Forum / LONG STORIES

Cherise Wolas
May 23, 06:16pm

I know there is a longer story group here, but the sense that I get is that we post there, but nothing much happens.

I am one of the writer/radr

Cherise Wolas
May 23, 06:22pm

Sorry about that.

Okay, here's the deal. I tend to write in much longer form. I would love to have those fictionaut readers who read longer form to comment. I am aware of the group, I am part of the group, but I don't get the sense that those in the group (myself included) actually provide the comments that the long-form writers are looking for.)

I keep printing out pdfs of those here on fn writing longer stories, but I wonder if there is perhaps some way we can really draw intense readers who want to read longer works?

Cherise

David Ackley
May 23, 08:04pm

A similar question was explored in the thread here called "Strictly out of curiosity" posted on apr. 24th. But although a lively discussion ensued, for the most part it explored the rationalizations/exuses of those who preferred not to read longer works on a computer screen. PDF printouts were quickly discounted as expensive wastes of paper.

I think your approach is more promising in asking in a positive way what can we do to get on board with each other's needs for a)an audience b) more extensive comment.

The Longer Story group might be a place to start if even those people who post long works would commit to reading and thoughtfully commenting on each other's work.

Linda Simoni-Wastila
May 23, 08:44pm

I would love to read -- and crit/discuss -- longer stories. Especially if we could have the option to keep private. I don't think I;ve found that group (so many!) but will seek it out. Peace, Linda

H-M Brown
May 23, 11:09pm

HEE HEE :)

The one thing I suggest in every post I make and stress it out loud:

IS TO TAKE YOUR TIME TO READ THE LONG STORY.

I am really convinced that some, not all, who complain about long stories on the interent are the ones who feel like they have to read a long story in one sitting. When they don't have to. Does anybody really read Stephen King's It in one sitting?

No one is telling anybody to read a story through one sitting on the internet. Just read the story at your own pace. It's not going anywhere anytime soon.

Now to reach out for readers and comments, that is something that many website forums, like Web Fiction Guide, have been debating and discussing the longest over.

Truth is, there are too many people set in their ways and resist reading long prose writing of any form on the internet, and convince other people to do the same. We can have all the page breaks we want, be it in PDF format or if Mr. Baker programs a page break option to eliminate the single scroll page when we post up stories.

It's not say we should give up, by all means no. But we have to face the fact that readers of long prose are a small minority. Whoever we have dedicated to reading our work, we should our best to give them everything we got to the end. Even if they don't want to comment in high frequency like flash Fiction.

Quite frankly, as I thought it over the past few months, it may be a good thing not to have comments at all. Too much criticism could hamper our ablility to write long prose because of high expectations or high standards. It's nice to get a praise or opinion once in a blue moon, especially in our darkest moments of writer's block. But it could get out of hand if someone comes out "backseat writing" your story when you have yet to reach 'The End'. Comments are really a double edged sword.

James Lloyd Davis
May 24, 06:30am

This is a problem. The internet is not the place to find an audience for any work of length, whatever the reason. And it is not the place to get honest, substantive feedback either.

Poetry, flash fiction, micro fiction abounds and thrives here. Essentially, the internet has become the place where you can be a star for as long as you can produce microbursts of brilliant light, keep it short and lite, and outrageously clever.

There are tools and possibilities available through the internet for writers to use in a cooperative effort that would provide a vehicle for genuine, substantive feedback. Development of those possibilities requires work, not effort, not inspiration, but work.

If you are a writer, you write. You don't need to get involved in a project that will take so much time away from your writing. The work of developing a beneficial co-op where writers can come together through the internet for serious critique requires the effort of someone who has the time, the ability, the motivation and the discipline to initiate and maintain it.

History shows that writers thrive in a community. The internet has the enormous potential to provide that community. People come to web sites like this in search of just such a community, but what they soon discover is that most people only come here to play.

The concept of the "serious writer" is just another one of a hundred in-jokes, fodder for even more clever, but ultimately shorter work.

I do it myself, but I would, if such a site existed, prefer something much more substantial. I crave honest feedback and I am more than willing to be reciprocal and honest where honesty is appreciated and not feared.

However, like most writers, I want to write, not develop a platform on the internet.

So who's gonna do it?

Ann Bogle
May 24, 09:10am

I wonder if it's wise to stereotype internet users as mostly uninterested in reading longer fiction, as if the same readers away from the internet are abundantly interested in it. There seems a danger of cementing a stereotype that way, of guaranteeing an excuse for reluctant readers not to read longer works. In my experience, a writer's limited attention span for reading occurs both at and away from the computer. It's still a virtue to visit the library, to read and discuss in book groups difficult books, but for many people, reading today is more like snacking. Eating today is more like snacking. It's true that people of an older generation may have a harder time orienting themselves to reading top-to-bottom, reading as from a scroll.

It's possible that writers who want to attract readers to longer works on the internet may do best to write them in shorter segments even if the seams are hidden. I always aimed for the miniature, including novels in miniature (perhaps my version of the long story). The game is to write in such a way that overcomes reader resistance to paying attention. The internet is like a see-through veil that partly reveals that process of attraction.

Writers who claim to be interested in "language" for its own sake, to writing as kin to poetry, may fall for a storyteller such as Bolano. Everyone falls for Bolano. I read a whole story in Harper's, though I was as usual very tired from working all day on the internet, a story about necrophilia though I have no interest in necrophilia. Usually my attention span for reading away from the computer is more, not less, limited. I have more to say about longer works after I read them than I have to say about short works. It's easy to overpraise word choice in a very short work and to underpraise detail in a longer work.

@James Lloyd Davis: I've heard a claim that there's a rival site more geared than Fictionaut to quality and serious pursuit; I took a look at it and saw the same bansheeism but for people who dislike working in a structure not of their making. I think it's important to influence good websites -- Fictionaut is definitely one of those -- with critical awareness as you do in your comment.

@H-M, excellent suggestion.

Cherise Wolas
May 24, 09:57am

Hi all, and all interesting comments. I do not see internet readers as less willing to read long fiction. Perhaps the answer, for me, is simply to utilize the groups here more effectively than I have been doing, especially, for example, the longer works group, or novels in progress. I have sent a few pieces to the longer works group, but I'm at fault for not commenting on those that are already there, unless I have done so on my own!

