Books read in 2012: No. 96 -- Countenance of War

by J.R. Tomlin

Started: Nov. 28
Finished: Dec. 3

Amazon link: Countenance of War, a Historical Novel of Scotland (The Black Douglas Trilogy)

Notes: I've been reading quite a bit of historical non-fiction of late, and I'm still in that kind of mood. However, I've also been in a mood for some sword-slinging fiction. What to do? Oh, what to do? Easy. Turn to some historical fiction, specifically this novel of Scotland.

Mini review: Plenty of war and sword swinging in this one. For fans of the movie "Braveheart," this is what happens after, sort of a "Braveheart: Next Generation," with the focus upon one James Douglas. Plenty of real historical characters from the period make an appearance, and there are more than a few scenes of raids, open warfare, and a fair bit of skulking about. I have some nitpicks with this novel, but nothing too strong. I look forward to reading more about Douglas in some of the author's other books.

What is my best novel?

The question that tops this post is one I face from time to time, though never from writers. Writers understand, it would be nearly impossible to pick out one of our own "best" novels, though some might have a favorite or two. Sometimes the question is a bit different, asking what is my best writing, or what is my best story, but it amounts to about the same idea.

For me, there is no simple way to answer the question.

What is my best novel?

Well, that's hard to say. I think Ghosts of the Asylum is the best plotted of my fantasy novels, but as far as literary value goes, I tend to feel my best novel is probably my more mainstream novel, More Than Kin, which is also my most personal novel, though not autobiographical by any means.

100 Years of Blood is likely my most difficult novel for readers to take, to understand, and it is also the most literary novel I've penned, as well as one of the most boring from a plotting point of view. One of thing's I find somewhat amusing about 100 Years of Blood is that it is, as I've called it, a novel of questions, not of answers, which was intentional on my part because I wanted to write something that made the reader think for themselves instead of just another fast-paced, action-oriented novel that reads like a movie script and spoon feeds everything to the reader. There are enough such novels on the market, in my opinion, and though I'll admit some of them are quite good and entertaining, it is possible to do more in the literary field. As expected, 100 Years of Blood is my least selling novel. I also find some small amusement in that readers who have approached me about this novel always tell me they have figured out what the "secret" is, that that secret is pretty easy to discover. Really? If I made the "secret" all that obvious, it likely isn't the real "secret," wouldn't one think? But it's a novel of questions, and I'm one who prefers to let a piece of literary work (or "art," if I can be so bold as to use the word for my own work) speak for itself and to allow the readers to take away their own conclusions.

For a long while, I felt my short story "Beneath a Persian Sun" was the finest thing I had written, but over the last year or so I've come to find many faults with the tale. I still think it's a good story, but it could stand to be rewritten. Though I'll never do that. From time to time I make minor corrections in all of my works, but I never go back and do a major rewriting once something has been published.

Of late, I've been feeling pretty good about a short story of mine that has yet to be published, titled "Daedalus Reborn." It should be available sometime next year in an anthology, but I won't say anything further about it other than the editor was quite pleased with my little tale.

It's funny for a writer to look back on works he or she penned years in the past. I cringe when I look into my earliest novels, yet those are the ones that sell the best for me. On the other hand, for a while I was somewhat disappointed with my fantasy novel Demon Chains, mainly because I remember feeling burned out from reading and writing so much epic fantasy at the time (I went straight from writing Ghosts of the Asylum into writing Demon Chains, something I normally do not do for fear of becoming burned out on a genre). But as I've looked back, I find Demon Chains isn't so bad of a novel, though I don't think it's my best. Sales for Demon Chains are decent, and usually better than Ghosts of the Asylum.

I've heard other writers say they cannot judge their own works fairly, and I've come to the conclusion there's some truth to this. Though I tend to think of Ghosts of the Asylum as my strongest fantasy novel, it is also the least selling of all my fantasy novels. So, I can't judge.

Which of my novels is my best?

I couldn't tell you.

I can't judge. I don't always love all my children, but I don't hate any of them through and through.

