My "hot button" post yesterday has generated a lot of comments… but I didn’t want two interesting responses to get lost amidst all the discussion about fanfic.
Here’s an excerpt of what PK the Bookeemonster had to say about the influence of crime fiction blogs:
But if blogs went away, I would continue to enjoy books without the
"insider knowledge." And that is a part of it, the insiders versus the
outsiders, and as you stated, there is another dark side to blogging
which is the power the more popular ones have similar to the cliques in
high school all over again: if you’re not in, you’re out. Ken Bruen is
an excellent example. I’ve tried his books and they don’t click with
me; that’s just me and my taste but they’re equally valid as those who
do like his stuff. There is a strong undercurrent in the mystery world
promoting the "coolness" of noir, dark novels which is great but it
shouldn’t come at the expense of any other subgenre. The phenomenon of
blogging is bringing mystery lovers together but also separating us
into niches of us and them.
Author/editor Michael Bracken discussed, among other things, the unfairness of lumping all POD publishers as vanity presses, particularly as it applies to the issue of the MWA restricting active membership to"published authors. Here’s an excerpt:
There must also be an effort to make clear distinctions between
legitimate small presses and self-publishing operations. Unfortunately,
this is difficult to do. For quite some time–and still in the minds of
some–any book printed using print-on-demand technology was
automatically presumed to be less than legitimate. The growing number
of legitimate publishers using PoD technology is changing that
perception.A similar situation applies to on-line and electronic publishers.
The low cost of becoming an electronic publisher means every Joe,
Frank, and Reynolds can be a publisher without any knowledge of
publishing. The few legitimate and legitimately "professional"
electronic markets are difficult to separate from the non-professional.
He also suggests that the MWA might want to consider the upside of expanding the membership rather than restricting it.
MWA currently has the highest annual dues of the four professional
writing organizations to which I belong, without offering significantly
more for the money. Perhaps if we had a few more affiliates carry some
of the organization’s financial weight, we might be able to lower dues
or increase member benefits.
And if we treat aspiring mystery writers as
professionals-in-training, teaching them the things they need to know
to become successfully published, perhaps they will become the future
lifeblood of the MWA. If we turn our backs on them, how long will it be
before the MWA is nothing but geriatric used-to-bes paying outrageous
dues?
Your thoughts?
The MWA would become close to worthless if they admitted everyone as an active member. What would be the point of joining? Their mission is to promote the careers of mystery writers, not fans, not wannabes, not reviewers. (If you haven’t published a book, if you’re not making money at at, you don’t have a career yet. Thus it’s not the group for you yet.)
Letting everyone in makes about as much sense as the WGA opening up their rolls to people who like to watch movies. It’s a professional writers group, and should remain such.
It’s hard to deal with outfits like PublishAmerica because there are a few good books in there, and a few people are probably making a few dollars. However, I think MWA should deny membership to those whose sole publication credit is with a company that’s recognized as a con by almost everybody but the pigeons. This would deny membership to a few people we might prefer to accept, but the alternative is to allow slush pile rejects control of what’s supposed to be a professional organization. (And presumably, the good ones will eventually surface in the legit world and we’ll get their dues then.)
However Michael is right: The use of POD technology shouldn’t be a reason for denial of membership. Business model, not printing technology, should be the criterion.
For reasons that I’ll get into later on this week, I’m finally able to join up with MWA as an active member. And although I could have joined as an affiliate, and then as an associate, in my mind I feel I can do more as an active member with the opportunity to vote, serve on committees, and the like.
So while others feel the minimum earnable income limit might be a hindrance, I saw it as a goal, one that was reachable and attainable.
What’s wrong with that?
Too sensible. You’ll never make it as a vanity press author.
Quit dropping hints, Sarah! :p
Yeah that’s too much like working your way up the food chain. Vanity press authors for the mostpart think they’re already there. Legitmate POD’s are as few as the percentage of PA authors who are good and just caught in the trap. It’s a technology made not to sell in the way we all know the term to be defined.
