Will Australia's Book Industry Burn? I'm Not So Sure.

So, I'm going to talk with you about an issue here in Australia that has been brought back into the spotlight this week and it concerns possible changes to parallel import restrictions and copyright as they apply to the Australian publishing industry. Some argue that the changes will destroy the industry here.

It's a little more complicated than that.

A body here in Australia - The Productivity Commission - tabled a report recommending a relaxation of parallel import restrictions and a change to the length of time a copyright can be held by an individual writer. The Federal government noted in its response to the report that 'the removal of PIRs will ‘make local booksellers more competitive with international suppliers, promote lower prices for consumers and ensure the timely availability of titles’.

Also highlighted in the reform proposals was a relaxation of the time frame intellectual property right of an author could be asserted - meaning that, after 15 years, an author loses the intellectual right to their published work. It follows that, a previously published work - without the protection of its authors copyright - could then be taken up by anyone and the author can do nothing about it.

There are two distinct issues here.

I have a problem with the parallel import protections as they stand currently. I am an Australian author, writing Australian stories but I happen to have a Canadian publisher. Now, presently it is not easy (though not impossible) for me to bring my titles into Australia for sale in Australian bookstores. The costs are considerable.

(Comfortable in the club - author Tom Keneally. Image credit: Australian Financial Review/Paul Jones).

The way I see it, the current parallel import restrictions limit new and emerging Australian voices from having their stories published and distributed widely at the expense of more widely known authors and more established publishing houses here in Australia. As it stands now, parallel import restrictions favor the few at the expense of the many - which is why you see the likes of Peter Carey, Tom Keneally, Richard Flanagan and Mem Fox being so vocal in their opposition to these changes. Parallel Import Restrictions amount to a protection racket.

A relaxation of these parallel import restrictions would make it easier for Australian voices to be heard - not only here but overseas. They can pursue publishing agreements with global publishing houses and import their titles for sale here in Australia more economically than they can currently.

(Federal treasure Scott Morrison. Image credit - Sydney Morning Herald. photography: Tim Bauer).

Now, the copyright changes that are being touted are another matter entirely. It is frightening to me that our intellectual property rights are being placed on a chopping block by legislators who have no appreciation of the creative process of writing and the amount of dedication it requires for a writer to will a story into being. In 2012 article for the Sydney Morning Herald, Federal treasurer Scott Morrison remarked “I don’t read international fiction. I just don’t relate to it. I’m interested in our stories.” Scott Morrison has no insight - and therefore no right to contribute to the debate on copyright.

That my intellectual property right on my titles can be deemed null and void after 15 years is nothing short of horrifying. I have bled for my work. Toiled in isolation. Wrought Australian stories about Australian people into being and to be told that, after 15 years, those stories are no longer mine...

Parallel Import Restrictions and Intellectual Property Rights are a vexed issue when thrown in together. They have the potential to pit authors against authors in an industry that is already struggling just to be viable. Already there is a split in the in the industry on the way forward at time when unity and a common position needs to be adopted. A conversation about these issues separately needs to occur.

The Federal government intends to implement changes to these laws in August, 2016.

DFA.

Being A Bookish Tart - