the curious case of filtering

I have an English degree. I've been a professional writer for 15 years. I edited for 12. I've never heard the word filtering pop up so much in the world of fiction editing as I have in the last year, and I have to admit, I'm sick to death of it.

There's an article here that describes what filtering is. Linky!

I like this article because it explains what filtering is but it also explains how sometimes "filter" words are necessary. You see, I don't subscribe to the all or nothing rules of writing theory. If you write deep POV, sometimes the only way for a reader to learn something is because the main character heard it or saw it. Sometimes the writer deliberately chooses to filter information because the POV character is unreliable, possibly lying to himself and others. Or sometimes the author just wants you to know that you as the reader and seeing what the character sees not, just some random, disconnected act.

That being said, I do think that an author needs to examine the instances of the words heard and saw and felt, just to see if they're necessary. Sometimes we find we don't need them at all.

Then again, sometimes we really fell like we do (grins)

XXOO

Julia

How small publishing works - a primer for readers

Hey y'all!

With the recent plea from a well known author not to buy her EC books, which I jumped on shamelessly, several people asked me to explain how small publishing works so readers know why we implore them not to buy our books from places like EC, and in my case, paperbacks from Torquere that are still up despite a rights reversion in January.

For our purposes, there are 3 types of publishing going on right now in romance. Major label/big 6 is one (though people argue big 5 pr big 4 these days). That's when you get in with say, Harlequinn or Avon and your book is paperback bound with the ebook as an added value. These ebooks can go for 10-12 bucks and are not the biggest concern for the publisher. Many of those big publishers are looking at e-first lines, but they haven't quite jumped on the bandwagon 100% yet. We're not talking about them right now.

Then there's self publishing. An author writes a story, buys or makes a cover, hopefully pays for an edit, converts book files to e-books and uploads them to Smashwords or Amazon or Kobo or Nook or All Romance Ebooks. Or all of them. Then the distributor, which is one of the previously mentioned places, pays the author all the money they made on the book, less their percentage. For anything 2.99 and over, Amazon only takes 30%. Not bad, right? Ah, but for that .99 price that everyone including me loves, Amazon takes 70%. The author gets .29 per copy, give or take. Seeing as how covers, edits, and formatting can easily add up to about 200-500 bucks, a small publisher, who provides all that for another cut of the percentage, looks really attractive.

So, then we come to small publishers. Yes, EC was a "small" publisher even at several million a year. Some small pubs put out 5 books a year. Some 50. Some 5000. What they have in common is their business model. Unlike the Big 6, most of these publishers have retail websites. They provide cover art, editing, proofreading and file creation at their own expense, unlike a vanity press who charges the author up front for that. They upload the books to the distributors, which stamps their presence on it behind the author. Like a Dreamspinner book? Then you might like Julia's, too! Then they do advertising. Often with blogs, reviewers, or websites such as All Romance, unlike Big 6, who focus on print and radio, even TV a la James Patterson's ads. Word of mouth and repeat customers are important to these publishers, as are their sales on their own websites, so they don't have to pay those commissions we talked about self published authors paying to Amazon, etc. Usually it's the same amount for publishers.

So, what does all this matter? Well, I was asked to explain because some authors and readers have seen people say, "Yes, but I never buy your books from EC. I just buy them from Amazon." This is not an unusual assumption, that the publisher's site is the only place the publisher makes money on a book. But it's not.

In fact, the author, in general, makes more money on a book sold on a publisher's website than they do on Amazon or Smashwords. Since the publisher makes more, they offer the author a better percentage. The money Amazon takes means the publisher makes less, so the author makes less. Often 10-20% less. And what about those .99 books? Oh, man, on Amazon, the author gets about .12. Ouch.

