I went to a book reading/signing a few weeks ago. Three authors were there, plying their written trade. I listened to the readings, as one does when one attends a reading on purpose.
One was very,very good.
One was 'meh'.
One sucked (not in the good way). One was very,very good.
One was 'meh'.
I don't know why things in life so often come in three's. You know, like...The Three Bears, The Three Little Pigs, The Three Stooges, my three husbands (not all at once, mind you...)
Regarding the "three" issue, if there are fewer than three it's more efficient to just name them: Lassie sounds better than The One Dog, Jack and Jill sounds better than The Two Children Who Went Up a Hill. If there are more than three it becomes a mental challenge. The publisher of The Three Musketeers knew there were four musketeers, but also knew that readers would have trouble wrapping their minds around the concept of more than three of anything.
Then there's the financial aspect. Consider Evil Editor's quality rating versus the gross receipts of the following movies:
..........Title..................................Quality.............Gross
The Three Amigos......................2 stars.........$40,000,000
Bob & Ted & Carol & Alice........3 stars.........$30,000,000
The Seven Samurai...................4 stars.........$16,700,000
Eight Heads in a Duffel Bag.....5 stars.........$3,000,000
The pattern emerges. Three is the magic number.
As for part 2 of the question, there are many possible explanations for what you experienced. Possibly the first book of the series was well-received, winning the author a contract for another three books, after which she decided to phone it in. Maybe these authors merely suck at reading aloud or at reading with an audience. While publishers do set up book tours for their big guns, the lesser lights go into bookstores and ask to do a reading, and if they're local, meaning they'll bring friends, the stores work them into the schedule. Maybe the bad authors have gained fan bases in some other field, fans who'll buy anything they're associated with.
And if it's actually true that meh-ness is what sells these days, would it kill you to write some meh? Don't you think a writer of your talent can produce better meh than those hacks you were listening to?
47 comments:
A former teacher of mine wrote a series of murder mysteries. The first book was written as a stand alone, took three years, and it was good. The publisher figured successive books would be better and better... However, although it seemed exciting for the protagonist to get shot, beaten, etc., this theme of disabling injuries created increasing difficulties in subsequent volumes. Which were supposed to come out annually. Plus the author did not begin with 7 good ideas for murder mysteries and by volume 3 had begun to hate the protagonist and regretted signing for a series. Then at about volume 5, someone she knew well was brutally murdered, and all the fun went out of writing mysteries, so the last two books had no reason to exist except that damn contract. Not surprisingly, the readership declined as the series went on, but nobody had the power to stop the train. So the publisher sought to limit losses by reducing the promotion budget. And that was the end of the author's career.
Y'know, I meet an awful lot of Published Writers.
And maybe one in ten is somebody whose work was actually paid for in genuine cash dollars by some publisher person. The other nine heard about this new concept in nontraditional publishing where you share the expenses with the publisher and eliminate the middle man...
(I am not sure who the middle man is or why he has awakened such universal hostility.)
What I'm getting at here was, are you sure the sucky author wasn't vanity-published?
Two stars for The Three Amigos?! Surely you jest.
Oooh. I'll be back later to discuss in depth!!
Hmmmmmm. Question Author here. Thanks for this, EE.
Maybe I can work some 'meh' magic...
I have to think about that. I don't suppoes you'd mind seeing a 'meh' opening sometime soon, would-ya?
three words:
Beginning . . . . Middle . . . End.
but then that doesn't explain The Chronicles of Narnia or the Harry Potter success and then the Lord of the Ring was written to have only two parts. . . .
Hmm, I think EE has the right explanation. As for "meh", I rather write "meh" than nothing at all.
I'm with the troll. The Three Amigos earns a plethora of stars, el guapo.
I definitely think that the person submitting this question -- whoever in the world that may be and I certainly am not one to guess her or his identity publicly, nope, nope -- is ready to rock the world with some superb meh. Superb meh by the way is also called, ummmm, really good.
I'm aspiring to "meh" but I haven't got there yet.
I saw this trend coming and worked hard to make my last novel as "meh" as possible. Apparently, though, it's still too good to publish.
Paca, I believe the word you want for superb meh is tasty.
As I understand it, if you're ever unfortunate enough to drown in porridge (c/o the 3 Bears or otherwise), your dying breaths take 37 seconds per yard depth to reach the surface — whereupon they greet the atmosphere with a muffled meh sound.
That movie chart was laugh out loud hysterical!
Along these lines... I purchased a NAME AUTHOR's best rated novel on Kindle this past weekend. I'd always wanted to read this particular writer's work. I'd seen a TV show that documented a part of his life and I thought of him fondly. 1/3 of the way through his "meh" of a mess (floating POV, rambling plot lines with little tension, unrealistic events, cardboard characters... the whole 9 yards) I asked for and received my first Kindle refund. No more reading "meh" for me just cuz it's sold/selling.
I'm with Fairy - I'm too striving to "meh" but have yet to reach it, especially lately.
I'm intrigued. So, once one has firs novel published, one can "phone in" the next one? I might reconsider shelling out the exorbitant cost for the new version of MS Word if I'm only going to use it once.
I'm assuming you're given a special number to call, it's not going to like "Press 1 for sales, Press 2 for accounts, press 3 to dictate a 100,000 word second volume of your epic fantasy", right?
Do the agents / publishers have people on staff ready to take these calls, or is it one of those Indian call center things, 'cause if it is, all I can say is that Charles Dickens lived and worked in a much better time, as far as authorship is concerned. I mean, imagine: It was being the very best of times; it was being the very worst of times. Yeah, it's cheap, but cheap isn't always better, right?
And phone calls are not cheap, either, are they? Better be an 800 hundred number, though knowing the greedy freaking publishing industry it's a 900 number and then you have to give your credit card number before they'll even connect you. That's not very author friendly is it?
Do you suppose we could just use Skype?
Well, hell. Now I'm wondering if I should actually ASPIRE to being meh, after reading this. Maybe over-aspiring is its own problem.
I'm with the questioner here - it drives me nuts, the processes of publishing. Just getting a short story published has been damned hard.
So bring on 'meh'...maybe...?
Y'know, this question kinda piqued my interest, 'cause just a couple weeks ago, my youngest grandkid went to a reading by one of his most favorite writers. Anyhow, he came back to me real disappointed, like, a said not just that it was "meh", but it "sucked the big one". He said the voice and pacing was all to heck and the writer didn't have no feel at all for the characterization. The kid said the book just sounds better inside his head, when he reads it himself.
Guess that's why people buy books to read for stead of watching it on TV.
I don't know why things in life so often come in three's.
I'm pretty sure that second apostrophe doesnt belong there.
Its tough to focus on the question when the grammars' kind of "meh".
The pattern emerges. Three is the magic number.
That's exactly what I told the Olsen twins!
The Three Amigos .... 2 Stars
Fuck off, philistine.
Its tough to focus on the question when the grammars' kind of "meh".
Like it's tough to focus on this comment? I'm trying to decide if that's irony or hypocrisy there, Anon.
Rod! I know quite a few women and maybe a guy or two who are going to be an awful lot disappointed at that profile link of yours. Cute, but not quite what we've come to expect from you.
OTOH, Iago, that's exactly what we've come to expect from you.
My advice would be for touring authors to book local elementary school teachers to do the actual reading for them. Elementary school teachers could use the extra money, can keep an unruly audience in check, and are, on the whole, pretty freaking awesome at reading aloud.
Adding a few pictures wouldn't hurt, too.
Maybe it's the first part of some motivational incantation for writers.
Along the lines of do-re-mi.
Yes!
Yes!
Got it!
* meh - d'oh - crap *
I shall be singing this all day as I'm writing. It's genius.
But on to the serious question - Rod the Roofer is a grandfather?! Last time I looked he was a hot young fellow. Obviously too much time has passed since I popped in here...
As for writing meh, I guess as long as people read meh, there will be a market for meh. Sadly. Meh.
Anon 12:29 pm - just read your comment more csrefully than the perusal I did when I skimmed the comments yesterday. The first novel was good and took three years, but the publisher screwed that up ny insisting on a yearly novel from your teacher/friend. That's ridiculous - to expect time compression to help an author. Guess it helps the publisher's bottom line, though, so yee-ha for them and to hell with the creativity and writing longevity of the srtist, huh?! This forced process would seem to breed meh-ism!
Looks like BT, paca, and - oh - Steve Martin - loved The Three Amigos. I sense a pattern here...
vkw - I've always been an opponent of meh, other than a mystery or thriller of the 'boring flight, oh what can I do to fill the time, oh whoa is me' yank something off the shelf at the airport bookstore persuasion. But then, there are so many excellent mysteries and thrillers, even for airplane reasding choices, meh is, uh, meh.
I do like paca's idea, however, about writing 'superb meh'. Now THAT's something I'd go for!
Phoenix, you haven't got a meh-bone in your body.
Tasty!! Oh girl, I haven't heard that word in a long time, other than re food, and that doesn't count, does it?
Anon 8:47 pm - Love your typo-filled comment, honey!
Made me laugh out loud.
Rod! (No need to look around for any lightning. I'm talking about the roofer guy...) It's been so long! That pic of your little grandson is special and sweet, but I was sure hoping for some butt crack like in the old days, fella.
(By the way, my word verify for this comment is letcracc. Swear to God, man.
iago, you nasty devil. But I bet they liked it and they found one for ya.
FH and Stace, since when did you all ever write anything meh, laydees?!
Whirl - I always wondered about the etymology of the word 'meh'. This porridge bears thing makes perfect sense!
ril, it would be good to hear some read aloud from teachers - but they always use that fake, sweet, singsongy voice...
Evil Mehditor.
