A Selkie's Prayer by Julie Bihn - latest release

A Selkie's Prayer is available for 99 cents on Kindle!

 

A Selkie's Prayer is a standalone novella in the world of Kinyn.

When Jedrey's selkie wife accuses him of stealing her sealskin and leaves him, his world is shattered. A mysterious goddess puts a magical map in his head to help him search for his lost love--but his wife may be closer than he thinks.

Also contains the first chapter of The Healer and the Pirate, Book 1 in the Kinyn Chronicles.

Writing Wednesday - Tucson Festival of Books - History Meets Fantasy

First, my weekly writing update. I actually still need to do a lot of typing on my snowflake, but I'm basically working on Step 4 now (and actually enjoying coming up with some new threads!). But I have a lot of work ahead of me. It's a bit depressing that the author of the snowflake method says that it may have taken as long as a week to get to this step...I need to work harder.

So as I think I promised, I'm going to share with you everything I heard at the Tucson Festival of Books! Preface: I attended most panels because of an interest in the TOPICS, not the speakers. So some of the people you may see referenced may not write things that are in line with my beliefs, and me mentioning an author here isn't any sort of endorsement at all unless I state otherwise. OK?

I roughly outlined the festival earlier. There are tons of "workshops" and "panels." Most look something like this one.

So I was tempted to go to the panel that author Dave Cullen commented on my blog was on at 10 AM Saturday. But I thought that would be a good compromise on something that would kind of interest my mom and kind of interest me. Except she wasn't interested! So with the fear of potential crowds I ended up at Yvonne Navarro and Janni Lee Simner's "History Meets Fantasy - When to Research and When to Make It Up" panel. (They're both TusCon regulars so I've certainly heard them both speak quite a bit.)

Yvonne Navarro said that you have to take what's real and twist it to fit your purposes.

Janni noted that Thief Eyes was well-researched (at one point she noted that she had to run it by an Icelandic reader to make sure it rang true!). She said that sometimes you start writing a story and realize it takes a lot more research than you thought. She also noted that you have to set up reader expectations. There are lots of different kinds of fairies and vampires, and these portrayals are influenced by legends, by the conversations authors have with each other on the page, and what you bring to them. Overall, you have to know your canon, whether you're writing history or a licensed property.

Janni also noted that it can be easier to have a character who doesn't know everything, so that things can be explained. ((Aside: I do that myself but I wonder if that's something more acceptable in children's and YA novels; I know in adult fantasy it's considered a cliche to have the farm boy who doesn't know anything come onto the scene.... Cliche or not, though, it does seem to work.))

On the topic of vampires, Yvonne noted that not all vampires drink blood (they may take life force, memories, youth--"anything that you, as a writer, could want them to take.") But you have to use the right words, whether or not they are historically accurate (some words that are accurate might not feel right.)

As far as writing goes, Janni said, "You can't write for every reader."

Yvonne replied, "You try, but there are just too many people." She noted that genres cycle through, so what you love may be popular in a few years. Right now zombies are popular, although they have changed quite a bit from their earlier portrayals (namely, they have gotten faster).

Janni and Yvonne joked that the zombies would pick off the smokers. Janni added that it could make a good ad campaign: "I gave up smoking and I survived the zombie apocalypse."

Again, back to writing, Janni said that it's very hard to figure out what people want. Write what you love. It's not a guarantee, but you'll have a better chance of selling, and you get the experience of writing it. (She noted this came from experience, where she tried to write what would sell, and couldn't sell it.)

Yvonne added, write what you love; tell the story you want to tell. "If you don't like what you're doing, if you're not enjoying what you're writing, you might as well work at an office somewhere ... you have to write what you want to write." She said you have to grab readers in the first paragraph. She also suggests new writers read their work all out loud, like it's happening, to help catch typos.

---

I'm actually kind of remiss in not having read anything by Janni Lee Simner in particular. I've been to a couple of her readings at TusCon and they're always excellent. I need to remedy that deficiency fairly soon. She's always been very friendly to me. Actually, at her last reading I attended, she did a drawing and I won a journal she made herself!

My concern with journals is the pressure of finding something worthwhile with which to fill them, though...someday!

And I think I'll make a trip to my library soon.

Random 13th - Books

First off, my thoughts and prayers go out to Japan (and every other place touched by recent earthquakes). I only have one acquaintance there; she is safe and her blog is very interesting.

