Paintings

The new year is five days away. Many of us look back over the year and reminisce about the events in our lives. The good and bad. That things hoped for that did and did not happen. We might be filled with regret, we might be filled with joy, but one thing is for certain: everything in the past 360 days is past. It’s gone. Only memories remain.

2016 was for me a good year. Writing and publishing went well. I sold a few books and gave some away. I started learning marketing, so I have hope I might sell more books in the future. I’m another year older and not deeper in debt — and that’s very good. And I’m loving retirement. Yes, 2016 was a very good year. Perfect? Nah. But it was a good year. I’m breathing air and not dirt, I’m in reasonably good health; there’s a roof over my head, clothes on my back, and food on the table. There is nothing I can legitimately complain about.

One of my joys, year in and year out, is that my wife, Raihana Dewji, paints what I think are wonderful, wonderful paintings. So I thought I would post a few of her recent paintings to close out this year’s blog posts.

The snow and cold are upon us in Minnesota; however, nothing can fetter the imagination. My wife hates the snow and cold. So her paintbrush creates a different world. One in which Winter is not coming. The snow might be blowing outside, but inside summer rules. I hope you enjoy these pictures as much as I do.

As always, comments are welcome and until next time, happy new year, and happy reading!

Mincemeat Pie

Mincemeat pie (or mince pie) is a holiday tradition on many tables and, like fruitcake, one either loves it or hates it. I love both! The Yuletide would not it be the same if it weren’t for mincemeat pie, fruitcake, and even the occasional plum pudding.

So what exactly is mincemeat? Historically, way back in England, to mince meat was to cut meat into a very fine dice. In today’s British English, mince meat is the same as American ground beef. Although technically a grind is even finer than a mince.

And because there was no refrigeration many centuries ago, minced meat was preserved for the long winter months by mixing it with sugar and spices. This mixture was then used by baking it as a meat pie for the main course of the meal.

Over time, fruit was added to the mixture: apples, raisins, and currants. Suet was also added, along with alcohol to preserve the mixture longer.

Today’s store bought mincemeat mixture is basically fruit and sugar. No alcohol. None Such brand does contain beef, but it is way down on the ingredient list. I’ve used None Such in the past and I can assure you, you can’t taste the beef. Just a sweet raisiny, apply, spicy mixture of doggone goodness.

This Yuletide, I’m using Crosse & Blackwell Mincemeat. There is no meat in the Crosse & Blackwell mixture. Just heirloom Pippin apples, raisins, orange peel and juice, sugar, vinegar, salt, spice, and tapioca syrup — which makes this brand suitable for vegetarians.

I’m interested to see how the two brands compare and will let you know.

Of course you can make your own mincemeat. Recipes abound on the Internet. I’ve found a few that look very interesting and next year I may make one of them. Many years ago, I made a green tomato mincemeat that was truly delicious. And recipes for this mock mincemeat are plentiful on the Internet as well.

Mincemeat is a wonderfully spicy concoction that can be eaten anytime and anywhere. I like it in place of jam on toast.

If you’ve never had mincemeat, I encourage you to try it. It is an English tradition that dates back to at least the Middle Ages and is an American tradition that dates back to the first colonialists. You just might find a new tradition for your own holiday table. And if you already like mincemeat, you know what I’m talking about.

As always comments are welcome! And until next time, happy reading!

Good Writing Means Good Reading

Don’t you love a good book? One that draws you in and lets you forget the day to day? I certainly do and I think you do too. In fact, reading is my preferred form of entertainment. I’d rather read than do just about anything else, except perhaps eat and drink tea.

But what is a “good book”? That is a difficult question. It’s like trying to define “beautiful”. There is no objective answer. Which means the answer is subjective. In other words, it’s personal.

What is a good book for me, may not be for you.

But in order to have good books to read, there have to be books that are well written. On that I think we can agree.

Good Writing = Good Reading

But what is good writing? And we are back to the same old conundrum, aren’t we?

I read a fair amount of self-published books and stories. And I have to say there are some very good writers out there. And you’ve probably found that true as well.

I also read quite a few traditionally published books. There are some really mediocre writers that give me cause to wonder where the editor’s head was when their books crossed his or her desk. You’ve probably wondered the same. Maybe even said, “Shoot! I can write better than that!” You’ve said that, right?

