Nothing for Nothing

When it comes to having your writing published, you shouldn’t settle for giving your hard work away for nothing.

But, what counts as something is for you to decide.

Some writers won’t settle for anything less than cash, and preferably pro rates. Others might be happy with a complimentary copy of the issue or anthology in which their work appears. There might be other forms of compensation you find acceptable (for example, ‘exposure’ – that’s the, ahem, polite term for condescending to publish your work and not actually giving you anything in return –  might actually be fine when you’ve written an article about a charity that will give them some visibility or if publication is in a prestigious journal that grants bragging rights or academic kudos, as might be the case in certain niche subjects).

Where you have free access to a publication – such as blog guest posts, public webzines and ezines that are free to download – I would count that as the equivalent of a contributor copy. (Some would disagree, but you do get a copy of the product.) Indeed, as you can point friends, relatives and fans to the appropriate site and there is potential for your work to reach large numbers of readers, it’s better, in some ways, compared to receiving a single contributor copy to take space up on your shelf.

Of course, you do need to decide how valuable your work is and how much compensation it deserves. Expending the first rights of a piece of work that took a lot of time and effot to create on a free-to-view website that doesn’t pay is a bad idea – at the very least, shop it around some paying publishers first. On the other hand, having a previously-published poem appear online gives it a new lease of life. This is why I’ve always welcomed reprints for Atlantean publications – not only don’t I agree with the idea that once something is published it can never appear again, I accept that a small press that only provides a complimentary copy shouldn’t be greedily demanding unpublished work.

For a beginner writer, it is often the case that the morale boost of being published, the potential for feedback (whether from the editor or readers), and the chance to list a title in your bio make it worthwhile to submit to small press publishers or have your work appear in webzines. If you are more established, such things are less valuable and you likely will want your work to appear in paying markets.

Not that non-monetary compensation should be ignored. Appearing in a webzine can still be useful to an established writer if their bio can include a link to their site or to the Amazon page of their latest book. Likewise, I’ve always been amenable to including links and adverts in Atlantean publications alongside an author’s work. You just need to decide if what you’re getting in return is worth what you’re giving up. (This also goes for publishing work on your own site, blogging, and even self-publishing – could you get paid to have it published? Or, are you creating visibility for your ‘brand’? Or, do you have the potential to make money yourself from it?)

Should you choose the self-publishing route, remember that, while there are legitimate companies that do the hard work of putting your book together, sourcing artwork and the like, there are a lot of scams and you need to be certain you are getting real value for money, especially as you can source services such as editing and artwork directly. And, remember: self-publishing companies are honest about what they do and you hire them to provide a service. Such companies don’t pick and choose clients (except, perhaps, at the most basic level of turning away genuinely-unpublishable work). If a company acts like a regular publisher, assessing your work, but then charges you for publication, it’s a vanity press and, not only is likely to cost far more than paying for legitimate self-publishing services, it is likely to be of a far lower standard. Avoid them.

Ultimately, the decision will always be yours. Just never give your work away for absolutely nothing. And, never ever pay someone for the privilege of being published.

As The Good Book Says…

In recent posts, I’ve discussed issues such as copyright and derivative works. One area that might surprise you is quoting the Bible. Surely it’s free to quote? After all, it’s nearly 2000 years old at its youngest. Unfortunately, no. The problem is that what you’re actually quoting is a translation, which, like all translations, means the copyright is vested in the translator, with all that entails. So, if the translator died over 70 years ago, you’re okay – unless it’s the King James Version and you want to publish in the UK, where it remains in Crown Copyright. (The details of how this affects the right to quotation is unclear – it definitely prevents you from printing a copy of the KJV Bible in the UK without permission, but whether you need permission to quote from it or must include an acknowledgement is unclear.)

Even if the translation is in copyright, you can often quote small amounts with an appropriate acknowledgement, but you do need to check if this is the case. Fair use for non-fiction, of course, still applies if you’re discussing the translation itself, but if you want to use the translation for other purposes (for example, discussing Biblical history) you need to check whether you can use it.