And I know there is the view that pdf'g and printing out the longer works wastes paper, but I already use a lot of paper in my own work, revising, etc., and I buy a ton of books. In addition, despite my love of books, I still haven't stepped forward techno-wise and embraced the kindle or its cohorts. The same way I cannot watch a movie on my computer, it's how I feel about printing out longer pieces.

I think Fictionaut is a sensational site. My intent with my initial comment was perhaps to see if those of us on it already are willing to delve more deeply into the existing long pieces that some are indeed publishing. Sometimes I feel so badly when I see a longer piece posted and lots of eyeballs, but I know the minute people see the word count they just bypass it.

I think it's essential that as writers and readers we continue to encourage all writing, in all forms, but it's easy to let the longer pieces get lost.

Stephen Carter
May 24, 10:04am

This is a neat site that i'm glad i discovered but i have been disappointed in some ways.

I think the long term fear is that fictionaut might become twitter...and sadly i don't think its too far from that now, generally speaking.

I've been surprised not so much by the quality of the stories here, not how well or poorly written they are, but how few actual stories there are, period.

Another unfortunate reality of fictionaut is that there is a large, vocal clique here. People who are in this clique can cough and it will get 20 faves and 40 comments, etc...etc...This hurts the members of the clique the most. Telling a writer everything they throw up is wonderful makes growth impossible. The person posts something, nervously, knowing in their gut something isn't quite right with it...and then all they receive is praise, and they think Hmmm...this must have been better than i thought. Sadly, 9 times out of 10, it isn't. But they'll never know that. Unless and until, ofcourse, they send it off somewhere for publication.

I thought it might be nice if new posts didn't have the authors name on them for say, the first week. This would help contain the problem of bias. Then, say after a week, the author could be revealed...like the system certain professors use for grading papers...they assign numbers and don't know whos paper they are marking until the end.

The other big problem here is that poems and flash aren't kept separate from short stories. As it is now, a 30 word poem competes for reads, comments, and faves, with a 2000 word story...which is apples and oranges. The result is that very few short stories get top billing, because it takes 30 seconds to read and comment on a poem and 10 or 15 minutes to do the same for a short.

As i said at the outset, this is neat site and i enjoy playing around with it. But i do think it could be improved. My suggestions might lessen the "sense of community" that i know is important here...but i also believe it would make better writers of us all.

John Slade
May 24, 10:38am

Boy you hit the nail on the head. Look at Susan Tepper. She could post a three line haikou and get 100 favs...not that I am a writer.

Susan Gibb
May 24, 11:16am

The problems have grown with the number of postings, more than the types of work. I used to be able to read everything daily, poems and all length of story. Lately it just seems that the same folks are posting every day and so yes, that's the first of the personal criteria I use to keep up--passing by something by someone whose work I've just read within a couple days. The second, unfortunately, may be poetry, since I've not the expertise to make more comment than "I like it," and long stories, for lack of time.

It also seems that we each tend to read more of the types of things that we ourselves write. After all, it's natural that when it's necessary to pick and choose, we'll select according to our own interests. I tend now towards shorter more edgy pieces and that's what I would read first if limited in time. I've also tried to cut back on the 'faves' a bit unless it really hit me.

Maybe the answer would be to separate out the forms, then the longer pieces would be visited by those who truly want to read them; the flash, the poetry, likewise. And while I myself have pondered the question of "story" there are no requirements that postings need be stories. Sometimes they're just fictions. Sometimes they're poems.

Anyway, I will try to read longer pieces and comment because yes, I think the most important thing is feedback and sharing.

Carol Reid
May 24, 11:24am

Trying to think of a practical way of making it easier for authors of longer works to get more detailed, more "workshoppy" comments on the pieces...I wonder if some kind of template or checklist ( I know, yawn ) might kickstart the process.

Matt Dennison
May 24, 11:29am

Okay, folks. I just posted a 5000+ word story.

Get to work.

;-)

Susan Gibb
May 24, 12:16pm

Carol, the thing is that some writers want critique and there are a few workshop groups (one of which I'm a member and sadly don't participate in actively enough) but basically, the fictionaut site itself is not a critique group. Everyone seems to have a different need and everyone is looking for something else out of it--sharing information, showing off stories, trying to get noticed by editors, getting a feel for the market, feedback, camaraderie, forehead stars, etc. So maybe it's time to be splintered off in a different manner, or maybe it's just never meant to suit everyone's needs.

David Ackley
May 24, 12:18pm

Good timing, Matt. You're on.

All the comments above seem on point and helpful but for one. Put a sock in it, John.

I've said before I think the difficulties of reading longer pieces on a screen are very much overblown. Reading and writing are conventions of their times, taking different forms in different eras. People adjust. So will we. It still seems incumbent on Fictionaut readers, as fellow writers, to do better by longer pieces than we do, and that it's simply a matter of doing it, rather than rehashing the difficulties.

Carol Reid
May 24, 12:47pm

Susan, I agree with you and I think that Fictionaut works well in the ways you've listed.

And David, yes, that's probably the most practical(practicable?) suggestion of all.

Stephen Carter
May 24, 12:53pm

Not to change the subject here, but is it possible to Un-fave a story? I seem to have lost one today.

Didn't realize that was possible.

Matt Dennison
May 24, 01:00pm

J. Yeah, it's at the top of the page of the story (shows up for the fav-er, giving them the option).

H-M Brown
May 24, 01:07pm

The internet is just as much a good place to post up a story of any length for whatever reason as it is to get it published.

It may sound dangerous to stereotype readers, but we have to understand that as old as the internet is (It's over 20 years I believe), it's still an untapped medium. Youtube is only five years old yet it feels like they been there forever doesn't it?

Just look what happened with Writer's Guild of America Strike. Their complaint was the internet.

Stories, novels, shorts, etc. on the internet is unfamiliar territory for readers. Yes, many will adapt and come to read on the interent at a frequency akin to going to a library or a Barnes and Noble. But right now at this moment, its not that way. This is because sites like Fictionaut are only a few years old, or writers create their own personal websites to post stories and no one is aware of it. Even Kindle, Nook and iPad are still uncharted territories for writers.

Readers are savvy and smart and the know what they are looking for and what they want in their reading time.

The bigger question should be, how much do we as writers see the potential of the internet? Or maybe in this case Fictionaut. I think back to the biggest mistake Nintendo ever made market wise when it came to new technology.

