http://www.slate.com/id/2193552/

“But at the same time, Mr. Obama’s notion of persistent improvement, both of himself and his country, reflects something newer–the collaborative, decentralized principles behind Net projects like Wikipedia and the ‘free and open-source’ software movement. The qualities he cited to Time to describe his campaign–’openness and transparency and participation’–were ones he said ‘merged perfectly’ with the Internet. And they may well be the qualities that make him the first real ‘wiki-candidate.’

When I read those words “openness and transparency and participation” I couldn’t help but to think of my experience writing my blog novel, which brings me to my second point. The ethos of the Net will inevitably influence the role and the work of the blog novelist. Those writers who embrace the technology and what the technology has to offer will reinforce and perhaps reinstate the Novel’s original pupose: to be novel! Over time, it seems, the word has lost its original meaning. Just as Cervantes revised the romance, blog writers can revise the dead-tree novel, and in doing so, breathe new life into the form. These writers will transform the form merely out of boredom, curiosity or playfulness. Therefore, “openness” to me implies openness to technology, openness to change, openness to other ways of doing things.

The blog novel is fairly transparent by nature. If you’re like me you’re going to keep revising the chapters you have written in addition to writing new ones. Your readers will know that the manuscript is constantly in flux and its condition are changing (think wikipedia and Obama’s notion of “perisistent improvement”). Furthermore, along the lines of transparency, you’ll find blog novelists at Novelr talking about their work, talking about subjects relating to novels and fiction. The very presence of the author-at-large means greater transparency. Links to other work by the same author creates a paper trail, and the spirit of the Net almost requires the writer be available and open for questioning, at least for emails. No more barriers.

Finally, participation. Perhaps the distinguishing feature of blog novels is the possibility of reader feedback. How that feedback shapes the progression of the novel is key. What will the writer do with it? How will it alter her own ideas for the direction of her novel? This can dramatically alter the writer-as-God model. Reader are actually influencing the writing of the novel, in media res. In addition, veteran bloggers cans assist aspiring blog writers to enter the stream. As for myself, I was awed to discover to what extent writers I don’t even know are willing to critique, edit and review my work. It is this spirit of communal creativity that makes writing on the web a unique experience.

And one more thing: what does “decentrallization” mean to the online novelist? The writer-as-God-model may go by the wayside, or not. But it definitely will diminish some, I believe. With the Net, we begin to see the emergence of something more dynamic between writer and reader. Not so unilateral, not so Bush admin.–more like, well, Obama.

I find that a TON of absolute CRAP gets published traditionally. I worked in a library for 6 1/2 years and was constantly put off by the loads of tosh I saw every day. Most of it was a result of publishers clearly being out to make a buck and nothing else.

I’m not nearly as disgusted with lackluster blog fiction as I am with putrid published crappiles of steamy commercialism. Because all blog writers are doing it for the love of the game, so to speak, and I’m finding lots of stories that I am becoming addicted to. It’s fun and I’m not going, “ARRGH what is wrong with the world that this got published?!?” every time I come across something that’s not very good. I just move on till I find something that grabs me.

At least, about this topic:

And most of the people who write blog fiction write it because they were rejected from the traditional publishing world. I did a lot of interviews for my thesis with blog authors, and this was the case in a lot of them. Did they all want to be traditionally published? Almost every single one. That was the goal, the absolute best thing that could happen. It is, for every writer nowadays, surely, the dream?

Hmm. When I was a child, before I had the internet available to me, I did like to think about being published one day. But mostly it was just the dream of having people reading my stories, besides my family and friends.

I used to think that traditional publishing was the only way to accomplish this. And this depressed me… not because I’ve ever tried to get my novels published and had them rejected… but because I dreaded it. I dreaded the entire process. I’ve never wanted to dive in, because to me it looks like a pit of lava. It’s not the “rejection” per se that I fear… it’s the endless ulcerating about what a hundred faceless editors or agents might think of my work. Writing to try and target the masses, make myself salable, create a product. Having it turn into “work” rather than “joy.”

I never liked the idea that to validate yourself as a writer, you have to “get published” and “make money.” There’s always the stigma attached to writing, like it’s a waste of time if you’re not trying to sell it. Like it’s self-indulgent crap if an editor somewhere hasn’t given it the stamp of approval. That’s what I’ve always resented most about the whole deal. And that’s why I’ve never even sought that approval. My writing is My Joy and always will be, even if it’s not paid its dues and earned the right to be considered “real writing” by going through the traditional process. In fact I can think of no better way to kill my love for writing than trying to make myself believe that it’s only worthwhile if it’s run the gamut.

Not gonna lie, I am poor (my car cannot go over 50 MPH, ok) so yeah, the candy coated dream of having writing as “my job” is probably still fluttering around in the back of my mind.