Thus, it is often best to use a translation that is out of copyright, such as the King James Version (outside the UK) or the Douay-Rheims translation. You could also translate a passage yourself (given that there are often only a limited number of potential translations for a given passage and most or all with have been used, often by more than one translator, this does throw up a question of whether a short Biblical passage is any more copyrightable than a generic sentence such as “Good morning,” he said.) There is also a further grey area where you are quoting an out-of-copyright source that quotes the Bible without attribution (as in The King In Yellow) or quoting common sayings that derive from the Bible (although these have often mutated slightly in the public consciousness).

Given the ubiquity of the Bible in Western culture, it’s an irritating area of confusion, but as long as you avoid using new translations that are definitely in copyright, you should be okay.

 

No Celebrities Were Harmed

In the last two posts, I’ve discussed copyright and derivative works, but there is one more aware to consider – using real people, places and items in your fiction.

Unless there is some element of copyright involved (such as a quotation or song lyrics), then anything that exists in the real world is, theoretically, fair game for inclusion in fiction. But, you’ve guessed it, it’s not quite that simple.

Once again, parody and satire apply, so if you want to mock a politician or make fun of a brand, you can, but, if you’re telling a story set in the real world, you probably want to be able to mention real things to give a sense of veracity. Sure, you can often just write that a character got in their car to drive to work or bought a takeaway, but sometimes you want to be more specific.

Mentioning a person, a place, a vehicle, or a brand is no different to mentioning the title of a song or book. You can say the character saw President on the news or went to school at Eton or drives a Porsche, that they eat at McDonalds and wear Nike trainers, just as you can say they listened to Eleanor Rigby and read The Lord of the Rings. You can even let them have opinions on things, just as real people can express their opinions.

Of course, as I keep repeating, the ability to afford lawyers can trump the facts of the case, so you may want to avoid identifying a heinour villain with a particular brand or saying anything especially rude about someone in case they choose to sue.

If it’s something public – a public street or building, the army or police force, Parliament or the US Senate – there should be no issue including it in your story, even if it involves negative aspects, such as police or political corruption (as long as you don’t appear to be targeting real individuals), as such places and bodies are so entertwined in our daily life that demanding they be cut out would be ridiculous. (Of course, some countries, with fewer freedoms, may restrict what you can say about public institutions, but that will only affect you if you live there or try to publish your work there.)

Equally, private property that is essentially public, such as shopping centres and malls, shouldn’t be an issue if used as a setting (featuring the owners or employees in a negative light could be a problem, though). Shops and other businesses are a little more contentious – having a character go into a particular shop to buy something and maybe chat to another customer isn’t likely to be a problem, but using a real business as a setting could be, especially if anything negative is involved (even if the business isn’t itself involved – portraying an employee as a drugdealer could still be seen as impugning the company).

Places where the public generally don’t go, such as the offices of a business, can be riskier still. (Things can get more grey if we’re talking about a future iteration of a real business in a future setting or parallel timeline. Probably still best to keep them to passing mentions rather than primary locations or using them as evil corporations.)

Although there is nothing stopping you from drawing inspiration from them, specific private homes should probably be avoided as it could cause problems for the people who live there or lead to claims you are targeting the inhabitants if something negative is said about their fictional equivalents.

People who are in the public arena can certainly be used as characters in a story, but there’s a reason why so much fiction claims that any resemblance to anyone living or dead is a coincidence – there’s always a chance they could sue if they don’t like their portrayal. Of course, a short story featuring a cameo by President Trump in a small press magazine probably isn’t going to be a blip on the radar of his libel team, but a successful novel in which he plays a prominent part may well be scrutinised closely.

If they are portrayed in a straightfoward way that fits with their daily role, such as the President handing out medals to the heroes of your story, there should be no problem, but you may find it safer (and, indeed, proof against them dying or retiring) to just generically refer to their job or create a fictional counterpart. Anything offensive or sexual is very likely to get you sued. Although unlikely to be granted, you could seek permission to use them.

People who aren’t in the public arena should be avoided unless you have their permission. Given that friends of authors already seem inclined to assume characters are based on them, and sometimes to take offence over a perceived similarity, it is a good idea not to actually do so (create composites utilising traits of multiple acquaintances).

Of course, as with fictional characters, there’s nothing stopping you from using the name of a real person for your character, but, if their name is disctinctive, there could be repercussions. (John Smith is safely generic, but if there is only one person in the world who shares the name of your serial killer and there are traits in common, you could be sued for defaming them.) Indeed, you may want to check that a name you plan to use for a prominent character isn’t that of a celebrity that you once heard and which has clung on in the back of your brain.

