The "Catch" in Author's Monopoly

Cory Doctorow's March LOCUS column asserts, "A Lever Without a Fulcrum Is Just a Stick":

Lever Without a Fulcrum

The "lever" here is copyright law, the "author's monopoly." The article focuses on some ways the common practices of major publishers can use this "lever" as a "stick" to beat creators. According to Doctorow, broad copyright protections designed in theory to safeguard the rights of authors often don't accomplish that goal in practice if publishers' contracts demand control over the exercise of those provisions. Authors, particularly novice writers, usually can't negotiate changes in standard publishing deals; they face "take it or leave it" offers. E-book and audio rights, for example, are seldom left under the creator's control. This situation effectively strips the "author's monopoly" of much of its power. "The fact that the company can’t reproduce your book without your permission doesn’t mean much if the only way to get your book into the public’s hands is through that company, or one of a small handful of companies with identical negotiating positions."

Doctorow analyzes phenomena such as music sampling, record contracts, Audible (the audiobook provider), video streaming, and DRM in relation to the general problem that, "Market concentration at every part of the supply chain is conspiring to make life harder for artists." His proposed solutions involve rights reversion clauses, changes in licensing rules, and unionization, among other possibilities.

I might suggest that authors deal with small presses (both print and e-book) rather than the Big Five. Small publishers can provide a personal touch and, often, more flexible contractual terms. But, of course, the mammoth corporations offer bookstore exposure and high-volume sales; the latter are almost impossible to achieve online without strong marketing skills. Also, an author who feels she lacks the expertise, resources, or time to exploit subsidiary rights effectively might prefer to leave those outlets in the hands of a publisher with the connections and experience to do so for her. It's a puzzlement.

Margaret L. Carter

Carter's Crypt

Reviews 52 Life and Limb by Jennifer Roberson

Reviews 52

Life and Limb

by

Jennifer Roberson 

Previous reviews have not been indexed.

But I have discussed Jennifer Roberson's previous work. She is one of my favorite writers.

I discussed Roberson's Sword-Dancer Saga in the first book review post I did for this blog.

https://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2013/10/reviews-1-by-jacqueline-lichtenberg.html

The Tiger and Del, Sword Dancer series went to 7 books, and I loved every one of them.

https://amazon.com/dp/B074CJYQLN





Roberson's Cheysuli Series - 8 Books - is very much worth your while.
https://amazon.com/dp/B078MRRYYV

And now we come to a new series, also Fantasy, but with a contemporary setting.  Call it modern Urban Fantasy.

https://www.amazon.com/Life-Limb-Blood-Bone-Book-ebook/dp/B07NV3DFF1/


You may remember the 15 Season TV Series, Supernatural, about two brothers who fight for right in a world of demons, possessions, Angels (fallen or maybe otherwise).  They travel the modern world saving the day from threats most people don't know exist.

It's a marvelous TV Series, but seemed to me to be flawed, possibly because there was more Horror Genre than Romance - more relationships that go nowhere than Happily Ever After trajectories.

I discussed the TV show twice:

https://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2009/04/puzzle-of-romance.html

https://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2009/05/urban-fantasy-job-hunting.html

And on this blog, Margaret Carter also discussed the show:

https://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2016/11/incarnations-of-lucifer.html

https://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2019/11/worlds-with-depth.html

We talk about this paradigm of "reality" because it is a fascinating backdrop for Romance, one that is not sufficiently explored.

Now, Jennifer Roberson (that is RoBERson -- not Robson) has brought her Relationship plotting talents to explore this basic concept.

In her afterword, she points out that her first impulse was to create the two lead characters as male and female and play the game as she has in previous series.  But she decided on two brothers to lead this series, brothers who are not physically related but are spiritually related in a way they (at first) don't exactly understand.

They are tutored by a man who seems to be an Angel (actual sort, with wings) working on Earth to gather forces to oppose Evil at an Armageddon.

This man tries to explain their nature to them as he trains them to conquer the evil forces, and supernatural creatures, demons that possess people.

This kind of Fantasy worldbuilding is Jennifer Roberson's strongest talent, and it shows in the first book in this new series, the Blood and Bone series.

This opening chapter focuses on introducing the two young men (who don't like each other - one who just got out of Prison because he killed someone, and the other who is a college educated Cowboy hick), detailing some of the tutorial assignments they are given, so there is a lot of exposition to absorb.  I liked them both.

The thing is, in this introductory novel, the exposition disguised as dialogue or even action, is not annoying.  The story unfolds at a good, solid pace, and the various oddball characters introduced show vast potential for Relationship.

I feel this Roberson series would have made a much better TV Series than Supernatural.

LIFE AND LIMB is not a "copy" of the TV Series in any way.

The world Roberson's characters inhabit is entirely different.  But if you study the 15 seasons of SUPERNATURAL along with this new Roberson series, do a deep contrast/compare analysis, you could learn why I keep harping on the worldbuilding from theme techniques.

The special difference between the TV Series, Supernatural, and the novel series, Blood and Bone, is theme -- and that difference generates the Characters, Plot, and Story that are so different.

Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com

Look Who Is Behaving Badly Now

Conspiracy theories about the Wuhan Coronavirus abound. I haven't seen any that suggest it was intended to destroy copyright, but the collateral damage to copyright may be irreversible.

Academics behaving badly.
Authors and their friends will have heard of the IA, which appears to be freely and incontinently giving away to all and sundry that to which they have no rights at all. Their rationale seems to be that all the world has an emergency need for free reading, because of the pandemic.

