Front Matter

The time has come for me to consider what I want to include in the front matter of my book. Front matter is those pages before the book actually starts. You know, the section with the title page, some legal stuff, dedications, an amazing photo of moi (not likely). At least I think that’s what goes in the front of a novel.

But maybe I had better check. 

Okay, so as usual, the book designer genius Joel Friedlander has the lowdown on what you put in the front of your book with all sorts of fancy titles and words – like frontispiece, verso and half title. Definitely check out his post for a comprehensive list of what can be included in front matter and the general order. But front matter can be long or short and I was most interested in what is usually included and what is almost always included in both print novels and ebook novels.

Print Novels

I used my usual method of surveying the books on my shelves for this. The basic elements of front matter included in all print novels are:

• A Title page—The title page includes title, subtitle, author and publisher of the book. Sometimes it can include the publisher location and year of publication.
•  A Copyright page – The copyright page is usually on the other side of the title page. It includes the copyright notice, edition information, publication information, cataloging data, legal notices (i.e. that the novel is a work of fiction), and the book’s ISBN. Credits for design, production, editing and illustration are also commonly listed on the copyright page.

The front matter of most print books also includes:

• A dedication

• Blurbs of support or praise for the novel from reviewers and/or other authors (note that Friedlander does not include this in his list)

• One or more half title pages (extra title pages with just the book title before and/or after all of the front matter)

Less common elements in order of the frequency of their appearance in the books from my shelf include:

• A list of other books in the series or by the author
• A quotation (called an epitaph) 
• A Table of Contents
• A list of characters
  
• A prologue
• A map
• A book description
• An excerpt
• Information about the author

Acknowledgements and information about the author are generally at the back of the book.

It is also important to note that most print books (traditionally published ones that is) include cataloguing data on the copyright page. In some books this includes a summary of the book and tags or keywords for what the book is about. I believe this is called metadata and I understand it is important for the “findability” of books. I will be looking more into this in the future.

Ebook Novels

But what about ebooks? Are they different? I had heard that it is desirable to keep the front matter of ebooks short, since you want to get your readers to the actual story as soon as possible in the Look Inside feature on Amazon, so they are more inclined to buy your book.

I decided to check out the front matter of ebooks by ten self-published successes including J. Konrath, Hugh Howey, Bella Andre, Melissa Foster, CJ Lyons, Russell Blake, Scott Cramer, Theresa Ragan, Aaron Saylor, and Keith Robinson.

I discovered that there is a vast amount of variation and there is simply no truth to the suggestion that ebook front matter is shorter. However, I did note that three of these authors had their Look Inside set to jump over the front matter straight to chapter 1. I will have to check out that setting. In addition, there is no consistent order in which these items appeared – in many cases it seemed almost random. Usually, the title page appeared first followed by the copyright information and then all of the other stuff, but not always. Likewise, although the Table of Contents often appeared closer to the start of Chapter 1, this was not always the case.

Below are what these ten authors included in their front matter, from most common to least common, with tallies in terms of how many included what.

• Title Page – 9
• Table of Contents – 8
• Copyright (the c in a circle with the author’s name and the year) – 8
• Rights notice (the all rights reserved, this book may not be reproduced in any way statement) – 6
• Dedication – 5
• Cover designer credit (sometimes with website) – 5
• Legal notice (the this is a work of fiction statement) – 4
• Contact information (email, twitter, Facebook, and/or website) – 4
• Introduction (why I wrote this) – 3
• About the series and/or book – 3
• Press name and/or logo (some indies set up their own imprint) – 3
• Blurbs from reviewers and/or other authors – 3
• Edition number – 2
• Formatting credit – 2
• About the Author – 2
• Recipe or music list or something unique - 2
• Foreward – 1
• Quote (epitaph) – 1
• Editing credit – 1
• Proofreading credit – 1
• Excerpts that link to author’s other books – 1

Whew… that is a lot. Several of the authors who are well established definitely used the front matter as an opportunity to highlight their success in the form of blurbs, introductions and statements about themselves.

