<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" media="screen" href="/~d/styles/rss2full.xsl"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" media="screen" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~d/styles/itemcontent.css"?><rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:feedburner="http://rssnamespace.org/feedburner/ext/1.0" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Max Barry</title>
    <link>http://www.maxbarry.com</link>
    <description>News and blather from MaxBarry.com</description>
    <language>en</language>

<atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/maxbarry" /><feedburner:info uri="maxbarry" /><atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="hub" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/" /><item>
 <title>Walkabout</title>
 <link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/maxbarry/~3/t2JT71vg7WQ/news.html</link>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.maxbarry.com/2010/07/19/news.html</guid>
 <pubDate>Tue, 20 Jul 2010 05:22:22 GMT</pubDate>
 <description>I shaved my head totally bald and the skin is so baby-smooth I can&amp;#8217;t
stop touching it. That&amp;#8217;s not relevant to anything. I don&amp;#8217;t know why I
brought it up. But seriously. Baby-smooth.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
So I didn&amp;#8217;t blog or go on Facebook or Twitter for six weeks and you
know what? It was kind of good. It was like walking into the desert
and rediscovering Nature. It was like being born again. It was like
looking at a photo of who I used to be.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
No, not really. It was pretty much like this, only I had more free time
and hadn&amp;#8217;t heard of Zach Anner.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
I have been doing lots of writing. The last big &lt;em&gt;Machine Man&lt;/em&gt;
novel rewrite is almost finished, and I started something new. I
was planning another serial, but this kind of grabbed me and it&amp;#8217;s
not at all serial-like. So now I&amp;#8217;m not sure about serials.
I&amp;#8217;ll see where I am in three months.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
Anyway, I just wanted to let you know I&amp;#8217;m here and writing and
I know who Zach Anner is. Also: baby-smooth.&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/maxbarry/~4/t2JT71vg7WQ" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
 <category>max</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.maxbarry.com/2010/07/19/news.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
 <title>Mind of the Agent</title>
 <link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/maxbarry/~3/2YubSEJodB4/news.html</link>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.maxbarry.com/2010/05/25/news.html</guid>
 <pubDate>Wed, 26 May 2010 05:59:01 GMT</pubDate>
 <description>I remember when I was desperate to find a girl but had no idea what
they wanted. I knew what I wanted. I wanted them to take delivery
of my package. But how to convince them? What did they want from me?
Where could I find one with a good reputation, who didn&amp;#8217;t charge
fees?
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
Wait, did I say girl? I meant literary agent. I couldn&amp;#8217;t find a
&lt;em&gt;literary agent&lt;/em&gt;.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
Now there are tons of sites about literary agents. Some are by
agents. My favorite is 
&lt;a href="http://nathanbransford.com/"&gt;Nathan Bransford&lt;/a&gt; of
&lt;a href="http://www.curtisbrown.com/"&gt;Curtis Brown&lt;/a&gt;, but there
are plenty to choose from. There&amp;#8217;s no longer any excuse for not
knowing at least a little about how an agent&amp;#8217;s mind works: what
they&amp;#8217;re looking for, how to approach them.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
Still, the other day I received an email from a writer facing a quandary:
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;p&gt;
A Literary Agent has given me a favourable reply (ie: wants to see my entire
manuscript from a lousy query letter), so I immediately panicked and sent it
to a &amp;#8220;professional editing&amp;#8221; service (one listed on Australian Literary Agents
Website) for a final Mr Sheening.  Do Literary Agents have a time limit before
they get miffed if you don&amp;#8217;t send manuscript by return email? The Editing
Service assures me that I have two months (?) to submit, as they have not
started it yet, but &amp;#8220;it is on the top of their pile&amp;#8221;.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
Help&amp;#8230; please?
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
Yours in awe
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
Elle
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;p&gt;
Usually I can&amp;#8217;t respond to emails, but I make an exception for
those that sign off, &amp;#8220;Yours in awe.&amp;#8221; So I replied, and then I thought
I might as well post my response here, because it was just that good.
Or possibly not, but what the hell, it&amp;#8217;s not like I&amp;#8217;m forcing you to
keep reading.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;p&gt;
Hi Elle!
