What do you think??
I shall be honest here: I really haven’t made up my mind because there are pros and cons, and both are persuasive.

1. I think most people agree there are quite a few male readers out there who won’t read female authors. 
2. Conversely, there are probably almost no female readers who turn down a book just because it’s written by a man. 
3. So, should a woman writer use a male or androgynous pseudonym in order to increase her sales?
4. Or should she stick to her feminist guns, use a female name, and say: “I’ll show ’em!” so that these prejudiced male readers finally realise being a woman has little to do with writing a readable book? (But…then they’ll never read it…)

That’s the first way of “hiding” one’s gender…and basically it has to do with money and reaching a wider audience. It also has to do with getting published at all. If your sales are too slim, the publisher won’t pick up your next book. Publishing is a business, folk. Shouldn’t we do whatever we can to sell? (Too late for me…I am committed to my female name, partly because at the time it never crossed my mind that there were 20th century men who wouldn’t read women writers!!)

The second concealment of women writers is – some say – by others…

1. There has been a great deal of blogging over the years about the lack of novels written by women up for major literary prizes, or short stories written by women accepted for anthologies.  Numerous reasons have been given for this and possibly the real reason is a combination of factor all playing a parts: fame, subject matter, prejudice, more male judges, more male writers, … Perhaps more male judges/editors in the past have regarded “female” family or domestic issues as less worthy when compared to larger “male” issues. This of course presupposes that women don’t write so much about large issues and men writers avoid domestic issues.
2. So, should there be prizes just for “women’s” fiction, i.e. by women writers? Such as the Orange Prize? 

No! That implies women aren’t as good as males, worthy of competing for the “real” literary prizes, like the Man Booker! Yes! There should be separate prizes for women’s fiction in order to get the recognition women deserve for both their issues and their writing! Otherwise we won’t be aware of their top-notch work…

 So what do you think?

Comment here and/or answer on the two poll questions in the sidebar…

 Firstly, so far so good. Stormlord Rising has been selling well in US, an indication that readers of The Last Stormlord want to know what happens next. I have my first Amazon reviews, and — as I am totally into watching Amazon ratings because I’m ridiculously pathetic — I am delighted that they are 5 stars; as are the ratings over at Barnes&Noble. (Yeah, I look at those too. Didn’t I just say I’m pathetic?)
So, for those of you haven’t read it yet, what’s Stormlord Rising all about?
 
Read the rest of this post at the Orbit site, here.

.

 Re the photo from B&N I posted yesterday, it seems this was the front-of-the-store display. What you see as you walk in the front door. Right next to Margaret Atwood’s latest too…

And just after I posted yesterday’s blog, feeling frightfully smug, I followed a link tweeted by a Twitter friend about author expectations on a blog by a literary agent, Rachelle Gardner.

Here are a couple of extracts:

and then this about one of the common unrealistic expectations:

So I had to have a bit of a giggle at reading this so soon after seeing the photo…
Stormlord Rising is my ninth book, so it’s taken a while for me to get on to the front table. And now that I am there, I am going to wallow in delicious smugness.


Until reality sets in, which it will.
.

“The characters were cardboard.” (Good Reads reviewer)
“full of interesting characters and the central characters are likable…” (Amazon reviewer)
“the characters are predictably clichéd, the villain more so than the heroes, and the supporting cast worst of all.” (Amazon reviewer)
“Larke calibrates conflicts and tensions between characters remarkably well and with subtlety.” (Online Review site)
“A lovely job is done here in showing him (Shale) growing up…” (another Online Review site)

Pacing and Plot
“A nice tight story line with no inconsistencies” (Amazon reviewer)

.
The UPS man came and left a shiny new book with my name on the cover. Book two of the Stormlord trilogy, Stormlord Rising, from the Orbit US. (See the cover to the left right…)

If you live in the US, one more month, people! You can order now, you know. Try clicking on the purchase ikon to the left right in order to order from Borders.

And I just signed the first foreign language translation contract for the trilogy. More about that another time…

.
One of the best and worst things about having a new book out is waiting for, and then reading, reviews. No matter how phlegmatic a writer is, I suspect they end up bouncing between despair and elation, not to mention all the prior nail-biting anticipation … and mind-numbing terror that nobody will say anything.

It is interesting therefore to see things from the reviewer’s point of view, such as this post at NextRead or here at Speculative Horizons. The comments are also worth looking at if the topic interests you.

From a reader’s point of view, I like a review that tells me only very briefly what the book is about (quite different from telling me what the story is); I like it to tell me why it worked for the reviewer – or why it didn’t. Remarks like “The beginning was a slog” mean nothing until they are followed by “because…”

As a writer I try to learn from well-conceived not-so-good reviews, as well as the good reviews. The reviews I really, really hate are the ones that dislike a book for what it sets out to be. There can be no more pointless review than that!