From the Tables of Contents I could also determine that a few authors put sections about their other books, about themselves and their copyright notice at the end of the book.

Based on the above, I would say if you are trying to keep your front matter short, pretty much anything goes and almost all of it could be moved to the back of the book. Based on the above, I would be inclined to definitely include a title page, table of contents, copyright statement, rights notice, legal notice and my press name. I think I would also like to credit people, but I am not sure. I might put that at the end.

I would love to hear what you think, and your experiences designing and selecting your front matter.

Photo Credit:  MikeBlogs via Compfight Creative Commons       

Trim Size and Your Novel

Or everything you thought you wanted to know about trim size but were afraid to ask

Who knew you could spend almost an entire day researching trim sizes? I didn’t. I didn’t even know what trim size was a month ago. And I certainly did not know how much variation there is in trim sizes in the publishing world.

So what is trim size? Trim size is basically the size of the book. It is called trim size because that is where the book is trimmed at the end of production.

Trim size affects a lot of things including (obviously) the size of the book, the number of pages in the book, how the book looks and feels, and the cost to produce the book. These are important things to keep in mind as you make choices about trim size.

There are industry standard trim sizes, there are certain trim sizes offered by self-publishers (usually industry standard) and there are certain trim sizes that are customarily used for certain kinds of books, such as children’s books or graphic novels, but there are no set rules.

The only real rule is that mass market paperbacks – the ones you can usually buy in grocery stores – must be 4.25” x 7”. Most other books, other than hardcover books, manuals and workbooks and photography or art books, fall under the general category of trade paperbacks. Trade paperback novels, memoirs and non-fiction can range in size from 5.06” x 7.81” to 6” x 9”, although some non-fiction can be larger at 7” x 10”.

The most common/popular trim sizes are:

5 x 8 inches (203 x 127mm)
5.06 x 7.81 inches (198 x 129mm)
5.25 x 8 inches (203 x 133mm)
5.5 x 8.5 inches (216 x 140mm)
6 x 9 inches (229 x 152mm)

Joel Friedlander is really the guru on trim size (and many other aspects of book design) so check out his posts in this regard.

Certain trim sizes are favoured for certain types of books. Children’s books are often smaller at 5.06” x 7.81”. Longish literary fiction is often 6” x 9” to accommodate longer word counts.

Trim Sizes and Types of Book

Despite reading all of this, I still was not sure what trim size was best for my novels given their word counts and genres. My middle-grade novel is 79,000 words and thus may be too long for a 5.06” x 7.81” trim size. My adult action-adventure is a hefty 138,000 words. Is that going to be a tome in a 6” x 9” trim size? How are they going to look and feel?

I needed some data. The best place for that of course was my bookshelf. Armed with my very irritating metric-only ruler, I started pulling books off my shelf. I made the following interesting observations.

There is a lot more variation in book sizes than I expected. I thought all the children’s books would be 5.06” x 7.81” and all the adult books would be 6” x 9” but in fact, some of the children’s books were bigger than 5.06” x 7.81”, and many of the adult books were smaller than 6” x 9”.

Middle-grade Fiction Books

The middle-grade fiction books on my shelves tended to be more “square” at 5.25” x 7.55” (?? – I don’t see that on the list of industry standard sizes) with a few, such as The BFG, clocking in at the standard 5.06” x 7.81” and the Diary of a Wimpy Kid series measuring 5.5” x 8” (again I can’t find that on the standard size list… maybe my ruler is broken). I also had one that was 5.06” x 7.55”.

Young Adult Fiction Books

The YA books tended to be slightly larger, but still smaller than the adult books, with the smallest at 5” x 8” and the largest at 5.5” x 8.25”(again not on the standard list) and one in the middle at 5.25” x 8”. These books tended to be much longer – all over 480 pages with lots of front and back matter.