Dead people can’t sue for libel, so you can certainly use historical figures however you wish. However, if they have close friends or relatives who are still alive, you may wish to be careful in case what you write reflects upon them by association. Writing a story about a dead politician being part of a paedophile ring could land you in court if you state his friends and colleagues knew and covered it up and some of them are still alive to be tarred.

Welcome to the real world!

Derivative Works

Following on from my last post, here are some thoughts on ‘derivative works’, that is, developing something new from an existing work (inspired by advice given here for a Beatles ‘What If’ anthology).

As noted previously, character names and the titles of stories and songs are fair game as far as copyright goes (trademarks and ‘passing off’ are a different issue). So, from a copyright point of view you could call your story “Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets” – where you would be in trouble is that the title is trademarked. Because trademarks cover specified fields (such as printed material or clothing), you may find that something is trademarked in one area and not another, allowing its use, but you would still need to be careful about ‘passing off’ your work as if it were officially licensed.

Characters as a whole sit in a sort of legal limbo. Obviously directly copying a character’s description would be copyright infringement, but, just as plots can’t be copyrighted, neither can a character as such. The problem is that not only can a character be distinctive enough that the elements can be considered copyright, but we return to passing off territory. Especially if you are using their name.

Which brings us to derivative works. While you could have a non-wizard character called Harry Potter or a parodic version of Harry, writing a story where Harry Potter is the Harry Potter (or, indeed, not the Harry, but another Harry in the same Wizarding World who is named after the hero) is a derivative and would require permission and most likely a fee. (Yes, fan fiction is derivative work, which means it’s technically illegal if you haven’t received express permission – some creators give blanket permission as long as you aren’t making money or presenting it as official material, some provide permission on a case-by-case basis, and some have blanket bans. Generally, as long as it isn’t being charged for, keeps a low profile and isn’t damaging to the brand, most property owners ignore it, but you may find yourself being ordered to take it down if you don’t have permission. Remember, you have the same right to object if someone is drawing from your creations.)

A grey area is when you take someone’s ‘intellectual property’ and recast it in a very different form that remains reliant upon the original to make sense (without it being parodic or satirical). Making Harry Potter an alien with psychic powers wouldn’t necessarily save you from being sued for infringement of the property (and, once again, by calling the character Harry Potter, you would probably be accused of passing your work off as officially licenced).

That doesn’t stop you from running with ideas inspired by an existing property, but the key word here is inspired. An urban fantasy where wizards operate out of sight in their own society isn’t a derivative work, but if you borrow too closely from the Harry Potter books, unless from the same sources that JK Rowling borrowed from, you could well be in infringement.

Of course, if you have a great idea for a derivative work, nothing is stopping you from contacting the owner and seeking permission, and many franchises have opportunites for fans to write for spin-offs (such as the Big Finish Doctor Who audio adventures). Or, if the franchise is the right sort, you might be able to write something that is clearly intended to be linked, but doesn’t actually infringe on any trademarks, nor risks being accused of passing itself as official (in Doctor Who fan productions, there migth be a passing reference to a minor planet, or ‘some guy who called himself the Dentist, or something like that’, enough to hint at a link without making it concrete and, thus, actionable).

If work is out-of-copyright, you are on safe ground – but, again, there can be risks. Sometimes things that should be out of copyright aren’t (because it was transferred to another owner by the original creator), sometimes things can be out of copyright but elements remain trademarked, putting you at risk of trademark violation or passing off (the early Mickey Mouse cartoons, for example, are out of copyright, but Mickey is still owned by Disney), sometimes the copyright was established early in a creator’s career and they lived a long time afterwards (remember, copyright extends for seventy years from the creator’s death, not its inception), and sometimes the popular version of a work includes elements added later (for example, King Louis wasn’t in the original Jungle Book, but was introduced by Disney).

And, even if something is safely out-of-copyright and free from trademark issues, or you’ve carefully skirted any that exist, publishers may still refuse to accept it to avoid any potential headaches. (After all, if someone claims to own a copyright or have a trademark that they don’t, or they object to your clearly parodic work, you can still find yourself in court defending your legitimate use. Too often, money is more important than actual right and wrong in these cases – unless you or your publisher have deep pockets, it may just be best not to risk it.)