I’m noticing more and more a disturbing trend, especially among self-published authors, and that is bling, glitz, and flash are taking the place of good writing (IMO, of course). Into the inbox come wonderfully flashy emails and some of those websites are awesome. But when I read one of these author’s books, it’s all I can do to keep my eyes open or not barf. For all the glitz and flash, these authors haven’t mastered the basic craft of storytelling. Have you had the same or similar experience?

In the race to be noticed and become a best-selling author (whatever that means these days when every nobody is one), writers are, it seems to me, forgetting the first rule of writing; which is, to write well.

As readers, we want good books to read. Not publisher hype. Not flashy emails. Not techno-wonderful websites. We just want a good story. A story with fabulous characters we love and love to hate. A story with a beginning, middle, and end. A story that moves us at some level other then to put the book down.

Over the past year I’ve run across a few authors who I think know how to craft a good story. Who know how to create characters I end up thinking are real people. Writers who I think are a cut above. And I’d like to share five of them with you. Let me introduce you to them.

Crispian Thurlborn writes fantasy and horror with such lyrical finesse I have to admit I’m jealous. His style is literary and magical. The humor is subtle. He can tug at your heartstrings. He can give you much to ponder. My only complaint is I’d wish he’d publish more. Take a look at Crispian Thurlborn’s website and do buy his books. They are truly reader heaven.

Ben Willoughby writes horror and fantasy, but I’ve only read his horror. And not even all of that, for which I’m glad — because that means more good reads are ahead of me! Willoughby has a crisp, no nonsense style. He knows how to tell a suspenseful story, with characters I care about, that keeps me on the edge of my seat. Check out his Amazon page for his titles. Please, don’t miss the treasure this guy has given us.

Steve Bargdill writes literary fiction that is dark, gritty, and edgy. He knows how to write a story and he gives us characters that are real. We care about these people, even if they are very flawed. His Wasteland reads like a modern Winesburg, Ohio. Take a look at his Amazon page. This guy is good. Don’t miss him. You’ll regret it.

Janice Croom writes romance and the Kadence MacBride cozy mysteries. I haven’t read her romance novels. I have read the first Kadence MacBride mystery and loved it! It’s a winner — and I don’t especially like cozy mysteries. But I love Kadence. She is thoroughly lovable. Croom is a master craftswoman at giving us wonderful, wonderful characters. If you don’t love the people in Kadence’s world, then you probably don’t like fried chicken either. And the humor! OMG, Croom’s writing is hilarious! I laughed my head off. Visit her website and treat yourself to Kadence MacBride. You won’t be sorry.

S.J. Rozan is a traditionally published author of the Lydia Chin/Bill Smith private eye mysteries. These are superlative reads and she has many awards for her writing. That usually doesn’t impress me, but in Rozan’s case I can clearly see why. Her writing has just the right amount of everything. It’s not too lean and it isn’t at all flabby. With an economy of words she paints the most beautiful pictures. Her characters are so real. Their world is so real. IMO, she is one of the best traditionally published authors I’ve run across in a very long time. She is truly a cut above.

These are five writers who I think are fab and think you’ll agree. No glitz, no bling, no flash. Just doggone good writing. And that’s what we readers want.

As always, your comments are welcome and until next time — happy reading!

What Type Of Writer Are You?

Not everyone is a writer, but every one of us has a book within. Of course, some of us have more than one book and even then there may not be enough for us to be professionals. But that is alright. Because in this wonderful day and age, we can get our books published and not worry about anything else other than sending them out into the world.

Every occupation has hobbyists, amateurs, and professionals and that includes writing. Let’s take a little deeper look into each of these categories and see what they mean.

Hobbyist

What is a hobbyist writer? A hobbyist is one who engages in an activity for the fun of it. I enjoy playing board games. They’re fun. They constitute one of my hobbies.

People can write for a hobby, as well. I think most fan fiction writers are hobbyists. They write for the fun of it. So too many writers who are on platforms such as Wattpad.

These folk enjoy writing. However, they have lots of other interests and little to no desire to make writing number one in their life. Perhaps like bike riding for me. I enjoy it, but I have no desire to go on a road trip or engage in racing or participate in a club. I just like to ride my bike every now and again.