Apparently, the Boston Library President supports this book piracy, and David C. Lowery has twelve stinging public questions for David Leonard.
https://thetrichordist.com/2020/03/29/12-questions-for-boston-public-library-president-on-emergency-national-library-endorsement/

The questions are well worth our readers' time. It does not appear that David Leonard has replied at all.

Pastors behaving badly?
Times are tough, and with luck, there's plenty of generosity and grace to go around... but, "thou shalt not steal."

Legal bloggers Caleb Green  and Andrea L. Arndt  for Dickinson Wright warn religious institutions to think twice before making their new live streaming performances irresponsibly modern and larded with copyrighted bells and whistles.  The religious exception does not extend to performances, distribution/publication outside of the house of worship. Facebook is not a house of worship. Nor is a private home.

Original link:
https://www.dickinson-wright.com/news-alerts/religious-institutions-v-covid19

Lexology link:
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=1ee63c5f-cf73-408a-9c4d-386ed3e03186

The Prager U has an interesting analysis of what constitutes "stealing", and it includes all forms of property including intellectual property.

Warning, the U is heavily supported by advertising.
https://www.biblestudytools.com/bible-study/explore-the-bible/4-things-you-never-knew-thou-shalt-not-steal-applied-to.html

Local politicians behaving badly.
While political campaigns generally pay for the appropriate licenses to play popular music to entertain crowds at rallies and other gatherings, local councilmen who choose to perform copyrighted rock and pop songs on Facebook, YouTube, and on local television to "cheer up" and endear themselves to their bored constituents may well not know or bother to buy licenses.

The usual suspects behaving badly (SNAFU)
As MTP points out from time to time, whether times are hard or good, Facebook always does well, and always at the expense of creators.
https://musictechpolicy.com/2020/03/27/arw-poll-results-facebook-should-pay-independent-artists-and-songwriters-in-cash/

One cannot pay the rent with "advertising credit," and if the old piracy argument that piracy is free advertising hold true, why should artists pay pirates to advertise on the pirates' platforms?

PS. An anonymous librarian has replied with an open letter to the multi-millionaire pirate running the so-called Internet Archive.  Please share!
https://thetrichordist.com/2020/04/05/open-letter-to-brewster-kahle-from-anonymous-librarian/

All the best,
Rowena Cherry 

SPACE SNARK™ http://www.spacesnark.com/  http://www.rowenacherry.com

Accessible Writing

The April 2020 issue of RWR (magazine of the Romance Writers of America) contains an article titled "The Literary Craft of Accessibility," by Rebecca Hunter. She begins by analyzing the difference between literary fiction and genre fiction, for which she focuses on level of accessibility: "Literary fiction expects the reader to come to the book, while genre fiction books come to the reader." To put it simply, literary fiction expects the reader to work harder. It would be easy to conclude that denser novels are therefore of higher quality than less "difficult" works, a "false—and harmful—hierarchy" the author warns against. I readily agree that a "literary" novel may be difficult and dense for the sheer sake of difficulty, putting unnecessary roadblocks in the reader's path from the mistaken notion that lucid prose and a clear narrative thread equate to "dumbing down." And a genre novel can include deep themes that make a reader think and challenge her established assumptions.

Hunter undercuts her cautionary reference to false hierarchies, in my opinion, by contrasting "lyrical" and "thoughtful" with "fast-paced" and "light," the latter suggesting a "more accessible style." A genre novel can be accessible, yet sedately paced and deeply emotional. Some factors she lists as contributing to degree of accessibility include length of sentences, breadth of vocabulary, balance among action, atmosphere, and ideas, moral clarity or ambiguity, how clearly the characters and plot fulfill "expectations set in the beginning of the story," and "use of cliches, idioms, and other familiarities." I have reservations about some items on the list. For example, I don't think a novel has to lean heavily toward "action" to be accessible. Many romance novels don't, nor do many vintage favorites in other genres. GONE WITH THE WIND is one perennial bestseller that has many more reflective and emotional scenes than action scenes in the popular sense of the word. I find the mention of "cliches" off-putting; while familiar tropes, handled well, can be welcome, an outright "cliche" is another matter. Another feature, "amount of emotional complexity spelled out for readers," sounds as if excessive telling over showing is being recommended. Every writer must balance all these elements in her own way, of course, and Hunter does address the shortcomings of cliches and "telling." She points out that "frankly, there are lots of readers who like this familiarity and clarity." So an author needs to know her target audience well. "Each reader's preferences are different. . . .there are readers for all accessibility levels." Hunter also discusses theme, which she defines as "an open-ended question our story asks" and briefly covers the possibility of increasing a work's complexity by adding additional thematic layers.

