Control Yourself!

This is not about publishing, though the trigger for it was that I echoed my piece on breaking into writing in PJM lifestyle and I got a comment that puzzled me.  I didn’t know what the commenter meant or what he thought he was saying.  Now, this is not unusual, of course, except that this commenter used proper grammar and everything, it’s just that I looked at his comment (several times) and the only thing I could think to say was “and?”

For those who didn’t read it, in the piece I advocated doing both, if possible, traditional and indie, and – if that was impossible – doing just indie for a while, till the industry stabilizes or the new way to break in makes itself clear.

The comment I got was this:
3. Delaware Peters

Write a 7 part series, each novel 1100 pages, and without ever having tried a short story. Then publish a Kindle version with covers you collaged from old Life magazines. Then, spam Amazon.

Don’t forget to write a fake blurb/synopsis like from the back of an old paperback that sounds like you were born in a stereotype factory.

I couldn’t for the life of me understand what he was getting at.  I linked my answer here (page down to the answer to comment 3.  My attempt to linking to the comment took me to a piece on Commentary, so I’m going to assume that something is broken or I’m inept.  both possible), but let’s begin with his premiss…

A seven part series, each novel 1100 pages… without ever having tried a short story.  I can’t even begin to understand why he thinks this is likely to happen.  Perhaps a freak of nature or two could achieve doing this, over a life time.  But look, writing novels is HARD.  Even bad novels are hard to write.  1100 page novels…  Okay, a novel usually has 500 words per page.  To write 1100 pages, you’d need to have a novel that was 550 000 words.  The average novel is 90 000 words, a thicker one is 100 000 words, maybe 120 000.  Those massive goat gaggers you see in bookstores, from esteemed names in writing, are maybe 250 000 words and it’s hard – hard as heck – to even keep the narrative going that long, much less make it good.  Unless someone is compulsive, insane, or otherwise affected, WHY would anyone even put themselves through that?  Seriously?  Much less seven times?

Then there’s the thing about the blurb.  More puzzlement.  First, most writers write their own blurbs.  Yes, blurbs often sound stereotypical.  DUH.  They condense into a paragraph what took many paragraphs to tell.  Your pianist might be a beautifully layered character with expression and feeling but in your blurb he/she will be “the pianist.”

But most of all – MOST of all – I couldn’t figure out why this person would care what others do.  Let’s suppose someone does just what he says.  Two results might come about.  Either the gargantuan series sells.  Or it doesn’t.

If it sells, what is offensive to him?  That someone is making money with product he thinks inferior?  Oh, golly gee, don’t read bestsellers.  At least half of them are guaranteed to bring that reaction in anyone (but not the same half in everyone.)

If it doesn’t sell, what annoys him about it?  That they’re… using electrons?  I mean, yeah, okay, tsunami of cr*p is the terrible thing people evoke to tell us why not everyone should self-publish. I.e. “if everyone is allowed to publish, we’ll drown in a tsunami of cr*p”  BUT current publishing is already by and large a tsunami of er… excrement.  By and large politically correct excrement, but smelly all the same.  I’ve explained, both in my comment and at other times that people, actually have no trouble picking what they want to read (and no one cares if it’s cr*p to someone else!) from a vast selection.  You start by “what do I feel like reading” and narrow it from there, then sample.  Same as you’d do standing in a bookstore.

The only thing I could figure out was bothering him was the fact that these people… “they” were allowed to put up whatever they wanted, in any way they wanted, with no reference to the fact that HE thought it sucked, and HE doesn’t like it. (Can’t you hear the Stomp feet, stomp feet!)

What this boils down to is “but I want to say who gets to do it.  They’re supposed to do it MY way.”

This must be a very basic human impulse, because from the moment my kids could talk, they’d do this.  Every morning brought the usual complaint, “Mooooooom.  Robert is eating his cereal wroooooong” Or Eric, whichever one of them got the complaint in first.  To which my answer was “Unless he’s putting it up YOUR nose, it’s none of your business.  Eat your own d*mn cereal.”  (I’d like to say that my adroit management is why they’re both sensible and non-authoritarian young men, but I was probably just lucky.)

