|
|
Click to enable
RSS feed.
Next issue:
August 17, 2008
Subscribe below to receive each new edition of Word-wise by e-mail!
Archive
May 20, 2007
June 24, 2007
July 29, 2007
September 2, 2007
October 7, 2007
November 11, 2007
December 16, 2007
January 20, 2008
February 24, 2008
March 30, 2008
May 4, 2008
June 8, 2008
|
|
Focus
Interview: Children's Book Author
Gayle Croissant-Madden
What inspired you to write a book?
My first published story/poem was a submission to Highlights, the children's magazine, when I was 9. I've had tendencies towards the creative side since I was a small child. I think the seeds for expression are in every child. Sometimes life experience buries them for a while. But even ancient seeds can sprout. As I am getting older, I didn't want life to pass me by without making an effort to make my voice heard.
The particular subject I chose for My Wild, Wild Hair stems from an experience I had with an unwanted haircut, and about how I felt (or didn't feel) about my appearance as a young girl. I think coming to terms with your hair is a very common experience for young girls, and I wanted to write a story with a strong, independent female character. My father was a barber. I have always loved old barbershops and wanted to incorporate that into my story as well.
I have written and illustrated small stories in the past but hadn't put much effort into the mechanics or the industry rules used to create them, and how to get them to a publishable state. The inspiration for a more serious effort came from taking a community school course in illustrated children's books. I was lucky to come across an in-depth course led by a published children's book author, and I found that course foundation to be extremely helpful.
What led you to self-publish rather than seeking a traditional publisher?
One can divide the options for publishing into three categories. You can go the traditional route and seek a publishing house to take you on. This requires research into targeting the right house for your work. With this option you might also want to work with an agent who would promote your work to the publishing house for you. A second route is to go through a so-called vanity press, which will take you on for a fee and publish you without any editorial approval. This method often provides some marketing benefits. Thirdly, you can self-publish direct to a press. This method requires you to know how to get your files to the press, it requires you provide your own marketing, and it also requires printing expenses be paid by yourself.
Did you work with a self-publishing house?
I chose to go direct to press. My final medium was electronic art (with preliminary stages in paper and pencil). I have a background in technical publishing and felt confident to take my work direct to a printer.
I wanted to have the experience of finding a publishing house, and I did go through the motions of writing the cover letter, submitting the required samples, and waiting by the mailbox for the rejection letters to come. A traditional publishing house does not want to see a book with complete illustrations. They do want the complete manuscript. But they like to have a big say in the total package and may only accept a book with requested corrections or changes. And they nearly always want to design the cover so they can market it how they feel is best. It may be a character flaw of mine, but I wanted 100% creative control.
You did both the writing and illustration. If you had not illustrated the book, would there have been support for finding an illustrator you approved?
I believe there are vanity presses out there that can provide illustrators for you, just as there are traditional publishers out there with 'stables' of illustrators available for a project.
One of my main interests was the illustration role, so I haven't researched the paths for finding an illustrator for a writing project.
Are there any restrictions at all on your ownership or rights?
Since I have gone direct to press, I own my own work completely. All published work is copyright protected by simply stating that in the book.
What was the cost to you to complete the process? Now that the book is complete, are all profits from now on yours or shared with the printer?
As this was my first serious project and experimental, I chose to go for a very short press run of 100 copies. The costs can vary with the printer you choose and the number of copies you want. A larger press run is cheaper per copy but more expensive up-front. My expenses were roughly $1500. I like to think of it like this--it is much cheaper than a set of golf clubs and club fees, or ski equipment and lift tickets. I have yet to make a profit, but the experience has been worth the expense, and the expenses have been slightly offset with the copies I have sold and the experience gained.
If you write another book, would you use a service or go it alone again?
I intend to continue self-publishing without a traditional publisher, an agent, or a vanity press.
So where do you begin? Roughly what are the steps of the process?
To create an illustrated children's book, I would recommend finding a course to help you through the steps. I would also suggest a very good international organization: http://www.scbwi.org. They are a valuable resource for books, local classes, seminars, and details. They can also get you in touch with local critique groups. A critique group is a club of peers who meet informally to provide each other support and recommendation for works in process.
How did you go about identifying a good printer?
I used the Internet quite a bit for getting a lot of information quickly.
Did you have any unexpected difficulties applying for the ISBN, getting copyright, or with any other legal considerations?
Getting an ISBN number is easily done on the Internet. If you can sign on with a traditional publisher or a vanity press, they would obtain that for you. As a self-publisher, you can go to www.isbn-us.com and get one with no effort for roughly $75. There is no copyright registration necessary. Stating it in your work provides the protection.
It is not absolutely necessary to have an ISBN number if you aren't going to follow through with marketing. This tracking number would only be worthwhile for providing a way to keep your work in a database for a bookstore or library. I chose to get one as I wanted to learn the entire process.
Your background is in graphic arts. How helpful was that experience to the publishing process, or was there still a learning curve?
There was a definite learning curve. I work in a RGB color space for my art rendering and then convert to CMYK for the necessary press run. I am aware of the different color spaces and that there is a shift between them. I was disappointed in the final result as it didn't match what I was seeing on the computer screen or on my RGB color printer. I should have more closely worked with CMYK colors and used RGB only when I needed to. Photoshop has special effects only available if you are in RGB mode, and I should have been more cautious when using them.
In retrospect, I would have chosen a press that was local and whom I could communicate with face to face rather than via e-mail. I would like to know the actual press run much better.
What tips would you offer to other authors who wish to self-publish?
I would recommend finding a critique group, joining SCWBI, taking courses, reading books on the subject, and rustling up a lot of self-discipline to keeping the work in progress.