Writing as a hobby twenty or more years ago was pretty much a solo activity. Perhaps you shared your poems and stories and novels with family and friends. Perhaps got the shorter works published in magazines or fanzines and got a couple contributor’s copies for payment. Anything beyond that was pretty difficult.

Not today, however. Today, it’s easy to share your work with the world. If you want to. And who knows? You might decide you like writing enough to move to the next level.

Amateur

I’m not referring to someone who’s a bad writer. As in Oh, my God. He’s such an amateur! 

No, I’m referring to a dedicated person who loves writing, has to write, but chooses not to make a career of it.

Many vocations have people who make an interest an avocation instead of their vocation. Why? For any number of reasons. For one, unless you are a tech writer employed by a company, you will probably be self-employed as a writer. And not everyone wants the uncertainties of self-employment. Others may truly love their day jobs and don’t want to give them up for a career as an author. So writing may become a part-time job for them.

For many years the Victorian novelist, Anthony Trollope, was an amateur writer. Even after he started achieving critical acclaim and a sizable income from writing, he held onto his post office job. He liked working at the post office and he liked the security a regular paycheck gave him. It wasn’t until he was passed over for promotion that he became disgruntled and quit the post office. By that time, however, he was earning a very large income from writing and felt secure to make his living solely as a novelist.

Being an amateur isn’t a bad thing. It simply means you don’t want to write for your day job. Not that you aren’t good enough.

Professional

Many writers, however, dream of earning their living via the pen (or keyboard as the case may be). And many people do indeed support themselves by writing. But most do so by writing non-fiction, rather than fiction. And this has been the case for many, many years now.

I remember back in the ‘80s the sage advice, if you wanted to be a freelance writer, was to write articles for the women’s magazines. The market was large and the demand was high.

When Woman’s World was new, I recall an article on growing orchids. At the time I was a serious orchid grower, with hundreds of plants. What was quickly obvious was that the writer of the article didn’t really know anything about orchids. He made too many factual errors. I began tracking that particular writer’s articles and noted two things: he was good with a camera and he wrote lots of articles. He was a pro writer. Making his living selling to women’s and other non-fiction magazines.

Making a living from fiction is difficult. It isn’t impossible; there are, though, far easier ways to make a buck.

Recently, I’ve noticed more and more indie fiction writers moving over to non-fiction by offering lessons on how to write or market your books. Claiming Amazon or USA Today bestseller credentials, they offer to tell you (for a hefty price tag) how you can do it too.

Why are they doing this? Because it’s easier than writing and publishing and marketing 4 or 5 novels a year. All you do is create a course, video record it, and you’re done. Simply advertise said course, collect the fees, and press “play”. And then “repeat” for the next group and the next one after that.

Now I don’t mean to be cynical. I’m simply saying these writers have found it’s easier to make a living via non-fiction than fiction. Something pros have known for over half a century.

What Kind of Writer Are You?

I make no bones about it. I want to be a professional novelist. Hopefully, one day I’ll succeed.

However, I won’t be sad if I end up being a serious amateur. Why? Because, due to today’s technology and opportunities, even as an amateur, I can publish and market my books and make at least some money doing so. And which I’m doing right now. Every month I earn a few buck from Amazon and the outlets I’ve signed up for through Draft2Digital. And that is a nice feeling. A very nice feeling.

What about you? What kind of writer are you? 

A hobbyist? Nothing wrong with that. Have fun and share your fun with the world.

An amateur? Good for you. Self-employment is not for everyone. But that doesn’t mean you can’t be serious about your poetry, short stories, or novels. And who knows? You might end up just like Anthony Trollope.

Maybe you’ve scaled the mountain. You’re on the peak. You’re a pro. Congratulations! Your hard work paid off and you deserve your reward. I envy you and also am inspired by you. Onwards and upwards!

As always, I look forward to your comments. And until next time, happy reading!

Jack Reacher, Lydia Chin, and U-Boats

Today I thought I’d share with you some of the books I’ve been reading. Specifically a couple of traditionally published authors whose books I’ve been exploring, as well as a return to an old interest.

Jack Reacher

In the thriller world, Lee Child’s creation, Jack Reacher, is all the rage. Sometime ago I picked up Number 15 in the series in a used bookstore. I’d never heard of Lee Child or Jack Reacher at that point and since the book was the fifteenth in the series and because I have a penchant to read series books in order, I set it aside until I could get the earlier books. 

Then I learned of the Jack Reacher craze and bought the first two books just to see what all the fuss was about. I bought them used because I have a policy not to buy any new books published by the Big Five. Mostly because the Big Five charges way too much for books, especially e-books.

And without a doubt I’m glad to say I didn’t pay anymore then the two cents plus shipping that I paid for the books, because I’m not at all impressed with Jack Reacher.

What I actually found most helpful was Mr. Child’s introduction to the first book in the series in which he explained how he created Jack Reacher and a bit about his philosophy of writing. That was valuable information and should be read by all writers.

So what didn’t I like about Mr Child’s writing?

• Mediocre writing. The books are over 500 pages long in the paperback versions and that’s about 200 pages too much. They are wordy and Mr Child continually defuses the suspense with lengthy descriptions and explanations. Which seems odd that one would want to kill suspense in a suspense novel.
• Technical inaccuracy. The first two books are riddled with inaccurate terms and information regarding firearms. Mr Child clearly knows nothing about guns — and he apparently didn’t bother to do sufficient research.
• An unbelievable main character. Jack Reacher clearly fulfills Mr Child’s intentions as to what he wanted to achieve in a main character. Child wanted someone who never loses. A wish fulfillment for everyone who’s suffered at the hands of a schoolyard bully. The problem is, Reacher is boring. He is never in any real trouble. He’s always in control and the few times he isn’t he always knows he’ll get the upper hand eventually. He has a few quirks which come off as more stupid than interesting. And Reacher’s personality is about as interesting as a cold fish.

Personally, I think the only reason Lee Child got a publishing contract is because he was a TV writer before he turned to fiction. It’s all about who you know.

Needless to say, I won’t be buying anymore Jack Reacher novels. I might read more if I were to get the books for free. But even then that would be iffy. Just too many better books out there.

Lydia Chin/Bill Smith

S J Rozan was an architect who decided to try her hand at novel writing. She’s garnered numerous awards and nominations for her mystery detective series featuring Lydia Chin and Bill Smith.

The series currently numbers 11 novels and since the last one was published in 2011 it may be at an end, as her two latest books our paranormal thrillers which she co-authored.

The series is somewhat unique in that the odd numbered novels are told from Lydia’s point of view and the even numbered ones from Bill’s.

I’ve read the first 3 and number 4 is in the queue.

Ms Rozan’s style is exquisite. Very polished. No extraneous anything. Lydia and Bill are well-drawn. They end up winning, but aren’t infallible. They come across as real people. By way of contrast, I’d say Jack Reacher is about as complex as a comic book character.

Lydia’s and Bill’s world is New York City. And Ms Rozan makes their world come alive for us. Her word painting is superb.

Of the two characters, I prefer Lydia Chin. She is more colorful and her Chinatown world is fascinating. Even Bill Smith is more interesting in the books where Lydia is the point of view character.

When Bill tells the story, everything is duller and somewhat darker. At least in the one Bill Smith point of view novel I read. We’ll see if that changes in the next one I read.

As of right now, I plan to get all of the Lydia Chin/Bill Smith mysteries. They are pretty much as good as it gets.

U-Boats

U-Boats? Why U-Boats, you might be thinking. I’ve studied history all my life. Majored in it for my B.A. and continued with courses in grad school. There are many aspects of history one can study and technological development is a very intriguing aspect.

Most know I’m crazy about airships. What most don’t know is that I’m also fascinated by submarines. The two are very much the opposites of each other. What it takes to fly a rigid airship is the same skills it takes to navigate a submarine. The one is in air, the other water.

I’m also fascinated by the losers in history. It isn’t always the good guys who win, unfortunately. They do, however, get to write the history books.

