Anti-Plagiarism Day: An Update

Remember how so many of us joined forces to fight plagiarism? I've been told that the "writer" who sparked off all that outrage has once again won a prize for a story which seems to owe far too much to someone else's work. And this time, the writer who wrote the original piece might well be considering litigation.

I hope she sues the arse off him.

I've now seen a whole range of allegations against this "writer", which range from a slight overstepping of the "inspiration" line to full-blown plagiarism. I urge everyone whose work has been copied to make everything public now: the "writer's" name, the stories concerned, how it happened, and exactly what he did. I realise that you have many good reasons for keeping quiet: but I don't think it's in anyone's interest to continue to protect him like this. There could be other writers who he has taken advantage of; and all magazines or literary prizes which publish his more worrying fictions are terribly vulnerable to legal restitution or a loss of reputation. By going public, you're giving them a chance to take steps to rectify any damage done before it's gone any further. And if you're still not convinced, consider this: I've heard that he's now working in collaboration with a new group of writers. There'll be rich pickings there, for sure.

WordHustler Asked If I'd Be Interested....

I do not recommend the use of automated submissions services: writers need to target their submissions, and have to check their submissions packages for errors and omissions before they send them off. And yet such services continue to appear, and some of them are extremely pushy in their approach.

On Monday I received the following email from Anne Walls of WordHustler.

Hi Jane-

I recently found your blog and have fallen completely in love with it.

I wanted to drop you a line to tell you about my company and see if it was something you were interested in mentioning on your blog, since we, like you, are dedicated to helping writers demystify the publishing industry.

My company, WordHustler (http://www.WordHustler.com), is the world's first online submission management platform for writers. My partner John Singleton and I are two writers who grew tired of the traditional method of submitting work to publications, literary agents, publishers, writing contests and more, so we invented a way to do it better and more cost-effectively.

Writers upload their manuscripts to their free WordHustler accounts, select markets from our free database of 4,500 agents, publishers, contests, and publications, then we take care of all the physical printing and shipping of manuscripts for them.

Coming in 2010 we are launching a Digital Submission System to handle email submissions as well.

Something that really may mean something to your blog readers is the fact that we solve the hassles related to International Shipping and postage. WordHustler even offers a Virtual Office service, where we receive your physical correspondence from markets (SASEs, etc), then scan and email the results to you.

Over 5,000 writers from all over the world have already used us to submit their work, saving themselves time so they can do what they're supposed to be doing: WRITING. Our goal is to make the submission process easier and more organized for writers AND the markets who receive their work. In fact, Bnet.com called us "The Match.com for the publishing industry."

I'd love to chat more with you about WordHustler and hope it's something that interests you and your readers. We've also got a blog with lots of interviews with writers, agents, editors, etc as well as tips on writing query letters, etc that you can find here: http://wordhustlerink.wordhustler.com/

Thanks for taking the time to read this and I hope to speak with you soon!

Best,
Anne

Anne Walls
Founder Creative Director WordHustler.com - One Click to Destiny
http://www.wordhustler.com

It's good of her to say such kind words about this blog but it's odd that she claims to have only recently discovered it, as she left comment-spam here early in September 2008; crowbarred a link to Wordhustler into the comments to my Essential Reading post on the same day; and left similar links on various other blogs, which all now appear to have been deleted.

So irritated was I by her actions that I began a thread about Wordhustler over at Absolute Write and everyone there came to pretty much the same conclusion: WordHustler is probably not something the serious writer should even consider, because it just doesn't do anything that writers can't do perfectly well for themselves.

WordHustler offers a publishing directory and a print-and-post service. The writer decides who to send a query, partial or manuscript to, and downloads it all to WordHustler; and then WordHustler prints out the work, and sticks it in the mail. And it charges a premium to do so. I cannot see the value in that.

Sorry, Anne. I'm sure you're well-intentioned, but next time you start a writing-related business you might consider offering a service which offers real worth to writers, and promoting it in less intrusive ways than you've used here.

Anti-Plagiarism Day!

Before I start, I have to point out that I don’t want to scare anyone here. Despite the fears of many novice writers, plagiarism doesn't happen often in the professional arena. Very few jobbing writers would ever even consider it as an option, and the odds in favour of a publisher or agent stealing the work of an unknown writer are almost infinitesimal. It’s more likely when you’re dealing with people who don’t know the rules, or who don’t have respect for other writers: as ever, if you take some care when deciding which company to keep, you’re unlikely to ever encounter a plagiarist.

