who you know, how do you know

I've been thinking about cliques lately. There are huge advantages to social networking, but I wonder if there is a downside? Objectivity. Once, we hardly knew who writers were. We knew their work, but not much about them. We didn't have to. It was mostly about their work. We didn't think we know them personally. All this has changed, writers are friends with other writers, etc, moreso with social networking than ever. Does this make things feel woolly? For instance, once, it was poor protocol for a writer to contact a reviewer in any way, vice versa. Likewise, we would never ask for a blurb from a friend. Now, there is certainly less distance between writers. Most writers would be hard pushed to find writers that aren't a social networking friend they have had contact with. This is all well and good. I'm not saying the people who are published, get good blurbs, etc aren't talented- they are. There is brilliant writing out there, but what about work written by writers not involved in cliques and social circles? Will it be given a fair chance, an equal chance, to work by people within circles of friends? I'm not sure.

I now find myself sitting on work that is better than anything I've done before, but I don't feel confident it will be given a fair chance. Am I being bullied into quitting writing by cliques? Does this happen? Maybe.

Strange Little Books I loved

Everyone seems to be making lists of books they've loved lately. Here are mine. They're not all new books, but are new to me this year. This is my list of favourite books of stories I read this year (there are many more books of stories I loved, but I read them last year.) Many of these I got interested in after reading 'Short Circuit' (Salt)- A Guide to the Art of the Short Story. I already enjoyed collections by many of the writers in the book (Vanessa Gebbie, Tania Hershman, Alex Keegan, Nuala Ni Chonchuir, David Gaffney) but some of the writers were newer to me. I read their essays, then bought their books.
Sarah Salway and Adam Marek discussed their choices when writing certain stories in such an interesting way I had to go and read them straight away (a writer talking about someone getting their fridge painted and another talking about hey Jude abd zombies? who could resist?)

Aimee Bender - 'Willfil Creatures'-

I loved these stories, how they seem unusual but still have a point ( a man keeping a tiny man as a pet in a cage by his bed, a woman who finds a place that sells words)- amazing writing. (currently waiting for more to arrive!)

Etgar Keret - 'Missing Kissinger' or 'The Nimrod Flip out'-

I read these for the first time in january. They are so good I've read them more than once. I love the poigniant emotional tug behind the oddness (the girl in the bottle, a magician who is afraid of what he may pull out his hat- beautiful, sad and strange.)

Sarah Salway - 'Leading the Dance'- I enjoyed 'Messages' (flash) so much I had to buy this. I expected alot from it and wasn't disappointed. It was even better when it arrived and turned out to be signed! :)

Nik Perring-(flash) 'Not So Perfect' (Roastbooks)

Don't let the title fool you, only someone who writes this good would dare give a book such a title. (otherwise sarcy reviewers would rub their hands together.) Again, unusual little stories but with a real point to them. Lonely people with real beating hearts in the most unusual of places in this book (a man listening to someone crying on the other side of a wall, an angel in a carpark, a shark boy in love.) Amidst strangeness is sadness and hope. These stories hit the right note. Wonderful.

Dan Rhodes-(flash) 'Anthropology'

100 stories of 100 words, light in tone, addictive somehow. Some of them decieve, they start and almost feel like jokes. The best sneak up with little truths about love that caught me unawares and made me smile.

Adam Marek- 'Instruction Manual for Swallowing'

I'm one of those people who never buys anything I hear lots about till later. (I didn't see The Simpsons when it first aired and there were t-shirts everywhere, or The Office till after it was aired- then I found them when I wasn't hearing about them so much and loved them.)(Awkward bugger? I like to think of it as not too susceptible to advertising - discerning book buyer :) I've heard a lot of good things about this book since it came out. I finally bought it this year. The stories, again, are outside the box: zombies, a giant creature in the city, modern art gone wrong). Often they have a cinematic feel (someone make a movie of Meaty's Boys now) but beyond the situation more is at stake, little morsels about human nature to go away and chew (Meaty's Boys, Jumping Jennifer are sublime.) Wow.

How to keep motivated?