Back in the 1980s, we had CDs. It was still a young technology that very few people could get or understood program wise outside the industry. Nintendo's top brass did not see the potential of the CD for manufacturing video games with. So what they did was, they went to Sony and gave licensing rights of their iconic characters, Mario, Zelda, etc., for their Sony CD Format since they did not see the viability of CD format games.

Now we come into the 90's CD format gained popularity and the potential was there. Nintendo teamed up with Sony to make a CD add-on for the Super Nintendo System. Nintendo realized they messed up giving away the rights to their characters, due their ignorance and dismissal of CD technology, to Sony for CD format game. Nintendo made a few moves to partner with Philips and had a big legal battle with Sony. Sony said to Nintendo we're taking the Playstation and manufacture it ourselves and the rest was history.

The point to this story is, DO NOT dimiss new technology just because it doesn't appear on paper to not have potential.

Right now we writers have Fictionaut. There are others writer websites as but here its a little unique and has untapped potential. Of course, to truely accomadate(SP?) all of us writers, we need programmers to re-write the codes to situate(SP?) all of our writing styles. Page breaks, line breaks, PDF Format, and so on.

So the question for us writers should be, how much do we believe in this technology called the internet?

Do we really believe that the outcome of harnessing all its untapped potential could truely take us to where we want to be as writers?

In fact a good question should be, what do we want as writers, for our works to be written for? Fun? Publishing? The Art itself?

I feel all of us, myself included, are not approaching this correctly. If we're in it for the fun of writing, then there should not be anything to worry about. But if we're serious about going to the next level as writers, then we have to roll up our sleeves, work hard and be ready for any possible outcome good or bad.

But we can't walk around saying "the internet is not the place to write stories" when we don't even know nor have attempted to try and see if that it works or not.

That's basically saying "I give up writing" without writing to begin with.

James Lloyd Davis
May 24, 01:35pm

Do we believe in the internet? Must we? It would be too much like believing in Kansas.

Ramon Collins
May 24, 04:18pm

One point in Internet writing is writers tend to write for writers, not readers. I've been in 14 online fiction classes and it happens there, too.

I tried to maintain a weekly online Micro & Flash site for readers and it dwindled on for six months. I could survey readers and ask what they wanted. Answer: Shorter stories. A common survey response was, "If I want to read longer work, I buy a magazine or book."

I honestly believe Micro & Flash are fiction's future because it's the way the few younger readers want to read. We often forget that readers are important.

H-M Brown
May 24, 04:24pm

Do we have to dismiss the potential of the internet if it could help advance the writing medium? Must we? It would be too much like dimissing Kansas.

Cherise Wolas
May 24, 04:25pm

That's an interesting comment Ramon. I am not sure I agree though. I think writers are readers, must be readers and so on a site like fictionaut both of those are at work.

And while I have never read the books, books like Harry Potter and the Twilight series, intended for a younger audience, are huge tomes, multi-books, which kind of upsets the thesis that micro and flash is the way of the future for younger readers.

I think writers write for readers.

H-M Brown
May 24, 04:56pm

You're correct Cherise. Writers write for readers. While writers double as readers, as writers exclusively, who are we writing for if not to entertain or to inform? Writing is not an exclusive country club. Communication is the key to writing because we have something say, something to share.

But the readers themselves get to decide whether to accept and process the information given to them or not.

All we can do is just write something, anything on our minds. The readers will see and judge what we write and say, as they want to see it.

And we just keep on writing some more afterwards.

David Ackley
May 24, 05:06pm

To speak to Ramon's point.

An article in the New York Review of Books by Sue Halpern ("The I-pad Revolution," NYRB June 10, 2010) notes that in the past two years "sales of digital books for machines like the Kindle and the Sony reader tripled to over $313 million" and analysts predicting sales of $3.2 billion by 2015. And that while "Most people may not have been reading...those who are doing so on digital readers seemed to be reading a lot." This seems to question both the assumptions that people don't read long works in digital formats, and that the future audience is for Micro and Flash. Note that the above figures are for the sales of books, not for micro or flash.

I'm with Cherise: I write for readers and people as Beate once wrote , 'who read to live'

Ramon Collins
May 24, 07:29pm

We have to be careful of Fascinating Facts & Figures from the publishing world these days, David.

I saw a publishing house vice-president interviewed on BookTV and he said (not a verbatim quote), "Of course book sales are up; we used to charge $9.95. then $14.95, $19.95 and now we're into the 20s." He went on to review the trouble the "print" publishing world faces. Things that most writers never consider: shipping, quality paper, ink, new technology and equipment, etc.

I have a Kindle and I dunno; it's just not the same relationship as holding a book. I hope electronic books are the answer -- at least, they'll save a lot of money on bookcases.

David Ackley
May 24, 07:49pm

Since you have a Kindle, I assume you know that the price of all books for Kindle is set at $9.99.

Cherise Wolas
May 24, 08:35pm

I am still kindle-less, however, my mother was given one recently and she called to tell me that she found it amazing... that it all became "about the words."

eamon byrne
May 25, 01:06am

Length might be overrated. For mine, even if a piece has 5000 words, it still contains a flash. The first paragraph or so. If that doesn't grab me, I pass. If it does, I'll read on till the light goes out on my screen.

A broader issue is what this site might mean to us writers. As time goes by the kind of material seems to be broadening out. The danger is that it'll get away from its (presumably) core value - as a forum for high quality literary writing.

James Lloyd Davis' post above touches well on many of the issues. J. Stephen Carter's point about cliques is also well made. I agree with it. Also, in my opinion, many feedback comments that people are posting tend to be on the innocuous side. Well-meaning, maybe, but they lower the standard of the debate.

Apart from those quibbles, I love the site.

Susan Gibb
May 25, 05:02am

I would agree, Eamon. Another thing is that since this isn't a critique circle, we aren't on a reciprocal basis of reading. We shouldn't be required or expected to read or comment on pieces that don't personally interest us. If I choose to read only poetry, or only flash, or only long pieces, that's my choice and I don't ask anyone to read my stuff if they don't want to. There are enough writers here in each genre and form to allow for reading of any piece.