And that's assuming the publisher pays the author. See, this is where people get confused. If you buy a book on any website that lists the publisher as Ellora's Cave, EC gets the money. No matter what site. There's always a publisher listing somewhere in the "information" section of the book listing. On Amazon it's after the blurb and the customers who bought this areas. Don't be fooled when it says Sold by Amazon Digital Services. Look for this: Publisher: Ellora's Cave Publishing Inc (February 5, 2014)

I know it's hard to tell who's doing what with as many publishers and self publishing nicknames (like my own Turtlehat Creatives) out there. But it's easy enough to see an EC book on Amazon. They might not band all their books at the top with their name anymore, but most have the ankh symbol on the top left, and some have EC under that. Then there's that publisher listing that, legally, they can't really hide.

I know some people, sadly, had new books out with this publisher and are still promoting them, so buy those EC titles at your peril. My wife, BA Tortuga, are asking people don't buy our remaining EC books ANYWHERE. EC gets the money, and we're not getting paid. I hope that helps out everyone who asked me to post about this.

Julia

Societal Debt

I have lots of long, involved thoughts on Social Media, society and human nature. I usually confine such musings to my time spent in the shower and on the pot, because I know no one wants to hear a romance author wax socio-economic anthropological, but I have too many feels right now to let it go. So bear with me, or just move on to my new releases and ignore the woman behind the curtain.

So. Has anyone else noticed that these days we live in a culture of societal debt? My mom and dad would have called it entitlement, and a lot of people call it melennial culture, but I'm not sure I can lay it at the door of the next generation. (I'm Gen X, the smallest generation, age wise, of any post Baby Boomer gen.) I think it's a combination of causes, but that's a whole other blog post.

What I'm here to comment on is the debt. Let's start with say, the idea that someone in the public eye, someone like Prince or Robin Williams, owes us, the consumer of their celebrity, some kind of access. Transparency is this huge catchphrase right now. So is need to know, or fear of missing out. The idea is that they OWE us the right to know how they live, or how they died, or why. Whether or not their families ask us for privacy or their legacy is prodigious and should be left at that, we have this sense of ownership, and therefore this idea that they're in our debt. That we deserve more than is really our right when it comes to someone we honestly don't know.

As an author, I often feel that people expect the same from me. Readers and bloggers and publishers I have never approached demand to know why I use a pen name, why I write what I write, and what's going on in my private life. All in the name of transparency. I also feel as if this culture of debt produces this enormous pressure to please everyone. With every review I get that says, " Too much sex. Not enough sex. This was handled well. This sucked," I feel as if I have to make everyone happy. That the people reading my books feel like I OWE them a book that ticks all of their boxes. Not only that, I feel as if I have to be sensitive to everyone's triggers, to everyone's needs, to everyone's wants when it comes to their reading, and provide an error free book. Even if that's not my job as a writer of fiction. And I feel like I have to do it all for 2.99 or less, thank you, because books aren't worth what people pay for a movie or some other form of entertainment. Hell, even Redbox charges $1.50

Now, before you get all mad, I need to mention that as authors, we're no better. We act as if reviewers OWE us a good review. If I gave you a book for free I should get a 4 or 5 star review, right? If you bother to go on Amazon I don't want you bitching about the price or the gay or anything else. There's no reason for me to feel as if any reader OWEs me anything. There's no contract that says you'll like my book because you bought it, or got it for free, just like there's no contract that says I have to write a book any specific reader will like.

So what the heck is with this debtor society? I love inclusion, and God knows I have FOMO sometimes. But does that mean I owe anyone anything, or that they're required to include me/like me? Nope.

I'd love to hear y'all's thoughts, but in reasoned discourse if you please.

XXOO

Julia

public service announcement on some titles

Hey y'all!

I've had some folks emailing me about some of my series, mainly Bloodrose and Full Moon Dating. They're no longer available on Torquere Press LLC or on Amazon because I have reverted all of my TQ LLC titles as of Saturday. I see my books are still up on All Romance Ebooks, but I am asking folks not to buy the Torquere titles at this time. My wife would like to ask the same, as she has also pulled her titles there.

I will be re-releasing both series asap. I'm very excited about taking these series to whole new levels. I gave up publishing over a year ago to write full time, and sad as it is I've now moved away from working with the company altogether. I used to write to fill holes in a production schedule, but now I can write these stories for the sake of the stories themselves and really explore the dynamics of how such long series fit together.