Recently, I watched a World War II movie about an Allied force that captures a German U-Boat in a stealth operation. Complete fiction. And complete propaganda. All the typical war movie tropes: all the Germans get killed and only one American does; the Germans can’t fix their diesel engine but the Americans can; the Americans in the middle of a tense situation with only one person able to speak German, figure out all the German instructions on how to run the boat; the German sub trying to recapture the U-Boat has all its torpedoes miss, but the Americans with only one torpedo left are able to sink the pursuing German sub; and on it goes.

What the movie did do was spark a renewal of my interest in submarines. Currently I’m reading two books from the German’s perspective on the Battle of the Atlantic. One from World War I and the other from World War II.

To me, the most interesting thing is if you were to simply change the perspective the books could have been written by the victors. In other words, the motivation behind the Allied and Axis troops to fight was the same. A vague sense of patriotism mainly. Rarely a devotion to ideology

To achieve balance in one’s understanding of history, one needs to read both sides.

We, as individuals, are the sum total of not only our past, but the past of our people. The more we understand the past, the more we understand ourselves. Our past defines who we are at this very moment. It may or may not define the future. That usually depends on how well we understand past drivers.

To read the exploits of the U-Boat commanders and their crews is giving me an appreciation for those men who have been so brutally demonized by Allied propaganda, but who in reality were no different than those men they were fighting.

A study of history quickly shows the historian people are people, no matter where they are found.

That’s some of what I’ve been reading of late. I’ve, of course, been reading other books and reviews of some of those will be forthcoming.

As always, comments are welcome! And until next time, happy reading!

No Plot, No Problem

The plotless novel, story, or movie seems an oxymoron. After all, weren’t we told in high school, college, and grad school by every English and creative writing professor we had to plot out our stories? In every literature class we took, didn’t the instructor talk about plot?

So what the heck is a “plotless” story?

Perhaps, though, we should talk a little bit about plot before we talk about no plot. So what exactly is a “plot”?

Webster’s New World Dictionary, Second College Edition defines plot as “the plan of action of a play, novel, poem, short story, etc.” However, Ronald B Tobias, in Twenty Master Plots and how to write them, would seem to disagree. He notes, “Plot isn’t a wire hanger that you hang the clothes of your story on.” He goes on to declare, “Plot is a process, not an object.” And “Plot is dynamic, not static.”

Basically what Tobias is attempting to say is that the writer has a story to tell. How the writer tells the story, what pattern he or she uses to tell the tale, is in essence the plot of the story. Story is a chronicle of events for Tobias and plot answers the question, “Why?” Why is this particular series of events played out this way? Plot gives story form, according to Tobias.

And yet for all Tobias’s arguing against planning, he is essentially planning. Plot imposes structure on story. Take a simple story. Say the story of Adam and Eve. According to Tobias, what we have is a chronicle of events. Adam has a garden, he is given a partner, they are told don’t eat the fruit of a certain tree, the partner convinces Adam to eat the fruit, and they get kicked out of the garden. According to Tobias, depending on which of his twenty plots you choose, you impose structure on the story and give it form. You could impose a puzzle plot and make it a mystery. Or an adventure plot or a quest plot or a forbidden love plot.

To my mind, we are back to Creative Writing 101. The story is an idea and plot gives it form.

Now one can certainly approach writing that way and that approach does work for many. But it doesn’t have to be that way. There is another way. One which I think is organic and was mentioned by Ray Bradbury.

Bradbury supposedly said, “Create your characters, have them do their thing, and that is the story.” It seems to me, Bradbury is turning Tobias on his head. Story is not a series of events upon which the writer must impose structure. Story is the natural result of what the characters do. Story is the chronicle of the characters living out their lives.

So how does this all relate to the plotless novel, or movie, or short story? Good question.

Recently, my wife and I watched the movies Piku and Love Actually. Both films have exceedingly simple story lines. In fact, one could say the story in both films isn’t even very interesting. But what is interesting and captivating in both movies are the characters. Without the characters doing their thing, neither movie would even have a story. The storylines exist so the characters can do their thing. Both movies are hilarious and touching and make telling statements about life. Yet nothing much happens in either one. Yet momentous decisions are made by the characters which have a profound effect on themselves and those around them.

The movie Little Big Man, one of my favorites by the way, also has very little plot. It is the story, told in vignettes, of a man’s life. And yet it is one of the most moving and poignant movies I’ve ever seen. Little Big Man does his thing and the result is a fabulous story.