Sara
May 25, 06:58am

I'm enjoying reading these responses. Cherise, thanks for starting the conversation. We were just talking about this in my writing group last night. Other people have said this (and far more eloquently) but I would say it comes down to how and when we read. Call me a Luddite but for me, after a day with the laptop, I desire the tactile feel of a hard copy -- for a longer story (that I'm reading for pleasure or to critique) or a book. While I do plenty of editing in live files (and enjoy work of different lengths on the internet), I still love to interact with the text on the page. Especially when doing a close read/to critique -- (could just be that I grew up in the old-fashioned workshop of printing out/marking up pages) - but it is a different experience. Slows me down, maybe. Trains the eye in a diff. way.

Long stories require time and attention (and while close reads of shorts do, too, I think you know what I mean) and especially if you are looking for thoughtful feedback the key is to get that committed band of readers. Real-life writing groups are great for that, (and when you're face to face you worry less about comments getting lost in translation) but I do think the same model can be actively applied to one of the groups you mention, Cherise. You don't need a ton of members but a handful devoted to reading and responding on a regular basis in an involved, thoughtful, critical way.

I get the sense from this forum that those people do exist here on f'naut -- which may not itself be a critical site -- but is a place to meet wonderful, diverse readers and writers. And it seems you could jumpstart that long story workshop right here.

David Ackley
May 25, 07:28am

Eamon's point above is well taken. Length by itself is a meaningless criterion. A long bad story is just bad to the excess. But I think there are values in fiction that are inaccessible to flash, and only achievable, when they're achieved, in works of some length. Flash as fiction can only achieve a couple of things: Compression; allusion, usually through imagery;captured moments, snapshots. The dimensions of time, past to present to future are the province of the longer work. The aspects of characters developing and changing. The interjection of the dramatic into the quotidian and its effects. One could go on. Flash is a kazoo. It can play you a pretty tune, in a limited range, as might entertain you on a street corner for a moment's pause. The short story is a violin, the novella a string quartet, the novel the whole bloody orchestra.

Stephen Carter
May 25, 09:53am

Very interesting discussion here and lots of good points. Susan, especially, i think is right about no one having to read or comment on anything they don't want to. The only reason i feel the "cliques" (which i should say are very small and are not indicative of fictionaut on the whole) are a slight problem is that the site rates works by reads, comments, faves, etc...and those that receive the most stay up on the front page, or somewhere near it, while those that don't quickly sink down into obscurity.

Presumably everyone who posts here wants as many people as possible to read what they post, and the reality is that the harder it is to find a story, the fewer the number of people who are going to see it and read it.

This isn't any posters fault, or any small group of posters, in my opinion, this is more a fault of the site itself. Social networking is, for better or worse, a large component of this site, and its only natural people will like and gravitate more towards some than others.

I have no issue with that whatsoever...until its begins to drastically affect what we find on the main page.

Anyway, its not a big issue by any means.

Also, and i'm sure i'm in the minority here, but i wish people could comment on the stuff here without having an account. Yes, naturally you'd get some pricks but the author can delete any comment they don't approve of...i just personally don't see what the big deal would be.

I'm not saying let anyone post a story or poem. I think you should have to belong to do that.

I'm just all for making things as egalitarian as humanly possible, basically.

H-M Brown
May 25, 09:58am

It's really all about a readers personal taste. Some like Fantasy, some like mystery, some like vampires, others like political. Some like flash and some like novel length.

I think in the end, we should not worry so much about who's reading and who's commenting and just write what we got. Write what we want to say. And let the dice roll accordingly.

I think the comment boxes of Fictionaut has cause an unnecessary stigma on all of us if we are so concerned about who's commenting or not. Maybe those things should go and just leave the comment in the forums and group discussion pages.

Cherise Wolas
May 26, 06:31pm

I will say that I took Mr. Dennison up on his challenge and printed out his 5000 plus word story, as I have done recently with other lengthy stories printed on fictionaut.

I have them stacked on my night-stand. I read them as I would read stories in a collection, chapters in a novel.

There is something quite wonderful about printing out another fictionaut writer's work and reading it in the printed format - trees be damned (Yes, I know, don't excoriate me for that, but come on, writers use paper!). Printing out and reading from paper gives work a gravitas, and a reality that is unique from reading work on the internet. Not necessarily better, but different. It has a heft and weight that all writers hope their work has, regardless of whether it's drama, comedy, or everything in between.

Bad writing is just as bad on paper as it is on a screen. But good writing will still jump off and into your brain. The thing is, we've all grown used to the "bites" the internet provides, and I think our brains go into overdrive and rebel when the form is longer than what we expect to see on a screen.

I don't know that I would have read all of Matt's piece on this site, but having printed it out, I am so glad I did. It made me feel like I was giving a writer his due. It makes me feel like I'm encouraging writing in general.

So print people. Use those reams of paper. As writers and readers we must resist the instinct to only read what can be read in a flash. And that is not a dig at flash, I love what I've been reading here. But writing comes in all forms, and it's up to us, as writers and readers, to champion what we love.

Gary Percesepe
May 27, 08:41am

anyone read gk in the times the other day?

May 26, 2010
The End of an Era in Publishing
By GARRISON KEILLOR
I ran into my daughter’s favorite author, Mary Pope Osborne, in New York the other night, whose Magic Tree House books I’ve read to the child at night, and a moment later, Scott Turow, who writes legal thrillers that keep people awake all night, and David Remnick, the biographer of Obama. Bang bang bang, one heavyweight after another. Erica Jong, Jeffrey Toobin, Judy Blume. It was a rooftop party in Tribeca that I got invited to via a well-connected pal, wall-to-wall authors and agents and editors and elegant young women in little black dresses, standing, white wine in hand, looking out across the Hudson at the lights of Hoboken and Jersey City, eating shrimp and scallops and spanikopita on toothpicks, all talking at once the way New Yorkers do.

I grew up on the windswept plains with my nose in a book, so I am awestruck in the presence of book people, even though I have written a couple books myself. These are anti-elitist times, when mobs are calling for the downfall of pointy-head intellectuals who dare tell decent people what to think, but I admire the elite. I’m not one of them — I’m a deadline writer, my car has 150,000 miles on it — but I’m sorry about their downfall. And this book party in Tribeca feels like a Historic Moment, like a 1982 convention of typewriter salesmen or the hunting party of Kaiser Wilhelm II with his coterie of plumed barons in the fall of 1913 before the Great War sent their world spinning off the precipice.