But I don’t view that as reality, at all. I never have, and never will. The notion of making a living off of my writing is a gum drop fantasy, not an actual dream. Because I know that trad. publishing is a business, concerned with money, marketing, and sales. I have no place in that sort of world. Even the thought makes me shudder like a thousand tiny spiders just ran up and down my spine. So my “ultimate goal,” in reality, is to get as many readers as possible using the most practical and enjoyable means available to me.

I have a Donate button just because I can, and I’m touched and grateful to anyone who chooses to hit that button. I know it’s never going to replace that car engine for me, or pay the rent, or buy groceries, but hey, it does help fund my advertising to draw in MOAR READERZ!

:)

I do want to have a physical, dead tree version of my work, but I’m fine with using Lulu for that.

Yeah, I do know that many people won’t take my writing seriously, or will lump it in with the 99% of rough out there to every 1% of diamond, etc. etc. I know that, to a certain extent, online fiction/lulu publication will never result in me being seen as more than one of the millions of lackluster wannabes.

But I figure, ef them. I’m enjoying myself, I’ve got readers, and that beats writing in the dark and dreading the corporate meat grinder as the only way to ever be read. When I made the decision to give away my first publication rights, I thought (and said to friends) “Let’s face it, I’m never even going to try to get published traditionally, so I’m not losing anything.”

Nothing to lose, everything the gain.

When I put my work online, I never had any angst about giving away my first rights – my only worry was that no one else would read my work (a fear long since put to rest).

I like, nay, love the serial format. I love being able to release parts to my readers 2-3-4 times a week, and getting immediate feedback (yes, that’s the danger of the instant-gratification society, but it’s serving me for now).

I know where I’m going with my work – I’m not going to email my page stats to an agent and go “pweeeease pubwish meeeee”, that’s just not who I am.

I guess I’m another voice offering up my own experiences. I’ve heard this arguement around three times in as many days, and it always makes me twitch. Why? Because I’m not that person.

I want to write online. I don’t have any desire to go into “traditional print publishing” for my fiction, and being scorned wasn’t what prompted me to dive into this field. I’m one of the wierd ones who prefers online fiction to traditionally published work, and wants to be one of the people supplying it.

There’s no ulterior motives, no ‘it’s better than nothing’ motivation. This is my medium of choice, and I can’t see that changing anytime in the future.

In fact, it generally makes me sad when I find out that a lot of the brilliant web talent isn’t here because they want to be, they’re here because they feel it’s their only option. Especially because there’s so much to be said about the joys of net fiction (as Gavin, Alexandra, and the others mentioned above). Everyone has their own choices to make, of course, and far be it for me to say that they’re making the wrong ones, but it does make me a bit bummed to know that brilliant talen will eventually be leaving us for something they deem to be bigger and better.

Would I like to make money through web fiction? Sure — I’d love to make enough money through the year (by ads or what-not) to support the hosting fees. But if I don’t make that goal, it’s really no hair off of my back. Usually, what I spend on hosting fees and advertising, is the same amount I would spend at the movies in a year . And to be honest? I don’t really like a lot of movies, anyways. ^^;;

It sometimes takes my breath away to see how many new ways to communicate are growing out of the Web – but there still seems to be such a strong resistance (out of hand dismissals even, often clearly based on ignorance) among “traditional” writers, maybe from the early days of blog-as-teen-diary or something? Or maybe so many writers still want to point to their book with a big publishing house label on it, in the window of B&N? Not sure. But why not do it all? (It being understood that this also means “do it WELL”. ) You can only increase your audience, or maybe even reach them more directly, more interactively, more honestly and intimately?

Online fiction is written differently than traditional prose, and suits a different type of audience. No one’s saying “stop writing traditional books.” It’s “start writing online fiction too.” Now is a great time to start, because the publishing world is closing doors, while the Internet is opening them.

Just a head’s up: James will be doing a counter-point guest post soon on Novelr. He’s highlighted a lot of the obstacles in our way before online fiction becomes a viable alternative, and I’d like to hear more from him on it. As they say you have to identify a problem before attempting to solve it – this is a good opportunity to figure out how.

PS: SueC – fascinating blog you’ve got there. I presume you’re catering to the freelance writing crowd?

It’s just tiresome to listen to writers (again, not, specifically, YOU) complain about being broke and how they wish they could make money from their writing, but they love putting words on the page and don’t do it “for the money” and it’s about the writing, and so on and so forth. Of course! that’s one big reason people decide to pick up the pen in the first place, because they love it. Go ahead! No one is saying you shouldn’t! But I have to ask, if that’s true, Why publish at all then? Personally, I don’t get that much of a kick out of reading and writing just for myself. But everyone is different as to what motivates them. No value judgment here.

