The Elaine Greywalker Daily

A list of headlines from my paper.li daily are supposed to appear above. My "news" paper is a bunch of stuff generated from my twitter stream. Plus, I added in what I hope will be relevant posts from sources like the BBC News and Wired Science. Tomorrow I will know how that worked out for me because the "paper" publishes once every 24 hours. I suppose I could do the same thing on Google and get continuous updates.

Keeping up with Kat

Kat and I met on the internet in the mid-90's. She was blogging under "Kat Litter" and I had just created my new last name: Greywalker. We both thought we were the only ones. She contacted me first and we been friendly every since. I've followed her career ... and read the books - which are really good. That is saying something because I don't normally read paranormal books, particularly ones which include vampires.

In the article, there's a bit a backstory which I didn't know about and a nice summary of how Seattle inspires her stories.

Seattle Wrote.: Seattle Author: Doing What You Love: With an English teacher for a father, it's not much of a surprise that author Kat Richardson started writing as a child.

Cover art piece for Uncle Tauber's Trunk

I have a proof copy of the novel on CreateSpace with a cover I made using their cover creator. I was going to put this on the cover but the book has been approved as "publishable" and if I change the cover it has to go through the review process again. 

Next time!

Flogging Art

Paradise Sky (2012)

The list of labels (or keywords) at the end of this post should tell you a little about the complexity of this topic. Sure, those of you still making art the traditional way (by hand, in meat-space) still have your traditional markets: art fairs, galleries, solo shows, etc. The rest of us, who, like me, have taken to the computer like a duck to water (how does a duck take to water? Is it really that natural? How would a duck take to water without mom around?), are having a different sort of experience.

This has all led me to the question: what is art anyway? Is it something we hang on the wall and perhaps forget about a lot of the time? Is it something we like on our (ooops!) CD covers? Is it just for decorating the desktop?

Once upon a time we all knew what art was: that stuff made out of canvas and oil paint hanging in a gallery. This is no longer the case. Now art is everywhere on everything. And with the tons of free art programs out there, anyone can make art. And I'm all for that.

My dilemma is how to make money flogging my art.

PRINTS
Once upon a time, there were originals. They were lithographs on stone or drawings on paper or a water color or oil painting that you could reproduce as a printed copy. That kind of art was not very expensive because it was easy to produce. You could make a lot of those and the fees reflected that. Art gets it's value from rarity. There is only one Mona Lisa and they ain't makin' any more.

Art also gets value from history. Old art is generally more valuable than new art. Mostly because no one knows what new art is really worth. It is, basically, worth what someone will pay for it. This is how old art gets it value. Over time a work becomes increasingly popular and so we have the old supply and demand law kicking in.

Art gets some value from art critics. Some. Friends ask me how to determine what is good art. I say, "If you like it, it's good art." Sure, a ton of "good art" gets bought and put into storage as an investment. But that's not how most artists make a living. In fact, most of that "good art" was made by dead artists.

Yellow Stones (2011)

ORIGINALS
When I make art, technically I don't have an original because I create on the computer. This means I have a file which can be endlessly copied without loss of quality and from which I can make an unlimited number of prints - also without loss of quality (depending, of course, on the output device).  Since value depends on originality, a lot of buyers have questions about rarity. Who wants to buy something you think is one of a kind and find a millions of them in Target?

One solution is to limit production and never sell or give away the original file. It would be nice to have just the one file, however, this is why backing up was invented. Also, as an artist, it is nearly impossible to keep just one version of a work a art when you discover that you can make endless non-destructible variations.

I can limit physical reproductions. No one makes prints or derivatives (versions) from my files unless I say they can. And I can limit the kind of reproductions they make. Although, technically, since you can't (yet) really display the original file, each reproduction is an original. Hence the title: multiple original. So, what I'm really doing is limiting the number of original prints. (Prints - not reproductions.)

So, here's the real issue: if anyone anywhere can view my art online how do I charge for it?

LICENSING
Digital Blasphemy has found a few ways. He chooses licensing. Licensing let's third parties sell art by giving the artist a percentage of the sale. Since the licensor bears most of the cost, they take most of the money. Typical licensing fees are about 10%, often less. Simple math: if I want to pay my mortgage with 10% fees, I have to sell about 400 pieces of art. Or the licensor has to.

This works really well for Digital Blasphemy because he's a high volume producer, kind of like Thomas Kinkade. He has a lot of outlets and he's been at it for a long time. He's also not bothered by how or where you use art. He even gives it away for free; a part of the new internet marketing model.

Which brings up marketing which still works traditionally and always will. As Kickstarter participants have discovered, you have to have a crowd for crowd fund sourcing to work. One way or another - on the web, at parties, on the news, through word of mouth - you have to get fans for you work. People interested in owning your work. Which is why artists are plentiful but rich artists are few.

Art is a solitary endeavor and tends to appeal to those who enjoy spending a lot of time alone. Which means most artists are introverts and tend to not engage in large quantities of group time. Although, artists can be happily sociable - see Whistler, Renoir, Rubens, Goethe, Oscar Wilde, etc. This is not the rule.

Which brings me back to how to flog my art. I have posted art on a few licensing sites. I haven't marketed those sites much. And, harshly, I don't care. What I really care about is being able to make art. Tangentially, it's nice to be able to show it, to have others look at and like it, and sometimes make a sale.

Few of my circle are interested in owning original art. Most are happy with posters or nothing. Many are totally satisfied with snapshots taken on family vacations. Where does the art go? It goes on packaging. Mostly. It goes into ads, on tee shirts, bed linens, web sites. It's disposable. As in, not long lived. Even my son has free desktops that change daily.

So, I'll go on making art and wondering what it is really - more than a concept or idea; more than execution; something between dialogue and a kiss; a conglomeration of color and form. Perhaps some day, somewhere in there will be something I can (ahem) monetize.

Bomb Shelter (2010)

Outlander: My Biased Review

Yep, that's me writing a biased review.  You may like wild and violent sex. I don't. Ergo the review below. Ye be warned! or invited, as the case may be.

Outlander by Diana Gabaldon
My rating: 3 of 5 stars

Well written, interesting story with attention to detailed historical clothing, speech, and events. Nice balance of action and description. Comfortable characters to travel with. One really evil villain. Too many instances of highly descriptive and sometimes violent sex. Obviously the author is unfamiliar with the fact that rape is never done from love but from a desire to inflict highly intimate harm. Stopped reading about 2/3 of the way through when the conjugal sex became more than rough. Sad as I would like to know how the story ends.

View all my reviews

Fun With Rejection

I've been vid blogging on my other blog about the rejection emails I'm getting in response to my job applications. Sort of reminds me of authors and their rejection notices. Are you an author? Do you have a bit of humor about rejection? Would you like to? Try this post from Teresa Nielsen Hayden's blog. She's one of those who is responsible for creating rejection letters.

She mentions that most authors don't understand the phrase "it's not personal." Authors aren't the only ones who have to go through the depersonalization process. Artists do as well. I have and I'm much better for it. I'll never forget the day a graphic design firm owner told me "We don't take anything personal around here." What a relief! It's all business, don't you know.

No future for books? I think not!

Tonight's James River Writers' Writing Show featured Joshua Kendall and Alan Cheuse mulling over the topic "The Future of Fiction." Both Josh and Alan shared their professional backgrounds and experiences. Neither of them, which may have been the non-directive style of the moderator, Brandon Reynolds, actually focused on the future of fiction. Tangentially, as a side bar to relating their experiences as editor (Josh) and reviewer (Alan), they touched on the future of the printed fiction book.

Alan's contention was that even though there are more people, the number of buyers of printed books appears to be stuck at the same number it has always been. His suggestion was that we proselytize readers. No one mentioned the evolving alternative avenues for fiction, like for example podcasts, or that fiction is the basis for most movies. It is standard industry practice for movie companies to review new fiction even before it is printed. Little mention was made of how fiction is consumed by movie goers and TV viewers. No one brought up podcasts or those who read books online.

They talked about the horrendous practice of refunding money to booksellers for unsold books. No one mentioned that Print on Demand (POD) might be an alternative to that. Perhaps books printed right at the book store? Neither did anyone mention distribution of electronic books as a way to avoid that refund.

Another issue raised was bricks and mortar booksellers running out of books and not keeping up with demand. Here, again, no one mentioned that POD might be a solution.

The most futuristic notion came not from the panel but from an attendee who raised the possibility that editors may need to partner directly with booksellers (rather than through a house) to get books out. Alan then mentioned the potential for sponsorship of books by commercial concerns, joking that perhaps a vampire book could be sponsored by the American Red Cross.

Josh mentioned the increasing number of independent publishers which Alan corroborated by indicating that a large number of the books sent to him for review came from independent publishers. While both men discouraged authors from taking the lone ranger unedited and unvetted route of self-publishing, neither of them considered that the ubiquitous online access to self publishing houses makes it easy to set up an independent publishing house (if you happen to be an editor and have a team to work with).

It seems to me that we have fiction, we've always had fiction and we'll always have fiction. Whether it's a printed book, an electronic file or a podcast. The future of fiction is absolutely brilliant. There are so many more avenues for distribution and so many more mediums that are derived from fiction books. Who knows where fiction will go next?

An audiobook or podcast though not in the same format as a printed book can still be mulled over. Not everyone listens to books in the car during the morning commute. So, it is possible to have an in depth experience with an audible piece of fiction. It's even more possible to get into the whole fiction experience in a wider way because of the online availability of the author and the dialogues authors and readers can have by way of blogs and email. This adds a whole new dimension to fiction. A dimension that needs to be developed.

Perhaps the printed book market is developing into just one niche of fiction consumption. If the number of readers stays the same, then printed book publishers will be lucky. What they need to look at is the rising number of fiction consumers who are not book readers. The digital age hasn't shown us everything yet. There are still a lot of good potential fiction products to be invented and consumed.