Are you an aspriing writer trying to break into the publishing world?

Trying to crack the odd language that is publisherspeak?

Don't know an ARC from a Full? Or a Sell-through from an Imprint?

The BookEnds Literary Agency has just posted a very useful dictionary of publishing which should help clear up some of your confusion.

After 10 years in the game, I knew 99% of the terms but the one that I didn't know (and the one that intrigued) me was the term preempt, which I haven't come across before.

It's defined by BookEnds as:

Preempt: When a publisher makes an advance and royalty offer high enough to take the book off the auction table. In other words, a publisher offers enough money that the author and agent agree that they will sell the book without asking for bids from other publishers.

I like this word. I like this idea. I would very much like one of my publishers to preempt my next series with an offer roughly equivalent to the GDP of New Zealand...

*wanders off muttering... how do I get them to do that?...*

A rom-com for a change this week. What is it with all these pregnancy movies? When did it become cool?

It's all Brangelina's fault, I think.

Successful single businesswoman Kate Holbrook (Tina Fey) is 37. After years of putting her career ahead of a personal life, her biological clock is ticking. Loudly. Undeterred by not having a partner in her life, she sets out to get pregnant, only to find she has a T-shaped uterus with a million to one chance of falling pregnant.

 Undaunted, the driven Kate hires Angie Ostrowiski (Amy Poehler) to become her surrogate. Supported by Angie’s boyfriend, Carl (Dax Shepherd) the eggs are implanted and a pregnancy ensues. But there is trouble in Angie’s life and after she discovers Carl has been unfaithful to her, she moves out and lands on Kate’s doorstep.

Baby Mama then becomes a sort of Odd Couple for the new millennium, with the added twist of a surrogacy thrown in. Fey and Poehler are great together as the uptight Kate and the laid-back, working class Angie, struggling to get along for the sake of the unborn child they share. 

The supporting cast includes Greg Kinnear as the affable small businessman who wins Kate’s corporate heart, and Sigourney Weaver as the owner of the surrogacy agency who inexplicably keeps having more and more children of her own, despite her advanced age. The best role, however, is saved for Steve Martin, who stars as Kate’s millionaire hippy boss, whose rewards for a stitching up a great deal include five minutes of uninterrupted eye contact. 

The film is amusing, although predictable. The Odd Couple scenario is hardly groundbreaking stuff, but the cast is competent and believable and there are enough laughs to keep the audience entertained, including an ending so obvious you knew in the first five minutes of this film, how it was going to end. Written and directed by Michael McCullers (who also wrote Thunderbirds and Austin Powers: Goldmember) it lacks the satirical edge of the Austin Powers movies, erring on the side of safe and comfortable, rather than threatening any mainstream family values. 

In fact, what I found most interesting — and ultimately irritating — about this film, was not that it was about surrogacy, but that it shied away from anything remotely smacking of controversy, which was a bit of a let down in the end, even though, as I said, you could see the ending coming before the opening credits had faded.

Well, the wait is finally over.

The Orbit edition of Warlord is now available in the UK. It's taken a while but it's here now so woo hoo!

Thanks to Gabby and Bella at Orbit for being so great and supportive.  

I was going to put up something about writing this week and then sci-fi writer Matthew Jarpe, author of Radio Freefall,  listed "5 Writing Lessons I Wish I'd Learned the Easy Way" over on his very entertaining blog.

They are important lessons, indeed. So, rather than re-invent the wheel, I'm reprinting them here, making me seem very wise and knowledgable for agreeing with him.

You really should visit Matthew's blog. And you should probably buy his book, too... :)

1. Be a do, not a be. Gordon Van Gelder sent back a detailed set of notes for the story I wrote with Jonathan Andrew Sheen, "The Bad Hamburger." He had already bought the story and his acceptance was not contingent on our making the changes, but he thought some of his edits would strengthen the story. We ended up taking almost all of his recommendations, not because he's a great authority on what makes a good story, but because all of his edits did improve the story. Well, most of them, anyway. I think he wanted to make the dog into a cat. But he made one suggestion that stuck with me through the years. He told us to comb through the manuscript and look for every appearance of a form of the verb "be" and look at those sentences closely. Could we re-write those sentences and make them stronger? We usually could, and did. "We were surrounded by the enemy," becomes "The enemy surrounded us."