So at the Tucson Festival of Books, in at least a couple panels, discussions arose about what books influenced the authors. It was fun to hear what books children's book authors Grace Lin and Candace Fleming used to love. Grace Lin cited the Anne of Green Gables series on two separate occasions; she said she wished the books went on longer because Anne was so real. Candace Fleming loved "The Witch of Blackbird Pond" and "Island of the Blue Dolphins," but her favorite was "Misty of Chincoteague"--she even got a signed first edition with Misty's hoofprint (!) in it. She also reminisced about the old Scholastic Book Club days, when they used to have real quality books you could order. I think I remember those days. Now I feel old, but I DO remember most of the books they mentioned. (Then Louis Sachar went and had a grown-up answer that he didn't really enjoy reading until high school, when he got into J.D. Salinger and Kurt Vonnegut. Oh well. I liked "Wayside School" when I was a kid anyway.)

What about me? Three that influenced me:

The Little House Series: I think I've always been interested in other cultures/technology levels, and that series has it all over. Also a very light touch on the romance (I hated the very thought of romantic threads in books when I was a little girl!). I've read them a ridiculous number of times; I'm the type that likes to reread books. I'm pretty sure if I went back and read them with a more critical eye they might not be quite as good as I remembered. But then again, I re-read "The Long Winter" (my least favorite as a child, unless you count "The First Four Years") fairly recently, and it held up pretty well, I thought. Though, it's my understanding that kids today aren't at all interested in pioneers anymore. I've even heard it argued that due to the prevalence of electronics, they can't even find that world interesting anymore. I think that's sad.

The Chronicles of Narnia: Honestly, I think it would be a pretty unusual Christian fantasy writer who doesn't at least kind of like them, and I REALLY like them, still. I was fairly young, sleeping in a cousin's bedroom (I think) at my aunt and uncle's house, when I discovered "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe." I stayed up late reading and was absolutely enchanted with the whole idea, though I'm not sure I picked up on the Christian allegory just then. I checked out all the rest of the books from the library and read them multiple times before we finally bought a boxed set for the family. I actually read "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" more critically before the movie came out, and it wasn't quite as good as I remembered...I think I found a typo or something, though given how many printings the book has had, that could've been the publisher's fault. If I recall correctly, I think the others have held up pretty well, though. I'm sure they gave me a push toward writing about other worlds.

Mrs. Frisby and the Rats of NIMH: I think I actually read this one AFTER the cartoon Rescue Rangers came out, though I imagine I've always been interested in tiny parallel societies and the like. Anyway, it's a fascinating exciting story AND has little mice behaving like people. I adored it, even though the ending was bittersweet. (The movie adds a lot of magic that I didn't care for; I thought their world was interesting enough.)

Robert C. O'Brien also wrote "Z for Zachariah," which I believe is a YA novel, but awfully dark--in some ways even darker than "Hunger Games," I'd say (maybe not moreso than the sequels, which I haven't read). Not a bad book, but I'm really glad I didn't read it until I was an adult!

Winning Wednesday

So winning refers to something that was "luck" (or Providence), not anything to do with writing skills. Be warned!

And for my writing progress report...could be worse. I did finally finish the last full chapter of Endwood (just need to complete the epilogue). I probably should have split the ending into two pieces but I really didn't want the story to continue too terribly far after the climax. I'm SO looking forward to being done with it!

So I joined American Christian Fiction Writers a while back and sometimes people will post about when they have agents or editors on their blogs. So someone at Seekerville posted on ACFW about how they were having a costume party and invited everyone to come. I'm not sure if they mentioned a giveaway or not, but I didn't notice. I just wanted to dress my avatar up!

So the real story is that Tina James, senior editor of Love Inspired Historical and Love Inspired Suspense, was announcing they are printing four Historicals a month instead of two. Since I've never actually wrote historical romance (or any historical fiction without a major speculative element) I'm not sure if that's relevant for me or not, but squee! Historical clothes!

So I posted.

Aside from sewing the ribbon on the hat, this is all items I found at Ross and/or TJ Maxx. I do love making historical and fantasy costumes, but I suppose that's a story for another time. Anyway, I chose to dress in 1920s garb because if I WERE to write an outright historical, I reckon that's when I'd set it. And I love the Coney Island pictures, LOL.