Change is always difficult, and sometimes it's downright sad. No matter what, I'm proud of my work and I want to find it the best home possible, whether it's self-publishing or going with another publisher to continue the series.

Feel free to email me if you have any questions about my books, and keep an eye out here for announcements about when specific books will re-release.

XXOO

Julia

the myth of a homogeneous experience

During a discussion of my last blog post on FB, the assertion came out that the "general you", in this case, a women writing m/m, tends to write "flat, two dimensional characters who in no way resemble gay men".

Now, I'm not going to get into the tired old argument about cross gender writing and whether men should write women or women should write men or what sexual orientation has to do with it. If writers only wrote what they were or what they knew personally, most of the great books and the lion's share of bad ones would never have hit the bookstores, brick and mortar or virtual.

No, what I'm having thoughts about today is the idea of the homogeneous gay man. Or the typical lesbian. Or the typical man or woman.

I'm terrible at sweeping generalizations in everyday life. "Those bitches!" I'll holler at the TV if I'm unlucky enough to see a housewife show when I'm clicking through late night channels, "Oh my God, it's the lesbian prison women! Because all women in prison go lesbian!."

But in my heart of hearts, I know those generalizations are full of caca. There is no such thing as the gay experience, or the lesbian experience or the Disney experience.

There's just people.

See, this is why I was so disappointed in the argument presented to me as, "Well, you have some valid points but I'm person X so I know and you don't, so there." To that particular person, my characters (the general me or specific me, take your pick, as I'm sure he did) may not in any way resemble a gay man.

But to, say, my friend Steve, who's ex-Navy and who had more sex with Marines than he could even remember on any given day, my "sex-crazed maniac erotic romance" resonates with his experience so much that he has me send him my books to beta so he can suggest ever more acrobatic sex. Or there's my old friend Scott, who went to Halloween one year as Pan, and who loves my werewolves and vampires because he's a gamer and thinks those things should exist, damn it.

I have readers who love my contemporaries because the men are just dudes who love dudes, and I have readers who hate that because they want their gay men to be sensitive and open with their feelings. One way or the other, someone may love what I write, and may say "OMG yes that's just like I see things and feel things" or they may hate what I do and say, "No, that's not my experience".

That's totally fine. That's what writing is. But to suggest that because I don't share some mystical connection or mind meld about a whole group of people because I'm not a member of a secret club? Well, that's just an argument you can't win with me, because I know such a thing doesn't exist, God knows, I know a lot of short haired, flannel wearing, clog stomping dykes. That doesn't mean that all lesbians dress, act, or feel the same way I do, and I hope I would never present us all as a shared hive mind.

In other news, it snowed! We got our Thanksgiving snow early!

Now, that's something to be tickled about

XXOO

Julia

Objectification, Divisiveness and One Author Calling Bullshit

It seems like there always has to be a kerfluffle in the writing world. Especially in romance. I happen to be very active in the m/m romance community, even though I write all genres and genders of romance, so I see these explosions daily.

The latest is an anonymous article about the objectification of gay men by romance women. You can read it here.

I have lots of feels here and I will try to list them in a relatively coherent way, off the cuff as this is. I may not achieve literary crit greatness here, but bear with me.

One, I find the argument in the article specious at best if you take the first lines as the premise of the whole commotion.

"As a gay man, the M/M Romance genre makes me extremely uncomfortable.

A lot of women in the genre, both readers and authors, seem to fetishize physically attractive gay men. Not all women in the genre are like that, but a substantial amount."

Hmmm. Because het romance readers never fetishize hot het men. Because before m/m conventions had go go dancers there were never Ellora's Cavemen flexing their muscled, oiled bods at RT. As the former owner of the first exclusively GLBT romance publisher, I can tell you long before we had naked waiters at the UK meetup there were hot cover models carrying mermaid dressed authors across the stage at the Fairy Court ball. Romance is about the fantasy. Period. The article fails to address this.