2. Oh, murder those darlings. It's not that I hadn't heard the "murder your darlings" advice countless times before, it's one of the most pervasive writing homilies around. I had to learn the hard what what it means. A darling is a phrase or a paragraph or a chapter or even a whole plot thread that you love but that doesn't push the story along. I can only imagine how many good pieces of writing ended up on the cutting room floor because, like me, most new writers think a darling is any piece of distinctive writing. I chopped a whole bunch of good stuff out of some of my earlier stories because I misunderstood this advice. My first story, "Vasquez Orbital Salvage and Satellite Repair," as well as RADIO FREEFALL, are full of quirky writing because I hadn't mis-learned this advice when I wrote those. And, if I do say so myself, they're pretty good. I don't think I found that voice again until "City of Reason."

3. Readers want to like the bad guy, a little. When you paint the antagonist all black, he becomes part of the furniture. Make him just a little bit right and he transforms the whole story, takes it to a new level.

4. The protagonist is the person most changed by the events of the story. You really do need to know who the protagonist is. Stories are not real life, stories are pieces of morality made entertaining. In real life, everyone is the good guy in their own stories, but in a story, not everyone is the protagonist. And if no one gets changed, no one learns or loses or triumphs or falls, you don't have a story. I struggled for a long time to get the ending of "Language Barrier" right, but I couldn't because I didn't know who the protagonist was. When I figured it out (it's Dane, by the way) it all fell into place. I knew all along that Audrey Callico is the protagonist of MACHINE INTELLIGENCE, but my test readers didn't get it. I had to make it clear that Audrey not only brings about the resolution, but she has to change to make it happen.

5. Conflict is the engine of fiction. I took a leadership training course a few years ago where I learned how to harness conflict to make things happen in business. I also learned how to harness conflict to drive a plot. Conflict is when you have two opposing ideas trying to share the same space at the same time, but when you resolve the conflict in a healthy way, the emerging idea is a new thing entirely that belongs to both parties. Everyone owns a piece of the new idea and everyone pulls in the same direction to bring that idea to reality. That's when it's done right, but we all know that it very often is done horribly, horribly wrong. I spent a lot of time early in my writing career writing lifeless stories because I only introduced a single idea and worked it through. When your antagonist is simply a wall standing between your protagonist and the resolution (see #3) nothing interesting happens.

Remember the reviewer that had a go at one of my books recently for the excessive use of silly names?

Well, I have now decided excessive use of silly names is merely art imitating life.

You see, Gwen Stafani and Gavin Rossdale just named their second son Zuma Nesta Rock. Clearly they expect him to have a future as an evil overlord's chief minion. But he won't be alone...

• John Mellencamp's daughter is Speck Wildhorse
• Penn Jillette's daughter is Moxie CrimeFighter. What do they call her at school? Mox? Crim?
• Jermaine Jackson's son is Jermajesty
• General Hospital star Ingo Rademacher called his son Peanut
• Shannyn Sossamon's son is named Audio Science
• Michael Jackson's son is named Blanket, although, to be fair, that's a nickname for Prince Michael II (as opposed to his brother Prince Michael 1) which is sooo much better.
• Jason Lee's poor son is called Pilot Inspektor
• Frank Zappa's kids are Dweezil, Ahmet and Moon Unit
• And Nicolas Cage's son is Kal-el

I think this is actually child abuse. Can't we stop them? Isn't there a law?

Actually, now I think about it, there might be a law against stupid names in some places. I believe Brazil enacted such a law a few years ago after some birdbrain tried to name his kids Paragraph and Full Stop.

And then, of course, there's the kid who recently won a court case to have her name changed from Talula Does The Hula From Hawaii...

Parents should be licensed, dontcha think?