Mystery Writing

The MWA has been criticized in some quarters for favoring the big houses over small presses. But as Publisher’s Weekly notes, the Edgar nominations this year tell a different story:

To nobody’s surprise, when the Mystery Writers of America announced the
finalists for the 2008 Edgar Awards last week  titles from the large
New York houses dominated the eight (out of a total of 13) categories
dealing with books. But one small Wisconsin press is more than holding
its own among the 35 books and five short stories selected as this
year’s Edgar Awards nominees. Three of the 15 titles released this past
year by Bleak House Books in Madison, an imprint of Big Earth Books,
have been nominated for 2008 Edgar Awards in three different
categories: Soul Patch by Reed Farrel Coleman (Best Novel), Head Games
by Craig McDonald (Best First Novel), and "Blue Note" by Stuart M.
Kaminsky from the Chicago Blues collection (Best Short Story).

Bleak House isn’t the only small press represented on the Edgar list this year. There are also titles from McFarland & Co, Serpent’s Tail, Hard Case Crime, Rookery Press, Level Best Books, Akashic,  Clarion, American Girl, and Busted Flush.

The Mystery Writers of America has revised the language of their definition of "self-publication" for membership application, publisher approval, and Edgar eligibility. The changes were made for greater clarity and specificity. 

“Self-published”
or “cooperatively published” works include, but are not limited to:

 a) Those works for which
the author has paid all or part of the cost of publication, marketing,
distribution of the work, or any other fees pursuant to an agreement between
the author and publisher, cooperative publisher or book packager;

b) Works printed and
bound by a company that does not sell or distribute the work to
brick-and-mortar bookstores;

c) Those works published
by a privately held publisher or in collaboration with a book packager wherein the
writer has a familial relationship with the publisher, editor, or any
managerial employee, officer, director or owner of the publisher or book
packager;

d) Those works published
by companies or imprints that do not publish other authors;

e) Those works published
by a publisher or in collaboration with a book packager in which the author has
a direct or indirect financial interest;

f) Those works published
in an anthology or magazine in which the author is also an editor, except an
anthology or magazine for which the author is a guest editor.

g) Those works published
in an anthology or magazine wherein the author has a familial relationship with
the editor or publisher.

Lately, Hard Case Crime editor and publisher Charles Ardai has gone to great pains to claim he’s not really an editor and publisher…and that his book SONGS OF INNOCENCE, which was published under his imprint, isn’t self-published and therefore should be eligible for Edgar consideration.
I guess he forgot about the interview he gave for this month’s issue of Mystery News about the evolution  of Hard Case Crime:

…and [Max Phillips] went off and mocked up some dummy covers to show me what it might look like if we did publish our own books in the old style. I’d worked as an editor of mystery anthologies for years, so it was simple for me to go to my bookshelves and compile a list of some great and undeservedly forgotten novels it would be fun for us to reprint. And Max and I are both writers ourselves, so we agreed we’d each write a book of our own for the line, guaranteeing that we’d have at least two original novels along with all the reprints.

Perry Middlemiss clued me in to this interview with Garry Disher, the author of the Wyatt novels. I’m a huge fan of the Wyatt books, which I read in one week after novelist Scott Phillips made me buy them all when we were browsing in a bookstore together. Although there are six Wyatt novels and they read like one, big continuous story, so you really must read them in order…if you can find them. They have been out-of-print for years.

Wyatt is an Australian version of Donald Westlake’s Parker, which was Disher’s inspiration. Disher says:

Yes, Wyatt was inspired by the 1960s
Parker novels of Donald Westlake (writing as Richard Stark). I’ve
acknowledged this several times in interviews. In fact, I think we
crime writers build on the traditions and authors who have come before
us — not copying or stealing, but adapting and building on. I liked the
cool, focussed, meticulous air of Parker, and I liked the
crime-from-the-inside nature of the books, and started with that kind
of character and approach when I set out to write crime fiction (I’d
already had “literary” novels and stories published). I didn’t want to
create another kind of private eye or cop, it had been done before. I
know I write about a cop in the Challis novels, but they differ from
other types of cop novels in several senses: a regional rather than a
city setting; a main cop, but also an ensemble cast of other cops; a
main crime, but also several minor crimes; the public, workplace and
private lives of the characters; an interest in the sociology of a
region.

[…]we never learn much about him (and nor should
we), but I think he’s a more rounded and complex character that Parker.
Also, the Wyatt novels are longer than, and structured differently
from, the Parker novels. Ultimately, Wyatt and his capers are
inventions, my inventions, not mere copies. Yes, they’re a tribute, and
I had fun with the Parker model, but I worked hard at the writing and
ensured they succeeded on their own terms.

The best news in the interview is that Disher is finally working on a new Wyatt novel after a long foray into police procedurals (with the Inspector Challis novels). I can’t wait.

NOW AND THEN isn’t the worst book Robert B. Parker has ever written (that award would go to the latest Sunny Randall novel), but it may be the laziest.  It’s definitely one of the weakest Spenser novels. Susan’s Harvard education was mentioned six times before I stopped keeping track. At one point, there’s a big shootout at Susan’s house involving Uzis and shotguns and not  a single neighbor calls the cops. Sadly, Susan survives.

I’m a Robert B. Parker fan, but he hasn’t written a good book since APPALOOSA. I hope the upcoming sequel is as good because this is one fan who is loosing his faith.