So, do your research and think carefully. If you do, you should be fine.

Can you quote it?

Quoting song lyrics seems to be one of the most confusing areas for writers (just consider the comments here). The simple answer is that no you cannot quote song lyrics in fiction unless either they are out of copyright or you have permission from the writer (which usually entails a lot of hassle and a fee). The problem, of course, is that not every piece that should be out of copyright actually is and some erstwhile owners don’t really own the lyrics, but have the money muscle to bully people into paying up regardless.

Of course, if you are writing non-fiction, discussing the lyrics of a song, you can quote it under ‘fair use’ (generally this means as small amount as possible to achieve what you need – so, no reprinting a whole song if a couple of lines would suffice). Even here, there can be risks, if the owner has deep pockets and is litigious, and where you stand if your fictional characters discuss lyrics is anyone’s guess…

What you can quote are the name of a singer or band and the title of a song, and there is nothing stopping you describing a song’s sound or lyrics as long as you don’t quote them. (Be careful not to let them slip in – write “That song the dwarves sing when they’re heading out to work,” not “That song the dwarves sing when they’re off to work,” or, worse, “That song the dwarves sing when off to work they go.”) (If you’re wondering, my use of the quotation there as a discussion of what not to do is an example of fair use.)

It is an unfair situation as songs permeate our culture and, in real life, people frequently quote them in conversation. Unfortunately, this is one area of realism your writing has to avoid unless you can get permission.

These points, of course, also apply to quoting poetry and prose. As with songs, you can mention authors and titles, and you can also mention characters (“He had a beard like Gandalf”); you can also descibe a novel’s plot.

Can you recycle character names and book titles? The answer is “yes, but…” As far as copyright goes, there is nothing stopping you – you cannot copyright a name or a title – but, and this is a big but, you do need to be aware of trademarks and ‘passing off’. ‘Passing off’ is when you try to make it appear as if your work is by or authorised by someone else – so writing a story under the pseudonym ‘JK Rowling’ would mean you were ‘passing off’ your work as hers (yes, this does lead to awkward legal grey areas where an author has the same name as another, pre-existing or more famous author, which is why you see them inserting middle initials, or just plain adopting a pseudonym). Equally, writing a novel with a lead character called Harry Potter, especially if you called it Harry Potter and the… is also ‘passing off’.

But, could you have a character called Harry Potter? Yes, technically, you could, certainly if the book isn’t fantasy, but, unless they are very minor, you’re probably looking at legal issues, accusations of trademark infringement, and certainly restrictions on using them in publicity. A character called Henry Potter who mentions he hates it when people call him Harry and ask him to whip out his wand would be far more acceptable. Names like Frodo and Gandalf, of course, if used in their proper historical context should be fine, as long as they aren’t too similar to Tolkien’s characters; you could also create the child of hippes named Frodo Jones, or something, but, like Harry Potter, you face problems with using the character in publicity, and might face litigation, even if most people would agree you weren’t treading on their trademarks.

The one area where you can quote freely (for a certain value of quotation) and use trademarked names is parody. If you are using copyrighted or trademarked material to make fun of the material, you are in the clear. (This should also apply to satire, but is more of a grey area – using Daleks to mock the BBC is a-okay, using them in other contexts may be less defensible). So, a story about Frodo bungling the ring quest in a comedic fashion is fine, better still if you change his name slightly. Frodo Jones, child of wacky hippies, could also be protected this way, especially if his life story parallels and comments upon that of the ringbearer. Generally, the more overt the parody is, the better. Subtlety might see you sued.

So, don’t give up completely on quoting lyrics in your novel, but do make sure you do the research first to avoid getting sued. (And, should you be submitting to Atlantean Publishing, let me be clear that we expect you to have done your research and that you are responsible for any legal issues arising from not doing so! This applies to most publishers.)

The Most Common Errors

Wordprocessing is a wonderful boon for writers, but also the source of the four most common errors in manuscripts. As you’ll see…

The first, as you may guess, is the curse of auto-correction and auto-completion, where the computer decides that it knows what you intended to type and makes a ridiculous error. If you don’t pay attendance, it is very easy to allow silly mistakes through for this reason.