Anyway, long story short, I was just outright SHOCKED to have won a contest that I believe was just a random draw. Really? I don't know how many entrants there were (well over 200 comments but some were from the same people). And I won four books? Shipped from the Senior Editor at the one Love Inspired line I could ever imagine writing for??? I didn't even know there were four books to win!

I used to believe in, if not luck, then things just happening randomly. But after going through Beth Moore's study of Esther, I'm not so sure. It's pretty much impossible for my mind to wrap around how every single little thing (as small as misplacing my keys and taking a minute to find them) could happen for a reason, but it certainly wouldn't be outside the range of God's power.

At any rate, winning four books is a lot bigger deal (and more unusual!) than losing my keys. A little part of me is wondering--maybe I should try a historical romance?

Another historical outfit I made (perhaps the most accurate, and completely made by me) is a 1770s dress. It would take so much work and research, but I believe people were getting into 1770s historical recreation in the 1920s...it seems to me that could be a very fun romance, with characters from a past era trying to recreate an even farther past era. And anything on Coney Island could be interesting (although I'm not so sure that would fly, given that the place used to be nicknamed "Sodom by the Sea"...).

Anyway. For now I reckon I will need to settle down and read them. I'll likely review them here, but I'm both a picky reader AND not much of a reviewer, so we'll see.

Oh right! In the comments from last week, I promised a picture of my phone, too.

If you want your Samsung Comeback to also look a bit like EVE from WALL-E, here's the photo.

I modified a page to print a paper EVE mask (of all things) I saw online, then shrunk it to a 240 height so it looks nice on the inner flip screen (I suggest you set your phone to "Black theme"--Menu, Settings, Display settings, My Theme, Black theme for the Comeback).

So, have you had anything recent happen that might be Providential?

Busy Wednesday

I don't have much to say today, really. I'm going a little slower than I wanted for my work in progress "Flight from Endwood." I hoped to have it finished by the end of the month, and I'm a touch behind. Believe me, if it were a hard and fast deadline I would have worked harder to get it done, but it's more of a "I'd just like to be DONE and work on another project!" date.

But without a hard deadline, how could I turn down a get-together with co-workers at a pizza place? (Delicious, by the way.)


In fairness, a little of the procrastination is that I got a new phone! (I got my previous one in November 2009, and have been complaining about it since...November 2009 + 2 days.)

I think it's about as powerful as the first computer I bought. If I can get a working microSD card, it will have considerably more "hard drive" space. Even without additional storage it's working out decently so far. AND it has a place for a cell phone charm!

Yes, that is Silvermist the Disney Fairy. I had Fawn on my old phone (in memory of a wonderful trip to Disneyland in June 2010, when we happened to meet her and Tinkerbell). Oh, I love Disneyland.

I'm thinking about changing my background to black with two blue ovals and making my phone look a bit like EVE from Wall-E. What do you think?

Anyway, despite such obstacles as playing with my shiny new toy and trying to get its memory card to work in FOUR different devices, I'm nearly done with the second-to-last chapter of Endwood, and the last will be an epilogue. God willing, I'll be there soon.

Got some great (positive) feedback on my collaborative novel, so that's great news! I'm wondering if we should just buckle down and edit it, then start sending it out...

I don't know. If I don't have anything interesting for next week, maybe I'll just put up some ship pictures? What do you want to see, anyway?

Why Write for Publication?

Writing progress report: I have another chapter of Flight from Endwood up for critique (33!). 34 has been kind of sort of written, and I think I just have one more chapter to go!

And, last weekend I found an Alphonse Mucha calendar (no nudity even). His art is just the type of art I want to see on the cover of my (eventual) next novel, so it seems very appropriate.

Last week I talked about why I write, and I promised I'd answer the question, why write for (traditional) publication?

Writing for publication is not the only way to get your work out there. If you give your writing away for free on the Internet, you just might end up with more readers than if a big publisher had your book. (That works well for webcomics; I don't know about novels.) If you sell your book for a small fee on Kindle, you have a potential to make thousands and reach tens of thousands of readers. Even if you want a book to hold in your hands (and e-books may make those a bit obsolete), there are several ways to accomplish that, with and without going through a traditional publisher.

I'll try to sum up some of the different means of publication as quickly as possible:

*Vanity press = more or less, the author pays someone to print his or her book

*Print on demand = the author uploads his or her book to a site like Lulu.com . When someone orders a copy of the book, the publisher prints a copy just for that person; the author gets a percentage of each purchase of the book, based on how he or she priced the book.

