BarCamp Milwaukee was this past weekend (October 13 & 14), and I did two presentations: one was on Electronic Publishing, which I've talked about before, and the other was on "Fast-paced Fiction".

The session was a bit misnamed, I suppose, as we talked about a variety of things, but mostly it was geared towards the concept of online writing and creating fiction in somewhat non-traditional ways. In the session, itself, we actually wrote what might be called a short story, but it was a fun collaborative effort, that I think everyone enjoyed taking part in. We also talked about shared-world projects, flash fiction, and collaborative works. There are an innumerable amount of each one of those on the internet these days, and I think they're wonderful ways of expressing yourself as a writer. (At the end of the post, I'll link to some of those sites).

I think one of the things that I felt the group really latched onto was the idea that traditional writing is certainly the best means of making a name for oneself as a writer, but because of the internet, there are more ways - and more inventive ways - to truly present oneself and stand out from other writers who may not have as firm a grasp on the internet as you.

Outside of a good writers group, I think online communication with other writers is a great way to continue to keep yourself in writing mode. If you're not always writing, then it's hard to get yourself motivated to write. Having contact as often as possible with other writers is great motivation, and I think that any one of the three ways mentioned above is a good way of doing that - even if it's just a casual thing.

Having a writing buddy is good, too, but I'll touch on that more next time, as I discuss the upcoming National Novel-Writing Month, which I will eagerly be working on throughout November.

Flash Fiction:
365 Tomorrows
EveryDayFiction
Flashshot

Shared-World Projects:
Fargoth

Collaborative Works:
Viyala Project

Recently at the Milwaukee Writers Workshop we discussed poetry. (It's a Google Group, so you have to register to be a part of it). Generally the group discusses works of fiction written in prose, so it was a nice change of pace to discuss something a bit more colorful.

What I found most interesting, though, was the overwhelming presence - or lack thereof - of punctuation in the poems. Now, there's nothing wrong with free verse poetry, but just because it's a poem doesn't mean a writer should automatically nix the punctuation.

"E. E. Cummings did it, though," you may say. And I would respond: Yes, but Mr. Cummings was an experimental master. What he did was unique. Doing it just because you think it's the proper way to do things doesn't make you an emulator; it makes you look like you don't know your craft.

The real discuss came down to grammar, syntax, and semantics. In order to play with the rules of grammar to craft a truly fluid poem, you have the know the rules of grammar. It was obvious after reading many of these poems that knowledge of grammar was in short supply. It's not entirely the writer's fault, but I believe that there is still some fault that lies in the hands of the writer. If you wish to perfect your craft as a writer or a poet, you have to know the craft; and I think with poetry - more so than with prose - you really do have to know the rules of grammar and syntax inside and out in order to manipulate them in a way to craft your poem effectively.

If you want an example of a master of this, read some of Emily Dickinson works. Her use of punctuation is phenomenal, and when you know the rules behind the use of particular pieces of punctuation, her poetry becomes more powerful.

The point is, ultimately, is not that you should always use punctuation in your poetry; the point is that in order to bend the rules of grammar in your poetry, you have to know them. If you don't, take a class, pick up a grammar manual, or ask someone. One can never learn enough.

John McIntyre, the assistant managing editor for the copy desk at The Baltimore Sun, and writes You Don't Say, gave everyone the heads-up for a new blog called Words to the Wise, which is written by Kathy Schneck of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel here in Milwaukee.

It's nice to have people close to home. I feel a little isolated at times way out here in the Midwest, even though we're so close to Chicago. There aren't all that many fiction editors or agents in the Milwaukee area, and it'll be nice to read some thoughts from someone like Kathy, who works for a newspaper like The Journal.

I shall eagerly revisit and comment on it. Though I will say that there seems to be a lot of Journal-reader-based commenting going on, so I suppose that means I shall have to work more diligently on pouring over the paper every morning before work.

This article came across my desk today (which has been packed with more than I knew what to do with lately - hence the delay in posts).

It's a good article, for the most part, and I really only wanted to comment on the fact that it's interesting that it's found a site completely unrelated to writing at all. As a process, creative writing is taxing at best and harrowing at worst. It's a job that I love, but sometimes I wish I'd gone with something a little more profitable.

There are a few things in the article that I did want to respond to.

First,

...In the end, there’s no such thing as the “perfect size” for writing. Short isn’t bad, and neither is long. That is, unless either size is forced...

A lot of people seem to think that this is true. A lot of publishers want you to think this is true. The bigger the book is, the less likely it is to sell in today's market because people have shorter attention spans, on average, when it comes to reading. Ironically, though, no one seems to be publishing novellas, which would be a much more marketable reading portion for the average reader.

Second,

If you don’t know what to write about, write fantasy: it’s the easiest to work with...Everything takes work.

Nothing could be more true. I've had relatively vehement discussions (for literature geeks, I mean) about the "validity" of fantasy fiction - or any genre fiction, really. Most people have the misconception that "escapist" literature (and I despise that term) is an easy way out when you're stuck for what to write. You can certainly make up whatever you want a lot of the time, but you always have to be consistent with what you make up, and that's what hangs people up when they start to write it.