What do I mean?

A SF writer friend once received a snide, sarcastic review from a book reviewer in a national newspaper. The whole review was just a let’s-poke-fun-at-fantasy- to-make-us-literary-types-feel-better review (nudge, nudge, wink, wink) . That’s probably the most extreme version of what I mean. But there are lesser kinds of irritating that have the same fundamental silliness.

Don’t criticize a paranormal romance for containing romance because all you’re interested in is vampires. Don’t attack volume 1 of an epic fantasy of 800 pages for being long, having too many characters and an unresolved ending. Don’t attack a SF novel for containing some scientific explanation. Don’t attack a writer with a reputation for writing blood and gore when he does exactly that in his next book.

What did you expect, for crying out loud?

If the romance is badly managed, if the epic storyline is dull, if the science is ridiculously wrong or poorly explained or dealt with in massive info-dumps, if the blood and gore is tediously repetitive – and you discuss that, or give examples, then you are writing a proper review.

As a writer, one of the nicest comments are the unexpected ones out of the blue from fellow writers – especially when it’s a writer like Alma Alexander whose writing I admire and whose books I love.

So, readers and writers out there: what kind of reviews and reviewers do you like or hate? And for those of you who don’t read reviews, why not?
.

.
There’s been some interesting talk about sexism in literature lately. We’ve been there before, of course, but this particular salvo started a while back with regards to women horror writers. Now the discussion seems to have morphed into talk about depressing fiction by women.

The post that started it concerned an Orange Prize (for women writers) judge:

But the chair of this year’s judging panel has launched a stinging criticism of the current “grim” crop of women’s fiction– complaining that female authors appear to have suffered a collective sense of humour failure.”
There’s not been much wit and not much joy, there’s a lot of grimness out there,” Daisy Goodwin, the author and TV producer, told the Guardian. “There are a lot of books about Asian sisters. There are a lot of books that start with a rape. Pleasure seems to have become a rather neglected element in publishing.”

There’s been an excellent reply in the Guardian here, which has a different take on whose to blame:

But nonetheless it seems unlikely that a similar critique would be taken seriously by the press – or even uttered – if it were levied against male writers. Debates about who’s going to be the next Philip Roth are not coloured by criticisms of brilliant young male authors for not being cheery enough – I’ve not read any criticism that Legend of a Suicide, for example, lacks joy. But men in any profession are rarely criticised for failing to present themselves to the world without the perpetual beaming grins of beauty pageant contestants.

Lots of people have weighed in and here is one by Benjamin Solah that took my eye and is well worth reading. He says, among other wise words:

I would also argue that male writers do not benefit from our female colleagues being excluded from anthologies, short lists, long lists and awards. Sexism in the industry, whilst primarily affecting women no doubt, still lowers the quality of literature for all of us.

So what do you think? Is women’s fiction that is taken seriously too depressing? Is witty fiction too lighthearted to win prizes? Are women’s issues not serious? Is it sexism or simply women=Venus, men=Mars syndrome? And why does this issue or similar issues occur again and again?
.

.
I’ve noticed an increase in the pirating of my books. As fast as one gets taken down, some sod of a book-thief asked for a site to put it up again. You want a free book, go to a library.

Piracy is stealing. Don’t do it. If you want to know why (apart from the fact that it makes you a criminal): see this article by Shiloh Walker.

And to all of you who buy books, I adore you. Over in UK, on the day that The Last Stormlord became available on Amazon, it sold out!! However, they have copies again now…

In the meantime, I anxiously await a review of Stormlord Rising from Australia, or a comment from someone who has actually finished it. Some 15 or so people have told me they think it is fabulous “so far” …but I haven’t heard from anyone who has actually got to the end yet. My nails are down to the quick…
.

.
Some time ago I said that I’d had some snippets of exciting news. The biggest bit comes later this week, and for me it’s over the top, but more of that probably on Thursday.

What I want to tell you about at the moment doesn’t actually happen until the end of the month and into April, and it is this: Borders.com has a blog called Babel Clash for Sf/F readers and writers. And it is one helluva fun place to be.

And I am delighted that they have asked me to blog over there from March 30th to 12th April. During that time you won’t find me here much! I am so looking forward to this… The moderator, Morgan, does a fabulous job of throwing out topics to argue.

Another author will be on at the same time, Celine Kiernan, who’s an Irish YA writer and artist, and just looking at her books makes me want to be a young adult all over again…
.

.
Every published writer battling deadlines and plot problems, late payments and imprints that fold, copy edits and reader mail overflowing the inbox, one star reviews or no reviews at all, will relate to this:

“Speaking to unpublished writers is like speaking to couples pregnant with their first child; it’s very hard to get them to look past the birth scene into the 18 years that follow.”

—Margo Lanagan (see the whole interview here.)