The second is an over-reliance on the spellchecker, whether it fails to notice that a word is wrong (mistaking their for there, say) or tells you that a correct ward is an error. Never blindly go with what the spellchecker is telling you if you have the slightest doubt – double check!

These two joined forces in one of my stories to provide a melodious, rather than malodorous, sewer that managed to go unspotted through about three read throughs I made, one by a friend who usually spots such errors with an eagle eye, and at least two editors who provided feedback with their rejections.

The third most common error is to hit ‘replace all’ without thought. Yes, it’s an incredibly convenient way to change a character’s name, but, depending upon how it’s set up (whether it’s case sensitive or you’ve included spaces) changing, say, Ben to Steve, could see a bend in the road become a Steved and  a benevolent monarch might transform into a Steveevolent one.

The fourth is the easy way in which you can rewite a sentence. But, too often you can find yourself messing up to delete everything, leaving echoes of the your previous sentence to cause confusion.

This is why it’s always vital to read your work aloud, and print off a copy if you find it easier to spot mistakes that way than on screen. And, all errors in this post are deliberate, even the ones I didn’t mean to make.

No end to corrections…

Checking the layout of a submission, I spotted a missing letter in its title (embarrassing!). In another, I happened to spot ‘men’ was missing its ‘n’. Both stories had been proofed, but somehow these errors had slipped through. No matter how many typos or other errors you manage to spot, it seems there is always one more you’ve missed. And, that’s before we consider those sentences that could still be tweaked to improve them.

This is why no manuscript is ever truly finished with – you can always afford to give it one more look, edging it a little closer towards the perfection you’ll never truly achieve. So, just because you thought you were done with it, don’t just forget about it. Even if it’s been published, consider looking it over again so that it’s better should you ever be republished.

The Quest for Publication

Two thoughts on the writer’s quest to be published – the one a reminder to persevere, the other a cautionary tale of sorts.

Opinions may vary…

As a writer, rejection can always shake your confidence, but it is important to remember that tastes vary and one venue’s rejection might be another’s acceptance. To illustrate this, allow me to share a recent experience of mine.

I had a story rejected by a publisher that uses readers and the comments of the three readers were included with the rejection email.

The reason why it was rejected was because one reader had given it a score of 1/5. Although they were enthusiastic about my actual writing, they felt the idea had been done before and wasn’t worth publishing.

But, the other two readers had given it 4/5 and 5/5 and the latter actually commented that they didn’t see the ending coming!

Had the first reader been replaced by someone else, it’s likely my story would’ve been accepted, but, more than that, the way in which one reader was jaded by the plot and another surprised, shows how you never can tell who will (or won’t) like your story.

The moral, naturally, is to shake off the rejection and send your story out again and again. Of course, if they make points about flaws that you can see the validity of, consider rewriting your piece, but, if not, don’t assume it’s rubbish – it probably just hasn’t reached the right editor yet.

When editing fails…

Of course, even when you have your story accepted, there can be problems. Magazines can fold before publication, you might withdraw it because you don’t agree to the contract offered, and sometimes the editor will drop it. This latter recently happened to me.

Having spent a lot of time and effort editing a story for an anthology, it was dropped because the chief editor felt my edits weren’t what he wanted.

Now, perhaps I am just too literal minded, or perhaps several months with a lot of stress and little sleep had left my brain unable to tease out the nuance of what was wanted, but while I had responded to all their suggestions, it seemed they had wanted a substantive and wide-ranging rewrite rather than the straightforward edit I had interpreted their request to be.

The problem was that not only were we approaching the edit at cross-purposes, they didn’t tell me I was coming at it wrong. In fact, the editor who responded to both redrafts I sent (a different person to the chief editor who dropped my story) not only said nothing, but actually stated it was ready for layout! (Call me naive, but that certainly sounded as if they were satisified with the piece – maybe they thought it was okay and the chief editor didn’t, or maybe they just automatically sent the email without checking it, but whatever the reason I assumed I’d produced a satisfactory job until the chief editor emailed me a few days late to say he was dropping it.)

Had they clarified what they wanted after my first rewrite, I probably would’ve had to ask for it to withdrawn as I doubt I could’ve produced such a substantive rewrite to such a tight deadline. But, at least that would’ve saved us both some time and effort, as well as avoiding misleading me as to the story’s status.

