It came to my attention today that some folks don’t really get what JukePop’s new Investment feature is about. The messages from the two authors currently in the program (Brian Guthrie of Rise and myself) don’t quite explain how people will profit from donating, and the only FAQ page on Investment is reportedly rather confusing. In the interest of goading more people into considering contributing to Prelude, here’s a full explanation of the Investment feature–simplified.

So Basically

Firstly, the “Investment” feature on JukePop is just a fancy way of saying a “crowdfunding” platform, like Kickstarter. “Investors” are people who donate money toward the book’s goal.

JukePop wants to publish some of its stories to retailers like Amazon and iBook. This way its authors can get paid and JP can earn a portion of the profits to keep itself going. Before doing that, JukePop needs to have a finished product from the author, not the unedited mish-mash that most stories turn into during serial writing. That will often  entail professional editing, a cover art rehaul, and marketing. In other words, that will require money.

Hence, Crowdfunding

Hence, the crowdfunding campaign. Authors write a pitch to their audience, set a funding goal, then they leave it to the masses to determine whether their story will get the services it needs to become that “finished product.” As of this writing, Rise has already hit its funding goal, and Prelude is more than 1/10th of the way there. Considering that both of these stories were pretty popular during their run on JP, I suspect that +Votes will be a future measurement of how likely a campaign is to succeed.

The Investors Getting Paid Part

Now, most crowdfunding platforms have “perks” that go out to donors to incentivize bigger donations. Some of you may have seen this. Donate $5, get a T-shirt. Donate $10, get a gift card for the mall. JukePop doesn’t swing that way. Since the only things that will be funded on JP are books, the reward scheme has been revised towards a completely different incentive: shared profits.

That’s right. Donate $5, get a share of the profits. Donate $10, get a larger share of the profits.

Each campaign will tailor this differently, so for the sake of keeping this simple I will use Prelude as an example.

The goal for Prelude is $2,000. That’s how much I need to get editing, cover art, and to market the book. When I signed up for the program, I listed that as 50% of the net profits I intend to make when the book launches. That means that if someone donates $2,000, they will have provided 50% of the book’s net sales. And you know what that means? It means they’ll get 50% of all future sales.

Okay, $2,000 is a lot. What if you donate only $20? According to math, you’ll have provided 0.5% of the net sales. That means you’ll get 0.5% of all future sales instead. Obviously, the less you donate, the less you earn, and the more you donate, the more you’ll earn. But the bottom line is that no matter how much you donate, you will be getting a stake of the profits.

Whaaat

I know, too good to be true. Except it’s not, when you think about it. This is a purely low-risk, high-reward system, which any real financial investor worth their salt should jump at.

Here’s some more maths for you. Prelude will launch at $8.99. If just 500 people purchase the book on launch day, the profits (before fees) will be nearly $4,500. 50% of that will go to me. The other 50% will go to everyone who donated to the campaign. Investment goal: $2,000. Return on investment on launch day: $2,250. What does that mean for you? Profits.

Did you donate $40? Here’s $40 back. Did you donate $100? Here’s a Benjamin for your troubles. $200? $300? Take it back, take it back! My profits are yours; your profits are yours.

And you know what happens afterwards, when the book hits 1,000 sales, or 2,000, or 5,000? That’s more and more money going back into the investors’ pockets. YOU are getting paid for having contributed to a book’s publication.

I think this is a groundbreaking development in the indie publishing scene, but hey, what do I know? I’m just  a guy who writes books. Prelude still has about 25 days and $1,765 to go, so if you’re interested in helping it become a success, do give it a read, and contribute what you think the story is worth. I’ll make it WORTH your while.

It’s begun. Metal Shadow #Prelude’s crowdfunding campaign to be published as a novel on Amazon has officially launched on JukePop. Don’t everybody line up at once!

I’ve written all the deets over on this page, so check it out when you can. But here’s a brief summary to whet your appetite. >:D

What’s Happening?

Crowdfunding. Prelude is accepting donations so it can be edited, prettyified with cover art, and be advertised on the NYC subway. Again, read all the deets here.

How’s it Happening?

Through JukePop’s new “Investments” platform. This isn’t your typical Kickstarter: this is crowdfunding with *punch*.

In summary, the more you donate, the more you’ll earn back in profits from the book’s sales. That’s right–YOU will earn profits if you donate to MY book! FOREVER! The going rate is $10 for 0.25% of profits, but you can raise your own income from there. Since the price is so low, I expect there to be quite a large number of people who will be on the investment team, and I intend to coordinate all of them in marketing efforts. Join us, eh? You can pitch in as low as $1 or even just tell a friend.

When’s it Happening?

NOW. RIGHT NOW. AND FOR THE NEXT 30 DAYS. AND THEN YOU GET MONEY FOREVER.

That’s really all there is to it. Jump over to that deets page and get informed. In the meantime, I’ll be updating Prelude with Phase 1’s edited chapters throughout the campaign. Look forward to that!

I just deleted the opening sentence of this blog for about the millionth time. Part of the reason is because I keep calling out the names of other authors, which simply isn’t nice. Another part of the reason is because I can’t figure out how to put what I want to say into words. Typical writer’s block.