Call me a pessimist, call me Ishmael, but I think that book publishing is about to slide into the sea. We live in a literate time, and our children are writing up a storm, often combining letters and numerals (U R 2 1derful), blogging like crazy, reading for hours off their little screens, surfing around from Henry James to Jesse James to the epistle of James to pajamas to Obama to Alabama to Alanon to non-sequiturs, sequins, penguins, penal institutions, and it’s all free, and you read freely, you’re not committed to anything the way you are when you shell out $30 for a book, you’re like a hummingbird in an endless meadow of flowers.

And if you want to write, you just write and publish yourself. No need to ask permission, just open a Web site. And if you want to write a book, you just write it, send it to Lulu.com or BookSurge at Amazon or PubIt or ExLibris and you’ve got yourself an e-book. No problem. And that is the future of publishing: 18 million authors in America, each with an average of 14 readers, eight of whom are blood relatives. Average annual earnings: $1.75.

Back in the day, we became writers through the laying on of hands. Some teacher who we worshipped touched our shoulder, and this benediction saw us through a hundred defeats. And then an editor smiled on us and wrote us a check and our babies got shoes. But in the New Era, writers will be self-anointed. No passing of the torch. Just sit down and write the book. And the New York Times, the great brand name of publishing, will vanish (POOF) whose imprimatur you covet for your book (“brilliantly lyrical, edgy, suffused with light” — NY Times). And editors will vanish.

The upside of self-publishing is that you can write whatever you wish, utter freedom, and that also is the downside. You can write whatever you wish and everyone in the world can exercise their right to read the first three sentences and delete the rest.

Self-publishing will destroy the aura of martyrdom that writers have enjoyed for centuries. Tortured geniuses, rejected by publishers, etc., etc. If you publish yourself, this doesn’t work anymore, alas.

Children, I am an author who used to type a book manuscript on a manual typewriter. Yes, I did. And mailed it to a New York publisher in a big manila envelope with actual postage stamps on it. And kept a carbon copy for myself. I waited for a month or so and then got an acceptance letter in the mail. It was typed on paper. They offered to pay me a large sum of money. I read it over and over and ran up and down the rows of corn whooping. It was beautiful, the Old Era. I’m sorry you missed it.

Tribune Media Services

David Ackley
May 27, 08:54am

This strikes me as the lament of the woolly mastodon as it descried a hairy, lean, hungry entity crouched behind a rock, its fate suddenly incarnate. Get over it, GK.

James Lloyd Davis
May 27, 10:52am

The idea that we are witnessing the end of a golden age seems premature. In the 60's there were many small revolts in universities here in the U.S., with passionate, disagreeable, and privileged young men and women staging takeovers of campus buildings, declaring that much of what was taught in their ivy-encrusted schools had become, suddenly, utterly irrelevant.

"Shakespeare," one particularly obnoxious young man from Scarsdale told me, "is irrelevant." He then proceeded to burn a book containing "Henry V."

I asked him later if he'd read it and he said, "Hell no!" He seemed rather proud of that.

With the rise of feminism and the ascendancy of minority literature, "old, dead white guys" were slated for the trash heap. I loved so many of the newer voices, but was dismayed that all the previous voices were decried. Again, not only poor Shakespeare, but Faulkner, Hemingway, the entire pantheon of famous, though thoroughly unfashionable white guys were declared an endangered species.

I'm hopeful, but guarded in stating what should be obvious. Books will be around for a while. I look at the bios of many people on here, their lists of favorite authors and favorite books, and I am enabled in that hope. Through experience I've come to the understanding that, though new things will always appear, the better part of the old things survive.

I write novels. I've read and reread "Henry V." I will persist in this, not from habit, but from the love of that which survives the ephemeral moods of fashion. And so do some of you.

David Ackley
May 27, 11:50am

I tried but was unable to refrain from one further comment on Garrison Kieler's smug lament for the good old days when publishers paid big money, and acceptances arrived a month after submssion, dancing through cornfields optional. This picture doesn't precisely comport with the experience with publishers of most of us, no doubt the great unwashed, who, after the umpteenth form rejection began to suspect that said publisher's mailroom was occupied solely by some underpaid scut, whose entire job was to open manila envelopes, run the pristine manuscript therein through the handily placed shredder, and place one standard rejectin form in the SASE also contained, flipping it with some acquired dexterity into the overflowing outbox, not forgetting that all this was to take place no sooner than 6 months after reciept of the manuscript because God forfend the hapless writer might ever come to believe that nobody at the New Yorker ever even looked at his fucking pathetic scribblings.

Christian Bell
May 27, 12:17pm

Is the death of the book the new version of the death of the novel discussion?

If ONLY I could make a $1.75 a year on my writing.

Gary Percesepe
May 27, 12:54pm

nah, that's next week, christian

lmao at if only 1.75

oh, this is a fine, fine group

Doug Bond
May 27, 06:48pm

Christian--we're in a barter economy now, that being said, I'll gladly pay you $1.75 for just one of your books thereby doubling your annual revenue, increasing your readership by 7% (i'm not a blood relative either, i think)the only catch....you too have to run up and down rows of corn (or any suitable subsidized American agricultural product) but I prefer, "Yawping" to "whooping". Oh, and I'm not laying out anything extra for P&H...so that's the deal, take it or leave it.

Linda Simoni-Wastila
May 27, 06:53pm

Ack, I read it this am in a REAL newspaper. Laying on of hands... jeesh, as if we just wave a wand over our jeyboard and voila! A novel ready for prime-time self-pubbing. Of course, he is from the same family as though bokes who walked ten miles to school and back, both times up a mountain, barefoot in blizzards.

Funny, even as he derides the elite, he is, himself, part of them.

Well, gotta go, just slipped into my little black dress to stare off over the Manhattan skyline...

Cherise Wolas
May 27, 07:44pm

I agree with the comments made by my learned colleagues above.

However, I cannot, will not, let go of my dream, a child's dream, of one day having books I have written, with my name on the spine, in bookstores and libraries.

I don't want to stop the technological progression, and this site surely is an example of that. We are all finding readers we wouldn't otherwise have found, and it's wonderful and miraculous, and the comments (which I wouldn't want to have cease) and the favs (which make each of our days, let's be honest) give us that little nudge once again to say we aren't necessarily writing in a vacuum.

Technology is fabulous, but there is a flattening out; anyone now can do anything: shoot a movie on a iPhone, edit it on a mac, self-publish, run a daily blog, become a You Tube singing sensation, and there's a lot of good that emerges from this democratic process, and a lot of crap as well.

But, if I had my way, I'd still like to be able to jump through my own version of a cornfield.

Susan Tepper
May 28, 12:11pm

The small press publishers. They are out there (and there are many) still making real books of fiction and poetry, distributing them, putting them up on amazon and B&N, etc etc, getting them reviewed.

Any writer who truly wants a book of fiction or poetry published, should seek out small press publishers.

Buy their books, send them a small contribution. Most are running the press out of their own pocket money, since grants have essentially dried up. They do it for the love of books.

They will remember you for contributing, and when you ask them to read your manuscript, you will get a fair read.

Trust me on this. I've been the route. Two of my novels spent nearly 3 years at a major commercial publisher, only to have my editor either quit or get fired, the books turned over to other eds, (a total of 4 editors in 3 years), and finally to have both manuscripts land back on my doorstep unpublished.
It was the nightmare of nightmares.

I found the small press to be a wonderful way to get a book published. You may have to do a lot of your own PR, but it's the same if you go with a commercial publisher too.

The book world is changing but the small press is a viable alternative

Cherise Wolas
May 28, 11:31pm

Susan,
Thanks for writing the above post, as well as the what-to-dos! So sorry about the travails you've gone through with two of your novels. What heartbreak.

Larry Strattner
May 29, 12:52pm

I really had fun reading these posts and I think everyone's right!

From my perspective the reading and commenting or helping with longer work has nothing to do with the internet - or many of the other factors noted by all; you who I came here to learn from. It has only to do with who is here and why; the inherent strengths and weaknesses of the forum by numbers.

Fictionaut is a large, diverse group. Not a good environment for a microscope. Some writers here don't want to write more than 500 words. A guy who I met early on here at fictionaut, a college professor, helped me out a lot with a number of incisive observations. He didn't seem to be influenced by length. Then he seemed to drift away. Maybe I/we wasn't/weren't his kind of writer. He was a practitioner of the longer form. Good at it too.

I seemed to notice over time the obviously long form people move on. Some join and never post much. Short forms aren't their thing. Plus, in the fictionaut environment it's difficult to tiptoe adroitly enough to be constructively inoffensive. I have always found constructive assistance for others much more difficult than any other type of writing.

Maybe one answer is a post on this Forum by people interested saying:
-Willing to read your work and comment.
-Fiction or Non-fiction acceptable.
-No romance or overly sexual material.
-Thriller or Mystery first preference.
-Narrative poetry acceptable if written in classic form.
-No cookbooks or self-help manuals

You get the idea. Separate into groups with common thematic interests.

E mail manuscripts (and here's a question - can an rtf or doc be downloaded onto a Kindle?) I agree with a lot of the mechanical and financial issues people note here but it looks like many are being solved every day.

I avoid publishing things of any length on fictionaut. (You're not missing anything.)If you publish something north of 2500 words see how many reads you get. Check other long pieces and see how many they get. Stop and think how you feel when you see a post of more than 2500 words. (I think, "Wow, this is long!")(and it is; for fictionaut.)
This teeny little bit of research should answer a few questions.

I am currently writing a novel with a co-author. We work over the internet. Vetting longer stuff is not easy at longer distance. We find phone calls to discuss progress-to-date de rigueur (noted because it is a cost).

Oh, and please add: no medical non- fiction, to my list. I have a rather weak stomach.

Gary Percesepe
May 30, 07:23am

a bit off topic, but v. klinkenborg chimed in on the book/text thing today in the times, fyi

May 28, 2010
Further Thoughts of a Novice E-Reader

By VERLYN KLINKENBORG

I have been reading a lot on my iPad recently, and I have some complaints — not about the iPad but about the state of digital reading generally. Reading is a subtle thing, and its subtleties are artifacts of a venerable medium: words printed in ink on paper. Glass and pixels aren’t the same.

When I read a physical book, I don’t have to look anywhere else to find out how far I’ve gotten. The iPad e-reader, iBooks, tries to create the illusion of a physical book. The pages seem to turn, and I can see the edges of those that remain. But it’s fake. There are always exactly six unturned pages, no matter where I am in the book.

Now, a larger problem. Books in their digital format look vastly less “finished,” less genuine. And we can vary their font and type size, making them resemble all the more our own word-processed manuscripts. Your poems — no matter how wretched or wonderful they are — will never look as good as Robert Hass’s poems in the print edition of “The Apple Trees at Olema.” But your poems can look almost exactly as ugly — as e-book-like — as the Kindle version of that collection.

All the e-books I’ve read have been ugly — books by Chang-rae Lee, Alvin Kernan, Stieg Larsson — though the texts have been wonderful. But I didn’t grow up reading texts. I grew up reading books. The difference is important.

When it comes to digital editions, the assumption seems to be that all books are created equal. Nothing could be further from the truth. In the mass migration from print to digital, we’re seeing a profusion of digital books — many of them out of copyright — that look new and even “HD,” but which may well have been supplanted by more accurate editions and better translations. We need a digital readers’ guide — a place readers can find out whether the book they’re about to download is the best available edition.

And finally, two related problems. I already have a personal library. But most of the books I’ve ever read have come from lending libraries. Barnes & Noble has released an e-reader that allows short-term borrowing of some books. The entire impulse behind Amazon’s Kindle and Apple’s iBooks assumes that you cannot read a book unless you own it first — and only you can read it unless you want to pass on your device.

That goes against the social value of reading, the collective knowledge and collaborative discourse that comes from access to shared libraries. That is not a good thing for readers, authors, publishers or our culture.

VERLYN KLINKENBORG

Cherise Wolas
May 30, 07:33am

Interesting article.

What is also lost by digital reading is the connections that are made between people, seeing what others are actually reading via book covers, on a subway or train, at a park, on a plane, wherever. Those instant quick exchanges between people ABOUT books, because of a book in hand. I became very good friends with a woman on a plane because of the books we each were reading. That discourse, those potential friendships, a little of the ability to pass on the love of a particular writer or book, are lost because digital readers give rise to a conversation about the digital device, and less about the book. On the other hand, if digital devices encourage more people to read, then that is all to the good.

Larry Strattner
May 30, 01:34pm

Seems like this forum is slowly deepening into an unfathomable mish mosh of art, technology and popular culture questions.

I was interested in who was going to read my longer stuff? I mean, who read Homer's longer stuff? And he didn't even have to take time out for phone calls.

Though I appreciate design I have to think The Road Not Taken is as impressive in Courier as it is in Helvetica. If you really care you can format artfully in digital media. The good formatting people aren't yet working on books. Maybe they won't ever.

We have to separate writing from text, tweet, flash and facebook. Popular culture will have its way; will go its way; around over or through us.

If you travel a lot for business or pleasure I'm willing to bet you'll own a Kindle or something like it sometime soon. It's too good a concept to ignore. Too convenient. Too robust. Early TV looked like shit too, if I recall.

But who will read your longer stuff? That's what I want to know. Will you read mine? Who goes first?
Do I need an MFA to permit me to comment? Why is everyone ignoring me? Why are they ignoring you?

What usually happens to me with issues like this is happening: OK, OK, I'll read your longer thing, send it, whatever. Just tell me what you want. Where and when. I only ask you respect my list previously posted. Then if you show me yours you have to let me show you mine.

BTW - I also just bought four hard cover books, all at one time. God help me; I love fictionaut.

and PS: The clique thing mentioned somewhere is so true. I laughed delightedly with the "sneeze and get forty faves." Welcome to the real world. Perseverance and craft will out. Maybe not exactly as you expected; but it will out.

Cherise Wolas
May 30, 02:02pm

Loved your post Larry! Unfathomable mish mosh! Perserverance and craft will out!

I have been reading people's longer works here on fictionaut. And as I read and think, then I comment. If you have longer work you'd like to have read, you can count me in.

BTW: I rarely get out of a bookstore without a huge bag of books. One of my favorite things to do is to have a nice, fresh stack of great novels to jump into.

Matt Dennison
May 30, 02:37pm

note to self:
sneeze better

(goes off in search of pepper, feathers...

Larry Strattner
May 30, 03:03pm

Leave it to Dennison to sum it all up in twelve words.

Matt Dennison
May 30, 03:10pm

Ha!

Larry, you've sneezed *very* well, very many times.

I guess the secret is in learning how to sneeze on others.

;-)

Jürgen Fauth
May 30, 04:41pm

As Cherise pointed out right in the first post, groups are supposed to help like-minded Fictionauts find each other. The Long Story group (http://www.fictionaut.com/groups/the-longer-story) was intended as a place where people interested in longer forms can get together. Just like the front page, you can sort groups page by "recommended" to see the most popular stories.

If posting there still doesn't get you enough attention, perhaps we could think about adding a rule to the group description that asks to read and comment on, say, 2 other stories before adding your own -- I've seen this kind of thing work well in Flickr groups. Or someone could start a new group with whatever rules they like.

I always pictured Fictionaut as a place that would work for a wide variety of forms. The idea was that groups would allow for this kind of diversification. If they don't quite work as well as they should at the moment, perhaps we could talk about ways to improve them -- we'd love to hear your suggestions.

James Lloyd Davis
May 30, 06:46pm

I haven't sneezed since disco died. Can anyone suggest an alternative?

Matthew A. Hamilton
Jun 02, 03:38am

I agree with Mr. Fauth. I try to read at least two longer pieces a week and critique them the best I can. It would be nice to have a rule in place.

The short stories I publish here are in need of critique, so it would be nice if more people read them. That way, if they suck, then I can correct them and send them off to a worthy publisher. If I thought they were super awesome stories, I would just send them off to the publisher and not post them here.

I think fictionaut is more for receiving good, honest critiques. Receiving high praise is also nice (I like giving as well as receiving) but I'd rather see more critiques and edits. I've read many stories that have been highly faved, but also contained lots of errors. I just posted a story, "The Burning Bed." I don't think its that great, but could be made into a great story. So far, there have been 13 views and no comments. Please, if you think the story is poorly written, say so.

Lastly, those of you who prefer reading hard copies, then print Fictionaut stories off. I do this for the longer ones.

Sam Rasnake
Jun 02, 09:02am

I like the idea of commenting on, analyzing, critiquing a couple of pieces before you can post your own. That would be similar to being unable to post a new piece to the general wall until your present work as disappeared. Commenting on several pieces before posting new work sounds like a good approach – though I have no way of knowing how this could be enforced.

Of course, we should all keep in mind that some writers post here only to widen readership of their work – and not necessarily for critiques – although critiques or comments should always be welcomed - even on published pieces. A piece is published, but it could always be revised.

The comments on my own published pieces - and that's all I post here at FN - help me in thinking about the possibilities of future writing or most especially in organizing ms projects.

George LaCas
Jun 03, 10:07pm

I've only recently become active on Fictionaut, and I can't say I'm disappointed.

As for the question of longer pieces on the site getting less attention just because they are not flash-short, I think that's true. I'm guilty of it myself, and while I've read several short stories here longer than 2000 words, I do get impatient.

The reason, for me, is that I'm sitting at my computer. When I settle down with a book it's in bed, and I might read 20 or 100 pages. I guess it's true about screens' backlighting being hard on the eyes.

I also tend to post shorter pieces here, and poetry (also short, though some might say not short enough). Although I've got tons of novel excerpts and longer stuff I could post here, I don't feel that Fictionaut is the medium for those: they wouldn't get read, and I'd risk Internet exposure of fiction yet to be published.

Still, the bar of quality on this site, in terms of writing, is several rungs higher than other sites involving mutual crit and social networking. And I've met some really smart, helpful people here as well.

Writers have to know who their audience is, and like many of you have already said, long pieces here don't get the reads that flash does. That's the nature of the site, and of many computer users in general. Maybe, with longer pieces, it's better to have a few trusted readers work with you, than thousands of people noticing you momentarily.

Ultimately it's about us, and our words, whether we write tiny poems or novellas. It's important that we keep writing and keep reading, on paper or e-readers or computer screens.

Somewhere on this site is a very long short story about a post-text world, where only machines are allowed to create and display words, and all humans may do is stand and stare. If not, maybe I'll write that story.

I'll shoot for 1800 words, though, tops.

H-M Brown
Jun 04, 01:26pm

George Lacas Wrote:

"As for the question of longer pieces on the site getting less attention just because they are not flash-short, I think that's true. I'm guilty of it myself, and while I've read several short stories here longer than 2000 words, I do get impatient.