The moral of the story for writers has to be, if an editor asks for more than a simple proofread of your story and a response to minor tweaks, clarify just how much rewriting they expect so that you can either get it right or, at least, avoid wasting everyone’s time.

But, for any editors who might be reading, there is a stronger moral for you – communicate clearly and in a timely fashion. Make it clear what you want at the beginning and if the writer doesn’t appear to be doing what you expected, let them know before the editing window closes. And, if you have other members on your editorial team, have them run any responses by you – this isn’t the first time I’ve had one editor tell me something only to be overruled (a member of the editorial team at one magazine told me they could pay via PayPal when they couldn’t, leading to a lot of hassle).

But, even though these sorts of mishaps can occur, the answer remains, keep submitting. Remember, if your story was accepted by one editor, it stands a good chance of being accepted somewhere else.

Just Do It!

If there is one piece of advice I give to wannabe writers again and again, it’s “Write it and submit it.” If you don’t do it, you might never know failure, but you’ll certainly never know success.

I’ve known many excellent writers who have come nowhere near the success they deserve and the one thing they all have in common is that they either don’t write much or they do, but refuse to submit it. Of course, some of them have good reasons for not doing so – they may be busy with their family commitments or pursuing a career they love, or have other artistic talents that take precedence – but most fail to reach their potential because they just don’t believe in themselves. Perhaps, they worry about the quality of their writing and, so, just don’t put pen to paper. Or, they continually revise it, seeking elusive perfection rather than actually submitting it. Or, they produce reams of work, but, fearing rejection, put it to one side and write something else that nobody will ever read. Then, there are those who are too caught up in every day minutiae, the need to earn a crust, who put off writing till for a tomorrow that never comes.

This is the reason so much rubbish gets published commercially. Professional publishers need reliable writers who can produce to deadlines more than they need good writers. If only those excellent writers would actually write and submit, they would be successes. Instead, the mediocre writers succeed unopposed.

Hence my exhortation. Write your story, poem or article – and, then, submit it. It may be rejected. In fact, it probably will be rejected – even the best novels were usual rejected several times before being accepted for publication, and even well-established writers will sometimes have work rejected. That is a hazard of being a writer – but, if you can understand it has little to do with the quality of your writing (whilst paying attention to any feedback you receive), you will be well on your way to success. Those who submit lots of work and resubmit rejected work stand a much higher chance of acceptance than those who write little and allow rejection to stifle their work’s chances.

If you have written something, you have achieved more than many potentially-great writers. If you submit it, you’ve made the first step towards publication. Keep at it, don’t be scared, and success is likely to come your way. Give up, and you’re guaranteed to fail…

Redundant Advice

There are many, many sites out there offering suggestions on improving your writing style. Most advice, if not applied slavishly, is well worth considering. Not every piece will apply to everything you write, but you will become more aware of what you are writing and why, helping you to improve.

As an example of why you shouldn’t just apply an idea without fully understanding it and when not to use it, I will take as my example eliminating redundancies in language. You are most likely aware of such things as ATM Machine (that is, Automatic Teller Machine Machine), but not all apparently-redundant words are actually redundant.

To consider just a couple of examples I found one site listing hundreds of redundant words they recommended writers should edit out, take ‘circle around’ and ‘climb up’. The site that suggests reducing ‘circle around’ to just ‘circle’, but this raises an immediate issue for me – the former implies 180 degrees (in the sense of getting behind someone), while the latter means 360 degrees. Of course, a sentence such as “circle around behind them”, could be changed to “circle behind them” and still make sense as it retains sufficient context. But,other sentences could be rendered gibberish or end up changing what you meant to say into something quite different.

It’s a similar problem with cutting ‘climb up’ to ‘climb’ – you can also climb down (as well as in, out and along), so it really depends upon whether the option is solely one way or not. Again, just assuming a word is a redundancy can lead to confusion.

In addition, a policy of redundancies also ignores the flow of the sentence. Sometimes a redundant word is present because it makes the sentence flow better. These can be removed without damaging context, but, sometimes, you may be left with a sentence that is less pleasing to the ear. (Of course, this can also work the other way – too many redundant words can make your writing clunky. Ultimately, you need to read aloud each variation and hear how they sound, not rely upon rules.)

So, consider the advice, but make sure you are applying it properly and you’ll produce better writing.