*E-books = like print on demand, minus the print aspect. When someone orders a copy of the e-book, they get it delivered digitally, and the author gets a percentage of each purchase of the e-book, again, based on how he or she priced the book.

*Traditional press = may or may not pay an advance to the author. Author probably gets a percentage of the sales (provided that amount exceeds the advance). An editor probably looks at the book and suggests revisions before it is printed. Small presses might use print on demand or e-book technology, as referenced above, but in this case the press will determine pricing and the author's share of any profits.


I bring all these options up because it was just a couple years ago that I discovered that to most people who don't write, a book is a book. They don't know or care how it was published. From interactions I've seen online and in person, a lot of people consider a print-on-demand book to be about the same thing as one printed by a small press, and maybe even as good as something from Random House. They seem to see it as, you have a book with your name on it! You're an author! I have a copy of a book that I got printed through Lulu.com just for fun and yes, most people I've shown it to are wowed that I wrote a book and am "published." I duly explain that no, I just got this printed out, but I'm still not convinced that they grasp the difference.

Writers, on the other hand, will often argue that you need to be accepted by a publisher in order to really be an author. It can be very hard to get published traditionally. Publishers have very narrow definitions of what they will accept, and finding a publisher can literally take years. They may request substantial edits to the manuscript, some of which the author may not agree with. Small-press publishers can have significant overhead as well, meaning that a book you could have sold for a good profit at $9 a copy, they might need to sell for $12 a copy, which can reduce sales, while still delivering smaller profits to you personally. Publishers on all levels still expect the author to do a lot of the work of promoting the book; many publishers do little or no marketing of their authors' novels anymore. I've also heard it said that publishers really want you to submit a near-ready-for-press novel; they're supposedly not even interested in editing anymore! (An editor I saw at the Tuccon Festival of Books disagreed, but he did seem old-school (and wonderful!).)

And if you're a Christian author writing anything besides category romances like Heartsong Presents or Steeple Hill Love Inspired, many big publishers won't even look at your book unless you have an agent. Meanwhile, it's very difficult to land an agent if you haven't been published.

On the other hand, quite a few people have had success selling their novels as eBooks on Kindle, for instance, with no particular publisher. When I say success, I mean I've heard of people selling thousands in a month. One person on the critique site I frequent (Critiquecircle.com) says she has sold over 20,000 copies of one book.

I'm sure those successful e-book writers generally work very hard to achieve those numbers, and I think these people often sell their books at a low price. But even if you make 35 cents profit on 20,000 books (which I understand is the norm for a low-priced book), that's $7,000, which is more than a lot (most?) authors get from publishing with a small press, and about the size of some advances. Meanwhile, I've seen small presses that offer advances of $10 and consider 300 books sold a success.


So, with all that in mind, why write for traditional publication?

I think the main motivation for being traditionally published for most people is probably validation and respect from one's peers and from some third party authority. I imagine it would be an incredible self-esteem boost to have a publisher accept your work. And fellow authors and authors' groups usually (not always!) consider self-published authors to be the same as amateur or unpublished authors. It can be hard for self-published authors to find promotion opportunities. And of course the (few) famous authors you hear of are all (eventually) traditionally published. There's something to it.

When it comes down to it, very few novelists make a full-time living on their writing, regardless of whether they're traditionally published or self-published. One (of many) reasons I don't play the lottery is because I'd much rather be blessed by becoming a rich novelist than just winning the same amount of money...and the odds of winning the lottery are a bit better than being a rich novelist, I think. So it's probably a matter of putting your book where God wants it to be, and not so much getting rich.

I'm not sure what God wants me to do with my writing right now; I only have one (co-authored) manuscript that's near the stage of being ready to go out, and it's not quite there, so I haven't worried too much.

But barring any specific guidance, the plan is to start with the biggest publisher that will accept Christian fantasy romance, and work our way down the (small) list, until someone accepts it or we end up self-publishing. I believe in our novel and I think God wants us to get it out to people. But I think a publication credit would be good for my co-author and me both.

All that said, I'm most likely going to do some experimentation on self-publishing with a novel that has 8 chapters on my personal website.

Wow; that's a lot of words. What do you think about publishing? I think I need to ask God for some more guidance.