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
This is why you don&amp;#8217;t query agents until your book is ready, of course.
But I know it happens. I queried a few agents with my first novel then
freaked out because what if they wanted to see it? I think I did
lightning rewrites every time someone responded.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
I see two issues. The first is: Are you damaging your chances if you don&amp;#8217;t
respond to an agent immediately? If we were talking about American agents,
I&amp;#8217;d say, &amp;#8220;Maybe.&amp;#8221; Most reputable American agents receive more queries than
they can remember, and might not notice whether it&amp;#8217;s been two weeks or two
months since they asked to see yours. But they might.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
For an Australian agent I&amp;#8217;d say, &amp;#8220;Probably.&amp;#8221; They deal with far fewer writers and are more likely to wonder what&amp;#8217;s going on.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
But either way, I&amp;#8217;d send them that manuscript. Agents want reliable
clients, and if the first thing you do is delay, they&amp;#8217;ll worry you are
one of those writers who are forever six months away from finishing their
next book. For this reason you should not reply with some pathetic story
about how you thought your book was ready but now you think about it can
you please have a few more months. Don&amp;#8217;t do that.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
You are worried that your book could be better; well, it probably could.
They all could. Do you think yours has little flaws or big ones? If they&amp;#8217;re
minor, they&amp;#8217;re unlikely to dissuade an editor who otherwise loves your work, 
and if they&amp;#8217;re major, you&amp;#8217;re dead no matter what: dead if you send in that
piece of crap, dead if you wait for two months only to discover from this
editing service that you need to spend six more on rewrites.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
Speaking of which. There are very fine freelance editors out there but I
don&amp;#8217;t like the concept. In particular I think it&amp;#8217;s bad for amateur writers
with no idea what&amp;#8217;s good and bad about their book to consult a 
freelance editor in the hope that this expert can explain it.
It&amp;#8217;s bad because
(a) to rewrite well you need to completely believe in what you&amp;#8217;re doing.
Receiving advice you don&amp;#8217;t really understand or agree with but feel compelled
to follow anyway because it&amp;#8217;s coming from an expert will crush everything
unique and valuable about your book.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
And (b) some freelance editors are delusional psychopaths.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
By my reckoning, about one in four pieces of literary feedback are so 
wide of the mark they&amp;#8217;re not just unhelpful but destructive. They want
your book to be more like a completely different type of book, or prostrate
itself before the altar of Strunk &amp; White, or not imply things about
hot-button issues you never even thought of, or go into depth about things
nobody cares about, or not do this mildly felonious thing that someone tore
strips off them for at their last story workshop, or stop reminding them of
their ex-wife.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
I&amp;#8217;m talking about feedback from other writers and readers, rather than
editors; you would hope freelance editors are less delusional than writers.
But I don&amp;#8217;t know. Why take the risk? This is why I advocate quantity: get
your ms. read by at least eight or ten people before you show it to anyone
in the industry. Enough to identify the outliers.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
More on this &lt;a href="http://maxbarry.com/writing/bits/rewriting.html"&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
Obviously I haven&amp;#8217;t read your manuscript (that wasn&amp;#8217;t an invitation). I don&amp;#8217;t
know which editing service you&amp;#8217;ve selected, or how experienced you are, or
whether you&amp;#8217;ve workshopped it already. But based on what I know: send it.
You&amp;#8217;re more likely to hurt yourself by not sending it than you are to help
yourself by delaying for months in order to maybe improve it but maybe not.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
Good luck!