Having said all of that, I've known a few writers who have fallen foul of plagiarists and every single one of them has been significantly hurt by seeing their writing so misused. Few have received a proper apology, let alone decent compensation for their distress: they've lost money, publishing contracts, and years of their life to plagiarism and despite it being recognised as wrong, it seems that little action is taken against those who commit this crime against their fellow writers. Having spent most of May and June watching as a new case of plagiarism unfolded before me, I announced two weeks ago that today would be Anti-Plagiarism Day, on my blog at least, and invited anyone who cared about it to join in.

I had intended to use this post to provide my own definition and discussion of plagiarism and copyright infringement—what each one is, where the two transgressions overlap, and how to avoid committing either—but discovered that it had already been done far better than I could manage at Dear Author. So instead, here is a roundup of some of the more notorious and entertaining plagiarism cases that I've heard about, for you to boggle at and enjoy.


In January 2008 those lovely girls at Smart Bitches, Trashy Books revealed how New York Times bestseller Cassie Edwards appeared to have plagiarised others in her novel Shadow Bear. A reader had found several passages of exposition in the novel which seemed very different in tone to the rest of the text. When she typed those passages into Google eerily similar passages turned up, all of which were attributed to other writers including one piece which concerned black-footed ferrets (and if you click on none of my other links you MUST go to that one: it’s priceless).

Further investigations revealed similar problems in other Edwards titles. Edwards appeared to have been caught red-handed but in a letter to the Smart Bitches, Edwards' publisher Signet was at first rather bullish.

Signet takes plagiarism seriously, and would act swiftly were there justification for such allegations against one of its authors. But in this case Ms. Edwards has done nothing wrong.

Signet later repositioned itself in a somewhat coded fashion when it wrote to the Smart Bitches again to say,

Our original comments were based on Signet’s review of a limited selection of passages. We believe the situation deserves further review. Therefore we will be examining all of Ms. Edwards’ books that we publish, and based on the outcome of that review we will take action to handle the matter accordingly. We want to make it known that Signet takes any and all allegations of plagiarism very seriously.

As far as I know Edwards is still being published, and her books—complete with the dodgy bits—remain available: and when it comes to borrowing words from others but remaining in print, she's not alone. “Wired” editor Chris Anderson found himself in a spot of bother last month when it was discovered that his book Free included at least a dozen unattributed passages from other works, including several from Wikipedia (which is renowned for its shifting and often unreliable content). He has at least responded with some grace by admitting the mistake and apologising for his error; his publisher, Hyperion, has stated that it intends to correct future editions; but that first edition of his book is still on the shelves, complete with the plagiarised passages.

Kaavya Viswanathan's novel was dealt with more appropriately. She was only nineteen when she reportedly received an advance of $500,000 for her novel How Opal Metha Got Kissed, Got Wild and Got A Life. Soon after her book appeared on the shelves it was noticed that it bore some striking similarities to two books: Sloppy Firsts and Second Helpings, both by Megan McCafferty. A print-run of 100,000 copies of Viswanathan's book ended up being recalled and while her publisher, Little, Brown, originally promised that a revised version would soon appear on the shelves, that new edition never materialised and nor did the second book which Viswanathan was contracted for. Whether she was ever required to repay her advance remains uncertain.

Not all writers who plagiarise get paid advances for their efforts or have a publisher with a legal team on hand to guide and advise. When a fan of Stephenie Meyers’ Twilight series announced earlier this year that she was going to write an unauthorised sequel to the series I blogged about it briefly here (if you’re interested in the fan-writer's many press releases and internet hissy-fits they’ve all been linked to, and discussed in good detail, at Absolute Write here and here). While Meyers’ publishers don’t appear to have taken any significant action against this ill-informed writer it’s important to remember that she’s not yet published her book: she's announced that it will be published in September 2009 and my hunch is that if she does go ahead with that publication she will very soon afterwards feel the full weight of Meyers' publishers' legal department on her shoulders. And if that happens, it’s going to get very nasty and very expensive for her, very quickly indeed.

