Three full 24 hour days on Facebook per year! Or nearly two full work weeks if you count a work week as 35-40 hours a week. And I suspect the statistics hold true in the U.S. as well.
Not all writers are full-time. Some must juggle day jobs or home-life responsibilities around their writing. So let’s say the average writer is cramming 20 hours a week of actual writing into their craft.
Thus if you are a writer AND you “Facebook” (is that a verb now?) this would mean the average writer is spend nearly a month’s worth of work time…on Facebook.
Yes, I know Facebook is a wonder of technology and allows for an incredible way to connect with lots of friends and readers at once. (Of course we have to redefine the word “friend,” don’t we?) But what would you have done with that time before you discovered Facebook?
In 72 hours a “nose-to-grindstone” writer could produce 10,000 words on their next work-in-progress (that is about 1/2 page per hour). A motivated person could memorize the Constitution. An avid reader could consume at least six of their favorite books. Or a die-hard fan could watch all 158 episodes of the “Dick Van Dyke Show” or all three seasons of “The Dog Whisperer with Cesar Milan” and still have time left to walk Fido!
I discovered first-hand the potentially addictive nature of Facebook’s lure. But I quickly learned to shut off all notifications and only visit the site periodically and see if there is anything of interest. Much like I do with selected blogs and news sites.
Don’t get me wrong, I know there are tremendous benefits for the author in connecting with their readers via social networking. And I’m not criticizing Facebook or Facebook users. My concern is with the amount of time authors spend on something other than making their next book a masterpiece.
Next time you enter the social networking world, time yourself. Then ask if it was beneficial to you personally, professionally, spiritually, emotionally, or otherwise. As with all things, use common sense, discipline, and moderation.
It will also keep your agent or your editor from posting a comment on your wall like “What are you doing here? You are on a deadline!”
For a laugh enjoy Rhett & Link’s hilarious “Facebook Song“on YouTube.
I went to high school in Hawaii (I know.. a rough life) where I learned the joys and perils of body surfing. That experience is a great metaphor for the new “waves” of digital revolution we are seeing in the publishing world.
The key to great body surfing is waiting for the right wave and then time your push just right. The ride is exhilarating (I still remember riding inside the tube of a perfect wave off the beaches of Kauai). BUT if you catch the wrong wave or mistime the push, there is no ride. Or worse, catch a wave that throws you wildly into a bunch of rocks…
But unless you are in the water and making attempt after attempt you will never achieve the perfect ride.
I see this metaphor applied to the new world of digital publishing. It is really fun to play a small part, but even more fun to watch others be extremely creative in their experiments. There are some very bright and exciting people trying new things in merging the traditional book with all things “interactive.”
One well publicized idea is the Vook (video book). This concept blends text and video into one package. Priced very low ($6.99 direct or less via iTunes) Simon & Schuster is starting with two novelists and two non-fiction projects. The 90-Second Fitness Solution, for example, features 13 short videos and 11 text chapters to present a simple fitness program. You can either read/watch it on your computer or download on your iPhone or iTouch.
The idea is creative but sales will determine its long term viability, especially at the prices they are charging. I downloaded the above title and found it fascinating to be able to see exercises demonstrated in video instead of still pictures.
Of course my purchase will be added to their “sales numbers” which makes me wonder how many “test drive” sales are going to happen.
Note that the fiction titles are using recognizable authors. The stories are novellas, not full length novels. Text for the Jude Deveraux title is declared to be 130 pages long but also has 17 videos to accompany the story.
If you are a Simon & Schuster author, don’t expect them to convert your book just yet. Their Vooks are a division of the Atria Books imprint and will be highly selective on where and with whom they put their investment.
In late October 2009 Harper Collins put Gary Vaynerchuk’s new book Crush It into an $11.99 Vook (complete with 17 videos.) This article pulls back a bit of the curtain regarding the costs associated with the Vook.
The next idea is also fascinating. Level 26 by Anthony Zuicker (creator of CSI) with Duane Swierczynski. This serial-killer terror novel has the premise that murderers can be classified according to 25 levels of evil according to the FBI. But now there is one that tops all the others…a “Level 26″ killer…the ultimate evil. Not a book I would recommend you read unless you love bloody horror novels or watch very disturbing movies.
What makes this novel different is that it is the first “Digi Novel.” You ask, “What is a Digi Novel?” Let me quote from the author’s description on Amazon.com:
“…where the traditional story ends, a deeper level of immersion is available at www.level26.com, exclusively to readers of the book. About every twenty pages, you will have the option of logging in to experience a digital cyber-bridge—a three-minute motion picture scene with A-list actors you might’ve seen in blockbuster films and award winning TV shows. Before your eyes, the characters will spring to life, crime scene details will explode off the screen, and the Web site might even ask for a phone number—where the killer can reach you directly. You might call it CSI with an edge.”
I can’t even imagine the amount of money this cost to produce. But again, a very creative way to merge visual/digital interaction with a book.
Another is ScrollMotion’s Iceberg Reader. This is an iPhone app that began with traditional text (and was competing with the dozen other e-book reader software packages) but has recently expanded to include full color kids books. They have both a Curious George alphabet book and a James Patterson Daniel X graphic novel (plus others, of course). There are lots of rumors about this expanding considerably if/when Apple’s tablet computer is launched. They are working with Hachette, HarperCollins, Random House, and Simon & Schuster, according to Publisher’s Weekly (August 24, 2009). From what I can tell this is one of the first e-book readers to fully incorporate color into the experience. But I have likely missed someone else’s software.
Last is a very creative use of the QR code (Quick Read Code). The square label looks a little like a Rorschach image. What makes these unusual is that with the right app on a phone you can take a picture of the image and it will then take your phone immediately to the web site embedded in the barcode. The QR technology is very big in Japan.
I used the QR-Code Generator to create this actual QR code…embedded in this image is the URL to my web site! If you look closely you can see me waving back at you. Just kidding, but this is a real QR code. Create one of your own.
According to Publishers Weekly (September 21, 2009), what HarperCollins has done is to incorporate this technology into books for Teens like Lauren Conrad’sL.A. Candy. According to Carolyn Pittis, HarperColliins senior v-p, global marketing strategy and operations, “In addition to the codes on the Candy jacket, QR codes were featured on posters used at the book launch party, and HC did a cross-promotion with Mark Cosmetics on the Mark site that drove consumers to the harperteen.com site.”
HarperCollins is breaking ground with the use of this technology by putting the code into ads in the NY Times and the Wall Street Journal. Imagine clicking a photo of the code while reading the newspaper and being taken to a site that has a complete video of the information you are looking for…along with an ad to buy something.
By starting with the Teen market they are truly capturing the “cool factor.” The problem of course is explaining what it is and how to use it. We visually block out bar codes because they are so prevalent. My concern as a parent would be “Where is this publisher taking my child?” But that is a topic for another writer to tackle.
Look on the back cover of the new Super Freakonomics book by Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner (published by William Morrow – a division of HarperCollins). You will see an OR Code and instructions on how to use it on your smartphone.
This must be what the music publishers felt like when the industry shifted from record albums to 8-Track to Cassette to Compact Disk to MP3 (and from record players to Walkman to Diskman to iPod) in less than 20 years. I hope to address some of the text based digital issues (Kindle vs. Sony vs. the world) in another blog, but for now, revel in the creative energy that is being expended to keep people reading and interacting with their books!
Yesterday I opened a can of worms. There were many worms in the can; some male and some female. I discovered that a few of the worms were married to each other. One couple was having a marital disagreement. They were arguing about grammar, of all things. The fight was about the proper use of gender pronouns. Here is the sentence under dispute:
“When a spouse greets a partner with derision because of an opinion, what should be ___ reaction?”
Fill in the blank. Should you use his, his or her, or their? This is a grammatical conundrum. Your choice will determine whether you will be categorized as “sexist,” “tiresome,” or “ungrammatical.”
Our vernacular has changed over the past years due to our sensitivity over the generic “he.” For some it is a matter of being politically correct. For others it is merely a way of being inclusive of both genders in their writing. In addition it can be simply a matter of using the common language of everyday speech.
So what is correct? I have polled a number of editors on this subject and find them equally divided. Some trained in journalism and others who are fierce copy-editors are vehemently opposed to the use of the “singular their.” Others claim to be more concerned about simple communication and lay the finer points of grammar aside. Yet even they are not unified on the issue. There is an entire website devoted to this question (The Anti-Pedantry page can be found at www.crossmyt.com/hc/linghebr/austheir.html).
Rosalie Maggio, in her book The Nonsexist Word Finder (Beacon Press, 1989) speaks to the issue of gender inclusive language:
“Defenders of the convention most often claim that is a point of grammar and certainly not intended to offend anyone. That is does in reality offend large numbers of people does not appear to sway some grammarians, nor does the fact that their recourse to the laws of language is on shaky ground. While he involves a disagreement in gender, singular they involves a disagreement in number [as in ‘to each his own’ and ‘to each their own’]. Eighteenth-century [male] grammarians decided that number was more important than gender, although the singular they had been in favor until that time.”
The plural pronoun has been used regularly for years. Few realize that some of the greatest writers in history utilized this method without criticism–Chaucer, Shakespeare, Swift, Goldsmith, Dickens, Fielding, Thackery, Byron, Austen, Orwell, Kipling, and even C.S. Lewis. Even The Chicago Manual of Style, 14th ed., “recommends the ‘revival’ of the singular use of _they_ and _their_, citing…its venerable use by such writers as Addison, Austen,…and Shakespeare.” (footnote on pp. 76-77 – 1993 edition)
Richard Lederer, in an article in Writer’s Digest wrote, “Let the word go out that anyone…their is destined to become good, idiomatic English. It already pervades the speech of educated Americans, and daily it grows more common in writing.”