The plotless story has been around for a long time. In the 19th century it was called the “Sketch”. A sketch has no discernible plot. It’s purpose is to evoke emotion in the reader. Sketches aren’t so popular today and I can’t understand why. They can be highly effective tales. Wonderful for blog posts. Here is modern example, which I think is simply brilliant: “A Fluttering On The Floor”.

You won’t find the plotless story as much in genre fiction as you will in literary fiction. However, Bradbury’s story “The Highway”, from The Illustrated Man, is an excellent example of a plotless sci-fi story. Very little actually happens. But the protagonist’s thoughts and reactions to what does happen are thought-provoking.

The same can be said for Kazuo Ishiguro’s foray into sci-fi, the novel Never Let Me Go. There is some action, but it too seems to exist as nothing more than the stage upon which the characters stand. It’s what the characters do and don’t do that make the movie and book so poignant.

In some ways, I’d class The Maltese Falcon, if not plotless, at least placing little importance on the murder mystery. Even though the falcon is supposed to be the McGuffin, it is in actuality a symbol of how we live our lives. We chase something and chase it and sacrifice everything for it and when we get it, we find out it’s nothing. It’s an illusion, a fake. To my mind, the murder is in a sense the real McGuffin. It’s the event in the background that drives Spade. I don’t think he really cares who killed his partner or even if the killer is caught. What he does care about is clearing his name so he doesn’t take the rap for the murder — even if he has to throw people under the bus to do it. Which in my opinion he does.

The Maltese Falcon isn’t about murder, it’s about Sam Spade. The murder and the falcon are simply Spade doing his thing. And in the process we learn he isn’t very likable. In some ways, he’s a little bit too much like us.

The plotless story isn’t really plotless. It’s just that the plot isn’t all that important. The plot exists but doesn’t drive the story. The characters doing their thing is what drives the story — and them doing their thing is what is important. Because what they do and how they react gives us a glimpse as to who they really are and, if the writer is worth his or her salt, who we really are. After all, isn’t that at least partly why we read fiction? To see ourselves in the main characters? To vicariously experience through them what we can’t actually experience? To be who we want to be and to see condemned in them what we don’t often condemn in ourselves — at least publicly?

Characters, like the play, are the thing. All of this emphasis on plot and outlining and structure is to my mind missing the point. We don’t read books for the great plots. We read them for the characters. How many plots stick in your memory? Contrast that with how many characters are there.

As always, comments are welcome! I’d love to read your thoughts on the plotless novel. And until next time, happy reading!

The Male Reader

A few weeks ago I wrote a post entitled “Do Men Read Fiction?”. The answer is, yes, they do. However, they may not do so to the degree women do — or, they may simply not admit they do. Because in America, reading is for girls and sports is for boys.

I’d like to revisit the data Kate Summers presented in her article for the Spring 2013 issue of Reference & User Services Quarterly. And I’d like to do so in the context of fiction writers and the male audience.

So what in general do men like to read? The three top genres according to a survey of 11th grade males were:

Adventure  81%

Humor         64%

Horror & Science Fiction  57%

One might question extrapolating from 11th grade males to adult males. From my own experience, I can say I don’t read fiction as an adult that I didn’t read as a boy. The genres, nor the subject matter hasn’t changed all that much — if at all.

What I’ve seen of late, especially amongst male indie writers, is the use of female protagonists in great numbers. In fact, I’m finding it difficult to find male protagonists anywhere in some of my favorite genres amongst new writers and new books.

I have nothing against a female protagonist. Certainly in the period from the twenties to the fifties, they were welcome — because there were so few. Today, the situation seems reversed. It’s difficult to find a strong male lead. I think that is why Lee Child’s Jack Reacher is so popular. He’s a strong male lead who allows men to fulfill some of their fantasies.

Perhaps the new wave of men writers have been seduced by the myth that men don’t read fiction. So they write what they think their female readers want to read. Or perhaps this new wave of men writers are of the opinion men want to read books with strong female leads. Perhaps.

However, the data would suggest otherwise.