Adult Fiction Books

These also ranged. Many of the books on my shelf, including, notably, all the self-published ones were in fact 6” x 9”. But there was also significant variation and some were 5.25” x 8.25” and some were 5” x 8”. When She Woke measures a strange 6” x 9.1”

To be clear here, I held the books up to each other to compare sizes after I measured to make sure the non-standard sizes were not a result of bad ruler use – they weren’t.

All of these books look fine. In some respects, the 6” x 9” ones border on feeling too big, but are fine. I would not go any bigger, and if your word count allows it, I would consider going smaller. As Friedlander observes, smaller sizes can make for a more intimate reading experience.

Trim Sizes and Word Counts

So what word counts work for what trim sizes anyway? Obviously with longer word counts, you want to consider bigger trim sizes so your book is not massively thick. Font size and line spacing are going to play a key role here in determining page length, but it is still good to know (vaguely) what word counts work for what trim sizes, as nobody wants to read 8 point font. Font sizes in printed novels tend to range from 10 point font to 11 point font with line spacing set at 120% to 125% of the font size. But there is a lot of variation in how much space different 11 point fonts take up.

I found the following rules of thumb, in terms of calculating number of pages based on word count and trim size, from Fiona Raven:

For 5.5” x 8.5” trim size, divide your word count by 390 to determine number of pages. So for my middle-grade novel, that would be 79,000/390 = 202 pages.

For 6” x 9” trim size, divide your word count by 475 to determine number of pages. So for my adult action-adventure, that would be 137,000/475 = 288 pages. Sounds like a positively slim volume!

But there seems to be a wide variation in these guides. I have also read from reasonable that you should assume 300 to 350 words per page no matter what the trim size (?). At 300 words per page, my adult action-adventure will be a more unwieldy 457 pages. Ack!

My formatter has just informed me that for 5.25” x 8” my 79,000 middle-grade novel will be about 300 pages. So that is about 263 words per page. I sincerely hope that if I choose 6” x 9” for my adult novel that I will get more than 263 words per page.

Update: I chose to make my adult novel In the Shadows of the Mosquito Constellation a 6" by 9" and had it set in 11 point font with 16 point spacing. It clocked in at a tidy 394 pages including all the front and back matter. Very relieved. One thing I did discover after originally having it set too small and too tight (10.5 font and 13 point spacing) and the doing line counts on many of the novels on my shelf is that most 6" by 9" novels have 32 to 34 lines of text per page. This is another good thing to check if you are in doubt with regard to your font size and spacing. But I will do another separate post on this sometime soon.

Word Counts and Printing Costs

My calculations started to panic me a bit. What if my action-adventure novel is too long? We’ve all heard that rule that novels should be between 80,000 and 100,000 words. I’ve been told by agents that they won’t consider anything over 100,000 words. Is this the ideal size of a novel? If so, my 139,000 word behemoth is way over the mark.

But, still, the books that I grabbed from my shelves to do my measurement exercise seemed to suggest otherwise. Not one of the adult novels was under 390 pages. I’m not sure what word count they are but surely they are over 100,000.

I did a quick check of word counts on popular novels and was stunned to find that a huge number of them are well over 139,000 words. All this time spent writhing in shame that I am way out of the ballpark!! Look at these numbers (from commonplacebook.com):

138,098 – Snow Falling on Cedars – Guterson, David
143,436 – The Two Towers – J. R. R. Tolkien
144,523 – One Hundred Years of Solitude – Gabriel Garcia Marquez
145,469 – Last of the Mohicans – James Fenimore Cooper
156,154 – Watership Down – Richard Adams
157,665 – Alias Grace – Margaret Atwood

186,418 – Memoirs of a Geisha – Arthur Golden
190,858 – Goblet of Fire – JK Rowling
196,774 – The Corrections – Franzen, Jonathan
216,020 – The Amazing Adventures of Kavelier and Clay – Chabon, Michael
225,395 – East of Eden – John Steinbeck
257,154 – Order of the Phoenix – JK Rowling
349,736 – Anna Karenina – Leo Tolstoy
418,053 – Gone with the Wind – Margaret Mitchell
455,125 – The Lord of the Rings – J. R. R. Tolkien
561,996 – Atlas Shrugged – Ayn Rand
587,287 – War and Peace – Leo Tolstoy
591,554 – A Suitable Boy – Vikram Seth

Check out the list at Indefeasible as well as it includes some analysis of award winners too.