Lastly,

...critics have written many papers explaining just why there is no more for literature to truly achieve.

While their arguments make sense, given enough arguing back and forth, never assume that everything has been done. There is always some sort of new grounds to explore...

The greatest achievement as a writer isn't to write something new, it's to write something fresh. If you can write something that can catch your readers attention in a way they've never experienced, then that's an accomplishment. It doesn't matter if it's a story that has been written before, it hasn't been written the way you wrote it - and that's the challenge.

I've been reading through Amy Einsohn's book The Copyeditor's Handbook (and yes, that's copyeditor - one word - not copy editor or copy-editor), and I've found a lot of interesting things in it that I wasn't fully aware of before now.

However, one thing in it bothers me - and has for a long time as far as grammar is concerned. The use of the question mark. Or more appropriately, the use of the question mark within dialogue in fictional works - or even in quoted material in general.

I took a class on advanced usage back in college, and it was then that I began to formulate the idea that there were certain marks of punctuation that could come and go as I wanted them to. Some, obviously, can't be excluded from any list (periods, commas, quotation marks), but there are some that - in my opinion - can be nixed on certain occasions, depending on the circumstances.

The question mark is one of them. As a parallel example, I offer this:

"John, you're nuts!" Marty shouted.

vs

"John, you're nuts," Marty exclaimed.

There's very little question about the meaning of either of those two examples. In fact, there's no difference between them. What's different is the emphasis on the lack of the punctuation. The exclamation mark certainly does add emphasis, but it's unnecessary, and in nearly every piece of fiction if it were omitted, an editor would find no fault in the author.

In the same fashion, I believe the question mark can be omitted in certain circumstances.

"Who's coming to the party, Donna?" (Sheila asked).

vs

"Who's coming to the party, Donna," Sheila asked.

In a question, there's no emphasis needed. So why use the mark of punctuation if it's redundant? In the first example, it might be assumed that there would be a previous reference to Sheila, so the dialogue tag could be removed altogether and the question mark remains. On the other hand, if the dialogue tag is necessary, if word 'asked' directly addresses the question, and it is my opinion that the (?) is unnecessary.

In her book, Einsohn claims that there are "stronger" and "weaker" marks of punctuation and that "when two punctuation marks are called for at the same location, only the stronger is retained" (Einsohn, pg. 112). I would have to disagree. First, I don't believe that a comma would follow the question mark anyway (as she states in the example following her quote); second, I don't think that any mark of punctuation is truly stronger than another, unless you're dealing with a period, which is about the most necessary terminal mark there is.

All in all, I think there is something to be said for the leeway and flexibility of the language. I'm not trying to persuade everybody to change their way of writing. I am merely trying to present another method of communicating your thoughts on paper.

I was discussing magazines with a colleague the other day (because we were talking about my magazine and a concept he's working on for his own), and the topic of classification came up - as in, we were tagging books with certain literary labels.

The idea of literary classifications always bothers a lot of people, especially within the genre community, because they think it's a way for the literary elite (whoever they are) to set the works aside as unimportant. To me, literary classification is a method for discussing similar literary works in a scholarly way.

It's hard to imagine sitting down with a copy of Brave New World and Hitchhiker's Guide and comparing the similar themes within their pages. I would say it's nearly impossible to find them. One is a literary work that points out the social implications of trying to create a utopian society; the other is a humorous look at how stupid people can be. So classification helps in that it identifies themes and particulars that are unique to certain types of literature. I think it's not only useful but it's necessary for anyone trying to discuss a work beyond "Well, I think it's got a nice story".

Coming up this October is BarCamp Milwaukee 2. For those who don't know entirely what that is, here is a brief explanation: it's an "un"-conference designed to allow the community of technology-based professionals to get together and exchange through seminars, demos, and expositions. It's a full weekend, and it's certainly worth the time - considering it's free.

My wife - who has helped a considerable amount on the project - mentioned to me that I ought to do a seminar for BarCamp because I've been working more avidly online and with online publication. So I mentioned to her that I could do a conference on "ePublishing", and she said that it didn't mean the same thing to me that it did to most of the people attending this conference.

So what is "ePublishing"? Wikipedia has this:

Electronic publishing includes the digital publication of ebooks and electronic articles, and the development of digital libraries and catalogs. Electronic publishing has become common in scientific publishing where it has been argued that peer-reviewed paper scientific journals are in the process of being replaced by electronic publishing. Although network distribution is nowadays strongly associated with electronic publishing, there are many non network electronic publications such as Encyclopedias on CD and DVD, as well as technical and reference publications relied on by mobile users and others without reliable and high speed access to a network.

More importantly, though - or rather, more pertinent to me - is this:

Electronic publishing is increasingly popular in works of fiction as well as with scientific articles. Electronic publishers are able to provide quick gratification for late-night readers, books that customers might not be able to find in standard book retailers (erotica is especially popular in eBook format), and books by new authors that would be unlikely to be profitable for traditional publishers.