Personally, I enjoy a book with a varied, challenging vocabulary and complex characters and emotions. What make me impatient are works that appear to be confusing for the sake of confusion, such as failing to clearly distinguish characters from each other or coming to a conclusion that leaves the reader with literally no way to be sure what happened—by which I mean, not an ambiguous ending deliberately designed to allow multiple interpretations, but one in which it's impossible to puzzle out the plain sense of what transpires on the page. As Marion Zimmer Bradley used to say in her submission guidelines, "If I can't figure out what happened, I assume my readers won't care." Levels of acceptable "accessibility," of course, vary over the decades and centuries according to the fashions of the times. Long descriptive and expository passages, common in nineteenth-century novels, would get disapproved by most editors nowadays, no matter how well written. Something similar to the opening paragraphs of Dickens' A TALE OF TWO CITIES ("It was the best of times; it was the worst of times. . . ."), although accessible in the sense of easily understandable, probably wouldn't be accepted by most contemporary publishers. It also used to be common for authors to include untranslated passages in foreign languages, especially in nonfiction but sometimes even in fiction. Most nonfiction writers up through the early twentieth century assumed all educated readers understood Latin and Greek. Dorothy Sayers inserted a long letter in French into her Lord Peter Wimsey mystery CLOUDS OF WITNESS; the publisher insisted on having a translation added. On the other hand, to cite a contemporary example, in Barbara Hambly's Benjamin January mysteries, set in Louisiana of the 1830s, January's erudite friend Hannibal often includes Greek and Latin quotations in his speech. They add flavor to the story's atmosphere, but understanding them is rarely necessary for following the story; when it is, Hambly clues us in as needed. Readers who'd be put off by this kind of linguistic play simply don't form part of her target audience, but then, such people probably aren't fans of historical mysteries in general, which require openness to navigating an unfamiliar time and place.

Hunter's article also doesn't discuss accessibility in relation to genre conventions. For instance, Regency romance authors probably assume their target audience has some familiarity with the period, if only from reading lots of prior novels in that setting. Science fiction, in particular, expects a certain level of background knowledge from its readers. We should know about hyperdrive and other forms of FTL travel, if only enough to suspend disbelief and move on with the story. Some SF stories expect more acquaintance with the genre than others. Any viewer with a willing imagination can follow the original STAR TREK, designed to appeal to a mass audience. Near the other end of the accessibility spectrum, the new posthumous Heinlein novel, THE PURSUIT OF THE PANKERA (the previously unpublished original version of his 1980 NUMBER OF THE BEAST), envisions a reader with a considerable fannish background. The ideal reader knows or at least has some acquaintance with Edgar Rice Burroughs' Barsoom books and E. E. Smith's Lensman series. That reader also has a high tolerance for dialogue about the intricacies of alternate universes and the heroes' device for transiting among them, on which the text goes into considerable detail at some points. Optimally, that fan will also have read Heinlein's own previous work, at least his best-known books. This novel is not the way to introduce a new reader to Heinlein, much less to SF in general.

It seems to me that "accessibility" forms a subset of the larger topic of reader expectations. So the question of how accessible our work is (or needs to be) comes back to knowing the expectations of the target audience.

Margaret L. Carter

Carter's Crypt

How Do You Know If You've Written A Classic - Part 7 - How Do You Know These Two Are Soul Mates

How Do You Know If You've Written A Classic

Part 7

 How Do You Know These Two Are Soul Mates? 

Previous Parts in this series are indexed here:

https://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2020/03/index-to-how-do-you-know-if-youve.html

Opposites attract, but do they always make a good team?

It is Ancient Wisdom that you shouldn't marry someone expecting them to "change" -- or expecting you can "change him."

But people do change, and the velocity of change can be ferocious during early life development (which is why we avoid marrying too young), and oddly enough, during the elder years (with the Second Time Around story).

It is said that if you're not a Democrat or Socialist when you're in your twenties, you have no heart, but if you're not a Republican or Capitalist when you're in your fifties, you have no brains.

Ferocious attention has been devoted to proving or disproving this notion that maturity dictates an individual's view of how society should govern itself.

In 1962 John Crittenden published a paper based on research funded by an award of a Law and Behavioral Science Fellowship at the University of Chicago Law School.

https://academic.oup.com/poq/article-abstract/26/4/648/1868747

The way party affiliation, or political views, tend to correlate with age has been a focus ever since.

Recent studies have shown that today people don't change their politics when they move to a state dominated by the other party, and people do not shift from progressive to conservative (or any other pair of polar opposites) of opinion as they age.

Science fiction writers ask: "Well, maybe they did shift, but they don't now. Why? What changed?"

Maybe there has been that kind of change in human nature, or maybe not.

Writing Science Fiction Romance will bring you to wrestle with the adage that human nature never changes.  Science Fiction is about science impacting human cultures.

See Part 18 of the Targeting a Readership series - Targeting a Culture
https://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2020/03/targeting-readership-part-18-targeting.html

Cultures change -- but the basic nature of the humans who form the culture doesn't change much. What does happen, over 280 year spans or multiples of that) is a shift in emphasis in a human generation.  What people all born in the same 20 year span think or feel is most important, most critical, most consequential.  Or in other words, what bothers them the most.

For that reason, we tend to make marriage matches with people of about the same age, and from the same culture (if not country).

Within the parameters of politics and generation, a person can find their match much more readily.  Many matches work just fine for all the decades of life to be lived, but a good match can be torn apart if one of the couple finds an actual Soul Mate.

Often, a couple merely matched will break up when one of them becomes so deeply infatuated (at a later age, it's really hard to admit to a teenager syndrome of infatuation) with another person, and believe they have found a Soul Mate.

A writer exploring the making and breaking of a marriage, in any setting and time, has to convince the current readership of the Soul Mate status.

It is possible for Soul Mates to stray because of an infatuation - what happens then? Does the marriage break then reform?

How does a person who is caught deep into an infatuation discover that the object of infatuation is not the Soul Mate they seem to be?

What is the diagnostic test for Soul Mating?

What will the reader accept as proof?