I'm wondering what the best way to stay motivated as a writer is. It's easy sometimes, on the back of a success to keep writing and sending out work. Likewise when there is a deadline involved, a new book in the post, a new project, a pat on the back still making your writer faith tingle. Other times its less easy. How does a writer keep writing when self doubt rears its ugly head? I hate to say it, but several people this year really destroyed my confidence. Everytime I sit to write a poem I remember. Likewise, when I sit to consider sending a poem anywhere I can't do it. I'm scared of abuse. If any writer told me this about themselves I'd say- Send work out NOW. Get back on the horse. Get some acceptances, positive comments to balance the negative out. What I'd say is prove the fucker wrong.
How to do it though, start, to get the faith back, love poetry and live with it again like I did for so long, I really don't know. Starting is thing.

when to promote, when not?

I've been thinking about promotion lately. For writers the net means its part of daily life. We are supposed to promote, everyday (we want to to an extent.) But are there times when it's OK to give it a rest? If we don't have anything new coming out should we still be promoting anyway? I'm not sure what the answer is, but my reservation about having time out from FB was 'darn, i'm supposed to be on there to promote my last book.' I want to, I should, I know. I do support the press, but sometimes there are times life is busy, times when new work needs attention to be written. Unlike a piece of work, which will be finished eventually, when it comes to promotion no end is sight. How do we know it's done? We don't. It never is.

To a certain extent the bigger the writer is is, the more they sell, the more promotion takes care of itself a little bit. People review books they've heard of, sucessful writers have opportunities to do residencies, readings, have interviews, get plugged by their friends, etc. For little known writers though- how do we make people aware of our work? How can we promote? And is it OK to step away sometimes to move onto the next thing, the writing?

I don't know the answers to these questions. I do know being a writer is different than it used to be with the advent of the net as a promotion tool. Writers may once have been squeezing in time to write amongst daily life, other jobs, family and commitments. This hasn't changed, though now writers must give more time to promotion and still find time to write and do all those other things. How? And when is it OK for time out?

Are we addicted to the net?

I recently decided to step away from facebook. I had my reasons. Largely, I thought it was time to concentrate on new things. Facebook is interesting as a phenomenon. What started as something we keep in touch with friends with and might check once a week has become something people are on everyday. I went with this thinking for a while. It makes sense to make friends and see what other writers are doing, etc. Also, I thought it may help get people interested in buying my next book. There are many books being plugged on facebook everyday. Its a place used by authors to plug- no harm there. But what about when the fun runs out?

I got to a point were facebook just was not fun any more. I wondered how much time it may be eating from my day. Did the negative aspects outweigh the positive? A minute here, five minutes there, putting off something on a to do list while I just encourage what this person is up to first... I suppose we are all better at multi tasking than we once were. On our computers alone we have email minimised to check in with, documents open and facebook minimised in the corner to go back to here and there. How do these minutes add up? And what is doing for our concentration?

Social networking, mobile phones, etc have changed the workplace. My husband works in an office. There, it is not uncommon for people to spend time on facebook socially, text friends, chat on their mobiles. My husband doesn't do this. When there is a rush job on he may be waiting for information from colleagues and happen to notice they are still taking ten minutes here and there to check in on facebook or take personal calls. Once work was one place. We rarely chatted to people from our own social life during the work day, maybe on our lunch hour. Maybe not. Our attitude has changed. At any given time we are juggling business and leisure, the flippant and serious, promotion and creativity.


I thought carefully about stepping away from facebook. These days writers are supposed to use it, expected to actively plug themselves and their book essentially every day. Publishers do the same thing. I wondered though- how long for? What's a fair amount of time for a writer to try and plug a book for if they are doing it every day? A year? Two? Until the next book comes out? (could be a decade, or may never happen. How many hours per sale?) When is it time to walk away?

I found myself having to deal with abuse and rude people sometimes. I thought, hang on why am I tolerating this? My book has been out almost three years, as a writer I've moved on to new work. I decided to leave facebook for a while, but it was with reservations and regrets. There are some lovely people I'll miss (I apologise to them and hope they understand.)