Member of the Copyediting-L e-mail list state, “‘They’ with a singular antecedent works well, because it’s already part of everyone’s vocabulary. Like the generic ‘he,’ it entails no new words, just a shift in semantics…[it] is just one item in the toolkit of those who wish to avoid using generic ‘he.’ It isn’t the only item, and it doesn’t fit every situation, but it is useful.” (http://atropos.c2.net/~srm/samples/net/celfaq.htm [link now broken])
My feeling is that it is entirely appropriate to use the “singular they.” We need to adjust, ever so slightly, to accommodate the changes in our language. While not succumbing to the landmine of being politically correct, I do believe that there are appropriate places to use “ungrammatical” words to effectively communicate to our readers. Even the Boston Globe agrees in their article from October 2008 “The Singular Challenge.”
Richard Lederer provided a wonderful exercise to illustrate the point. Fill in the blank in the following sentence: “Everyone in the building attended the party, and ___ had a wonderful time.” I suspect that nearly everyone supplied the word they.
For a nice, but not definitive, introduction to the subject visit the Wikipedia entry for this topic.
And please note that I am a NOT grammar expert by any means. Heaven forbid I get that much credit. While I am an advocate of great writing and proper use of the English language I am also an advocate of communication. And communication has a tendency to adapt over time, the written word is no exception.
An earlier and abridged version published as “Opening a Can of Worms” in The Advanced Christian Writer, June 1998.
If you ever get the chance to visit a printing press, do it. I’ve had the privilege to visit two of them. The first was Standard Publishing’s printing press in Cincinnati. Their plant is quite large and they do a wide variety of printing, everything from books to curriculum to Star Wars coloring books.
The other plant was Bethany Press International in Bloomington, MN. During my years with Bethany House Publishers I visited this plant many times since their building is about 100 yards from the back door of the publishing house! I watched them move from the old “film” method of processing to a completely digital technology.
The beauty of watching the books being printed is partly the fascination of cool machines, but also an insight into all of the incredible details that go into the manufacturing process.
What most people don’t understand is that there are certain book jacket treatments that make a book “feel” or “look” special. The standard lamination is what we are used to seeing because it is the most inexpensive process. That is the “glossy” lamination on the majority of books.
Some books get a “matte” finish – which gives a tactile feel to the cover, almost a rough, yet smooth, touch. This adds a cost to every book printed. This has become more common over the years.
Next is the “spot gloss” finish. This is where they start with the “matte” finish above, but using the gloss lamination on specific spots on the cover. They might laminate just the letters in the author’s name, or the face of the character on the jacket design, or maybe just the title. Again this is an additional cost for every book printed.
Last is the “embossing” or “stamping” process where they created a metal plate that stamps an imprint on every jacket. So instead of a flat cover, each book has embossed, or raised, letters or symbols. This can be expensive because the publisher must first create the metal stamp (a few hundred dollars just for the plate). Then, after the cover is printed, each jacket must be run through the process a second time to stamp the imprint into the paper. This is very labor intensive and a lot of spoilage can happen if the imprint starts to miss its mark. We’ve all seen a few books that got past the inspectors where the stamp doesn’t fit the design by being off by as little as a sixteenth of an inch.
And then some really special books get a gold foil that is also applied to the cover, before the embossing process.
Why am I telling you all this boring stuff? Because the following YouTube video is a four minute video of the printing process of the new Dan Brown novel, The Lost Symbol. You get to go behind the scenes into the printing company and see it at work. This book will have a first printing of 5,000,000 copies and will be released on September 15, 2009. In this video you will see all of the above cover treatments applied to the manufacturing of this book. Realize they must use more than one printer to fill this five million copy order. At the stated rate of 30,000 books per hour a press must run for over 167 hours (nearly seven full days) to print that many books!
The following article appeared in the UK on November 5th, “Facebook Users Spend Three Solid Days a Year on the Site.”
I went to high school in Hawaii (I know.. a rough life) where I learned the joys and perils of body surfing. That experience is a great metaphor for the new “waves” of digital revolution we are seeing in the publishing world.
Yesterday I opened a can of worms. There were many worms in the can; some male and some female. I discovered that a few of the worms were married to each other. One couple was having a marital disagreement. They were arguing about grammar, of all things. The fight was about the proper use of gender pronouns. Here is the sentence under dispute:
If you ever get the chance to visit a printing press, do it. I’ve had the privilege to visit two of them. The first was Standard Publishing’s printing press in Cincinnati. Their plant is quite large and they do a wide variety of printing, everything from books to curriculum to Star Wars coloring books.