This list tells me there is no ideal novel size in terms of reader preference – at least it is not necessarily under 100,000 words. There is an ideal novel size in terms of printing costs though and, according to Novel Writing Help, for many publishers, that ideal size is between 80,000 and 100,000 words. This is because it costs a lot more to print a longer novel, but you cannot increase the price of a longer novel to match the printing costs (we don’t pay twice as much for a 600 page novel as we do for a 300 page one). As a result, publishers must sell more units in order to make a profit. Thus, they tend not to take chances on first time novelists with long novels.

However, as ebooks are on the rise, length may not be as critical, as obviously they do not have to be printed. That said, I think I better investigate the costs of printing my not-quite-a-behemoth adult novel before I proceed. That will be the subject of one of my future blog posts.

As with all my posts, this is just an overview of what I have learned through a little bit of research. Please feel free to add or clarify, I would love to learn more and hear your thoughts!

Photo Credit: » Zitona «          via Compfight http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ 

Why do we Stigmatize Self-Publishing?

Why do we Stigmatize Self-Publishing?

Why do we stigmatize writers who self-publish? Other kinds of artists  – painters, musicians and filmmakers – are respected for their efforts to sell their work on their own. Artists sell paintings out of their house and in local galleries. Musicians put out indie records and tour around local clubs and restaurants to promote their work. They have  local followings and fans. We do not refuse to go see a band because a big label has not signed it. We recognize and respect it either as an up-and-coming band learning their art and building a fan base, or a band with decent talent that we like to listen to that might never make it big. Indie filmmakers are totally respected by both those in the film industry and the public for having the guts, talent and perseverance to put their work out there.

Why then can writers not do the same? What about writing requires curation and gatekeeping in a way that other art does not?

There is a lot of terrible self-published work out there, but surely there are terrible paintings, garage bands and indie films. Yet we still respect these other artists for putting their work out there for the public to decide on what it likes. Even if they fail, we have the attitude that at least they tried and followed their dreams. It is okay for a band to make a living doing small gigs and weddings.

Self-published writers, however, are often rejected by the traditionally published world and the public unless they make it big. There is limited respect for selling a decent number of self-published  novels or appealing to a small fan base. Self-publish and your neighbours and friends (especially your writing friends) will whisper “she self-published” as if you were caught sending photos of your  privates to everyone in town. We in general refuse to treat writers like we treat other creators. This is changing of course, and many self-published writers indicate they have had a very positive reception and experience.

I think the stigma associated with self-publishing is wrong. Let’s look at some of the reasons why it should go away altogether.

1)   Many famous writers in history self-published. According to Melissa Donovan of Writing Forward, Walt Whitman, Emily Dickinson, Jane Austen, William Blake, Benjamin Franklin, Edgar Allan Poe, Gertrude Stein, Mark Twain, and L. Frank Baum all self-published before they were traditionally published. 

2)   Many great books were rejected multiple times. Books like Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone, Animal Farm and Lolita were all rejected over and over. While the authors of these three books persisted and eventually received publication, their repeated rejection indicates traditional publishers cannot always identify what will  resonate with the public. We expect writers to persist through rejections that would bring people in other professions to their knees. What if these writers had not persisted? How many great novels sit in  drawers because their authors did not send it out one more time to just that right publisher or agent who could see the merit in their work. The Help by Kathryn Stockett was rejected over 60 times. I went to a conference once and a writer who was an invited speaker indicated his first effort had been rejected 127 times. 127!!