If you are now convinced that all books either will be plagiarised eventually or are themselves the results of plagiarism I direct you to Neil Gaiman, who provides a welcome interlude of calm and reason to the debate; and from there, you might like to go to Jonathan Lethem's thoughtful and witty essay on the subject, which appeared in Harper’s Magazine (to get the full impact of this piece make sure you read down to the key: I loved the joke but admit to being a sad obsessive about such things).

In an attempt to provide a little balance to my rant, I have found a few pieces which suggested that plagiarism isn't always carried out with malice in mind. My favourite among those essays appeared in Newsweek when Russ Juskalian discussed the suggestion that unconscious plagiarism, or “cryptomnesia”, could be to blame. This excuse has been used by several writers who have been accused of plagiarism but, like me, Juskalian is not completely convinced:

Unconscious plagiarism does exist, but writers who don't take proactive steps to avoid it are often either being lazy, or they have a diminished fear of being caught.

In my view, Juskalian’s opinion is reinforced by the Edwards case. When such large chunks of text appear to have been borrowed, it seems to me that a writer would have to have a very capacious unconscious indeed in order to retain so much text in her memory. If it wasn't plagiarism, then sloppy record-keeping is far more likely to have been the cause; but that since several of Edwards' novels have been found to contain many such “borrowed” passages, her sloppiness appears to be more of a confirmed habit than an occasional lapse.

Not everyone agrees that plagiarism is a bad thing: I've found countless articles online which argue that our works should be made widely available and distributed freely: but they all seem to ignore that writers have to earn their livings somehow; and the terrible hurt and anger that plagiarism can cause. Not only can it mean that a writer who has worked for years on a book sees it suddenly valueless if a plagiariser steals from it before it's published: there's also the senseof intrusion and violation which the plagiarised writer feels:

I feel as if he's broken into my house, stolen my computer, defaced all my family photographs and crapped on my bed. I've lost the better part of two years' work because of him and now it's been made public he's not had to pay back the money he has been paid for my work, he's had no more than a slap on the wrist. He's been boasting that all the publicity he's received has put the sales of his other books through the roof. And he's not even bothered to apologise to me.

I'll give the last word to Nora Roberts, a best-selling and highly prolific writer who endured a two-year-long legal battle after it was discovered that fellow romance writer Janet Dailey had plagiarised her widely and often. When the court case was over Roberts wrote,

Until we, the writing community, take a strong, public and no-nonsense stand against plagiarism, the publishing community will, I think, continue to downplay it, to keep violation after violation quiet--or attempt to. And the reading community will go on largely in ignorance.

Many people have supported Anti-Plagiarism Day, and here are links to their pieces, in no particular order. Let me know if you'd like me to add you to the list.

Tania Hershman happens to be a brilliantly gifted writer, a lovely woman, and a birthday girl today (happy birthday, Tania!). She has chosen not to dwell on her recent plagiarism trauma and instead discusses inspiration and intent in her characteristically engaging piece, This Day.

From Manuscripts Burn, a personal account of plagiarism and being plagiarised, which ends with this great quote: The moral of the story, kids, is that plagiarism hurts people. It might seem like a victimless crime, but when you steal someone else’s ideas they sit in their metaphorical elementary school chairs angrily not getting their metaphorical extra credit.

From Quiller's Place (the blog of writer Sally Quilford), a useful discussion of plagiarism, fan-fiction and betrayal with a useful list of links at the end.

The incomparable Nicola Morgan exhorts us all to not copy her, and reveals her own amazing story of not-plagiarism.

Even without adequate doses of ginkgo biloba, Sally Zigmond cuts the mustard: If another writer is generous enough to allow you access to their work in progress, then it’s wrong to ‘rewrite’ it for your own gain... that is not homage. That is not zeitgeist. It is a betrayal of trust. It is theft. Pure and simple. And it stinks.

Dear Author's Top Ten Tips for Plagiarists.

Victoria Strauss at Writer Beware provides a little history and perspective.

Dan Holloway points out that although he chooses to give some of his work away for free, you're not automatically allowed to take the rest without asking.

Catdownunder gets to grip with a hairy issue.

Miriam Drori supports Anti-Plagiarism Day.

Teresa Ashby tells us how she discovered that her own work had been plagiarised: "She said that she loved the stories so much she just wanted to write something similar."

Editorial Anonymous discusses how publishers are unlikely to plagiarise.

Marion Gropen beat me to the finish line, and covers a lot of ground with her post about the causes and limits of plagiarism.