1)I am sorry to the genuine people on there I do like who I am interested in and wish to support and keep in touch with. I'm happy to hear from them via email or elsewhere.
2) I am sorry if it creates an anti social impression or that I don't support the publishers.

One thing I considered was: If I go on facebook can I just check in on those great people without seeing what other people are doing or saying? I didn't think so. Can I avoid being sucked in? We often go online for one thing like research and can easily click interesting looking links and end up spending more time than we intended or end up in placed we might not want to be. Facebook can we handle it? Just a minute, no more... I can stop anytime I want..

So, to clear up any confusion, my compromise is this: I spend no time on facebook whatsoever (infact I can no longer personally get into the account- cold turkey is the only way.) However, a third party will occasionally post for me if there is news to share. The reason I decided to do this was because there a few people who have contacted me in the past who genuinely enjoyed my writing. I am grateful to them. I appreciate their kindness and encouragement. So, for that handful of people, a third party may occasionally post links to new work when it is published, that way the people who want to can read it and be aware where it is.

Has not being on facebook improved anything? Time will tell.

Nettiquette

Following an 'anonymous' smear on myself and my work I have found myself thinking about ethics and etiquette online lately. Online we pretty much say what we like, what are the pitfalls of this? It's easy to slate someone online, damage a colleagues career in front on thousands of people or be snide, but do we take the sort of care being constructive in our feedback online as we would if we were looking someone in the eye? For instance, in a review online someone who is Oxford educated said they don't like my photo 'my whole pose'. If a writer had been writing a review for a national newspaper would they mention what the writer looks like as part of their argument? I don't think so. In reviewing for journals we take our time. The best reviews, even negative ones, offer constructive points, examples of what we are saying. We would consider our personal dislike of what someone looks like to weaken our professionalism at best, to be discrimination at worst. Online this sort of stuff largely seems OK. I don't think it is. At our fingertips now we can leave a review, anonymously. Just as writers form alliances they can as easily ellimnate their competition, anonymously.

It has made me consider conduct and ethics on the net. I can't change how other people behave online or elsewhere, but I have my own code of ethics as to what is acceptable nettiquette. I hope others have the same.

1) Reviews- I make a point of never doing reviews of books I didn't like or aren't my sort of thing.(eg:) I'm not a sci fi fan so I don't touch them, I can't treat it fairly or do justice to the genre it is. The reason is I'm not sure what the advantages of a review with no empathy to the work of the writer or its theme are except to make the reviewer look big and clever. I only review what I 'm interested in, hoping to encourage other people who may also be to look into it. If there are areas that could have been improved upon it's OK to mention it, but I don't see any advantage of reviewing just to destroy a writer or hinder a publishers sales (why bother? Being a writer or publisher isn't easy these days. Something like poetry is marginal enough without stabbing poets of any kind in the back.) If you want to trash someone aim for the big boys, writers on the major bucks, instead of any easy target. They have nothing lose.

2) Comments- I've always tried to encourage other writers on social networking forums and be friendly. Interesting discussion is fine, but I don't believe in slating anyone or being rude.

3) Never discuss someone who is not there. This is something I never thought about till recently, but I wonder how often people are publicly destroying the reputation of people who aren't party to the discussion? It may be fair game to question editorial policy of a press in an online discussion for instance, but isn't it somewhat cowardly to trash someone is not even there to defend their name? I don't think I have ever done this, but I now have a concious policy that I will never negatively discuss the work of any writer online if the writer is not present. It's only fair.

4) I will never make a negative comment about what someone looks like online. It's not relevant. It's akin to schoolyard bullying. It is not PC. It destroys confidence and isn't funny. (Come to think of it, I should really try to apply this principle to real life instead of muttering that guy down the road is Alvin the Squirrel.)

5) I will never put someone down in any way to make myself look good or clever. It isn't.

6) If I like someone or their work I will stand by that regardless of fashion, social cliques or an attempt to curry favour with presses, reviewers or writers. I won't cozy up to them in an attempt to further myself.

7) Consideration, Respect and Honesty. As easy as it to forget form behind the saftey of a screen I remember that on the other end lies a human being and consider what impact I may be about to do or say (or how I do or say it) may have on them personally or professionally.