Today, families are riven apart by politics and arguments about how ethical, moral, or intelligent those who support one view (or the other) are.  The view espoused over the family dinner table can label a person so "deplorable" they will never be welcome in this house again.

So the problem, even if the hosting couple are genuine Soul Mates, becomes how do you change your in-laws' minds about an issue of right/wrong ways of thinking, of solving ethical dilemmas?

Such a dramatic scene, played out in show-don't-tell, in symbolism and dialogue, and storming out of the room, and returning in a different mood, and maybe pulling down reference books to prove a point, may become our next towering Classic that lasts forever.

To convince your reader that two Characters are true Soul Mates, show them handling such a delicate, strife-ridden family scene.

That scene would be the middle of a Happily Ever After novel, an epic fail of family bonds.

Say, for example, this family dinner were the celebration of a young couple's engagement where they are discussing Setting The Date.

The first half of the novel has to reveal the reasons why each of the family members holds the view of right/wrong that they do -- the view of justice, and the correct way to proceed with the wedding plans.  If the family is large enough, you can bet any date chosen will exclude someone.

It has to be soon because so-and-so is thinking of entering Hospice.

It has to be later because so-and-so has a scholarship for a year in school in (some exotic place that will give them major credential in job hunting - say Tokyo?).

It has to be here because most of us live here.

It has to be there because so-and-so can't travel.

It has to be somewhere else cheaper, or where the weather is nice that time of year.

Or if someone is running for public Office, there will be political reasons for place, date, and timing, possibly even religion or lack thereof could figure.

Watching this family define and solve the problem will telegraph to the reader which couples are actual Soul Mates -- and which are likely to break up next.

The first half of the novel reveals how each faction in the family arrives (by reason, by emotion, by unthinking commitments) at their stances on the matter.

The Soul Mate parent-couple in the family will show-don't-tell the solution, and lead all the factions toward each other.

This could take several chapters -- as groups break away and reform in the kitchen, the back porch, the front yard, even the garage to show off a new car, or one being fixed.

The Soul Mates won't impose their solution on the engaged couple, but rather bring up the basic principles they have always taught their children for social and family problem solving.

If the reader agrees with those principles, the reader will likely believe the elder couple are Soul Mates -- and by association, that the married-children of that couple are likewise Soul Mates.

For contrast, at least one couple should be merely a good match with a solid working relationship.

The second half of the book is all about the engaged couple trying to make the family chosen date-time-place actually work for them.  How they go about making the adjustments will reveal to the reader whether this young couple are Soul Mates.

Soul Mates fight each other harder and hotter than any other sort of partner.  But the fire exploding through their arguments heals rather than wounds.

Soul Mates argue - but they don't fight.  And they argue all the time over everything.  Vociferously.  Adamantly defending their positions.  Stubbornly returning to that position. All until they suddenly discover the error in their argument - then they change their mind and immediately admit that out loud.

A Soul Mate might not behave that way with anyone else, might fight all the time with others, concede or crow victory, and just be obnoxious about it.  But that behavior would change when in the presence of the Soul Mate.

The second half of the novel would include the engaged couple arguing shown in high contrast to another couple in the wedding party who fight each other over the same issue (e.g. which restaurant should the dinner be at).

The couple that fights, and simply can't be guided into arguing, ends up in divorce court just before the Soul Mates' wedding, while the couples that argue show up at all rehearsals and do their jobs smoothly.

What is the difference between an argument and a fight?

An argument is about what is right.

A fight is about who is right.

When it's about who is right, it is all about power, dominance, and avoiding confronting emotions.

When it is about what is right, it is all about the mutually shared, urgent, burning desire to choose right over wrong.

That is how Soul Mates are distinguished from other couples, and, whether they are conscious of it or not, readers can see the difference.

Sorting out right from wrong is hard, and humans rarely agree on how to apply those principles to solve real world problems (like choosing a restaurant).

The symbolic difference between fighting and arguing is simply whether the pair doing the shouting are articulating their reasons for their stances, then delineating why the other person's reasons don't apply to this case, or how that reason is based on a fallacy.

Soul Mates argue, destroying each others' reasons for holding a position, until they both agree -- often they evolve to agree on something neither knew before, or would have adopted as a position.

When Soul Mates argue to a conclusion, they are each thankful to the other for imparting new information or correcting an error.  Learning from a Soul Mate is a great joy, not an ignominious defeat that leads to subjugation.

A mismatched couple will fight, and if one of them always wins, the marriage will likely break up unless one of them prefers being subjugated.

Marriages based on a good match generally go through many fights, many arguments, ending with a basic score of 50/50, keeping the balance so neither is subjugated.

To convince readers your Soul Mates are genuine, you need contrasting couples, contrasting families, and contrasting Singles, divorcees, widows, etc.  We need to see them all fighting, arguing, and settling the matter to see the stark difference in methodologies.

The future Science Fiction Romance Classics will lay out this pattern around at least one Human/Alien couple.

The Classic that defines the field will (maybe already has) illustrate the nature of Soul Mates by how they go about solving problems using an Alien methodology.