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
Max.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/maxbarry/~4/2YubSEJodB4" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
 <category>writing</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.maxbarry.com/2010/05/25/news.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
 <title>If you blink really fast it kind of moves</title>
 <link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/maxbarry/~3/yMwkx0p-kS8/news.html</link>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.maxbarry.com/2010/05/05/news.html</guid>
 <pubDate>Wed, 05 May 2010 12:08:10 GMT</pubDate>
 <description>Who do I have to hug to get a &lt;em&gt;Jennifer Government&lt;/em&gt; movie made,
that&amp;#8217;s what I want to know. It&amp;#8217;s been like seven years. Yeah, yeah, it&amp;#8217;s hard to
make a story work in 100 minutes when you&amp;#8217;ve got six major characters and
nine interconnected plots. Boo hoo. You know what that sounds like? &amp;#8220;I&amp;#8217;m a crappy
screenwriter.&amp;#8221;
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
In the meantime, here&amp;#8217;s something almost as good: 
a wallpaper!  I stumbled across this a year 
ago but it took that long to track down the original artist:
it started as a
&lt;a href="http://www.graphic-design.com/Gallery/polycarbon/polypencil.jpg"&gt;sketch&lt;/a&gt;
by &lt;a href="http://polykarbon.com"&gt;Patrick Shettlesworth&lt;/a&gt;
that had nothing to do with Jennifer Government until
&lt;a href="http://lordkelvelos.deviantart.com/art/jennifer-gov-38168219"&gt;lordkelvos&lt;/a&gt;
of deviantART reworked it and added a barcode tattoo, which I stuck
in front of a background designed by
&lt;a href="http://www.michaeljwindsordesign.com/?cat=6"&gt;Michael J. Windsor&lt;/a&gt;.
That&amp;#8217;s three different people who can now sue me for copyright infringement.
But at least two of them said it was okay so here you go:
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
&lt;a class="nounderline" href="/images/JenniferGovernmentWallpaper1920x1200.jpg"&gt;&lt;img
src="/images/JenniferGovernmentWallpaperpreview.jpg"
alt="Jennifer Government wallpaper" title="Jennifer Government wallpaper" /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
It may help you enjoy this image if you imagine you&amp;#8217;re a teenage boy.
I don&amp;#8217;t need to do that. But you might. Here it is in different sizes: 
&lt;a href="http://www.maxbarry.com/images/JenniferGovernmentWallpaper1920x1200.jpg"&gt;1920x1200 (widescreen)&lt;/a&gt;,
&lt;a href="http://www.maxbarry.com/images/JenniferGovernmentWallpaper1280x800.jpg"&gt;1280x800 (widescreen)&lt;/a&gt;,
&lt;a href="http://www.maxbarry.com/images/JenniferGovernmentWallpaper1440x900.jpg"&gt;1440x900 (widescreen)&lt;/a&gt;,
&lt;a href="http://www.maxbarry.com/images/JenniferGovernmentWallpaper1600x1200.jpg"&gt;1600x1200&lt;/a&gt;,
&lt;a href="http://www.maxbarry.com/images/JenniferGovernmentWallpaper1024x768.jpg"&gt;1024x768&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/maxbarry/~4/yMwkx0p-kS8" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
 <category>jennifergovernment</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.maxbarry.com/2010/05/05/news.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
 <title>At the End of the Tunnel is an Extremely Ornate Light</title>
 <link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/maxbarry/~3/RLvtar9dXMs/news.html</link>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.maxbarry.com/2010/04/21/news.html</guid>
 <pubDate>Thu, 22 Apr 2010 06:06:05 GMT</pubDate>
 <description>I have a bunch of blogs backed up. Wait. That sounds disgusting. 
Pretend I didn&amp;#8217;t say that. What I mean is: I keep thinking of things
I want to blog about, but before I do I get distracted by emails or
real writing or my wife getting pregnant. I know. You could argue
that I have prioritization issues. On the other hand, you could argue
I don&amp;#8217;t. It&amp;#8217;s not like anyone pays me for these. I only do them for
the look on your face. That&amp;#8217;s right. I&amp;#8217;m watching you. I&amp;#8217;m watching
you right now. See that webcam? Give me a little wave. Hello,
my pretty. Hello.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
But that&amp;#8217;s beside the point. The point is: my wife is pregnant.
I can&amp;#8217;t believe you didn&amp;#8217;t react more when I mentioned that
a second ago. You barely frowned. Oh, wait. I see. You were wondering
if you already knew about that. I guess I didn&amp;#8217;t really telegraph it. I
just kind of slipped it in there. But enough about the conception.