Unfortunately, David, your comment that “[t]he MWA would become close to worthless if they admitted everyone as an active member. What would be the point of joining? Their mission is to promote the careers of mystery writers, not fans, not wannabes, not reviewers. (If you haven’t published a book, if you’re not making money at at, you don’t have a career yet. Thus it’s not the group for you yet.)” is exactly the kind of “us” vs. “them” argument that overlooks a great number of writers that don’t fit either end of the spectrum.
Yes, if the MWA admitted everyone as an active member, the organization might be worthless. But they don’t. The MWA already has a non-voting category of membership for non-writers and not-yet-writers.
More importantly though, why does one need to have a book published to be a mystery writer? Why is it that mystery novelists (and I’m generalizing here, not picking on David specificially) who want to reform the MWA seem to constantly ignore those writers who write short mystery fiction?
Why is it that mystery novelists (and I’m generalizing here, not picking on David specificially) who want to reform the MWA seem to constantly ignore those writers who write short mystery fiction?
Published or unpublished? Surely having your short story published in a compilation (sp?) book of short mystery stories or (do they admit writers published in literary magazines?) would count as being published, more so at least than writers-in-progress.
I’m not a published mystery novelist, so I speak as someone who isn’t eligible to join the MWA. You can meet the eligibility requirements with short fiction, though.
The question really isn’t about whether short story writers can join MWA; they can and the requirements are spelled out on the MWA web site. The question is why discussions of membership requirement reforms frequently ignore short story writers and other writers who fall in that gap between the well-established and the want-to-be.
“More importantly though, why does one need to have a book published to be a mystery writer?”
This stikes me as bizarre. Why can’t I just join the Operating Engineers? Well for starters I haven’t driven heavy equipment. Why can’t I just join WGA? No produced screenplay. I’ve written two but that’s not enough. I don’t have a problem with that. Why can’t I just join SAG? Because it’s easy enough to get in as it is with the one path most use: union vouchers as a background performer or a stand-in. Or both. This requires a certainly level of finaggling. You have to get and perform union work before being allowed to join and pay the high fee. I did that, but I wouldn’t call it easy.
Diagnosis Murder and Dr. Quinn got me there but it was a reward for work done well and recognized by the directors. That’s a test passed and graded.
My experience has been that there’s little gained in arguing with prolific authors from POD-based presses. The defense always leads me back to the source. It matters who publishes your work. That’s the gist of it.
Sadly, Mark, you’ve missed the point. It isn’t a question of published vs. unpublished. It’s a question of novels vs. short fiction.
To use your example back at you, it’s like saying only a writer with a produced movie of the week can join WGA. Having a produced half-hour sitcom just doesn’t cut it.
I wouldn’t call it sad. My question is published by whom? Some e-zine? A download e-book anthology? There are certain criteria to be met and most things published online only or POD just don’t count as publishing credits. What have I missed now?
I think the reality of the MWA, or any other professional writer’s group, is that there is very little they can do to help writers of short fiction. That’s not to say they shouldn’t try, but considering the virtual absence of a market for it, what can you hope to happen?
“There are certain criteria to be met and most things published online only or POD just don’t count as publishing credits” brings us almost full circle. Every professional writers’ organization I belong to is facing this issue: What constitutes “published”?
Unfortunately, there’s no absolute answer that will have universal application. “[M]ost things published online only” may not be professionally published. So what constitutes the exception? “[M]ost things published […] POD” may not be professionally published. Again, what constitutes the exception?
Professional writers’ organizations struggle with the answers to these questions. Unfortunately, the technology for reproducing and distributing our work changes faster than we can address these issues.
My concern throughout the discussion is to ensure that work that doesn’t clearly fit either end of the spectrum (bestselling novel published by major NY house at one end, perhaps, and never-appeared in print in any form at the other end) is given fair and appropriate consideration and that the line between “professional” and “unprofessional” isn’t drawn arbitrarily because someone or some group is unwilling to carefully examine that gray area between the extremes.