As Gavin said, above, “It just takes trying”. Actually, Gavin’s post (to which I was responding) did actually talk about how to sell your work online – as well as give it away. Lots of options out there now and more every day! That’s what I was talking about (in my response to Gavin). It’s the “options” part so many writers (again, not, specifically, YOU, James) don’t “get”. (PS, “traditional” publishing is just another option … so if you want to pursue that no one’s telling you not to.)

As I said above, I have written stuff online, and quite a lot of it. I also happen to want to publish my writing conventionally. When did this become a sin, some cardinal error that somehow stops me having the right to a) have an opinion on the state of online publishing and b) voice that opinion on a website that I thoroughly enjoy reading? I maintained a blog for 2 years that dealt with my own place in the online-writing market, and recently I changed it to be a more personal blog concerning my writing. I “get” what is possible, and more importantly I like what is possible.

It’s nothing to do with the money Sue, and I don’t think any part of this argument is actually to do with that. Like it or not it is about the words on the page, and nothing more. You don’t have to “get” the internet to see that.

the myths abound: “unsuccessful writer publish blogs” “only get-rich-quick writers make money” “I writer because I love to write not to make money [yeah RIGHT]” “only conventional publishing reaches readers [when the OPPOSITE is true - WILL PEOPLE PLEASE READ SETH GODIN???]”

But then I have to ask – why be concerned when other writers don’t understand how to be successful – meaning, you earn a living – writers online; and I’m sure I don’t know.

I’m also not going to argue anyone else’s experiences here, but my own.

I started writing because I wanted to write; to be perfectly honest, I needed an outlet, and I found writing cathartic. Being read, much less published never even entered my mind. It still doesn’t really. It was due to a friend or two of mine who I happened to let slip that I wrote that AD ever made itself known beyond my browser. Don’t get me wrong; I love my readers, every one of them. But getting published? Nope, not really a concern of mine. I know my own writing is passable, but not up to scratch. I also know it isn’t mass-marketable; neither would I want it to be.

Do I want to make money off it? It’d be nice to make a few pennies off it, since I’m out of a job at the moment, but honestly, beyond advertising dollars when I get enough posts up for Project Wonderful to consider me, I don’t expect much there either.

The quick summary: Anything is better than nothing.

Honestly, though, I don’t feel that I can quality control my own work as well as an editor. I’ve been really lucky to have my tutor and a great writer-friend (published, incidentally) editing stuff for me, reading and commenting and helping out, and pointing out things that I’ve missed. Qualifications mean nothing for your editing, I don’t think – didn’t I read that Alexandra Erin left university? – editors get their jobs because that’s what they do, and it is what they are good at.

And, personally, quality control is an issue for me with blog fictions. I wasn’t basing my statement on the lack of editors, per se; rather, it was based on me reading blogs and judging them. My job requires me to read past my taste and look for good writing, and the vast majority – nearly all of, in fact – blog fiction isn’t good. I cannot say the same about the bookshelves at my local Borders, where the ratio of good to bad is far, far higher.

And most of the people who write blog fiction write it because they were rejected from the traditional publishing world. I did a lot of interviews for my thesis with blog authors, and this was the case in a lot of them. Did they all want to be traditionally published? Almost every single one. That was the goal, the absolute best thing that could happen. It is, for every writer nowadays, surely, the dream? And that will never change, even if the means of presentation does: the validation afforded by somebody else saying that they think others would like your work, and they want to publish/publicise/distribute it for you will always, always be the dream. If that is a publisher, great. If it’s a community of writers who only endorse what they see to be The Best Blog Fictions, that’s great as well. Anyone can start a blog, and nowadays they do.

Look, when push comes to shove, we’re arguing the same thing. Using the internet to publish fiction is a way of the future, and that isn’t going to change. We agree on that, right? I think it’s great that people write and that people want to read, and it’s brilliant that communities exist to help people become better writers. It’s exciting, yes, but I have to look at it with a tempered excitement, and qualify it with relevance to my own writing: I would rather be published in a way that my Mum can actually enjoy reading my work than not. It’s as simple as that for me. I don’t care about the financial side, the glory, the ego-rubbing, none of that. I care that conventional publishing will get my writing to audiences (and, as stated before, help me get the jobs that I want and am qualified for). And I care that, in the nebulous future of all-digital, my first novel – which was designed for the net, full of hyperlinks etc, and then transported to paper, incidentally – will also be available online and for the world to read on their future-Kindle devices, and everyone can enjoy them however the heck they see fit.

This is where I need to step in I think.

Firstly, there is a difference between accepting feedback from everyone, and taking everyones feedback to heart. I agree, no, you shouldn’t change everything you write because some random person suggests it. But then again, if they’ve taken the time to leave feedback… maybe there is something wrong with that sentence, maybe it is a little jumbled and hard to understand.