Second, as the L in LGBT, let me talk about how straight men have objectified my "people" for decades. Do we even get romance novels? No, we get bad porn reels with big boobed porn ladies pretending to be into one another, all for men to enjoy as a fantasy. Because most of us lezzies of a certain age have never seen our partners look like that...

I'd also like to note that the pics accompanying the anonymous post are more likely to be found on a gay porn site than a m/m author's FB and are there for shock value. Here's more what I see on my facebook and on m/m book covers. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=505808079586315&set=a.248987658601693.1073741828.100004713810507&type=3&theater

Am I saying this guy is 100% wrong? No. Am I calling bullshit? Yes.

On the eve of a gay man being appointed Director at Large of RWA, what I see in this article is divisiveness.

Yep. There's the go-go dancer groping commentary. I've seen both genders and all sexual preferences do this at all kinds of events. Do I love it? No. In fact, my main objection to sexy male models parading around at cons is largely feminist. If I would object to a woman being viewed that way, I have to give equal time to the guys. But that's my issue, and I don't go if I don't want to see it. The porn fest masquerading as lit is another comment in the article. This is causing authors to defend romance. It's not all sex! they say. Sex is bad! Bullshit again. You don't like erotic romance? Don't read it. But don't tell me it's not valid, and that het romance doesn't do the same thing. Listen to Can Johnson talk at a panel about alpha alpha heroes and tell me het romance is any less interested in the heat.

Romance is a valid genre, with a huge, diverse following. We don't need divisiveness and we don't need all the tired old accusations of objectification just because our genre is mostly about women taking their sexuality into their own hands. As a m/m romance author, I think my genre is also about acceptance and love, because many a reader has told me they didn't believe in gay rights until they read a m/m romance. How can that be bad? Own what you read and what you write, and sure, fight for understanding and equality. But don't try to blame all the ills of the world on a go go dancer and a couple of smokin' hot novels... I'll call bullshit.

XXOO

Julia

writing on days I don't want to

Some days I just don't feel like writing.

Take today, for instance. BA and I try to get up at 7 am so we can start writing days. We write from 7 to noon, and from 12:45 to 5 ish. A lot of times 3:30 to 5 is spent in edits, social media and more, but sometimes if one of us is in hard deadline, we keep going.

Today I wanted to sleep until 9 or 10. I wanted pancakes for breakfast. (I settled for a Jimmy Dean eggwhite and turkey sausage bowl). And today I want to work on a miniature crazy quilt for a dollhouse and watch Sherlock.

But, since I write for a living, I'm here at my computer, alternating fiction with blog posts. Romance is, well, romantic, but writing is work. My wife always answers the "How do you deal with writer's block?" by explaining that the mortgage has to be paid. That's so true. Even writers have days where they want to call in sick or disinterested.

So, I'll put off my crazy quilt until 5 and write about moose shifters.

Because I'm a writer, and that's how I roll.

XXOO

Julia

where have all the cowboys gone?

this is a question for stock photographers, because I know cover artists can only choose pics that they have access to.

So I ask. Why do we have all these Guido types with spray tans and bandannas under their redneck straw or leather hats doing the armpit sniffing pose?

Now, don't get me wrong. I have nothing against Guidos, spray tans, or fitness models. But when I have to help my wife, who writes a very specific brand of Texas cowboy, find a cover model, I want, well, a cowboy.

There's an old song by Conway Twitty, called Don't Call Him a Cowboy (Until You've Seen Him Ride). In this case don't slap a hat on a guy with no shirt on and call him a cowboy.

See, there are all sorts of cowboy hats from the low crown Texas straw Stetson, to the high crown, curly brim high mountain hat. They all have a few things in common, though. They come in felt or straw. They do not come in leather. They are not worn by celebrities like Toby Keith or Bret Michaels. They are not bought in a tourist shop at Myrtle Beach or at the Margaritaville in NOLA.

As a side note, the redneck leather hat that most closely resembles a civil war cavalry hat is what the slimy, jerk of an ex used to wear and call it a cowboy hat, and is never, ever an appropriate hat for a BA Tortuga cover. Ever. Julia would rather bash herself in the head than see it on a cover, thanks.

