not for years. I'll no longer give them that latitude with me or my writing. I won't put myself in that position.

But I see them on forums occasionally, like on the Amazon Breakthrough Novel Award discussion board. They're so certain of the advice they dispense to noobs. Yet, they themselves don't advance in the contest and year after year, remain unpublished.

Now, keeping it real, in terms of my novels, I'm unpublished, too. However, I don't ram my advice down other writers' throats either. I put my opinions out there while encouraging other writers to develop the confidence to make their own best choices, to learn to trust their gut--not mine.

I wish more amateur writers would do the same. Then I wouldn't have to write blog posts encouraging other writers to beware.

Do dumb questions make others writers look like Dumbos?

Recently I participated in a TweetChat with a (very) published author who is now also a literary agent. Though it was more than generous of the author/agent to spend an hour plus answering people's questions, I had to excuse myself from the chat early because more than a few would-be authors were asking really, really, really (did I mention really?) dumb questions, and I could no longer contain my irritation.

In this instance, the question that sent me signing off from the chat was something like this, "When I'm ready to shop my manuscript, should I just send an agent my first 50-100 pages and a synopsis in an attachment?"

There is abundant information on the Internet about what to send, when, to whom. A-b-u-n-d-a-n-t! With a smidge of research even someone intellectually challenged and/or completely self-absorbed (sometimes it's hard to pinpoint the source of their Dumbo-ness) can find out within minutes what the agent/editor wants and that you only send them what they want. Go find them on their website or AgentQuery. Take some initiative. Investigate they want and send them what they want.

Why does it bother me when other writer-wannabes blurt out Dumbo questions?

Maybe because I take care when I'm given a chance to them questions. They're busy. They get tired of answering the same questions. They are looking for signs of intelligent life.

And you, lazy-writer-who-could-find-out-your-answers-anywhere-with-a-modicum-of-research, aren't helping the rest of us. Of course, maybe they aren't hurting those of who have done the research and found the answer to softball questions as much as I think they are. Maybe agents/publishers can sniff out those who have done their homework and are serious about being published versus those who are, well, not.

What do you think? When other writers do Dumbo things, do you think agents and publishers than think we are all Dumbos who'd just as soon blow water out of our trunks and think things like, Gee, I've never written a book before but I think I'll write one today?

Disclaimer to today's post: I happen to really like the character Dumbo and the movie of the same name except for the scene with the delirium tremens. No malice is intended toward either.

Five ways to ensure I'll never participate in your writing contest again

I'm a little frosted right now. Arguably, I am involved in many things--too many things--and understand the tendency to overcommit myself. Regardless, I try to deliver on my promises or implied promises.

But what about under-commitment? Under-commitment or not sufficiently caring about something you've already committed yourself to can be as serious a deficit. It can lead to really disappointing blog contests, like the one I just participated in.

Now, I haven't hosted hundreds of contests, but I can tell if you do the following things just as this blogger did recently, you'll never have to worry about my participating in your blog contest again.

1. Host a blog contest without posting a "results by" date.
2. Say nothing about your blog contest for five days after the deadline has come and gone and then post something like, "You weren't waiting for me, were you? Got too busy with real-life things to read and evaluate your entries" with no apology offered to contestants for the lack of communication.
3. Extend the deadline for another week--again, no "results by" date included.
4. At the last minute, bring in an outside reader to evaluate eleven (11) 150-word entries because you lacked the interest and enthusiasm to do it.
5. Announce that no one has won--that none of the entries was good enough, per the outside reader brought in at the last moment.

I'm a busy person. But if you give me a deadline, I'll try like hell to hit it. But if I do participate in a writing contest this time of year, it means that presents have gone unwrapped and lights unstrung and cookies unbaked just so that I could participate in your damn contest.

Yes, simply post those five guidelines for participation, and you'll never have to worry about receiving an entry from me.

Attention to detail separates brains from boneheads

Two and a half years ago, I had two pieces of flash fiction acception to an anthology, which shall remain nameless, but whose name is synonymous with Insight! It was my first acceptance to a fiction collection, and I couldn't have been more excited. Imagine my disappointment when I received the publication and the bio paragraph said something like, "Gale Martin has published numerous pieces of short fiction. He lives in Lancaster County . . . ."

He? I'm a he? Like I was going to show my first anthology acceptance to anyone after that gaffe. I wrote the editor, thanking her for inclusion in the publication but told her by no means am I a he. I've never been a he. I'm not a transgendered individual and have no plans to become one.

She apologized profusely and said I should submit two more pieces of flash for the next edition.

Well, I did. And guess what? This time, she referred to me as a she but spelled my first name wrong. She spelled it G-a-i-l.

Now, in the first place, I never misspell my own first name. Most people usually don't--not even the diehard boneheads among us. So either this editor thought she knew better than me how a woman named Gale should spell her name or she was a complete and utter bonehead.

I'm thinking complete and utter bonehead at this juncture.

Thanks to this editor, I mention the clip in my bio, but I never show these stories to anyone. How embarrassing! And if she was so careless with my information, I can only assume twenty or thirty other writers who had their work accepted in Insight! are hiding their anthologies in the back of bookcases worldwide.

This editor has gone on to publish her own work, which leads me to believe that she's not only a bonehead but an egocentric bonehead who gets the details right when they concern herself but not when working with other writers.

I know my first name has an unusual spelling. My whole life long everyone has misspelled it. I'm named for my late father, whose first name was Galen, which I'm none too proud of since he was a cruel, self-centered man. My parents simply dropped the "n" from Galen and got Gale. But Gale can also a man's name. So besides being named for a crummy, abusive human being I virtually hated and who gave me a lot of bad genes, I am constantly having my name spelled Gail or Gayle or even Gael, and to top it off, on those rare occasions when they spell my name correctly, I'm addressed as Mr. Gale Martin. After about forty-five years of having my name chronically misspelled or being confused for a man, I thought I'd adopt the nickname Gray, which some of my closest writerly friends call me. Turns out people can and have misspelled that, too, addressing me as Grey. Maybe I should just change my name to Lil. Or Bob. Or maybe people should just start getting it right, no matter what I choose to call myself.

The point of this whole post is to say that attention to detail matters--at every intersection in life--but it's critical for writers. It may be a learned skill that requires more effort for the global, big-picture thinkers among us, but I can't imagine succeeding as a writer or an editor without a requisite attention to detail, so you'd better start paying attention.

It all gets back to a point I made speaking to a freshman composition class taught by a Wilkes University writing program colleague. Know your deficits. That editor should have known she had a propensity to mispell people's names or to be careless, and double-checked her work. She should have had enough self-awareness to accept that she tends to make assumptions because she's lazy that could easily be clarified with a follow-up email, such as, "I'm putting your bio together. Silly question, but are you a male or female?" Granted, that's a very silly question, but it's not nearly as stupid as the mistakes she ultimately made out of carelessness.

Pay attention. Be careful--especially when spelling others' names. If you are an egotist, avoid the natural tendency to be so egocentric that you think you and your concerns are the only ones that matter. Or be prepared to be viewed as a big, fat bonehead.

Signed,

Bob