No, noone is perfect, I know I don’t have my own personal editor for my work. I’m greatful for all the comments on my story with suggestions though. I might not agree with them all, and certainly, not all of them are incorporated into what I’ve written, but they are still a valuable resource to me. To quote AE’s comment policy for ToMU (which I seem to be doing alot recently :/ ), “You agree that corrections or technical improvements you offer are understood to be helpful suggestions”. Ok, so this isn’t the context it’s meant to be taken in, but I think that’s an important part here. They are helpful suggestions, that’s it. Advise my friend, is firstly cheap, and secondly, easily ignored if you don’t feel it is the right advice.

Quality issues will always be around. The thing in print is this; it is difficult and costly to self-publish, so not many people do it. On the internet, it is cheap, and relatively easy. As you’ve pointed out before, the same issues are prevalent in music, etc being published on the internet too.

But the core things that I think a decent piece of literature needs – strong narrative voice, good writing, good characters, editing (both by the self and others) and a story – those things should be the same however you present your work, no?

Yes, yes, yes, yes, and yes. The wonderful thing about the internet is that you only need about two of those to start off with, a story and good characters. No, you won’t make any hit lists without all of them, but the others can be worked on progressively and revised as you get feedback (as you would in a print form from your editor/friends/whomever). Undoubtedly, it’s probably slush, but someone is likely to read/struggle through it if it has atleast those two, and if they are anything like me, will probably leave comments about things that need fixing up, especially if it’s mostly just technical issues; jumbled sentences, spelling, grammar and the like.

Or I could be wrong. Wouldn’t be the first time. My 2c either way.

There’s no risk, no loss, no worry involved. Putting all your hopes on traditional publishing is a crap-shoot. It’s like winning the lottery. Making zero money never getting published traditionally sucks. Well, making zero money publisihng on the Internet sucks less: because readers find it. And sometimes, if it’s good writing, the audience grows and you start making some money. There’s nothing to lose, except the possibility of that specific manuscript ever being published traditionally. So what? It probably wasn’t going to be anyway, and if you’re talented enough to write a publishable book, it will happen sooner or later, if you keep trying. In the meantime, you become a better writer posting the online story, because you’re practicing writing every day.

Quality control is not the problem you make it out to be. Editors and publishers are NOT genetically gifted in the means of improving a story. They don’t have some special key or computer or a god’s magic quill. They have years of training in how to promote and mass market the same stories year after year. They know how to reach a big audience with a universal story.

What they don’t do is fit individual niches. I’ll refer you to different articles here on Novelr: 1000 True Fans, and The Long Tail. You’re a PhD: you think you can’t control quality just as well as some editor at a publishing house? You think there aren’t more people like me on the Internet? I was a Dean’s List English major, taking courses in creative writing. I’m a lifelong reader. I’m halfway through two masters degrees. Eli and I (and others) are hashing out how to improve online writing, support authors and push the envelope. We’re working out the process of how to draw attention to online writing and raise its profile. It could take years. It could happen overnight. But it won’t happen if we don’t TRY.

Traditional Publishing does not have all the best writers and editors, and the magic power to create the best writing. Look at some of the crap that gets published every year. Look at some of the bestsellers. It’s middle of the road, suit everyone kind of stories, and they’re derivative. Tell me you don’t question the sanity of the world, when Danielle Steele has the numbers that she does.

Now, you can buy into their system. Or you can try to create a new one that fosters independence, creativity, and new forms of writing, at no risk. Because you can also continue writing for traditional publishing and be a double threat.

The difference is, someday the old paper model will become unsustainable. Why not be good at both and make the future easier for other digital writers, because you were a pioneer?

It’s a noble thing, to start establishing this concept of a community that can act as editors, but there then becomes further problems. How do you say that everyone should have a say? Why would you want feedback from everyone? Why should you get feedback from everyone? It’s fine when you respect people – I’ve been chatting with Eli for a while, and if he emailed me and gave me feedback on something I had written I would listen and take it to heart. But if somebody I didn’t know left me a comment that said something was patchy or whatever I would ignore it. How could you not?

And so, that quality issue still pervades. I love Blog Fiction. I love the concept, I love the idea. I was part of a community years back that thrived on it in the early days, and I love the idea that it could thrive now. I have delivered papers and written a thesis on how great it is. But for 99% of the world who try and write nowadays it isn’t what they are reaching towards: it’s the fallback, when they discover that they cannot get traditionally printed. It is, for most writers, a way of vanity publishing. For that 1% who WANT to write on the internet, who do see it as an emergent form that they can make full use of and expand their ideas with, and actually put technology to use to further the art of storytelling, for those people I am in a little bit of awe, because they are brilliant, and I’m willing to bet that those 1% have some of the best writing you’ll find on the net as well.