The day jobs of famous writers

Check out this amusing chart (and why is it that the one woman is paid a puny fraction of what the men made?):



See the big version of the whole thing at Lapham's Quarterly.

Apply for an arts grant

Thanks to Lois Brandt for sending this info along:

King County has a grant project for individual artists, including writers and illustrators. The grant application is due March 10. (Sorry for the late information, I just found out myself.)

This is a project-based grant. Writers are required to submit a ten page sample, illustrators are required to upload a sample from their project portfolio.

Here's the link.

Apply for an SCBWI grant

SCBWI members can apply for a variety of grants during the year. Here's a list of deadlines, near and far:

Work-in-Progress Grants
Completed application and accompanying materials must be postmarked no earlier than February 15th and must be RECEIVED BY March 15th.

Barbara Karlin Grant
Completed application and accompanying materials must be postmarked no earlier than February 15th and must be received no later than March 15th.

Member of the Year
Nominations can be made by sending email to Stephen Mooser or mailing a letter to the SCBWI Executive Office before May 1st.

Martha Weston Grant
Letters must be postmarked on or after May 1st until or on June 10th.

Sue Alexander Award
Varies by year, typically must be submitted around June 15th. See conference brochure for details.

Portfolio Award
Varies by year, typically must be submitted around June 15th. See conference brochure for details.

Amber Brown Grant
Applications may be submitted between November 1st and December 31st.

The Golden Kite Award
All submissions must be RECEIVED no later than December 15, 2009

Sid Fleischman Humor Award
All submissions must be RECEIVED no later than December 15, 2009

Magazine Merit Award
Entries must be submitted ON or BEFORE December 15th of the year of publication (entry year).

To learn more, visit the SCBWI awards page.

The Amazon mess

Val Serdy sent this along:

John Scalzi has a great post today about how the writers are getting screwed by the kerfuffle between Macmillan and Amazon. These writers are losing money, and potentially losing future book deals when their sales numbers come in lower during this quarter. He recommends going out and buying their books at other sellers to support the authors.

Scalzi is usually extremely snarky, but I loved this post, especially:

the sales that [Macmillan authors] are getting cut out of here are going to make a real and concrete difference to them when it comes time to tally up royalties, and when they’re trying to sell that next book.

So rather than focus on what should happen to Amazon or Macmillan, here’s an idea, and here’s my point: let’s us focus on the writers, who are getting kinda screwed here. None of this is their fault, it has nothing to do with them, and they don’t deserve to lose sales and their livelihood while this thing goes down. If you want to make a statement here, don’t make it against a corporation, who isn’t listening anyway. Make it for someone, and someone who will appreciate the support.

Support the authors affected. Buy their books.

and Macmillan’s children and teens book list.


And this part is just my opinion, but...I am a St. Martin's author. I also own a Kindle and have bought many a thing from Amazon. I include links to their store from all my sites.

Amazon's move here revealed a lot about the company: They are not about selling books. They are about selling products, and their primary strategy in selling is to sell at the lowest price. Apparently, there is a cost to that for all of us. If Amazon doesn't like our publisher, our books might disappear in a weekend. Who's to say that if Amazon doesn't like the content of our book, they might at some point make it disappear, as well?

Amazon is NOT about supporting authors, nor is it about making books available to readers, as this move makes perfectly clear. They'd rather not sell a book than sell it for anything less than a rock-bottom price.

This is why I'm not linking to Amazon's novel contest. You can find it if you're curious. But I'd rather stick with traditional publishers--who at least love stories--for as long as I can. I'll also be sticking with local bookstores wherever possible.

Have a different opinion? Share it below, please.

James Patterson, Inc.

The New York Times Magazine has an interesting piece on how he's transformed publishing.

Track your Amazon.com rank

This new site tells you how many books you've sold this month on Amazon (as opposed to just telling you your relative rank, which is sort of unhelpful): Novelrank.com.

The business of publishing evolves

Business Week reports on the gradual affection the publishing industry has for the Internet. It's worrisome how slow they've taken to the biggest revolution in print since Gutenberg (the press, not the Three Men and a Baby actor). But at least revenue is up in the first half of 2009:

Book publishers are learning to love the Web. They have to. In hopes of avoiding the toll inflicted by the Internet on newspapers and the music business, the publishing industry is experimenting with a growing array of ways to distribute reading materials digitally. Some might even boost profits.

Publishers already sell digital versions of books for electronic readers such as Amazon.com's (AMZN) Kindle and Sony's (SNE) Reader. But other, newer methods being considered or tried out include Netflix-like online book rentals, sales of individual chapters, and placement of ads alongside digital books.