Ha ha! Joke. We used IVF. Not because we have to. We just like to
employ advanced medical technology wherever possible. It&amp;#8217;s expensive,
but we think it&amp;#8217;s worth it. They say you can&amp;#8217;t genetically
engineer your embryos, but once you get inside and they close
the door, you totally can. We went for a female green-eyed redhead
with a propensity to sneeze in sunlight and a tail like a fish.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
Last Friday we went along for our 20-week scan. We decided to
find out the sex this time, because Jen wanted to find out the sex
and I couldn&amp;#8217;t stand the idea of her knowing something I didn&amp;#8217;t.
It would have thrown off the delicate power balance of the whole
relationship. You might think that&amp;#8217;s silly but that&amp;#8217;s what they said
about Palestine. I don&amp;#8217;t want a repeat of that. Not in my house.
So off we went, and Dr. Andrew showed us that we&amp;#8217;re having a girl!
He showed us in a way that would be truly mortifying if the girl
was aware of it, by the way. I kind of feel sorry for girls today
growing up with DVDs of their prenatal scans tucked away in their
parents&amp;#8217; bedside tables. You just know they&amp;#8217;re going to come
out at the 21st party. Anyway, there it is: we will have two girls,
and the new one will own nothing new until she leaves home.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
Before Finlay was born, her placeholder name was &amp;#8220;Popsicle&amp;#8221;
(Poppy for short),
because she was brewed from a frozen embryo.
As we were walking out of the clinic, Finlay said, &amp;#8220;We should call
her Chandelier.&amp;#8221; I don&amp;#8217;t know where that came from. But that&amp;#8217;s the 
placeholder. Chandelier Barry. A new light in the world.&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/maxbarry/~4/RLvtar9dXMs" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
 <category>max</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.maxbarry.com/2010/04/21/news.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
 <title>My Stupid Industry</title>
 <link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/maxbarry/~3/gRJZX-A_cE0/news.html</link>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.maxbarry.com/2010/03/04/news.html</guid>
 <pubDate>Fri, 05 Mar 2010 05:01:39 GMT</pubDate>
 <description>Lately the publishing industry has been trying to commit suicide over
electronic rights. It&amp;#8217;s funny because every time in history a
revolutionary new way to do business comes along, the first instinct of
all established players is to strangle themselves
with it. Movie studios fought the VCR. Microsoft fought the Internet. 
The music industry fought MP3s. TV networks are fighting PVRs. 
Eventually, these turn into important markets, fully embraced by the
companies that tried to kill them. But until then everyone spends a lot
of time throwing lawyers at anything that doesn&amp;#8217;t
look like a traditional business model.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
The first e-madness was DRM, of course. That&amp;#8217;s the code
they wrapped around electronic books to ensure they couldn&amp;#8217;t be
pirated. Well. &amp;#8220;Ensure&amp;#8221; is a big word. I&amp;#8217;m not sure that any piece of
DRM in history has survived an interested hacker. What it did
ensure was a steady trickle of emails to my inbox from people who
couldn&amp;#8217;t find an electronic copy of &lt;em&gt;Jennifer Government&lt;/em&gt;
in the right format for their device, or could but after they paid their
money it didn&amp;#8217;t work.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
Next came
&lt;a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704825504574584372263227740.html"&gt;e-delays&lt;/a&gt;,
where publishers held back electronic versions for four months following print
publication. &amp;#8220;The right place for the e-book is after the
hardcover but before the paperback,&amp;#8221; said Simon &amp; Schuster CEO
Carolyn Reidy. This is a brave counterpoint to the more common wisdom
that the right place for selling something is wherever customers want
to buy it. So we were not just restricting e-books to particular
formats within particular territories, but also to particular windows of time.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
But that wasn&amp;#8217;t enough. Publishers didn&amp;#8217;t like the fact that Amazon.com
started selling e-books for $9.99 each. (They thought that was too cheap,
if you&amp;#8217;re wondering.) It didn&amp;#8217;t affect publishers&amp;#8217; margins, nor authors&amp;#8217; royalties,
since 
&lt;a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/01/technology/companies/01amazonweb.html"&gt;Amazon.com was selling below cost&lt;/a&gt;
to promote its Kindle platform. But still, 
&lt;a href="http://blog.nathanbransford.com/2010/02/kindle-missile-crisis.html"&gt;publishers were uncomfortable&lt;/a&gt;
with the idea of books being that cheap.