Karen of Get On With It decides that enough is enough!

Nik Perring lightens the tone with a great interview of a brilliant writer, has a short rant against plagiarism and plagiarists, and remembers to wish the great Tania Hershman (read her book NOW) a very happy birthday.

At (W)ords and (W)ardances Jodi Meadows feeds her own ferrets duck soup, and sends her best wishes to the black-footed variety.

At Crawl Space, Sarah Hilary discusses how voice, influence and plagiarism can sometimes overlap, and lists some of my favourite short story collections.

Authonomists discuss Anti-Plagiarism Day.

Lisa Gold discussed academic plagiarism on her blog last week.

iThenticate congratulates us at Twitter!

David Tulloch draws us a cartoon. I hope he didn't copy it.

Anti-Plagiarism Day: Friday 17 July

A few weeks ago I watched a nasty case of plagiarism unfold which involved some writers I’ve had close dealings with over the last few months.

One trusted, talented member of an online writing workshopping group went much too far when looking to his colleagues’ writing for inspiration, and ended up in deep and particularly dirty water. He won at least one cash prize with a plagiarised story, and there are possibly more out there which have not yet been discovered or acted upon.

His actions were hurtful and distressing to all the writers concerned. The plagiarised writers are terribly upset and understandably angry, while the plagiarising writer has lost the support and friendship of a valuable critique group and is unlikely to ever be published again by anyone who is aware of this whole ugly mess.

The plagiarising writer still insists that he did nothing wrong; I don’t think he’s even aware of how deeply he has hurt his friends and his own reputation, or of the corrosive effects that his actions will continue to have. I don’t think he had malicious intent: he just didn’t consider what he did to be stealing, and he still doesn’t seem to understand what is and isn’t acceptable when seeking inspiration.

I wish I could have made him aware of the facts before he went so far: it’s too late to help him now. However, it’s not too late for other writers and I’d like to try to reach some of them, with help from all of you.

I’m declaring Friday 17 July Anti-Plagiarism Day. On that day I’m going to blog about plagiarism, and I’d like you to do the same: on your own blogs, on message boards, on Facebook or Twitter: anywhere where writers congregate. If you don’t have a blog of your own but would like to get involved then email your piece to “hprw at tesco dot net”, with a subject line of “HPRW anti-plagiarism day”, and I’ll post it here. Send me links to your blog posts or message board discussions and I’ll edit them into my piece.

You can write about anything you like, so long as it’s based on plagiarism: what it is, what’s allowed and what’s not, famous cases of plagiarism, how it feels to be plagiarised, and what effects plagiarism can have (on both of the writers involved): anything which is plagiarism-related, honest, well-researched and properly informed.

I hope that by extending this theme across a lot of blogs and cross-linking between all the pieces we’ll create a network of articles and discussions about plagiarism which we can point to whenever we feel another writer is veering too close to the edge, or when a new writer asks why it’s wrong to “borrow”, or when an established writer grows lazy in her ways. We’ll reach writers who are unaware of the laws and conventions, or misinformed about them. And if in the future our work stops just one writer from making the same mistake my former friend has made, then we’ll have done a little bit of good.

Spread the word.

The Author's Big Mistake

I thought that this novice writer's reaction to a poor review was bad. But last week Alice Hoffman claimed the prize for The Worst Ever Reaction To An Unfavourable Book Review by posting the reviewer's email address and phone number onto Twitter and encouraging her fans to harass the reviewer concerned.

In Hoffman's favour she has now apologised, and her Twitter account has been deleted: but I'm amazed that she saw fit to put someone else's personal information up on the internet in order to get others to make contact. It's an appalling thing to have done.

I loved Hoffman's book Blackbird House, and I've enjoyed a good few of her other titles, too. But as a direct result of this, I will not be buying any more of Alice Hoffman's books.

You can read a good account of this at the wonderful Galleycat; Gawker mopped into all the corners with screenshots of all of her terrible Tweets; The Book Maven told the story and added some more background about a previous Hoffman overreaction. You can read what Lynn Price (of Behler Publications) has to say about it here; Editorial Ass has picked up the story, too; AuthorScoop mentioned it; and (inevitably) it's now being discussed at Absolute Write.