Selling lower-priced books online is likely to cut into revenue, but margins could hold up or even widen in some cases as publishers save on printing and returns—which can account for as much of 40% of the sale of a physical book, analysts say. "If they can migrate to the [digital] model and eliminate manufacturing and inventory costs, the economics could be a lot more interesting," says Peter Appert, an analyst at Piper Jaffray (PJC). "That'll drive margin upside." Today, publishers' margins hover in the high single digits, although some companies, especially those selling textbooks to college students, fare better.

Across the publishing industry, revenue rose 1.8%, to $3.71 billion, in the first half of 2009, according to the Association of American Publishers. In the first half of 2009, e-book sales reached $61.2 million, up from $24.6 million a year earlier, the AAP says.

Read the rest.

Scholastic has a good first quarter

In news that should buoy us all, Scholastic reports a good first quarter for fiscal year 2009-2010. Here's what Publishers Weekly has to say:

Led by gains in its educational technology and trade book segments, revenue for the first quarter ended August 31 rose 14% at Scholastic, to $315.6 million. The first quarter loss from continuing operations was cut to $24.6 million from $42.9 million, while the net loss was reduced to $23 million from $49.1 million. Chairman Dick Robinson said the results keep the publisher on track to achieve “significantly higher” earnings for the full year.

In the children’s book publishing & distribution segment, total revenue rose 25%, to $76.2 million, led by a 25% increase in the trade segment which benefitted from sales of the paperback edition of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows and the release of the fifth title in the 39 Clues series. The Hunger Games also continued to sell well. Sales through book clubs rose 46%, while book fair sales fell 7%; the first quarter represents a small portion of revenue for clubs and fairs.

Read the rest here.

What, pray tell, is 'merch'?

Editorial Anonymous has some words of warning on the topic of dolls and toys that accompany books:

Q. Crocodile Creek, MerryMakers, Inc., and Manhattan Toy Company design plush toys for children’s book publishers. When do publishers decide to introduce this type of product? What percentage of sales goes to the author and/or illustrator?

A. Often, those makers approach the publisher, not the other way around. If a publisher does approach a toy company about a plush add-on, it's NOT when the book is newly out. It's when the book clearly has a significant fan base. Did you sell 50,000 copies last year? Great, have a doll. The plush market is not strong right now, nor has it been for the last several years, so getting a plush to go with your book is extremely unlikely.

Lots of authors have visions of sugar plums and merch subrights dancing in their heads when their book comes out. Whether it's a doll, or apparel, or whatever. Do yourself a favor and let go of those ideas. I've known a couple authors who spent the couple of years following a book publication doggedly trying to scare up interest in merch rights, and were bitterly disappointed. Because they did not have the huge fan base that would make merchadise manufacturers interested.

Read the rest.

Okay, this is mean but...

May we all have such success with our writing that the U.K. Telegraph devotes space to dissecting our twenty worst sentences, as they've done with Dan Brown.

A teaser:

16. The Da Vinci Code, chapter 4: A voice spoke, chillingly close. "Do not move." On his hands and knees, the curator froze, turning his head slowly. Only fifteen feet away, outside the sealed gate, the mountainous silhouette of his attacker stared through the iron bars. He was broad and tall, with ghost-pale skin and thinning white hair. His irises were pink with dark red pupils.

A silhouette with white hair and pink irises stood chillingly close but 15 feet away. What’s wrong with this picture?

Authors: an invitation to hold your horses

Editorial Anonymous gives us a nice reminder not to get too YESYESYES when an editor makes an offer.

You can, you know, ASK FOR MORE MONEY.

Read the post.

Dear Google, don't be evil

The Open Book Alliance, which includes tech companies Yahoo! and Microsoft, and author, publisher and library groups, has written a "manifesto" challenging the Google Book Search settlement.

The settlement is bad for consumers and book-lovers: It deliberately thwarts competition in the emerging e-books market, creating a digital book monopoly that will inevitably lead to fewer choices and higher prices for consumers of digital books...

The settlement is bad for libraries and schools: While a handful of large and well-funded university libraries participated in the Google book-scanning effort, many other educational institutions and libraries will be forced to pay monopoly prices...

The settlement is bad for authors and small publishers: Unless they act to opt out of the proposed settlement by Google’s deadline, authors and other writers lose rights to the fruits of their labor...

The settlement sets a dangerous process precedent: The proposed settlement far exceeds the bounds of a typical legal settlement. It privatizes important copyright and public policy decisions. It abuses class action procedure to create an exclusive joint venture between Google, AAP and the Authors’ Guild, strengthening Google’s dominance in search and search advertising and creating a private monopoly for the sale of digitized books.

Read the rest.

We're Rich! We're Rich!

Oh, wait. The average picture book advance was $4,000. We never have been good at counting those zeroes.

Get more detail about average and mean advances on Barbara Kanninen's site ("mean" here is a mathematical term, not a synonym for stingy, though you would be forgiven for thinking this).