My candidate for CLASSIC SCIENCE FICTION ROMANCE is the Alien Series by Gini Koch -- #16 came out in February 2018

https://www.amazon.com/Aliens-Abroad-Alien-Novels-Book-ebook/dp/B06XJYL8LY/

Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com

False Flags

This week, the Authors Guild exposed a gob-smacking abuse of the public trust and of the concept of law order and copyright. Kudos to Authors Guild for that!

https://www.authorsguild.org/industry-advocacy/internet-archives-uncontrolled-digital-lending/

There are many Covid-19 scammers pretending to be helpful, while actually ripping off the public or writers, artists, musicians and film makers, or pursuing a political agenda, and  IA appears to be one of them. Authors and bookstores cannot survive if society tolerates digital looting.

Andy Chatterly, co-founder of the for-profit anti-piracy business MUSO (which will send out take down notices on behalf of its paying subscribers) has published a white paper on the rise and rise of digital piracy... which is discouraging reading for creative individuals and small businesses.

https://www.muso.com/covid-19-protect-landing-page?utm_campaign=COVID-19%20Protect%20&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=85294752&_hsenc=p2ANqtz---AbBRnta68KyCYlaKrM5_YKblGvUx6eYDT2G47U_bcAf9KhL_7hYzXL6oPcDBa_qaMEY2cOK1jNogFEsi-FuSI2PWwg&_hsmi=85294752

Recently testifying to the United States Senate subcommittee on Intellectual Property under an apparent false flag were members of The Pirate Party, as discussed by the Chris Castle, guest of the editors of thetrichordist.

It's kind of like bank robbers testifying on how bank vaults could be made more transparent and accessible to the public.

Particularly dispiriting are Chris Castle's revelations (or not) about the part played by academics and lawyers (and sometimes by members of the legislature under the influence of lobbyists) in weakening copyright and exploiting and enlarging loopholes in already Gruyere-like IP laws.

Thanks to MusicTechPolicy for a lively report on what Jonathan Yunger had to say to Chairman Thom Tillis's and Ranking Member Christopher Coons's committee about the functioning and effectiveness (or not) of the DMCA.

https://musictechpolicy.com/2020/03/12/you-cant-call-911-jyunger-of-millenniumfilms-tells-senate-why-piracy-is-still-a-problem-and-how-u-s-has-failed-to-lead/

That's four lengthy links. Enjoy!

All the best,

Rowena Cherry 

SPACE SNARK™ http://www.spacesnark.com

EPIC Award winner, Friend of ePublishing for Crazy Tuesday   

Science in SF, Continued

The second part of Kelly Lagor's LOCUS article on "Putting the 'Science' in Science Fiction" is here:

Putting the Science in SF

As in the previous essay, she quotes opinions from various authors and editors, including Elizabeth Bear, Sarah Pinsker, Lee Harris (editor at Tor.com), and Sheila Williams (editor of ASIMOV'S), among others. Some bits of advice on the "delicate tightrope walk" of "getting the level of detail just right so as to not be so technical you alienate your readers, while avoiding being needlessly inaccurate":

An SF author should keep up her "baseline knowledge of popular science" (in Elizabeth Bear's phrase) at a level sufficient to make her aware of what's going on in the scientific world and where she needs to seek out deeper research into any particular topic or sub-field. Academic journals and popular science books and articles each provide useful resources, which should be consumed in the proper balance. Other comments logically point out that the amount and kind of research needed will depend on how much the author already knows about the field. The level of scientific detail required to make a story plausible also depends on the subgenre. Readers of different types of SF have different expectations; as Lee Harris observes, "we’re much less critical of the science in the latest superhero epic than we would be in a hard science fiction story." Another observation states that "with great familiarity can come great reluctance"—a writer might hesitate to delve into the technical details because he or she finds it hard to resist including excessive exposition that might turn off the reader. Some other suggestions: Don't hesitate to consult experts firsthand. The kind and degree of technical specificity varies depending on the viewpoint character—what would he or she notice and care about? And getting the depth and scope of detail correct ultimately grows out of knowing how much the reader needs to understand to enjoy the story. "Sometimes, when it comes to details, less is more."

By the way, Lagor's phrase "needlessly inaccurate" seems to imply the existence of conditions under which inaccuracy is needed, a position I'd find hard to agree with. Whether the density of detail is heavy or light, surely whatever IS on the page should be accurate, within the limits of how technical the particular text gets. Even in fantasy, I find a story more interesting and entertaining if the writer gives the impression of accuracy in mundane matters such as architecture, food, travel times, etc., as well as basing the biology of imaginary creatures (for example) on a plausible analogy with real ones. The more incredible the central premise a reader has to accept, the more plausible the supporting details ought to be.

Margaret L. Carter

Carter's Crypt

Targeting a Readership Part 18 Targeting a Culture

Targeting a Readership

Part 18

Targeting a Culture

Previous parts of the Targeting a Readership series are indexed here:

https://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2013/10/index-to-targeting-readership-series-by.html

These posts are about marketing, where the first step is to determine who the decision makers buying your product are, where to find them, how to reach them, and thus how to craft a narrative hook that will make them remember your byline, maybe even the series title.

Marketing is heartless, mathematical, me-me-me oriented, and all about moving product at a profit (buy low, sell high).

Targeting is more about empathy, resonance, understanding.  Targeting is like entering a group conversation.  If you are not naturally a member of the group, nothing you can say will hook the attention of the group.

For a writer, that means writing swiftly, quickly, not getting trapped in endless rewriting, or in other words mastering the wordsmith's craft of vocabulary, grammar, spelling, punctuation and symbolism that evokes emotion.  The real trick to becoming prolific is to also master the template for the type of story your targeted market is willing to buy.