3)   Many writers like the control and the financial returns  associated with self-publishing and do not want to be traditionally  published. The traditional view is that self-published writers are  those who have been rejected by every publisher under the sun because  their work basically sucks. However some writers now, such as Hugh  Howey, never considered a traditional publisher, while others, such as Polly Courtney, returned to self-publishing after being signed by a traditional publisher. There are many such examples of writers who like the control of self-publishing. When you self-publish, you get to select  your editor, choose your cover design and decide how you want to market  your book. When you traditionally publish, you do not. Self-published writers also receive a much higher share of the sale of their books – up to 70% of the cover price, compared to the 10% commonly associated with traditional publishing. It is simply no longer true to say that self-publishers are those who could not make it in the traditional publishing world.

4)   Some self-published books are good and sell well. The idea that all self-published work is crap is simply incorrect and self-published novels are selling. In 2012, according to CNN, Amazon indicated that 27 of the top 100 Kindle ebooks were self-published. Self-published books are regularly making the New York Times bestseller list and the number of self-published writers who have made it big is continuing to grow with names like Hugh Howey, John Locke  and Colleen Hoover. There are also many self-published writers who are not famous but who are making a living. Detractors will point out that  most self-published writers sell fewer than 100 books, but there is also  a high percentage of failures in traditional publishing, so it is not clear why this failure-to-sell stigma should attach itself to self-publishing.

5)   Traditional publishing can lead to a stigma too. Being selected by a traditional publisher is not the windfall that many  believe it is. It works out wonderfully for some writers, but they give up control over how their book is marketed and where it is  sold. Traditional publishers generally focus much of their effort on their best-sellers and established writers. New writers whose books do not sell well during the first six weeks can find their books pulled by booksellers and their chances of future publication diminished, which leads to a stigma of its own. The publishing world is simply not kind to writers who have only fair to middling success, or who have limited  success on their first time out. Stories abound of writers whose books were just not given a chance on the shelves and find their books wallowing in the warehouse while they struggle to find a publisher for  their second novel. Sometimes (often?) it takes more than six weeks for a   book to get noticed and become a success, or more than one book for a writer to become a success. In many other careers, we allow people to  grow and develop in their profession. For some reason, in writing, we often do not provide that opportunity.

6)   The whole stigma just does not make sense. Going back to the story about the man whose book was rejected 127 times. We laud a writer whose work was not good enough for 127 publishers or agents and invite him to a conference as a success story (and receive no actual  information regarding the number of books he has sold – just that he  ultimately was ‘approved’ by the industry), but we snub a writer whose  self-published work sells reasonably well. We admire indie films and bands and allow them to distribute their work through a variety of  traditional channels such as radio stations and movie theatres, but we mock self-publishing (calling it vanity publishing) and many bookstores still refuse to put self-published books on their shelves.

If you read any articles on the stigma of self-publishing (and there are lots), check the comment sections at the bottom. The level of  disagreement over self-publishing is significant, with some commenters staunchly defending the traditional publishing industry, decrying the  crap that is self-published and emphasizing the need for curation in  books, while others point out that they are making a decent living as a self-published writer and noting that perhaps it should be up to the  public to curate. I am still not clear why the debate rages in  self-published writing more than in other areas of art. Are there more self-published authors than there are garage bands, artisans and indie film-makers and, in particular, are there more bad self-published  authors? Maybe, but that still does not mean that they should be mocked so derisively. Those who are not good enough or don’t have some sort of appeal will simply fail to find an audience and will likely eventually channel their efforts into some other pursuit. Those who are good enough and find an audience, even if it is a small audience, deserve the  same respect that other artists receive.

I am not suggesting that the traditional publishing world sucks  (indeed, it routinely selects and publishes a multitude of brilliant books), or that writers should not consider the many potential benefits associated with traditional publishing. I just do not understand why traditional publishing and self-publishing cannot co-exist and why there has to be such a stigma associated with self-publishing. It is hard enough for writers of all types (traditional or self-published) to be successful and build a career that none of us (especially those of us who are writers) should look down our noses at those who try their hand at getting their work out there through other means – whether they succeed or fail.