The reason, for me, is that I'm sitting at my computer. When I settle down with a book it's in bed, and I might read 20 or 100 pages. I guess it's true about screens' backlighting being hard on the eyes.

I also tend to post shorter pieces here, and poetry (also short, though some might say not short enough). Although I've got tons of novel excerpts and longer stuff I could post here, I don't feel that Fictionaut is the medium for those: they wouldn't get read, and I'd risk Internet exposure of fiction yet to be published."

Eyesight is an understandable reason for most readers, since not everyone has good eyesight or has physical eye defects. That can be uncomfortable when looking at a computer screen.

But you've shown in your statements that you have the capability of reading a little over 2000 words for some works here, so I don't understand why you feel Fictionaut is not the place for Long Stories. Especially your own.

First and foremost, let's be clear. You're not forced into reading Long Stories here, it's still your choice, BUT at the same time no one, none of us, is forcing you to sit down in front of your computer and read a Long Story through one whole sitting. You can take your time reading Long Stories, stop after a few pages, and come back later to continue the story on. Fictionaut's PDF Format option really gaurantees a Readers choice of pacing. So why do you feel impatient, if its not the terrible writing and bad storytelling that makes you feel that way?

Let me ask you this, Do you read the entire Stephen King novel IT, big as it is, in one whole sitting?

Let me ask another question, and pardon me if I am coming off as presumptuous, but, do you feel that Fictionaut Members should not write Long Stories here at all? Do you feel that Fictionaut should only cater to Flash Fiction, Shorts, or Poems exclusively and nothing else? Since you feel Fictionaut is not the place to post long works. You're not the first member to feel this way, but you're by no means the last.

As for the risk of Internet Exposure of unpublished work, we have an entire post with a short list of a few Publishers that have no problem with accepting our Unpublished Works posted here on Fictionaut. From what I have also been told and understand, is that most other publishers don't see the Internet as a valid "Publishing House".

And just to add a little extra, like I said in another post. The number of Members here on Fictionaut is but a microbe compared to the 500 million Harry Potter Readers who purchased that book. And 99.9999% of those readers do not know Fictionaut exist nor even both to come here if they know about it.

So unless all of us here at Fictionaut tell them to come here or give Fictionaut one big PR campaign, the economics of Publishing a book will not be hampered if it was posted on Fictionaut, or the Internet, first. In addition, we do have the ability to remove our posted works here on Fictionaut after our story gets Published into a book.

You shouldn't hold your Long Stories back if you genuinely feel it in heart that you want to share them here on Fictionaut. There are Fictionaut Members that read Long Stories. They may be a minority compared to Flash readers, and they may not comment with a high frequency, but they are our readers nonetheless. And we should give them our best and everything we got if we post up our works here on Fictionaut.

George LaCas
Jun 04, 05:00pm

@H-M : I never said that Fictionaut is not the place for fiction over 2000 words. I simply confessed that, for me, when I read on FN or any other online source, I read it on my computer. I almost never print anyone else's stuff. Personal preference.

And I was simply observing that FN seems geared more toward short pieces. Not that it should be, but that it is, in terms of views.

I've just posted a 2200 word short story on FN. My shortest piece, not my best, was 42 words long; I like to post pieces of varying lengths. The one I just posted was written especially for FN, and is available nowhere else.

And I do read longer pieces here, as I believe I stated in my previous post. I get "impatient" because I've ruined my eyes over the years - by reading.

H-M Brown
Jun 04, 09:08pm

Unfortunately, we all have no choice to but to read the stories on Ficionaut on the intenet. :D

You wrote: "while I've read several short stories here longer than 2000 words, I do get impatient."

Then followed the next paragraph with: "The reason, for me, is that I'm sitting at my computer. When I settle down with a book it's in bed, and I might read 20 or 100 pages. I guess it's true about screens' backlighting being hard on the eyes."

Because they were in seperate paragraphs, I did not connect the "Impatient" part with the "eyes" part. For that I apologize if I have offended you. It was not my intent.

My impression of your comments was that you felt that long stories, not just your own, but anybody's, is not meant to be posted on the Internet or Fictionaut. You said you held back your long stories because of that, that they wouldn't get read, and that you had fear of Internet Exposure.

I didn't want to see you or any writer feel discouraged from posting Long Stories on Fictionaut because of the attention to Flash and Shorts. Every work here is on equal terms. I hope.

In fact, I did a little test work. I don't know if you use MS Word to write your stories with, but from what I found out is that a story of 2000 to 2500 words, would equal around 4 to 5 pages. In Fictionaut's PDF Format, it's font size stretches it to around 8 to 10. I'll have recheck that.

But think about that for a moment, 2000 to 2500 words equal around 4 to 5 pages of MS Word in Times New Roman, Courier New, or Verdana fonts. 5000 words equals around 9 to 10 pages of MS Word. Doesn't seem like a lot for a story does it?

Fictionaut likes to give word counts with each story post we make. And I think that we members put too much stock into Fictionaut's word count. If anybody sees the word count in the thousands, suddenly its an intimidation to read, and the story is to be avoided. This without realizing that the story is actually just 4 to 5 pages in MS Word, or for even longer ones, 10 pages.

Now I don't know if there is a big difference between page length shifts when a copy of a story on MS Word gets placed in an actual sheet of Publishing Paper for a Novel. But what I do know is that 4 to 5 MS Word pages of a story posted on Fictionaut should not mean "avoid the story" and "I can't read this".

But as I said before, Fictionaut's PDF Format increased the font size of the text and turns a 4 to 5 MS Word pages into 8 to 10 PDF Format pages. 10 MS Word Pages equals 21 to 22 PDF Format Pages. Which is really annoying for Long Stories.

It's just too bad there is no PDF Button to change the Font size in PDF Format, and decrease the text, so that PDF Pages can shrink down to maybe 5 PDF pages for a 5 page MS Word Doc, or 10 PDF pages for a 10 page MS Word Doc. It would make reading a lot easier for everyone here.

It may even help with the memory and server space that Fictionaut needs to save to handle all the traffic.

George LaCas
Jun 05, 02:01am

It's all good, HM.

I accept that fewer people will read my long pieces, since I am not famous. Yet. But some will.
:-)
You must log in to reply to this thread.