So they
&lt;a href="http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/29/amazon-pulls-macmillan-books-over-e-book-price-disagreement/"&gt;went to war&lt;/a&gt;
and forced Amazon.com to bump up prices to $13-$15, in exchange
for taking a lower royalty on each sale.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
Let&amp;#8217;s review. Amazon.com was eating it in order to allow you to buy books
for ten bucks, instead of twenty or thirty, while paying authors the same royalty.
Publisher intervenes, and now books are more expensive for you, while the
author gets less. Also, the publisher gets less. Oh, and I didn&amp;#8217;t mention this,
but during the war, Amazon.com took down all the &amp;#8220;Buy&amp;#8221; buttons for Macmillan
books, so you definitely couldn&amp;#8217;t buy them no matter how much you wanted to
and nobody made any money at all.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
I won&amp;#8217;t say it&amp;#8217;s impossible for an industry to push retail prices up while pushing
their own margins down and be successful. I&amp;#8217;ll just say that&amp;#8217;s not the way it
usually works. Also, as a general rule, when customers want to buy a product,
it usually works out best if the company lets them. I don&amp;#8217;t think there have
been too many examples of companies making money while refusing to sell
their products in the formats their customers want while also forcing retailers
to charge more and pocketing less themselves. I&amp;#8217;m not sure. But
that&amp;#8217;s my feeling.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
Meanwhile, rocked by the Global Calamitous Money Disappearing Event, publishers
began cutting back what they do. Ten years ago, a publisher gave hopeful authors editorial advice,
a printing service, a promotional budget, and access to bricks and mortar
bookstores. There was really no viable alternative, short of becoming a small
publisher yourself. To become a successful author, you needed a publisher.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
Today, the promotional budget is more likely to involve encouragement to do
something on the internet rather than a book tour. Publishers are still fantastic
at getting you into bookstores, and physical books still comprise the vast majority of
the market: you need them for this. But in e-books, you can click &amp;#8220;Export to EPUB&amp;#8221;
as easily as they can, and without giving up 75% of revenue.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
Also, publishers are getting less willing to make risky bets. Instead of taking
an unknown author and striving to find her an audience, they want authors
to establish their own audience in advance, via a website or similar.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
Now, publishing is full of terrific, smart people who love books and want to
promote authors. I haven&amp;#8217;t met a single person in publishing I didn&amp;#8217;t like. I even
love my old Viking editor, who dumped me via relayed e-mail message. I
forgive you, Carolyn. I really do.
But the people in charge there are trying to sue the VCR. If publishing
gets tomorrow everything it wants today, it will be smaller and less 
relevant. Imagine the world in in ten years, when e-books are 50% of the market:
What will publishers offer authors? Not the ability
to find an audience, if they&amp;#8217;re pushing that onto authors. Not the distribution network:
anyone can get their book into an electronic store. Not promotion; or at least,
not much of it. That leaves editorial and distribution of hard copy.
Not to be sneezed at, for sure. Editorial in particular is often the
difference between a great book and a mediocre one; I can attest to that. But if I&amp;#8217;ve got a web site
and a hundred thousand visitors, I&amp;#8217;d think seriously about whether
editorial and print is worth giving up 90% of my income. I would, at the
least,
drive a harder bargain with a publisher than if they were providing
more services I really needed.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
The publishing industry is trying to think long-term, like every industry
that faced a revolutionary change before it. But please, this time, can we not batter
ourselves to death? It&amp;#8217;s not that complicated, Publishing. I write stories. I want
people to read them. 
I want as many people to read them in whatever format they want, wherever they
want, as cheaply as possible, while I earn a living. I don&amp;#8217;t want lower
royalties in exchange for higher retail prices. That&amp;#8217;s the opposite of what I want.