To the reader, the cost of a story includes not only the purchase price, but the reader's time and emotional investment.  Hence Netflix facilitated binge-watching of series that could hold up -- not so much the anthology series of yore, but today's more DALLAS type, prime-time soap story-arc series that progress at a crawl.

If you are a natural member of the group you target with your story, you will listen, follow the story of their narrative, and add to their narrative -- not insert your own narrative, not disrupt the conversation, not attract their attention, but rather further their adventures on the way to THEIR goal (which just happens also to be your own).

You won't be seen as the annoying pest, trying to butt in where they are not wanted.  You will be welcomed and your contribution to the discussion will be discussed.

So, for a writer, what exactly IS a "readership?"

One of the many useful ways to define a "readership" for marketing purposes is as a "culture."

So what's a "culture?"

The best place I know of to start molding your notion of "what" culture is happens to be a very old non-fiction book I've mentioned here many times, THE SILENT LANGUAGE by Edward T. Hall.


Note the cover blurb "targets" a readership neatly.  "THE SILENT LANGUAGE shows how cultural factors influence the individual behind his back, without his knowledge."

People who feel in charge of life, and who think they make their own independent decisions experience a frisson of alarm if they view this sentence as authoritative.  That emotional frisson rivets attention.

If this is seen on a book cover on a store's rack, the target will find his/her hand reaching for the book, turning it over, looking inside to find out more.  "Nobody can do that to me!  I won't allow it."

Readers come away from this (rather brief) book with a wide comprehension of "what" culture is, where it is inside themselves, and the writers among those readers start thinking of ways to "show don't tell" their Characters responding to Culture.

How can a writer "target" an entire CULTURE or sub-culture such as a certain generation among all residents of the USA?  Your chances of pulling off this stunt increase with your ability to define and identify a culture.  But you also have to understand what marketers mean by "targeting."

In How To Use Tarot And Astrology in Science Fiction Part 6 Confronting Change, we referenced this Time article

-------quote------
Consider this LONG PERSPECTIVE article from a Time writer.

https://time.com/5770140/millennials-change-american-politics/

That article traces the interactions between generations as Millennials sweep the reins of power from the Baby Boomer generation (as usual ignoring the Silent Generation).

---end quote------

And just after that reference, I wrote:

-----quote-------

PLUTO IN CAPRICORN is where we are now, and it is about CHANGE IN GOVERNMENT, shifting borders (we did that in Channel's Destiny, moved the Territory border to make room for Householdings).

This item on generation gap, shifting views, is related to a Blog post on writing craft I did a long while back:

https://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2009/10/astrology-just-for-writers-pt-6.html

About halfway down that blog post is a list of what signs Pluto was in at various points in history and how that played out in "generation gap" thinking.

Get a good grip on this principle, and the spectacle of NEWS today will suddenly make sense.

--------end quote-------

Each generation generates a "culture" of its own, and within it many sub-cultures.  A writer can build a world to showcase a story, but that story needs a "backstory" (each Character needs ancestors, a history, a changing perspective through life).

To learn how to convey, in symbolism, with few words, how Characters from different generations communicate, understand the generations in terms of culture.

That difference in culture has been termed "The Generation Gap."

Most often parents grow up to discover their children have ditched major tenets of the parent's and grandparent's generational-culture and behave in "deplorable" ways because of it.

The parents are not aware (because they don't see it in terms of culture) that they, themselves, did exactly the same thing and considered it righteous to ditch the elements of their parent's culture that no longer pertained to modern life.

The themes your reader are struggling with in daily life are mostly derived from the elements of their parent's culture that they see as deplorable and necessary to ditch.  So study that "generation gap."

Google "Targeting definition marketing," and get this definition:

-----quote------
Targeting in marketing is a strategy that breaks a large market into smaller segments to concentrate on a specific group of customers within that audience. It defines a segment of customers based on their unique characteristics and focuses solely on serving them.
------end quote------

Note the "focuses solely on serving them" -- but you have to know "who" them is before you can determine what "serving" means.

So bring THE SILENT LANGUAGE up into the 2020's by noting this article:

http://theconversation.com/hate-cancel-culture-blame-algorithms-129402


The Twitter/Facebook social-media, Web 2.0 tool-set put into the hands of humans whose culture included elements that prevented the adaptation to living in a world where you're personal, private, small circle of friends could be multiples of 10,000.

We came from villages of a dozen families where most people never traveled more than 50 miles from home.  We knew everyone - their grandparents and great-grandchildren (because people had children in their teens).  We associate IN DEPTH, by nature and by culture.  We reject anyone not a natural member of our group, our village culture.  Anyone "different" is rejected -- watch kindergarten and first grade children playing in a school yard.

REJECTION -- pecking the unfit to death as duck flocks will do -- is built into our physical bodies (not Souls, though, hence Soul Mates are often from different cultures).

Today, we live in the 3rd generation of a cultural-change sparked by Web 2.0

I noted that in 2008 on this blog entry:

https://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2008/11/i-love-web-20.html

And still delving into this phenomenon and what it means for book sales:

https://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2009/09/marketing-via-social-networking.html

In 2009 writers were collaborating via the Web

https://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2010/07/emigrating-to-future.html

And in 2010 I still saw vast joy in the freedom the Web was providing:

https://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2010/07/emigrating-to-future.html

In 2011 writers were already exploiting the social networking tools:

https://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2011/05/social-networking-is-learning-tool.html

It really got started in the 1980's as computers appeared in everyday houses, and those computers got online. In the 2000's kids were raised with the necessity of having a laptop in high school.  Now kids "must" have some kind of tablet computer for grammar school -- or schools are full of desks with screens.