I don't think this will take on, but this is my nettiquette. I aim never to say anything unfair or to which I wouldn't be willing to put my name.

Quaint old expression my grandparents used to say 'It's nice to be nice, costs nothing to be nice, if you can't be nice say nowt.' They might have been onto something. Online, off line, perhaps it isn't a bad idea to think 'did i do or say anything that may have made someone's day worse today?'

Are we Just Bullies?

It seems we are more aware of the issue of bullying than we once were when it comes to the playground and children. We campaign to stop it. We want schools to be aware of it. There are organisations to support its victims. Such awareness is long overdue. As a survivor of school yard bullying the issue is one I take very seriously. I hope there is no one who will have to tolerate it.

As an adult I've started to wonder how far bullying still goes on? We'd like to think this is stuff of the playground, that as adults we don't bully and won't be bullied. I'm not sure how true this is. Adults may be bullied in the workplace, their communities, even by family members. In the workplace we can possibly complain (though often don't). But what about bullying elsewhere? Social media has introduced a new element to childhood bullying, behind closed doors in the safety of home bullying can occur online. Is this happening to adults? I believe so. Social Networking sites have their own hierarchy of users and cliques, people with more friends than others, etc, snide remarks, gossip. We may find ourselves in the position to the feeling of being excluded from the circle of the popular kids at school. The advantages of social networking are numerous for businesses and anyone with a product to sell, but is there a downside? Perhaps so. Are social networking sites used to gossip? Are we saying things that in any other context would be slander or at very least mean? Do we put other people down to make ourselves look better? Do we say things with a smiley emoticon that we would never say to a friend?

The danger of social networking is that we do all this. Behind a smiley face or wink icon we can be as bitchy as we want. We can say things we'd never say to a colleague. Worse, we can say this in a public forum. We don't think much of it even. Hey, we can say its a joke. Whoever leaves a comment and wonders how supportive is this? Could what I'm saying be the start of a rumour that is damaging to someone's career? More importantly, would I say this to someone's face? On the net it seems saying anything is fair game as long as we use to right emoticon or post a link to 'Thank you for being a friend.' I'm not sure it is. Facebook is a site that began as a way to stay in touch with friends. perhaps like many people I opened an account to see photos of where people I'd lost touch with live now and hear about what they are doing. It was fun. Increasingly though Facebook is more than this. Publishers, recording labels, writers, song writers and musicians use it as a place to create awareness of their brand and work. We are expected to. The nature of this is it isn't friends but colleagues we are adding to our list. A negative comment about us, a snide remark, even a joke is there for colleagues to see, to potentially start rumours that may be damaging personally or professionally. We don't consider this, it's only facebook after all.

Social networking has created a blurring of boundaries, but our attitude to how we use it hasn't changed. On facebook we may find ourselves at the equivalent of a business meeting in our pyjamas. Even something as simple as deleting a friend from a friends list may be noticed by colleagues and begin gossip and speculation. But no one deletes a friend and considers this. Likewise to don't consider if what we are saying publicly about someone else may be damaging. For instance, a friend left a comment on my facebook page once saying I should write about being a failed poet who can't find a publisher. As well intended as such a comment may be someone reading it out of context or otherwise may see such a comment and say to someone 'She can't find a publisher' (certainly damaging in a network of writers and publishers.) Infact, I have made no attempts to find a publisher and have sent no poetry to any publisher whatsoever! But such a comment used out of context can create the impression that I've tried and failed. If I was to send work out at any point publishers on facebook may dismiss work as soon as it arrives, prejudiced by the belief that the work has been rejected everywhere! I suppose we'd all like to think such things don't happen, but we are being naive (when it comes to facebook we may have a light tone, but we still read into things and speculate- I've had people approach me based on their interpretation of jokey messages to ask if so and so is sleeping with so and so or so so is getting divorced.) It happens, yet we don't consider when we delete a friend or leave a comment how it may be interpreted and what effect it may have on someone or their career.

It's time to stop bullying, spreading rumours. With the merging of friends and colleagues the carefree snide smiley face days of facebook and other social networking sites may be gone. Just when we thought we could be flippant it may be time once again to think about what we say.