Books read in 2012: No. 95 -- Jesus

by A.N. Wilson

Started: Nov. 24
Finished: Nov. 28

Amazon link: Jesus: A Life

Notes: 'Tis the season, right? Actually, I just finished this author's book on Tolstoy, and it came to my attention that the writer had actually written numerous biographies of historical figures, one of them being this one about Jesus. The approach, apparently, is to look at Jesus as a historical figure and not so much as a religious figure, which I find interesting. However, I'm a bit skeptical of how this author will approach the subject matter of Jesus. Wilson did a strong job of demystifying Tolstoy, so I'm wondering if he will try to do the same with Jesus. Then there is the fact that Wilson, now turned back to Christianity (I won't call him "born again" because that has social, even possibly political implications I'm not sure are appropriate), was an avowed atheist during the writing of this book about Jesus. Frankly, if he spends much of this book trying to debunk Jesus, Christianity, and religion in general, I'm likely to lose interest. It's not that I can't tolerate atheism or skeptical thought and writing, even appreciate them at times, but I find some of today's ardent, vocal atheists (with whom Wilson associates) as annoying as I do the overly rambunctious evangelicals. I simply want to study the subjects for intellectual purposes, not be talked down to by one side or the other. So, I'll see how Wilson handles this book and the historical figure of Jesus.

Mini review: I have to say, I was pleasantly surprised at the route the author took in his exploration of a historical Jesus. I felt he did jump to a few conclusions without evidence, but at least some of the time he would say something along the lines of, "here I am making a guess." He seemed to come down on the side of Jesus being a non-divine entity, a healer and religious figure of much ability and wisdom whose words have been distorted and changed many, many times throughout history. The author gives some evidence for this, but most of it is, in my opinion, not overly strong evidence. I'm not disagreeing with Wilson's conclusions, but I also am not agreeing with them. I think he would understand that, for in the end he portrays Jesus as such a mysterious and complicated figure that even the early church fathers had little idea with whom they had actually been dealing, that Jesus is practically unknowable, at least from a historical point of view. As far as how the Christian churches have dealt with Jesus over the centuries, I find much in agreement with the author, thus I quote Wilson here: "Few of the Christian Churches have ever viewed the teaching of Jesus with anything but contempt. And while Churches might think that they are returning to the teaching of Jesus it will invariably be found that they are pursuing a distorted version of one or two of his ideas while contradicting the others." I agree with those words. I could write a book on such myself, and perhaps some day I will, but for now I will not bore or frustrate the reader with my own thoughts and ideas, which change often enough, anyway. Wilson leans toward a Jesus who wanted others to think for themselves in order to become closer to God, and I tend that way in my own thoughts.

Books read in 2012: No. 94 -- The Repairman

by Harry Harrison

Started: Nov. 22
Finished: Nov. 22

Amazon link: The Repairman

Notes: I've never read anything by this late, popular science fiction author, but I've been hankering for something short and fun to read.

Mini review: Well, this did the job. A nice little fast read. I don't know the original publication date for this story, but it reads like a late 1950s or early 1960s tale, something that could have appeared on television on The Outer Limits or some such show. The repairman character is kind of a jack-of-all-trades fix-it man who has the job of traveling from planet to planet in order to rebuild or repair beacons that help spaceships navigate throughout the universe. In this story, the repairman finds himself dealing with a somewhat intelligent but barbaric lizard race who has turned a beacon into a holy shrine and temple. How to fix the beacon without making the lizard folks angry? That's the gist of the problem, and it was a pretty fun read. If you're ever in the mood for something breezy, or for some old-fashioned science fiction, or both, I can suggest this tale.

Why I have stopped online marketing

In the last year, I have done two blog tours, interviewed more than 50 writers for this blog, gathered more than 2,000 followers on Twitter, and made more than a thousand friends on Facebook. I have also made use of social networking sites such as StumbleUpon, Digg, Reddit, and a handful of other sites. I've made use of Amazon's KDP Select program and various other online marketing tools. I've post at a dozen or more various online boards, a few of them on a regular basis. I've blogged and blogged and blogged, with the posts drawing the most attention (by far) being the ones I wrote about weapons (mostly guns and swords).

During that time, my sales dropped, dropped, continued to drop, bottomed out, tanked out ... whatever you want to call it. Across the board, at all sites where my books and e-books are available.

For a while there, I was fearing I would have to enter the workforce once more, which is not appealing for a variety of factors, a big one being the state of the economy.