I’m gonna just say it, then: if writing were 90% art, 10% science, then that would mean 90% of all the advice about writing is bullshit and anecdotes, period.

This isn’t some universal truth or anything; that’s just my opinion. My unpublished, unbestselling, uncritically-acclaimed opinion. As much as I respect other writers, some of them follow the rulebook way too closely. They have all these ideas about writing a certain word count each day and reading books every day which are just…ugh. Not true. Everything is undergoing evolution in this intricate Matrix we live in, and writing and language are among that. The conventions that worked yesterday aren’t guaranteed to work today.

Allow me to go through some of my favorite examples of very popular advice that now fall short of being universally applicable. (Hopefully some of you reading this will have an open mind and not bash my head in afterward.)

Show Don’t Tell

The “show-don’t-tell” rule is meant to make writers focus on creating visual imagery in their text. By using descriptive words for actions, objects, and even concepts, the scene gets painted in the reader’s eye the way the author visualized it. This is supposedly important because readers are humans, and humans are visual creatures. If a paragraph in a narrative contains not even a single word about something people can visualize, then by contemporary standards it is considered a bad paragraph.

This is 90% bullshit.

Take a look at the paragraph I just wrote to you. There are barely any visual objects in there. Bad paragraph? No, of course not. All I’m doing is talking to you, explaining something, and you, being the human you are, are processing this information as efficiently as if you could actually hear my voice. This naked relay of information from me to you is called “exposition,” and it’s a wonderful freaking thing.

The show-don’t-tell rule disdains exposition. It sees exposition as boring, lazy, unskillful. Yet exposition helps readers understand what the hell is going on, and thus is entirely necessary in every story worth its salt.

Don’t get me wrong; visual imagery is nice. I think it’s just as important to have imagery as exposition in your works. But we can’t keep knocking on exposition, because it takes skill to write that too—especially when weaving it in between action and dialogue. The number one rule should be “Show AND Tell.”

Active Voice Over Passive Voice

Passive voice is when two verbs show up to the party and don’t even have the audacity to enter one at a time—“pass through the door,” as I say. Eg: “she was running.” The was and the running are just all up in there, groveling at she’s feet. This is bad for several reasons: the writer wastes words; the reader has a harder time visualizing the action; and in some cases, the double-verb creates confusion. Active voice is better because it aids in imagery and is more precise. “She ran” is infinitely cleaner to read.

This is also 90% bullshit.

I forget which author mentioned this, but Tolkien’s “The Hobbit” is passive as shit, yet how many readers actually care? Harry Potter too, and, I’m willing to bet, countless other bestsellers. If that’s not evidence enough for you that the “active voice/passive voice” conflict is just made up jargon, I don’t know what is. The fact is that passive voice, for most writers, is sooo much easier to write, and thanks to that, allows the writer to focus more on their story and less on political correctness. Most readers don’t care about anything but the story. What else did they purchase the book for?

However, let’s be sure to take the scientific 10% into account. Active voice does create better imagery. Thus, the number one rule should be to “Switch Voices as Necessary.”

The Serial Comma

The serial comma, also known as the Oxford comma, is a comma which appears before “and” at the end of a list. Eg: “him, the bear, and the orange.” This is recommended by The Chicago Manual of Style to be used at all times because it enables precise listing and disables any room for confusion. The classic example is “they called his parents, Mother Teresa and the Pope.” This is clearly wrong because no one has those two people as their parents (I think).

This is 66% bullshit.

The serial comma is a wonderful tool, but it should not be used at all times. There are some instances where omitting it is aaalright, and incurs no harm on the text.

No serial: She called his parents, Mother Teresa and the pope.
With Serial: She called his parents, Mother Teresa, and the pope.
Difference? Yes. Definitely use the comma.

No Serial: He has a grape, apple and orange.
With Serial: He has a grape, apple, and orange.
Difference? No. Use it or don’t; doesn’t matter.

No Serial: Have some food, friends and family.
Serial: Have some food, friends, and family.
Difference? Yes. You should NOT use the comma here.

There are more examples, but I think you get the point. When it comes to artistic forms like writing, convention doesn’t always equal correction. While I’m sure those writers out there who are giving advice mean well, they often forget to preface their musings with the fact that they are not writing scientists, editing gurus, or grammar wizards, and are only relying on past wisdom for what they are about to say. At some point these people should really figure out where to draw the line between “giving advice” and “forcing other people’s style.”

Authors, please. Write freely. Own your voice. And when other folks try to declare the rules—including myself—let them know: this is 90% an art form, so you’re talking 90% bullshit.

I’m outie.

When I submitted my story Ratchet Retail to Ksenia Anske’s Mad Tutu Competition, I didn’t expect to win. Writing about elephants, bricks, and purses all at once is no easy task. Imagine my surprise when the results came in, and I didn’t win. It was so…so… Well, unsurprising. I didn’t expect to win. Weren’t you listening?

The winner is this piece of insanity here. Make sure you’re not eating cereal when you read this because you’re likely to spit it out.

A great thanks to Ksenia for the publicity and setting up this hilarious competition. Follow her on the Twits. Congrats to everyone who entered–you’re all winners!