I don&amp;#8217;t want to get emails from people saying they wanted to buy my e-book but
they couldn&amp;#8217;t because it wasn&amp;#8217;t available or didn&amp;#8217;t work. This is text. It&amp;#8217;s not
hard to put text on an electronic device. It&amp;#8217;s only hard because you make it.&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/maxbarry/~4/gRJZX-A_cE0" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
 <category>writing</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.maxbarry.com/2010/03/04/news.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
 <title>Fiction For Short Attention Oh Look At That Laughing Dog</title>
 <link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/maxbarry/~3/P__DmWjmevM/news.html</link>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.maxbarry.com/2010/02/11/news.html</guid>
 <pubDate>Fri, 12 Feb 2010 06:30:45 GMT</pubDate>
 <description>&lt;img src="http://www.maxbarry.com/images/booktower.jpg" alt="Tower of Books" title="Tower of Books"
class="intropic" /&gt;Since
I got a iPhone, my bedside table has turned into a tower of books. It was
always pretty bad. But now it&amp;#8217;s worse. Look at that. It&amp;#8217;s a fire hazard. One
day I&amp;#8217;ll toss a cigarette in there and it&amp;#8217;ll be a conflagration. Not that I
smoke. That&amp;#8217;s the only thing saving my life.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
The problem is when I go to bed, instead of picking up a book, I think, &amp;#8220;I&amp;#8217;ll just
check Reddit.&amp;#8221; Or Twitter. Or the news. Or Facebook. Or my email. Not &lt;em&gt;or&lt;/em&gt;.
&lt;em&gt;And&lt;/em&gt;. I check all those things. I have 65 apps. I just counted.
Halfway, I thought, &amp;#8220;I wonder if there&amp;#8217;s an app for counting your apps.&amp;#8221;
I was tempted to take 20 minutes and hunt one down, so I wouldn&amp;#8217;t
have to waste ten seconds the next time I need this information. You see what&amp;#8217;s
going on here. It&amp;#8217;s a sickness.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
It&amp;#8217;s got me thinking I should do more short attention span fiction. Maybe another
serial, like &lt;em&gt;Machine Man&lt;/em&gt;. Firstly, because that was fun as hell,
in a terrifying kind of way.
Secondly, because I&amp;#8217;m rewriting it as a novel, and it&amp;#8217;s pretty great.
I already have the story. Now I get to play around in all the spaces I
skipped over because the serial had to go go go. It&amp;#8217;s a good system.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
But thirdly because maybe no-one has the time to sit down with entire novels
any more. Or rather, maybe there is a class of
people, to which I belong, that is becoming addicted to bite-sized information
delivered by scattershot. I hope there&amp;#8217;s a class. I hope it&amp;#8217;s not just me.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
Not that it has to be one or the other. I&amp;#8217;m not saying that once you sign
up to Facebook, you abandon Margaret Atwood. Although I have done exactly
that. &lt;em&gt;The Year of the Flood&lt;/em&gt; is just sitting there. What I mean
is that the novel seems to be getting more competition. The novel is
very strong, of course; there is no replacing the novel. But the competition is pretty
great. The internet is everything in bite-sized pieces.
It&amp;#8217;s candy-flavored stream of consciousness of whatever you want.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
And increasingly the same device will access both. I&amp;#8217;m having trouble
getting to novels just because an iPhone is in the same vicinity. What happens
when my books are actually on my phone? Or in my iPad? When I&amp;#8217;m one swipe away from
the web, will I still be able to completely sink into a novel? Plenty of times
I&amp;#8217;ve slogged my way through a book that wasn&amp;#8217;t really holding my attention
just because it was there, in my hands. I don&amp;#8217;t think I&amp;#8217;d do that on an iPad. I think
I&amp;#8217;d tap that bastard into oblivion and answer an email.
&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;
So I am interested in fiction that works with the internet, rather
than fights it. Something that doesn&amp;#8217;t sit there, 400 pages heavy,
asking for a seven-hour commitment before I start. That&amp;#8217;s the
kind of fiction I&amp;#8217;d like to read right now. Something that sneaks 
under my guard and pries me away from memes and status updates. I
would like to find that.&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/maxbarry/~4/P__DmWjmevM" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
 <category>writing</category>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.maxbarry.com/2010/02/11/news.html</feedburner:origLink></item>
  </channel>
</rss>