Do you currently have any plans for future books?
I do have plans to continue with more books. I have the rough outline of a book in my head, but it hasn't made it to storyboard yet. Getting something to storyboard, the first step, may be the most difficult!
|
|
Word-wise Challenge
Congratulations to Tanja Cilia, winner of last issue's Challenge. Tanja is a freelance writer who loves to play with words, so it's no surprise she came up with not just one but a whole collection of celebrity anagrams.
Tanja's winning entry was "Barbra Streisand: Satan's Bared Rib." Apologies to Babs and her many worldwide fans...but you have to admit, it's clever.
Here are a few of Tanja's other offerings:
- Amy Winehouse: A Whiney Mouse
- Elizabeth Taylor: To Breathe Lazily
- Charleton Heston: Slattern Honcho
The next Challenge will appear in the September 21, 2008, issue.
Not-so-idle Musings
I have been of two minds whether to place this little essay under this Musings section or the Business Beat feature. There is a business illustration to be made, but as I am no marketing expert, I'm not too comfortable putting it under that banner. So here you have it--purely from a consumer's point of view.
What Is the Real Cost of Two Units?
A Rant against Product Downsizing
Sometimes the price on a product doesn't change for years and years, despite inflation's effect on all the products around it. There may be a logical explanation for this phenomenon, such as technological advances that have made production of the item more efficient. But often, the same-price phenomenon is actually a price increase. Known as product downsizing, the technique has for years been used by manufacturers to do an end-run around consumer awareness by leaving a price consistent while lowering the amount of product in a package.
A very careful, savvy consumer will note the difference many times. But far more often, these changes go unnoticed among the hundreds of items we buy. Either the practice is suddenly becoming more widespread in our current economy, or I'm finally getting wise to it on my ever more squeezed budget. Either way, the sudden realization I've been had hit home twice in the last couple weeks.
The first example came as the result of comparison shopping to make sure what I thought sounded like a good deal really was. I confess I'm a compulsive bargain shopper when it comes to the weekly grocery trip. I plan the next week's menu based on the local in-store specials of the curent week. When a recent circular advertised a sale on Hillshire Farms sausage, I was happy to fill in not one but two evenings' meals. When I got to the store, I saw that Hillshire Farms was actually one of several brands on sale, so I started comparing and discovered that, in contrast to Smithfield or the local bargain-basement brand, Hillshire Farms sausage does not actually come in a full-pound package any more. It's 14 ounces.
Turns out that even with the size difference, the Hillshire Farms special was still the better buy, but the realization that what I'd thought was a pound for who knows how long was not what it seemed left a bad taste in my mouth. I felt like I'd been suckered.
I swallowed my disappointment and got in line to check out. There, I realized I was about to have a compulsive chewer's nightmare: I was on my last stick of my favorite gum, Winterfresh. But I had a strangely difficult time finding the Wrigley's display. The reason? The package didn't look like I expected. Wrigley's now comes in a new "SlimPack" design. Instead of a single tall stack of sticks, the stack is divided into three smaller stacks and aligned side-to-side. The resulting package shape is completely different.
Grateful to find my favorite despite its new appearance, I didn't notice the other change until later. Seventeen sticks, you see, don't evenly divide into three stacks. But fifteen sticks do. Yep--the new package design disguises the fact that I am now getting less for my money. I give Wrigley's credit for its marketing creativity, but I resent the change. Not only have I two fewer sticks of gum in a pack, the new broader package doesn't fit into that handy inner pocket in my purse, either. Sigh.
So what's the big deal? After all, we're talking about two ounces of processed meat or two sticks of gum. This is not earthshattering volume. True, the downsizing of a single product doesn't make a heck of a lot of real difference to the consumer. After all, even though I'm now aware of their downsizing, I still bought the products in question and likely will continue to do so. And the few cents' inflation they represent is not enough to noticeably cramp my budget.
In my estimation, the bigger problem is consumer trust. Product downsizing is not illegal. Since both size and price are clearly marked, it can't exactly be called deceptive, either. In fact, in Wrigley's case, it can even be called clever marketing spin. But the practice leaves an unsavory impression when a consumer realizes the change. I, for one, would be more comfortable with a modest yet upfront increase in price than being left with the feeling I've been had by companies I've happily patronized for years.
I sell services, not products. Imagine what would happen if I tried to downsize my units instead of raising prices to reflect inflation: would I redefine "one hour of service" as fifty minutes? Would I add a separate processing fee to each hour I perform? Of course not.
Inflation is a fact of economics. Consumers understand that per-hour pricing is not going to remain static decade to decade. When I realize I must raise my prices, then that's what I do, and my pricing menu reflects that upfront.
Maybe it's not pleasant, but at least it's transparent.
Usage Tip
Irregardless
Be cautious with irregardless.
- Regardless [of] = (adj., adv.) without concern or consideration
- The prefix ir: not; the opposite
Logically, then, the definition of irregardless would seem to be "with concern or consideration." But in fact, that logical definition is almost never what a person who uses irregardless really means.
Even so, the "ir-" prefix has somehow become ingrained. At best, it is ambiguous for a reader. But perhaps worst, irregardless is one of those usages that sets the teeth of language sticklers on edge and quickly leads to the judgment that the person who uses it is uneducated or ignorant. Google "irregardless" and you'll find thousands of blog posts, forum discussions, and articles dedicated to blasting irregardless and everyone who dares utter it. Even the question of whether it's really a word incites angry soapboxing.
Avoid unintentional self-negation as well as having undue judgment cast on yourself: opt not to use irregardless at all. Chances are, the simpler regardless carries the meaning you intend; better yet, regardless is completely unambiguous, unlike its "ir"-ridden counterpart.
|
|