;-)
Couldn't resist.
I'm ready to hop on the meh train. It's just I'll be hopping from the opposite side as all the talent fine folks here.
:-)
Rod the Roofer!!!
How could I have missed his comment?
And how has EE missed interviewing this fine specimen?
Maybe it was just the reading out loud part that was "meh," anon? Some people don't have that skill. I mean, we can't all be Fairyhedgehog reading her stories on her blog in that department. Because, no matter what she says, she's damn good at reading out loud.
Doesn't this 'meh' thing apply to all aspects of life? 'Meh' or even downright crappy TV programs, politicians, music, clothing and even humans enjoy inexplicable popularity. Eastenders will always be more popular than QI.
Basically, I don't wonder why people produce crap; I wonder why people buy it.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go buy three donuts. They're doing a Teletubby marathon tonight and I need munchies.
Anon 8:47 pm - Love your typo-filled comment, honey!
Made me laugh out loud.
You know, I had an awesome follow on would have had you rolling, but EE canned it. Guess it was a touch over the top... Meh.
It's permissible in English to use an apostrophe in making a plural of words that aren't usually pluralised. So, three's is correct.
I'm writing "meh" right now, actually. Actually, it's worse than "meh." it's downright crap. So bad I'm thinking of scrapping it and starting over.
ril, I love the hiring elementary school teachers idea. That would bring them some extra cash! And seeing them round up a bunch of adults might be hilarious. I can see certain unruly patrons being made to stand in a corner.
Buffy,
I was wondering about that recently. My WiP has a family with the surname Mathis. I've yet to find a way to pluralize it so that it doesn't look weird.
Mathises?
Mathis's?
I would go with Mathises, like the Joneses we're supposed to keep up with :).
Maybe don't scrap the meh, Stace? Maybe just battle on through, let it sit for a bit after you finish, a month or so, and then reread it?
Because most likely, knowing you, there's a lotta NOT-meh in there.
It's permissible in English to use an apostrophe in making a plural of words that aren't usually pluralised. So, three's is correct.
I've seen grammar guides that permit the apostrophe to form plurals of lower-case letters ("mind your p's and q's") and in certain other special cases of potential ambiguity, but never of just any words that aren't usually pluralized. Just doing a brief survey online, these three pages all delineate rules for when it's permissible to use an apostrophe in a plural, and none of these cases would seem to include "three's". Ditto Wikipedia, for what it's worth. (If it were a numeral, then the apostrophe might apparently be permitted in the plural—"3's"—, but not in the number when it's spelled out. And even regarding the numeral, not all sources agree.)
On the other hand, that's not to say there may not be some grammar authorities somewhere that do condone the use of the apostrophe in the plural of any word not commonly pluralized. The authorities don't agree on everything. It certainly doesn't seem to be the majority view, however.
Yeah, there's no consensus, Zach. Different style guides handle tricky grammar and punctuation issues differently, and it depends on whether you're following a style guide at all, and if so, which one. If you're following AP style, you wouldn't use an apostrophe in this case, but if you're following Webster's New World (according to AP), an apostrophe would be fine. And if you're dashing off a blog comment, as you can see, anything goes, even if the error-riddled anonymous comment criticizes the grammar of another.
What I wanna know is, what does EE think?
Its tough to focus on the question when the grammars' kind of "meh".
Anon, was the above sentence sarcasm? I hope so...
If you're following AP style, you wouldn't use an apostrophe in this case, but if you're following Webster's New World (according to AP), an apostrophe would be fine.
Actually, no in fact it wouldn't -- I just checked. Webster's New World does reference forming the plural of numerals with an apostrophe, but not of numbers spelled out as words. And even in the case of numerals, the 2006 edition says this was how it was done "in the past", but that "Now, the trend is to simply add the letter s".
I know authorities do disagree on many fine points of grammar, but the more I look into this the more it seems that there is a consensus on this particular matter. Sure, the authorities disagree about "1960s" vs "1960's", but they all seem to agree that "three's" is wrong.
But yeah, it's probably not worth obsessing this much about a blog comment...
Yeah, I guess it makes more sense that numbers written out wouldn't have an apostrophe. Most of them are sorta plural, anyway.
Wow. I get busy for just a week and look what happens. A minion reunion!
Late to the party and I see it devolved into a grammar debate. So here's my 2 cents on that. Don't put those poor copy editors out of business. Crap up the grammar and the apostrophes every once in awhile. Do your part for the publishing economy.
As for meh-ness. Hm. Just trying to write at all these days (but don't tell the tartan Koala). I'll take meh if it means there are more words in the WIP and I won't get my butt shredded.
Meh Club T-Shirt!
http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=meh+t+shirt&x=0&y=0
Oh my God- I thought you were teasing, McK - but there they are- Meh!!
Well, it wouldn't be a proper reunion without Nasty Anon nit-picking grammar, right?
:)
Absolutely, Reunion Anon!
Post a Comment