Above I cited the top genres men like to read. Those genres do not occur anywhere near the top for female readers. Women prefer these genres:

Romance (no surprise here) 68%

Realistic Fiction Dealing with Relationships 65%

Mystery 59%

Realistic Fiction Dealing with Problems 57%

Humor 51%

So right off the bat, men writing science fiction with strong female leads, for example, have immediately narrowed their market. They aren’t tapping into their potential male audience, nor their potential female audience. Women tend not to read science fiction and, as we’ll see in a bit, men tend not to prefer female protagonists.

This is not to say men shouldn’t write science fiction with strong female leads. I’m just noting that in the quest for market share, one should be at least aware of what each gender reads and prefers. Why pick a narrow segment of readers, when a broader one exists? Especially for those crucial first few novels.

So what gender of protagonist do men and women prefer? Summers found in her survey of books cited as favorites by men that the gender of the protagonist was

Male — 64 books

Female — 8 books

Male & Female — 8 books

Men, it seems, tend to prefer books with male protagonists. Contrast this with the female readers surveyed

Male — 32 books

Female — 24 books

Male & Female — 6 books

The women surveyed were more evenly divided, although male protagonists also had the edge with them.

Another piece of interesting information Summers uncovered was that of the 60 authors the men in her survey chose as their favorite, 57 were men and 3 were women. On the other hand, the women’s favorite authors were 44 male and 19 female. Quite clearly, men have an almost total preference for male authors. While women are more fluid, but still prefer male authors over female.

I found this data quite surprising and the more I ponder it the more I’m convinced that this is a good day and age for men writers and protagonists who are men.

Which isn’t to say women authors don’t have a voice, nor is it to say women shouldn’t be protagonists.

What I think this data shows, is if we want to attract men to fiction we need to write what men want to read.

Men prefer adventure and humor by large margins. They also prefer male authors and male protagonists by very large margins. This is important data to keep in mind.

Lee Child became a best selling author with his Jack Reacher novels. Indie author Mark Dawson, who modeled his character John Milton after Jack Reacher, in the short span of three years went from nothing to gross receipts in the 7 figure range. That is something to think about.

Of course we can contrast that with, say, Janet Evanovich and her Stephanie Plum novels, which are immensely popular best sellers. However, note the genres: Jack Reacher and John Milton are adventure/thrillers and Stephanie is mystery. The first ranks high with men and the second with women. Although Mark Dawson’s research into who comprises his audience has found the numbers of men and women who read his John Milton novels to be evenly divided.

When I took a look at the protagonists in my own stories and novels, I found a preponderance of male protagonists. That written, The Rocheport Saga is populated with many female movers and shakers. The Justinia Wright mysteries feature a female private eye and her brother as “Watson”. A combo protagonist. And, of course, the Lady Dru novels have a female protagonist, with a female and male as secondary protagonists.

As a writer, I found the Lady Dru novels to be the more difficult to write. I wanted to write a convincing female protagonist and joked about having to get in touch with my inner woman. Whether or not I was successful, I’ll leave you to decide.

So what can we take away from this data? First, we must keep in mind that Ms Summers’s survey was small. As was the survey she cited by Constance Schultheis. Small surveys mean there is a possibility of a high margin of error. More surveys are needed to verify or reverse her results.

However, when I look at myself and my reading habits — I tend to follow the same preferences that were found in the surveyed males.

Secondly, I think we can take away the rather obvious observation that men and women have different preferences when it comes to reading fiction. As writers, paying attention to those differences and identifying who our primary audience is will be critical to our book marketing success.

Thirdly, men do read fiction. We men who are writers should not shy away from writing for men. To do so will limit our potential audience and who wants to do that?

I don’t know if there is a one size fits all solution. If there is, my guess is that it would be a combination of adventure and romance, with a touch of mystery and a dollop of humor. One could possibly substitute for romance realistic fiction dealing with relationships, as half the male readers surveyed by Schultheis cited a preference for that category (as well as a high percentage of female readers).

Otherwise, we writers might want to simply focus on two approaches: one oriented towards a male audience and one towards a female audience. Indie authors will be able to pull this off much more effectively than traditionally published authors, as publishing companies tend to put their writers into straightjackets when it comes to genre.

I hope you found this article of interest and help. As always, comments are welcome! And until next time, happy reading!