In an attempt to be fair, I have to point out that Alice Hoffman isn't the only writer to spew her objections to a bad review onto the internet. Anne Rice introduced her new and exciting paragraph-free style when she objected to an Amazon review of one of her books, while Laurell K Hamilton took us Christmas shopping for her characters and along the way revealed how much work her editors have to do.

This kind of reaction to a review has been called The Author's Big Mistake for a very good reason: it can't change the review, and the results are going to hang around for an awfully long time (as is shown by the links I've given above). If an author is determined to respond to a bad review but would like to keep some dignity intact, then the only possible course of action is to thank the reviewer for his or her time, and hope that they like the next book better. It's possible to do this with grace and style, as was ably demonstrated when I reviewed a book called We'll Always Be Pals on my other blog, The Self-Publishing Review. I wasn't terribly keen on the book but its author, Tom McManus, left a few very gracious comments, including this:

It's all good Jane, everyone is entitled to their own opinions and you have yours. I am not hurt by it. As you know, when you put something out there like a book, you take the good and the not so good in stride.

I just wish that Alice Hoffman had spoken with Mr McManus before she visted Twitter. She could have learned a lot.

But the last word here must go to John Scalzi, who has written an excellent analysis of The Author's Big Mistake. Some people are indeed crazy screechy monkeys, and some writers are asstards.


Edited to add some more linky heaven:

Thanks to Daniel Blythe, here's another writer reacting to a poor review. She's switched off the comments to her blog so there are no reactions there: we'll just have to make up for that here.

Pub Rants has now blogged about it too.

These ones come courtesy of AuthorScoop:

When Richard Ford shot Alice Hoffman's book: "it's not like I shot her." That's OK then.

There are some scary stories about more writers who have overreacted to bad reviews at The Salon.

And here Alain de Botton reacts to a very negative review. I've not read the book, but I am backing slowly away: here it's the reviewer who scares me the most.

Editors Use Google Too

Writers work very hard on their books and if they don't want to waste all that effort, it is essential that they present them in the best way possible. This means they must follow all available submission guidelines to the letter, and be courteous in all subsequent correspondence with the people they’ve submitted to: but there's more to consider than just that.

One of the first things that an editor or agent will do now, on the rare occasion that a thoughtful, well-written and appropriate submission ends up on their desk, is to run a quick internet search for the writer’s name.

This reveals a lot about the writer’s work: most publications and competition placements from the last decade or so should appear somewhere or other.

It also reveals a lot about the writer. Especially if they belong to writers’ message boards where the posts are open for all to see.

If their posts routinely contain careless errors or sloppy grammar, or are hectoring or bullying in nature, lacking in logic, or wildly misinformed, how do you think the agent or editor is going to respond?

There Are All Sorts Of Ways To Fail

When I worked as a full-time editor I was frequently amazed by the submissions that I received. I worked for a book packager which specialised in highly-illustrated esoteric non-fiction: we packaged books about retreat, meditation, religion and myth on behalf of publishers who didn't have the time or the in-house expertise available to produce the books themselves. And yet every day I received proposals for books which simply didn't match our very specific requirements. Among the many submissions I received were illustrated children's books, car maintenance manuals, fiction of all kinds, memoir, graphic novels and pet-care manuals. My favourite was a children’s story which, judging from the illustrations appeared to be about trolls but I couldn't be sure: it was written in Dutch, with no translation provided.

I received a query letter hand-written on scented, fairy-printed paper, with a sprinkling of loose glitter which fell into my coffee as I opened it; and an entire manuscript which must have been a third or fourth carbon copy (remember those?) judging by its feintness and blurring (that one was made even more memorable by the absence of any spaces, punctuation or paragraph breaks, so the entire text was one great big run-on word). Then there was the hand-written manuscript which arrived with a cover letter urging me not to destroy it, as it was the writer’s only copy—but no postage or return address was provided for its return; and one writer sent me a banana, surrounded in layers of bubble-wrap and encased in a cardboard tube.

All of the writers responsible for those ridiculous submissions must have thought they had a chance of publication with us, or they wouldn’t have bothered to send their work in: but because of the nature of book packaging it was very unlikely that we would ever be able to commission their books, even if those books had come close to our requirements. As a result, the writers concerned wasted everyone’s time and money by making a submission that had no hope of getting accepted.

Because the writers failed on so many basic levels, they failed to get published regardless of the quality of the work that they submitted. If they had only researched their market more carefully before submitting they could have saved themselves time, money and disappointment: and instead could have sent their work somewhere it had at least a chance of being considered for publication.