Would an agent or publisher we’ve heard of accept those gray area rules? Are you the exception you’re talking about? Am I?
What we can hope to happen, David, is a reasonably level playing field where short fiction writers are treated in a manner similar to novelists and that they have an equal voice in any organization of professional writers.
Am I the gray area exception, Mark? I doubt it. I’ve been writing professionally for about thirty years, and I currently earn a living as a freelance writer/editor. I have enough sales to enough professional markets that I don’t worry about being an exception.
On the other hand, I’ve certainly placed work with venues across all shades of that gray area, going all the way back to the pre-electronic days of science fiction fanzines and semi-prozines printed on mimeographs when writers had some of the same discussions about the differences between professional and non-professional markets.
“I have enough sales to enough professional markets that I don’t worry about being an exception.”
How confident. Who bought the work and what are the sales figures? Where is the novel with HarperCollins, RH, St. Martin’s and the like? POD only is not the top of the heap by anyone’s reckoning. I’m afraid all I see is gray in your mind. It isn’t in mine.
who cares?
I agree. The MWA began as an organization for professional mystery writers and should remain so. I remember how I felt when I got my WGA card… I knew then that I’d become a professional TV writer and I was thrilled. I felt the same way when I qualified to join the MWA. I think the more flexible MWA becomes in their admission requirements the less meaning membership will actually have. Is that elitist? Yes, it is…and it should be. What is the point of having a professional organization if you let in anybody who can pay the dues?
Thriller writers felt under-served by the MWA… so what did they do? They created their own organization, the International Thriller Writers for professional writers of thriller novels and screenplays. The ITW also has rigid membership requirements…as well they should. The requirments of membership go a long way towards defining an organizations goals and identity.
Where does this leave short story mystery writers? Screwed, probably. The market for mystery short stories is all but evaporating. My suggestion? If there’s a viable number of disenfranchised writers, start your own organization… the Mystery and Suspense Short Story Writers of America.
I’m doing something like that right now.I’m in the early stages of organzing, with a bunch of other writers, an organization for people who toil in the world of tie-ins, novelizations and other licensed writing. We’re forming the International Association of Media Tie-In Writers (IAMTW, which is also an acronym for “I AM a TIE-IN WRITER”). We’ve had a Yahoo Discussion Group going for some months now, made up of the leading writers in the field, and have hashed out some of the issues, goals, and pit-falls of creating an organization.
Anyway, this comment is my long winded way of me saying I’m all for the MWA becoming more exclusive and less inclusive, even if that leaves some short story writers or POD authors in the cold.
When I was first POD/self-published, and I learned of the requirement, I have to admit it irritated me. I even contemplated attempting to get around it, which the lovely G. Miki Hayden gently assured me couldn’t be done. I didn’t want to be lumped in with all unpublished writers. I’d worked for fifteen years as a technical writer and editor, and while that didn’t qualify me as a creative writer, here I was being grouped with people I knew couldn’t string a sentence together. That hurt. But that was before I knew much about the publishing world.
I think if fledgling authors educate themselves a little and think this through, they’ll come to realize why the rules make sense, and that it’s a good thing MWA has a set of standards. I’m still not a member, but hope to be. As Sarah said, the best way to look at the requirement is as a goal.
Why?
Because MWA is a professional organization and they have a prestigious award program, neither of which would be taken as seriously if just anyone could be an active member. And anyone who’s ever had to come up with a set of guidelines like this knows there’s no perfect place to draw the line. No written rule like this can account for every scenario. Short of taking the time to read every applicant’s written work, the guidelines they’ve come up with make sense and are fair. The organization is a benefit to its members, the publishing world, and the reading public for this very reason, a specific set of standards to shoot for and judge from. Unfortunately it’s impossible to apply any such thing fairly to every individual writer and their situation.
It’s a goal to meet not figure out how to evade.