Children raised in a computerized environment are now having kids - that's 3rd generation.  Their great grandparents didn't know how to type, but these people "thumb type" at the speed of light.

What has speed of thumb typing to do with Targeting a Culture?

Thumb typing is a cultural symbol, and it increases the broadcasting power of the youngest, least experienced in life, people growing up without being surrounded by a closed multi-generation community.

Classmates are from families who come from all different places, often speak different languages, certainly read different books, watch different TV shows, etc.  A "class" is just a bunch of kids who happen to be the same age.  They come from different cultures and hit different stages of maturity (as we mature, we shift cultural environment) at different ages.  And they REJECT that which is "different" and peck them to death on social media.

This younger culture has even named this PECK TO DEATH process -- "Cancel."

The school corridor version was named "crowding."

Now whole commercial chain stores, or brands, are being "crowded" to death (often real bankruptcy), and individuals are learning the hard way that if they stick up for the REJECTED, they, too, will be CANCELLED.

This experience, and watching their parents generation doing the same, will shape the themes they love most in stories.

From the article HATE CANCEL CULTURE BLAME ALGORITHMS

---quote------

A lot of attention has been given to repercussions of cancel culture on celebrities, from JK Rowling, to Kevin Hart to Lena Dunham.

Less talked about is the way algorithms actually perpetuate cancel culture.

-----end quote--------

The article identifies the widely used algorithm that, when activated, sends minor items (even personal opinion tweets or YouTube items by non-celebrities) viral as triggered by "outrage."

That's a current cultural artifact.  Eventually it will shift to some other response, but the magnifying power will remain and even grow.  The common villager whose heritage equips him to associate with about 1,000 people suddenly is aswim among millions and they are all facing him, yelling vile epithets.

The tiny firecracker of bullying and "crowding" - ganging up on the different one - now has become an atomic bomb, capable of destroying not just one teen-school-life, but millions of adult careers.

Humans don't know (on the SILENT LANGUAGE cultural level, the part of us that functions behind our back, without our knowledge) how to manage that much power.

Internationally, countries are struggling to keep "different" countries from attaining atomic missile capability.  We know we don't know how to handle that much power -- but the internet has swamped us before we can realize we don't know.

It is knowledge that has to be infused into our being on the pre-verbal level, before we learn to walk and talk.  Culture is pretty much set in stone by age 7, and one element of culture is kindness.  Not to just act kindly - but to have no unkind emotional responses to the "different" one.  A kind person doesn't FEEL like hitting back, gathering a mob and destroying the intruder.

To our 2020's online culture, that lack of hostile response to intruders is just plain Science Fiction Alien material -- no human could relate to it.

To portray a non-human Character, study the culture of your target readership, and create such an Alien to make them empathize with, and understand on that "behind his back, without his knowledge" level how to communicate across a cultural gap.

 The more people who understand on that level, the easier it will be for your children to live in their world, beyond the generation gap.

Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com

ANTI SOCIAL MEDIA Part 1

Not everything is anti-social.

Kudos, for instance, to Publishers Weekly (PW) for making their digital publication available.
https://www.digitalpw.com/digitalpw/20200323/MobilePagedReplica.action?pm=2&folio=COVER#pg1

Many authors are turning increasingly to social media, and to platforms such as Zoom, since live book launch events, book signings, readings, conferences and so forth are being cancelled.

The Authors Guild shared a guide for writers and authors on You Tube on how to use Zoom.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6X5qZBoGvWE&feature=youtu.be

The Electronic Freedom Foundation has shared some useful information about Zoom (and the information they retain about their users).
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/03/what-you-should-know-about-online-tools-during-covid-19-crisis

Like "the parson's nose" (more widely known in America as "the curate's egg"), offerings from The EFF tend to be good in parts.

And then, there is the Bah, Humbug! stuff.

For instance, allegedly, there are many online sites that appear to offer visitors choices about how much they agree to be tracked, and targeting with advertising, but according to sources, the clickable link is the internet equivalent of a placebo. It does nothing.

David Zetoony,  writing for Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP explains.

Original.
https://www.bclplaw.com/en-GB/thought-leadership/what-percentage-of-opt-in-cookie-consent-banners-ignore-visitors-choices.html

Lexology Link.

Then, there is the bad review, and what can you do  (as pertains to hotels on the receiving end).

Blogging globally for the Australia- based law firm Baker McKenzie, lawyers Graeme Dickson,  Andrew Stewart, Kerrie Duong, and Nicholas Kraegen discuss entertaining and scurrilous examples of probably false and defamatory observations made on social media by anonymous "reviewers".

Original
https://bakerxchange.com/rv/ff005ab4c2f4a024e609e3a0ac479512f6dbb38e

Lexology Link.

Presumably, if the reviewer actually captures a bed bug or two, and keeps them for proof, and also takes date stamped photographs of the damage inflicted to the body by the alleged bed bugs, there's not a lot the hotel can do.

Authors may extrapolate.

Some authors in a discussion forum have recently noticed the appearance of probably malicious sites with names that differ from that of the widely-trusted Facebook by a mere character or two. Beware "facedbook" links, for example.

Legal blogger Sandy Zhang, writing for Eaglegate discusses "the lawsuit that is shaking up the tech world" in which Facebook sues a cheap domain name seller, instead of going after small time name-squatters and phishers.