I remember this same argument about blogs.  “Why should anyone be allowed to say whatever they want?  We need control.  How will you find the good stuff amid the cr*p?”  And yet… people do.  And if they ever do control blogs it will be far worse for everyone.

In fact, I suspect the instinct for control is behind most things that annoy me.

Opposition to homeschooling, for instance.  “But how can we ensure they’re teaching the RIGHT things?”  (Well, other than that the kids will eventually enter the job market, you can’t.  And if you define the right things as reading, writing and arithmetic, don’t look at public education.  JUST don’t.)

Drug prohibition.  I want to say upfront I think drugs are bad for you.  Sorry.  Most of them are, at least.  There is substantive research.  But here’s the thing for some people in some occasions they might be the least of two evils.  Do I have the time to figure out everyone’s situation?  No.  Also, like controlling blogs, controlling drugs leads to all sorts of other problems.

Does it bother me that people do drugs?  Sure.  Some of them, some of the time.  Are they directly affecting me?  Well, not most of the time.  So, it comes down to, the law should regulate the circumstances in which this affects others.  Like… accidents under the influence which, wait, it already does.  And it should allow employers to regulate whether they accept them in the work place or not (like, for instance, drug tests.  Which it already allows.)  Or a shop should be able to remove violent-and-stoned customers.  Fine.  Private property rights.  Other than that?  Well, unless they put it up my nose, I don’t CARE.

(And let’s forget for a moment that laws are so ineffective that the other measures are ALREADY in place.)

Sexual perversion or creativeness…  Same thing.  Look, my husband once dragged me to this art film (he’s terminally literary sometimes) in which people got turned on by being in car crashes.  Let’s take that sort of extreme, okay?  Do I find that repulsive?  Well, sort of.  It’s so out there, that, frankly, what I find is that it is bizarre, kind of like people getting turned on by ironing boards.  But let’s suppose I found it icky.  Do I have a right to control it?  Well, not so long as they’re only crashing into each other’s cars.  What business is it of mine?

And the same applies to EVERY sex crime, fetish or perversion that takes place between either consenting adults or a human and something non-sentient .

Should other people be forbidden from doing what they want?  Why, if it doesn’t hurt anyone?  Why if it doesn’t hurt anyone but themselves?  Hurting other people might be a sin.  Hurting yourself is only stupid.  And if you start outlawing stupidity, which of us will remain free?

Does some of it disgust me?  Oh, sure. But look here, other people’s housekeeping disgusts me too – often.  Doesn’t mean I want to regulate how often they scrub their toilets or enforce that EVERYONE should own the same high-tech steam iron I do and iron ALL their cotton clothes.  I’m even friends with some horrible housekeepers.  I just don’t look in their houses.  And ANYONE who wants to know what their friends do in bed has a funny definition of “friend”.
Same with gun control.  If people aren’t actually using the guns to shoot other people, why shouldn’t they own them?  (Or if they only shoot other people in self defense.)  WHY do you care that people have guns in their house.  You don’t like it?  Big deal.  It’s still not your job to control it.

Do I have that impulse to control?  Of course I do.  I am human. Take the commenter who annoyed me.  I want him to stop posting stupid comments.  I want to order him to think.  Would I legislate it?  No.

Doing so, would allow him to order me to not self-publish.  Or perhaps order me to stop eating tasty animals.  Some of my gay friends who are utterly disgusted by hetero sex might order me to stop sleeping with my husband.  And then we’d have to do it on the sly, which is a great sf story, but not something I’d like to see enacted.

So to those who don’t want me to self publish, and to everyone else who wants to curtail others’ actions and establish a lot of “victimless crimes.”  Go control yourself!  And stop trying to put cereal up my nose!

And if you get a chance, pick up Peter McWilliam’s book It’s Nobody’s Business If You Do.  Oh, yeah, and stop whining on the internet about people doing what they want to do in a way that doesn’t affect you at all.  Don’t MAKE me come out there.  I mean it.


Posted

in

by

Tags:

Comments

One response to “Control Yourself!”

  1. Eric Avatar

    Wonderful Sarah.

    And if I don’t think and do what other people want me to think and do, it’s because I need their help! And if I don’t agree, it’s because I am in denial!