It's Dangerous Out There

Publishing is changing and with it, some of my favourite places have announced big new changes today.

Absolute Write has been struggling financially for some time now, and it's hoped that its new association with Twilight and the accompanying merchandising deal will raise enough money to fund it in the months and years ahead. While this new deal should allow it to continue to operate at full speed, it does come at a price: the forums have been renamed Absolute Bite, the Office Party area of the forum has been renamed the Twilight Party, and vampires are running rampant throughout.

In an effort to improve its scam-busting capabilities, Writer Beware has teamed up with the FBI. I'd be grateful if someone would explain to Victoria that speaking sternly to big blokes with guns is not likely to make them stop what they're doing, because last time she tried it the powderburns ruined her hair.

Finally, I've decided to self-publish my first novel, Ambush of Shadows. I'm well aware of the many limitations involved in self-publishing, but the book isn't achieving anything by sitting unread on my hard drive, and with this blog getting around 10,000 visits per month now I like to think that a few of you might buy it. I'm in the process of editing it now, and will let you know when it's available.

Now. What news have you read today about publishing? Anything good?

Train Wreck Now Boarding On Platform Two!

This one is going to be good. It's so good I wonder if it's just a staging for an elaborate April Fool's Day Special To Trump All Others. But even so, here it is for your enjoyment just in case it's for real.

An unknown writer called Lady Sybilla has announced that her book, Russet Noon, will be published in September of this year. Despite its odd title it isn't a new form of potato-porn: it's far, far better than that.

It's fan fiction. An unofficial sequel to Stephenie Mayer's Twilight series. And, children, we all know what fan fiction is, don't we? Say it with me:

Copyright infringement.

Lady Sybilla insists that her book doesn't infringe any copyrights because, as she writes in the comments thread here,

The characters in SM's novels were not copyrighted because she never drew them or hired an artist to draw them. Today she shares her character copyrights with Summit. And, no, Russet Noon does not have direct permission from SM to publish this sequel, which is why the article says that it is a "Tribute" or "Unauthorized" Sequel.

Unsurprisingly, Lady Sybilla got a swift response when she defended the book's publication at the Twilight Lexicon and pointed out that other people had also written Twilight fan fic: the Lexicon's owners responded,

So when it comes right down to it, you’re a self admitted thief whose only defense is “well they were doing it too.” (*Insert foot stamp, pouty lip, and flounce here*)

Lady Sybilla is talking nonsense, and is going to get sued from here to Pluto and back if she persists with this publication. Especially if anyone were to sell copies of the book on eBay ahead of the publication date, which someone has tried to do (you'll note, though, that the auction has ended and refunds have been promised: perhaps the lawyers are onto Lady Sybilla already).

There's an active discussion about this already at Absolute Write; Lee Goldberg has blogged about it beautifully; Fandom Wank has an excellent analysis in which Lady Sybilla's casting-call for models for the graphic novel edition is revealed; if you want to read the preface to Russet Noon it's been copied into the comments here; and there's even a YouTube reading available if you want to enjoy the full russet-rich experience.

Edited 5 April

Many of the links I provided originally are to pages which have now been taken down. The eBay auctions have been closed ahead of time; the Russet Noon website has been closed, apparently by Lady Sibilla herself. She is now complaining about Fandom Wank's postings about her, but has only encouraged more people to point and laugh. And blogger Dal Jeanis has posted a great Russet Noon Analysis, and another post in which he suggests How to Win the Russet Noon Lawsuit, and points out that titles are not copyrightable. I can feel another Atlanta Nights coming on... anyone?

Writers Should Know Better

Last week, Editorial Anonymous blogged about a very foolish writer who seemed intent on shooting himself in the foot as many times as he possibly could. And as usual, I have my own version of this story to tell.

A few weeks ago a writer complained to me about the lack of help available to struggling writers. He had submitted his book widely but he had received nothing but standard rejections, with no indication of why his work had been rejected. He had edited and revised it as much as he was able to and simply had no idea what was stopping him from moving on to the next level with his work.

He seemed genuinely frustrated and keen to improve so I offered to take a look at his first one thousand words to see if I could spot anything obvious. I promised him a no-holds-barred opinion, warned him to brace himself: and he seemed grateful.

I should have known better.