In my industry, ePublishing is the publication of work in an electronic medium. Ezines are very popular now, as are downloaded files from regular print magazines. My own magazine offers both options, as there are plenty of people who prefer one over the other.

So what does it mean for the more technologically-minded individual - the kind who will be attending this conference?

This is the answer I got out of my wife:

"[Part of] the problem is that I can't, technically, define it for you. The other problem is the difference between the 1995 epublishing* and the 2007 epublishing. And a lot of people are still operating [with] of the former definition."

And this is the answer I got out of one of her colleagues, Pete Prodoehl (it harkens on the same point):

"[It's] anything in electronic format as opposed to print. I think some people make a distinction, in that they consider 'e-publishing' as a way to force people to pay for electronic versions of stuff . . . DRM and the like."

Both Pete and my wife are web designers, developers and the sort. So they're talking about a vast array of options when it comes to publishing. In my line of work - editing and publishing of fiction - it's almost entirely centered around the publication of works of fiction. That's the only definition there is.

So going into BarCamp I have this to keep in mind and to consider when talking to a group of web-savvy individuals who are going to know the difference or only know one meaning. It's the case in other instances, as well. When you're in one industry, and you have to cross over - for whatever reason - be sure you know your audience.

*1995 epublishing is more specifically oriented to the companies and communities that ran on the internet. Electronic publishing focused on web-linking and 'digital multimedia' rather than the publication of materials online.

The poignancy of such a short post is potent. I cannot say that there was much of an initial reaction to this other than: "Wow. That is very true."

Here, though, is a slightly more well-thought-out response to such a statement.

Editors are necessary. Just as one wouldn't try to fix their broken car if they've never changed the oil, one should also not try to fix their own prose if their knowledge of the language is only rudimentary. And sadly, there are more people that can change their own oil.

Those of us who have chosen to be editors have done so because we have a knowledge of the language beyond that which is presented in high school grammar lessons. There is more to it than commas before conjunctions and capitalizing proper nouns. The intricacies of syntax are equally as impressive as the webwork of pipes that goes into a high-rise building.

So you write your piece; you read over it to make sure it sounds nice; you hand it off to friend who gives it the nod. Fine. You're done if all you're doing is sending it to the local community bulletin. If you're looking for publication outside of that, here are some tips:

1. Join a writers group. These people know their craft - some better than others - and can point out a variety of things missing.
2. Find a good editor. If you're looking for publication, find someone that knows the market and knows the minute details in your piece that need attention.
3. Don't trust your friends. While friends may be reliable in other situations, unless they're that editor mentioned above, they may not know what advice to truly give you.
4. Also, don't trust family. Family has only the best intentions and most of the time, they just pat you on the back.
5. Lastly, trial & error. Start sending things out without having someone look at it if you're confident in your work. When you start to get it back, then try one of the other options.

Editors do what they do because they love language, and they love the beauty of prose (or poetry). They want pieces to shine and to bring out the message that the author is trying to present. They're not there to make your life miserable by showing you what you've done wrong. Rely on them like you would the plumber.

I really don't enjoy this topic, but it has come to my attention that it should be addressed. For any of your who are interested in my magazine, you've probably noticed that there are still not any print copies available. I'll say it here, but I'm sure I'll say it again: I am sincerely embarrassed by this. It is not my habit to fall short on delivery of a promise.

I've currently been working with a printer, who I shall not mention for reasons of a conflict of interest, and with whom I'm growing increasingly disappointed. My layout & design team sent out a galley to the company to be printed. Here were the problems:

• Their version of Quark is out-of-date
• Email has been "spotty"
• Phone messages have gone unanswered
• The machine operator is now currently on vacation, thus halting production

This is why I dislike having to deal with other people to take care of my work for me. If only I could print these things myself.

This discussion truly ought to center around the idea of writing up a contract. I should have done so. I have a lot to say about contracts - because they are important in this business of freelancing and small business. So now I am working to resolve the issue by going with someone whom I can rely on.

All I can really say is be careful in who you choose as friends. Professionalism seems to be a dying quality all around us.

I’ve noticed over the past few months that there is a sincere lack of blogs on the topic of publishing and editing from someone not in a big-name company. Sure, there are plenty of blogs from agents and publicists and such, but none of them ever really seem to touch on topics that mean anything to new authors. In fact, a lot of them just seem to talk about their lives outside of work, which I can’t say really interests me. I want to read your blog to gain information – not see your vacation photos.

The majority of blogs I read within my trade seem to be slightly unrelated to the realm of fiction. I wish there were more.

There are a lot of varying opinions about writing out there – as evidenced by the pile of blogs that sit (many times, unread) in my genre category on Google Reader. However, I am eager to hear opinions from fellow fiction editors about editing. other opinions breed discussion, which lends me to think about why I do what I do, which then affirms my decision to have jumped into a pool full of hungry sharks – also known as fledgling writers looking for their big break. (I do love all of you).

My colleagues within the trade seem to have migrated almost entirely towards the realm of genre fiction – which I admit is my specialty and which is my greatest interest. Those people, though, are mostly writers and reviewers, not editors.

So this is a call to my cohorts in the small press/freelance/independent world of editing: where are you?