Photo Credit: marymactavish         via Compfight http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/      

Writing Shit

Writing Shit

I’ve been meaning to rewrite this post for some time. It was one of my first posts as a blogger and thus I had not yet settled on how I was going to approach blogging or how much time I was going to put into each post. Nevertheless, this has probably remained one of the most popular posts on my blog, and thus I decided it was time to rewrite it, because it was at best half-assed. At worst, it might have been sh*t.

1) Sometimes you will think your writing is fantastic. Sometimes you will think it is shit. Both will probably be correct.

Writer Hari Kunzu, in The Guardian Writing for a living: a joy or a chore? probably captures this best in the following quote about the writing process, and in particular of writing novels:

"Along the way, there are the pitfalls of self-disgust, boredom, disorientation and a lingering sense of inadequacy, occasionally alternating with episodes of hysterical self-congratulation as you fleetingly believe you've nailed that particular sentence and are surely destined to join the ranks of the immortals, only to be confronted the next morning with an appalling farrago of clichés that no sane human could read without vomiting."

We have all had the experience of reading our own writing and being blown away by how great it is. We have probably also all had the experience of cringing in despair at how appalling it is. Sometimes we experience both emotions regarding the same section of writing depending on our general state of mind when we read it. Writing well is insanely hard. There is a fine balance between looking at your work critically and improving what needs to be improved, and brow-beating yourself into believing that it is shit and you will never write well. Most writers probably do both. But serious writers know anything can be improved. It just depends how long you can keep at it. As Stephen King observed in On Writing:

"Sometimes you have to go on when you don’t feel like it, and sometimes  you’re doing good work when it feels like all you’re managing is to  shovel shit from a sitting position."

2) You have to be prepared to write shitty first drafts.

Most writers will know this comes from Annie Lamott's Bird by Bird and most writers will be thoroughly acquainted with writing shitty first drafts. Shitty first drafts are critical to the writing process and you will never be a writer if you do not get words down on the page. The key is to know that it is a shitty first draft and not to stop there. Shitty first drafts must be revised, again, again and again.

The tricky part comes sometime between the fifth and the tenth draft when you are no longer able to discern whether you are improving your manuscript or ripping apart that which gave it soul or movement. That’s when the writing process gets shitty (but that’s another post).

3) There are few accepted external criteria with regard to whether your writing is shit or not.

Okay, yes if you have sold a million books, fans love your writing, the reviewers fawn over you, you have won a Pulitzer and you make $5 million a year, your writing is probably not shit. But very few writers have achieved all of those things. Best-selling authors get panned by reviewers. Prize-winning authors fail to sell copies. Different readers have different tastes and very little writing will be universally loved. Thus while external feedback is important in determining whether your writing is shit or not, it is not the only metric you should use. If you have met even one of the above criterion, you should probably be happy. Even if you haven’t, your writing might not be shit. There is just so much writing out there that some good writers will fail to get noticed. Definitely do not use your ability to generate income from your writing as a criterion for determining whether your writing is shit or not.

4) Your writing might be shit.

This may be the hardest thing to accept as a writer. Some of us will simply not be good enough, or as good as the truly gifted writers out there and no amount of revision will make our writing not shit. Not everyone will be a good musician, artist, or doctor. For every human endeavor, there are people who fail. Just take a quick sift through some self-published novels, and even some traditionally published ones if you want to unearth much shit (you will also find many great novels).

There is a somewhat pervasive myth that you can do you want as long as you work hard enough at it. This is simply not true, and at some point it may be desirable to accept that your writing may be shit. That does not mean you cannot continue to write. I am a shitty ballet dancer, but I love it, and I get a lot out of trying to improve just a little bit each year. But it is also important to be realistic. I will never make a living dancing ballet and it is quite possible, you or I, will never make a living writing. But sometimes it’s also important to have a big slug of your gin and tonic and see number one, two and three above.

Photo Credit: andreasf 

One writer I know tells me that he sits down every morning and says to himself nicely, "It's not like you don't have a choice, because you do - you can either type or kill yourself." ~ Anne Lamott, 1995