A real cowboy hat can be bought at a western wear store, a rodeo, and in some states, Wal-Mart. Approved manufacturers include Stetson, Resistol, Justin, Larry Mahan and many, many more.

I am begging for real cowboys to come back into style. They're hot. Trust me.

XXOO

Julia

rewriting

I am not the queen of rewrites. I will try to make what I have work.

Sometimes though, you have to kill part of a story. Scrap it and start over. I hate it, but it happens. Like a surgeon, you have to cut out the parts that kill the flow. wah. It hurts.

I wish I could ignore the need, but there it is.

Hormonal train? Oh yeah

XXOO

Julia

What I'm working on and a new dragon book!

Let's see

Out now! Desert Dragons 2: Coyote Dance

Buy it here!

Banger wants to save the day. Mik wants to save the world. What they really need is to save each other.

When Banger wakes up in an earthship house in the desert, surrounded by dragons, he knows his whole life has changed. Add to that the fact that the man he's been chasing for years has a new lover, and he's pretty sure his day can't get much weirder. Which is when Cereyshe accidentally trips trying to save his friends and shoots someone.

Mik has never been shot on a first date before. When his spirit dragon Piasa tells him to go to the little compound in the Chihuahua desert he's expecting dragons, maybe smugglers, but he figures no one could expect Banger. Even as Mik falls for Banger, his new lover decides he's a danger to the baby dragons he's there to help, and Banger ends up kidnapped by a white slaver in the desert. Can Mik save Banger from danger, and keep him from hurting himself?

Publisher's Note: Coyote Dance is best enjoyed after reading Turquoise Trail (Desert Dragons 1).

It's on sale, too!

what I'm working on now.

Desert Dragons 3. Daniel, a coyote shifter introduced in DD2 and a new dragon keeper

Cereus whatever the new title is...

A new wold shifter novela

A contemporary for Dreamspinner about a former lifestyle sub and a cowbpoy

XXOO

Julia

Why defending romance makes me crazy

I read smut. I read chicklit. I read romance, gay and straight and otherwise.

I also happen to write all of these things.

I see a lot of articles defending one or more of these genres at the expense of the others. I see a lot of people validating their romances simply because men read them.

Crackling static.

Why? Why do men have to read your genre for it to be serious and worthy. Why do we have to put down erotica or say "mind candy" is bad and I write serious shit, Jim!

We write what we love to read. I had a professor in college who told me at the beginning of my lit career, "Never be ashamed of what you love to read."

I have echoed that here many times, and I always hear it in that Mainer accent my prof had.

I'm sick of the word defending popping up all over when it comes to what I adore. Fuck that shit. These days I think I'll just start slapping people with my heaviest paperback.

Love, Smut loving angry woman,

Julia

romance is a wonderful genre!

I love romance books.

I love the happy ending. I love the crazy big misunderstandings. I love the amnesia, secret twin, lost heir stories. I love historicals with lots of heaving and throbbing.

I adore it all.

I'm baffled by romance writers who don't read romance.

Yep, I said it.

Never let someone make you ashamed of what you read. Never act ashamed of what you write. Glory in it. Put sprinkles and whipped cream on top of it. Screw politically correct and author ennui. Don't be a hipster about it. Love is worth reveling in, and so is the fiction it creates.

I love me genre. *sparkles*

XXOO

Julia

Fridays for the self-employed

Fridays are a big day for most weekly 9-5 folks

For those of us who are self-employed, it's a little less woo and hoo, but it's still exciting to see my friends' plans for the weekend. I'm going to breakfast with BA and our godbaby and her parents tomorrow, but today looks more like this"

do blog and other social media (there's so many places to post, so little time!)
work on publishing work (I have about 10 hours worth today)
write 1000 words
walk dogs
work out before you gain all that weight back
clean out emails
walk dogs
fall into bed

Lest you think I am not grateful that I get to work from home, I just want to say I can do all this in my pajamas. That rocks enough to make up for the lack of Friday anticipation...

So, happy Friday, y'all

What are you up to?