Original
https://eaglegate.com.au/resources/news/articles/facebook-unleashes-legal-hounds-against-deceptive-web

Lexology Link.

EFF, also has something interesting to say about phishing and scams when people are feeling vulnerable and online more than ever before.
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/03/phishing-time-covid-19-how-recognize-malicious-coronavirus-phishing-scams

It's a very good guide!

All the best,

Rowena Cherry 

SPACE SNARK™ http://www.spacesnark.com/  http://www.rowenacherry.com

Risk Assessment and Fear

So schools, bars, restaurants, theaters, concert venues, casinos, etc. in Maryland have been ordered to close, and gatherings of more than fifty people are forbidden. Both of the cons I was scheduled to attend this spring have been canceled, sadly but inevitably. While of course we'll obey the official edicts and exercise prudence in daily life, I can't help thinking some reactions are overkill. The panic-buying, for instance, aspects of which baffle me. Bottled water stripped from store shelves, when there's no threat to the drinking water supply? We have electricity, running water, heat, and cable and aren't at risk of losing them. Major retailers reassure us that there's no long-term shortage, only a distribution problem that will clear up rapidly if people stop panic-buying. If everybody would just buy what they require for a week or two at a time, the stores could keep up, and we'd all be able to get what we need.

It's a familiar truism of human psychology that we overestimate rare dangers and underestimate common ones. The extraordinary threats draw attention BECAUSE they're rare. Here are two short pieces on that tendency:

Jared Diamond on Common Risks

Drawing the Wrong Lessons from Horrific Events

As is often pointed out, we're far more likely to get into a car accident driving to the airport than to die in a plane crash. We're more at risk of injury or death in traffic on the way to the big-box store than of exposure to the coronavirus (in this region, at least). The population of Maryland is about six million. Our county has a population of 573,000. As of Monday, there are 37 confirmed cases in Maryland, only two in this county. Since members of our family haven't traveled abroad lately or come into contact with anyone who has, our individual risk of crossing paths with the virus is near zero. Yet the daily deluge of breaking news still makes me anxious (mainly, on a personal level, about being unable to restock the items we need for daily living), and to stop brooding over it takes real effort.

Psychologist Steven Pinker has a section on phobias in his HOW THE MIND WORKS. He notes that almost all phobias (irrationally exaggerated fears) fall into a few categories, derived from things that threatened our prehistoric ancestors. Hence our common fears of spiders and snakes, even though most species encountered in urban areas of North America are harmless to humans. "Fears in modern city-dwellers protect us from dangers that no longer exist, and fail to protect us from dangers in the world around us." Instead of spiders and snakes, we should be afraid of "guns, driving fast, driving without a seatbelt, lighter fluid, and hair dryers near bathtubs." While we may exercise sensible caution about such things, most of us aren't terrified of them (although driving-phobic people do exist, and transportation assistance is available for those who can't force themselves to drive across the Chesapeake Bay Bridge in Maryland). For every freeway-phobic person, large numbers suffer from fear of flying, despite the greater safety of the latter mode of travel.

In C. S. Lewis's THE SCREWTAPE LETTERS, senior devil Screwtape reminds his nephew Wormwood that "precautions have a tendency to increase fear." When standard precautions become routine, however, "this effect disappears." (Think how blase we've become about airport security lines. I remember when dinosaurs roamed the Earth and non-flying companions could accompany departing travelers right up to the gate.) Screwtape advises Wormwood to keep the "patient" obsessing over all sorts of extra things he can do "which seem to make him a little safer" and can be developed into "a series of imaginary life-lines" in response to imagined potential developments. (Accumulating a hoard of bottled water even though there's no threat to the public supply?) Earlier in the book, Screwtape points out that "real resignation, at the same moment, to a dozen different and hypothetical fates, is almost impossible."

One of my favorite Lewis quotes comes from an essay he wrote in answer to the question, "How are we to live under the threat of the atomic bomb?" It's a longish passage, but I think it's worth reproducing here:

"In one way we think a great deal too much of the atomic bomb. 'How are we to live in an atomic age?' I am tempted to reply: 'Why, as you would have lived in the sixteenth century when the plague visited London almost every year, or as you would have lived in a Viking age when raiders from Scandinavia might land and cut your throat any night; or indeed, as you are already living in an age of cancer, an age of syphilis, an age of paralysis, an age of air raids, an age of railway accidents, an age of motor accidents.' . . . .

"In other words, do not let us begin by exaggerating the novelty of our situation. This is the first point to be made: and the first action to be taken is to pull ourselves together. If we are all going to be destroyed by an atomic bomb, let that bomb when it comes find us doing sensible and human things - praying, working, teaching, reading, listening to music, bathing the children, playing tennis, chatting to our friends over a pint and a game of darts - not huddled together like frightened sheep and thinking about bombs. They may break our bodies (a microbe can do that) but they need not dominate our minds."

As a last resort, we could reread Daniel Defoe's A JOURNAL OF THE PLAGUE YEAR, Stephen King's THE STAND, or Connie Willis's DOOMSDAY BOOK and remind ourselves our current plight isn't nearly so bad as that, nor is it likely to become so.

In case you have time to watch a video of about six minutes, here's a calming message from a layman of our church—with a Maine Coon. Cats make everything better:

Jeff Conover

Margaret L. Carter

Carter's Crypt