Then, a few months back, I decided to hang it all up and to stop my efforts at social marketing and most of my social networking.

Since then, my sales have jumped. Oh, my numbers still aren't as good as they were a year ago, but this month is better than last month which was twice as good as the month before. Across all venues.

So, all that online marketing, it didn't work for me. Obviously.

Social networking and marketing works for some authors, apparently, but for me? Nah.

So, I've given all that up.

Oh, I'll still post on Facebook from time to time, and I might even put up a tweet every once in a while. Maybe I'll even leave a note on an online board from time to time. The difference will be, I'm only going to do so when I truly feel I have something to say or add, and only when I really want to.

This has taken a lot off my mind, and I write more.

Another benefit I've found is that by staying away from most of the boards containing writers, I see and hear a lot less bitching, whining, and conspiracy theories. Which is like balm to my soul. It seems all writers do is whine, especially indie writers. It's a rare thing that I see long-time professionals constantly griping, though it does happen from time to time. But I see this mostly in indie writers (of which I'm one, and yes, I suppose one could argue that I'm whining here ... deal with it).

Any way, if one's sales are not what one wants them to be, I suggest experimentation. Which is what I did. Social marketing works for some. Giving away freebies works for others. Simply writing the next damn story or novel and getting it out works for others (and seems to be working best for me, along with a combination of freebies).

Concerning e-book freebies, I'd like to add that I don't care for them and feel the market is glutted with them, but yes, I have to use them. It seems to be part of my marketing efforts, whether I want them to be or not. I have bills to pay, today, not next year, and the long-term approach didn't seem to work all that well for me, though it is the approach I would prefer to have. Such is life.

Books read in 2012: No. 93 -- Smite Me, Oh Dark One

by Steve Thomas

Started: Nov. 17
Finished: Nov. 17

Amazon link: Smite Me, Oh Dark One

Notes: A lot of my reading of late has seemed kind of heavy, often even dark, so I was thinking I needed a few laughs to lighten things up some. I had heard this fantasy e-book about a dark god of the goblins is pretty funny, so I thought I'd give it and the author a try.

Mini review: Not laugh-out-loud funny, but definitely has an amusing ring to it throughout the tale. Also gives quite a different look at a creation mythology and the supposed villain or dark god of a pantheon and how such relates to traditional fantasy creatures like elves, dwarfs, goblins, etc. The writing here was pretty solid, in my opinion, and fit the subject matter to a T.

Books read in 2012: No. 92 -- Tolstoy

by A. N. Wilson

Started: Nov. 13
Finished: Nov. 24

Amazon link: Tolstoy: A Biography

Notes: For some few years now I've been enthralled by Tolstoy's journey as a writer and his changing views of morality and spirituality during his life. I'm not saying I agree with his viewpoint on everything, nor that I strive to, but I find his thoughts and writing interesting, his non-fiction more so than his fiction. So, for some while I've been looking for a good, popular biography of this famous author, a biography that doesn't get too bogged down by the scholarly approach. From my research, this book appears to fit the bill.

Mini review: I have plenty of quibbles with this book, but I must say, it has opened my eyes to much about Tolstoy and his life. For one thing, the author demystifies the sense of awe that surrounded Tolstoy during his later life and to some extent after his death. I believe there's little doubt Tolstoy was a literary genius, but I think there was also at least a little dementia there, perhaps growing worse with senility as he aged. Tolstoy put enormous emotional, spiritual and somewhat financial pressures on those family members closest to him, but they in turn (especially his wife) apparently made his last few decades no bed of roses. It did not help things that Tolstoy seemed to have an occasional tendency to stir up trouble simply for the sake of being noticed, of drawing attention to himself. All that being said, one of the problems I had with this book was that I felt it focused too much on Tolstoy's later years, especially the last few decades when his life was in turmoil to some extent or another. To be fair, that section of Tolstoy's life is much, much more available to historians and writers and readers than the earlier years because Tolstoy himself and his wife and his family and ... geez, it seems like every person the man ever spent more than a minute with ... wrote out extensive diary notes, letters, official papers, etc. I feel this was a solid book for what I wanted, but now I'm kind of wanting more, my eyes having been opened to Tolstoy, the world he existed in, and others around him.