RANDOMNESS

RANDOMNESS Nathan Bransford wrote recently about the randomness of bestsellers. In other words, there isnt some magical power that preordains the qualities of a story that breaks records and defies the odds. Sometimes a perfect storm just comes together. Like the mega waves he describes at sea, the ones that appear from nowhere and make a huge impression in that vast, monstrous water, they just happen and cant be fore casted. http://blog.nathanbransford.com/2012/06/randomness-of-bestsellers.html And yet, we keep trying to understand the process. Whats worse,in my opinion, and this is a BIG gripe with me, is that we also bash traditional publishers for producing books that do not do well. Thats talking out of both sides of our mouths. We try to think we can duplicate bestseller status, and really learn how to define the path to such a level, as if there was a manual somewhere. That logic should also mean that if we can predict great books, then we know enough to avoid a bad one. The deal is, people, is that we can only write our best.Publishers can only attempt to predict what will sell. eaders can only pretend to recognize a debut book as a bestseller. The fact is that nobody has mastered how to make a bestseller. There is no HOW TO WRITE A BESTSELLER FOR DUMMIES. Just spoke to someone this week who justified self-publishing Hes only trying to assuage his own conscience, the one thats attempting to rationalize into a hazy reality that he probably has no chance with traditional publishing. So he says theyve lost touch, can no longer produce quality material, thus leaving him no choice but to proceed with self-publishing since it has equal credibility. This is my reality . . . and my explanation of publishing: The more seasoned, experienced people who lay their eyes and hands on your manuscript, the better the book. Note, I did not say traditional or self-published. Multiple layers of review and decision making goes into traditional publishing. If you self-publish, make sure you put the same degree of attention into your manuscript as a traditional publishing house would put into it. Hire editors. Hire a cover designer. Hire a for matter. That is, unless you are experienced yourself. That doesnt mean read instructions and learn as you go. Sure, you CAN learn as you go, but do not go it alone. Youll never see the landmines, no matter how many blog posts you read about the business. This business isnt about randomness. Its about diligence and focus to detail. Nothing is fool-proof. Failure exists. Less than satisfactory happens. But your odds improve the more experience you put into your books development, writing,and promotion. Instead of trying to orchestrate a bestseller, just write your best. Then recognize what you should and should not do. Be daring in your writing. Be grounded in your publishing, no matter which route you take.

Brave New World

Brave New World Brave New World Brave New World By Maeve Maddox The phrase â€Å"brave new world† is popular in headlines used to introduce a variety of topics: High School Basketball: Brave new world in regionals The Brave New World of Ferraris in China The Brave New World of  Food Oldman’s Brave New World of Wine Why We Need To Talk Now About The Brave New World Of Editing Genes Internet Eavesdropping: A Brave New World of Wiretapping Welcome To The  Brave New World Of  The Corporate-Sponsored Artist   Cubicles Rise in a Brave New World of Publishing Because â€Å"brave new world† is an expression loaded with negative connotations, some of these uses are more appropriate than others. The phrase originated with Shakespeare. When he put the expression in Miranda’s mouth in The Tempest, he was being ironic. O, wonder! How many goodly creatures are there here! How beauteous mankind is! O brave new world, That has such people in’t! Miranda is speaking of the men whom her father- Prospero, rightful Duke of Milan- has caused to be shipwrecked on their island. The irony is that five of the eight men who come ashore are not â€Å"goodly† at all; they are dirty rotten scoundrels who represent all that is evil and corrupt in the â€Å"civilized† world of Europe. When Aldous Huxley chose the phrase as the title of his 1932 novel about a future in which society is carefully organized and monitored, he was echoing the idea that what might appear to be wondrous at first glance may in fact be evil. Writers who use the phrase as if it has a positive connotation misunderstand Shakespeare’s use of brave. Modern speakers use brave to mean courageous, daring, intrepid, and stouthearted. We speak of â€Å"brave soldiers† and â€Å"brave explorers† who risk danger to do their work. In Shakespeare’s day brave could mean splendid, showy, grand, fine, and handsome. Miranda, impressed by the appearance of the courtly strangers, was probably using the word with this meaning. In any case, to speak of â€Å"a brave new world† of wine or basketball doesn’t make a lot of sense. The second set of headline examples seems to have been written by people who know what Huxley’s novel is about. Brave New World is set in a future in which technology has reorganized human reproduction so as to produce babies in laboratories. The goal is to eliminate such inconveniences as disease and human dissatisfaction. DNA is manipulated so as to produce three castes of people designed to be happy with different types of work. Should any of these designer people grow up to be nonconformists, they are exiled to remote locations. The headline about gene editing is especially on point. Careful writers will not use the phrase â€Å"brave new world† if all they mean is â€Å"a new set of circumstances.† The phrase belongs only in a context of dehumanization or oppressive surveillance. Brave New World entered the public domain in 2008. Want to improve your English in five minutes a day? Get a subscription and start receiving our writing tips and exercises daily! Keep learning! Browse the Expressions category, check our popular posts, or choose a related post below:Program vs. Programmeâ€Å"As Well As† Does Not Mean â€Å"And†The Difference Between "Shade" and "Shadow"