The first clue came when he sent me his entire novel because (as he mentioned in his email) he didn't have time to mess about separating the first thousand words of it into a new file. This irritated me: not only did it imply that his time was more important than mine, it also clogged up my internet connection because, living out in the sticks as I do, we don't have access to broadband and so I rely on a very slow dial-up service to connect to the outside world. His book was over 750 pages long (single spaced...), and it took nearly forty minutes to download.

If he had been submitting to a publisher he would have earned himself a swift rejection right there for the tone of his email and for ignoring the submission guidelines which I had provided. But I had promised to look at his work, and so I kept my word. I read his first chapter and was not impressed: his writing was patchy, cluttered with clichés, and very passive in tone. However, his premise was intriguing and despite the problems his writing did show promise: some of the better patches were quite good, and could have been very much improved with just a little bit of rewriting.

I emailed him my thoughts, along with my annotations to his first chapter and my reasons for suggesting such changes: and in reply he told me I didn't know what I was doing and that rules are made to be broken. He made it quite clear that he disagreed with everything I had written, and would not be making any of my changes.

So I e-mailed him back just a few words: "I'm sorry I couldn't be more help." And he sent me back a long, detailed email in which he called me names, accused me of being a racist (even though I hadn't been aware of his colour until he made his accusation), and said that I’d completely missed the point of his book.

And that's why so many editors and agents are no longer prepared to give personalised rejections.

Special Orders: Why You Have To Pay In Advance

Suppose that a customer walks into a bookshop and asks the bookseller to order her a copy of a book that the bookseller has never heard of: and that when the bookseller looks the book up, he finds that it was published by a vanity publisher which is notorious for publishing terrible books at horrible prices. What do you think he's going to do?

The well-informed bookseller is going to demand that payment is made for the book before he actually orders it—otherwise the book is likely to never be collected and could end up sitting on the shelves for years, at the bookseller's expense.

You can read about just such a case here.

Editors On Facebook Discuss Difficult Authors

A discussion on Facebook has irritated a few author-friends of mine. I've been sent a link to this ongoing discussion and, while the editors involved think it's funny, not one of the writers who have seen it seem to be laughing.

I'm not going to tell you which side I'm on because then I'll upset everybody. Just click the link and work it out for yourself. You'll need a Facebook account to be able to read it.

How Not To Sell To Book Shops

Any self-published authors who intend to sell their books direct into bookshops would do well to read this post from the Fidra blog, which tells everything you need to know about how NOT to do it.

There's also a sequel to it, in which a better strategy is revealed, which will be useful to all writers, whether they're self-published or with a mainstream, commercial house. Go and read these two pieces now. You will be glad you did. Honest.

How To Make Sure You Will Never Be Published (Part I)

Publishing doesn’t have technology at its heart: it has people. No matter what new printing and distribution methods and models emerge, publishing can only flourish while writers, editors and agents excel at their jobs.

When any one of those three fail to behave responsibly or sensibly, publishing suffers.

I’ve seen very few instances where editors or agents acted like idiots in public. Writers, on the other hand, seem to do so every other day* (and before you judge me as too harsh remember that I’m a writer too, and am responsible for more than my share of foolishness).

Yesterday, I read a story at Editorial Ass which made me cringe. The editor liked a writer’s proposal but felt it needed a little tweaking before she’d be able to sign him up. She discussed the changes that she’d like to see with the writer’s agent, and the agent saw no problem with them: so the editor offered to take the writer and his agent out to lunch, in order to discuss more fully the tweaks required.

Everything went swimmingly until, towards the end of lunch, the writer demanded to deal with someone who he perceived as being more important than the editor before him. Never mind that the editor had seen something that she liked in his work, and had been prepared to spend time working with him to get it good enough to sign up: he wanted someone more senior, and that was that.

The lunch was brought to a swift conclusion and the writer lost any possibility of a deal with that editor, or the publishing house that she worked for.

As if that wasn’t bad enough, agent Janet Reid got to hear about it and also blogged on the subject.

Agents don’t just exist to make deals: they advise their clients on the best way to proceed in all sorts of ways. If the author concerned had quietly asked his agent for advice before speaking out, he might still have a book deal on the table and an editor who was keen to spend the time to make his book the best that it could be.

(*I did find several examples of writerly venting to link to for this piece but felt that that would be too cruel. I must be mellowing as I age.)