Today, Sarah Weinman wrote about the MWA’s decision that Charles Ardai’s book SONG OF INNOCENCE is ineligible for Edgar consideration because it’s a self-published title. Charles is the editor and publisher of Hard Case Crime, which also published his novel.  She asked me about it before she wrote her piece because I am the Edgar Chair this year and, therefore, the one who had to deliver the bad news to Charles. Here’s is how I explained the situation to her:

The decision on SONGS OF INNOCENCE was not a reflection of our "new
active membership status rules." The rule about self-published books
being ineligible for Edgar consideration has been in effect for several
years and is clearly stated on our website. (LITTLE GIRL LOST, for
example, was originally published by Five Star before the Hard Case
Crime paperback reprint or it would not have been eligible). Our
guidelines state:

"Among (but not all of) the situations defined as "self-published or
cooperatively published" are works by those who have paid all or part of the
cost of publication or distribution of the work; works printed and bound by
a company that does not place the work in physical (aka brick-and-mortar)
bookstores; those works for which the authors were required by the publisher
to pay any monies whatsoever before or during publication; those published
by "cooperative" publishing or others which require authors to pay for
marketing; those published by privately held publishing companies with whom
the writer has a familial or personal relationship beyond simply author and
publisher; those published by companies or imprints that do not publish
other authors; those published by publishing companies in which the writer
has a financial interest."

Charles Ardai obviously has a considerable financial interest in
Hard Case Crime. Not only is he the founder and te publisher, he is
also the primary editor. He has said so in countless published
interviews. In fact, he states it outright on the copyright page of SONGS OF INNOCENCE. The page states that the book
was published in collaboration with Winterfall, LLC, which is his
company. It also definitively states that "Hard Case Crime books are
selected and edited by Charles Ardai," who is also the author of the
book. On the Hard Case Crime webpage, it states:"Hard Case Crime was
created by Charles Ardai and Max Phillips; the line is published as a
collaboration between Winterfall LLC and Dorchester Publishing."

No one is saying or implying that Hard Case Crime is a vanity press.
It is a respected and legitimate publisher that I, and all the members
of Edgar Ad-Hoc Committee, admire. However, as unfair as it may seem to
Charles, his book unquestionably meets our definition of a
self-published title under the rules we adopted in 2006….which is why
the committee unanimously voted that it is ineligible for Edgar
consideration. If the book had been published by another publisher,
like St. Martins or Penguin for example, it would have been eligible.

This decision is no reflection whatsoever on the quality of the
book, which many of us on the committee have read and enjoyed. In fact,
the point of our guidelines is to assure that decisions about Edgar
eligibility are made regardless of a work’s perceived quality (or lack
thereof) or the popularity (or lack thereof) of the author.

If we allow Charles’ book to be considered for an Edgar, then we
would have to accept *all* self-published titles for consideration,
otherwise we would guilty of blatant favoritism. Charles has my respect
and my sympathy but the MWA is not prepared at this time to accept
self-published titles simply to allow SONGS OF INNOCENCE to be
considered for an Edgar.

Sarah basically argues that this is wrong because his book is well-reviewed, he’s an award-winning author, and Hard Case Crime is a highly respected publisher. She believes, and so does Charles, that we should either make exceptions for critically-acclaimed works, and those written by highly respected authors, or simply allow all self-published titles to be eligible.

I disagree. Speaking only for myself, and not the MWA, I think those suggestions would turn the Edgars into a popularity contest. In their view, and one folks like Jim Hansen share, is that whoever gets the best reviews, or is the genre darling of the moment, deserves special attention…others don’t.

The only reason Sarah is peeved about this situation is because Charles is a remarkably talented, award-winning writer and a highly respected publisher. If we were talking about someone else — a writer with a book from PublishAmerica or even Jim Hansen — this wouldn’t be an issue for her.

Personally, I think the MWA rule is a good one. I don’t think we should allow self-published books to be eligible for Edgar consideration. The fact that the self-published rule applies equally to Charles Ardai as it does to someone less well-known and well-reviewed speaks to the inherent fairness and objectivity of the rule. We have created a level playing field.  All self-published authors are treated the same, whether they are poorly reviewed or former Edgar-winners, complete unknowns or highly respected.

If his book was published by St. Martin’s or Random House, instead of under his own imprint, we wouldn’t be having this conversation. But he chose not to do that. For whatever reason, he chose to publish it through his own company. My guess — and it’s purely that — would be so he could exercise more control over how his novel was packaged and marketed. And, I assume, out of pride in his work and in his imprint. To say that his book is not self-published because he didn’t go to iUniverse or lulu, or doesn’t own Dorchester, is disingenuous.

Should the MWA consider every mystery or crime novel that’s published in the U.S., regardless of how it was published?

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences doesn’t allow every single movie released in the U.S. to be eligible and considered for Oscars…nor should they. The MWA doesn’t consider every single mystery novel published for Edgars, either. Nor do I believe they should.

I’m sure there are lots of Oscar-quality movies that are being over-looked because they don’t meet the Academy’s criteria, which I’m sure some people think are draconian and unfair. Like the Academy, the MWA has criteria. Not including self-published work is one of them. It’s inevitable that some good books, like Charles Ardai’s, will not be considered. I don’t blame him for  being hurt and angry, but that said, I don’t think this indicates any a flaw in our rules.