Sunday Bonus - What is "Meek"?

Yesterday's question got me wondering if the definition of "meek" has really changed so much over the years. I'm not a huge fan of Webster's 1828 dictionary, per se, but a lot of Evangelicals love it. Personally, I need to get a good concordance, and/or find a trustworthy one on the Internet. Unfortunately, there is a lot of bad/disturbing/worrisome Bible commentary on the Internet, even though there is also some excellent commentary. So I usually don't attempt searches on things subject to so much interpretation, like the definition of "meek."

But from the dictionary definitions

1828 Webster's:

MEEK, a. [L. mucus; Eng. mucilage; Heb. to melt.]

1. Mild of temper; soft; gentle; not easily provoked or irritated; yielding; given to forbearance under injuries.

Now the man Moses was very meek, above all men. Num.12.

2. Appropriately,(sic?) humble, in an evangelical sense; submissive to the divine will; not proud, self-sufficient or refractory; not peevish and apt to complain of divine dispensations. Christ says, "Learn of me, for I am meek and lowly in heart, and ye shall find rest to your souls." Matt.11.

Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth. Matt.5.



1913 Webster's (same page):

[Compar. Meeker (-1913 webster dictionaryr); superl. Meekest.] [OE. mek, meoc; akin to Icel. mj(?)kr mild, soft, Sw. mjuk, Dan. myg, D. muik, Goth. mukam[u

1. Mild of temper; not easily provoked or orritated (sic?); patient under injuries; not vain, or haughty, or resentful; forbearing; submissive.

Now the man Moses was very meek. Num. xii. 3.

2. Evincing mildness of temper, or patience; characterized by mildness or patience; as, a meek answer; a meek face.
"Her meek prayer." Chaucer.

Syn. -- Gentle; mild; soft; yielding; pacific; unassuming; humble. See Gentle.



Modern Miriam-Webster Dictionary:

Definition of MEEK
1: enduring injury with patience and without resentment : mild
2: deficient in spirit and courage : submissive
3: not violent or strong : moderate


So it does look like there has been a shift in the worldly definition of "meek."

That said, I'm not sure it's quite right to provide two different definitions in 1828, one for Moses and one for Christ. Granted, the Old Testament was Hebrew and the New Testament was originally Greek, right? But does that really mean that "meek" had two significantly different meanings Biblically? I don't know about that.

Either way, I think a man could possibly accept 1828 definition 2 in a hero (though "not...self-sufficient" is pushing it). Definition 1, maybe not; "soft" and "yielding" are not really something one expects a hero to be.

1913 would be less popular with heroes, I think ("submissive," "mildness," "soft").

I think the modern definition, with the possible exception of definition 1, is just disastrous for male heroes. Definition 1 actually more or less matches how some Bible sites I saw online defined "meek." Other definitions included "submission to God's will." That sort of submission is super-hard, granted (at least, I struggle with it). But to me it sounds much easier than both submitting to God's direct commands and ALSO being humble and gentle to other people. One page mentioned that meekness to people will come easily if you're completely submissive to God. Could be; I've just never gotten there.

Saturday Bonus - Meek Heroes

Friday night I went to Corona After Hours (a.k.a. "loud church," or at least I call it that because of the rock music, which I like, but I always have to put in earplugs, even at concert!). Pastor Mike preached on the Beatitudes, and specifically:

Matthew 5:5: Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth. (NIV)

Pastor Mike noted (correctly, IMO) that in today's society, it's especially hard for men to be meek and gentle, as it's not a quality valued in men. But that made me think of Suzanne Collins' "Hunger Games" (a kind of post-apocalyptic book--incredibly compelling, rather dark and not from a Christian worldview at all). Nadine has a pretty good review of it--though she was a bit more positive toward its morality than I am.

I think you could argue that Peeta, the male lead, embodies many of the Beatitudes, while Katniss, the female lead, rather does not. And I adored Peeta in that book (haven't read the sequels and don't plan to). While I found Katniss fascinating, I can't say I actually LIKED her as a person, exactly. It could be that she's too human, fair enough, but I really wanted to shake some sense into her...

That said, Peeta's gentleness makes me wonder if guys actually like Peeta, or if he's just a woman's fantasy. Thoughts? Can men enjoy reading a "meek" hero?

(EDIT: I answer a great question in the next post.)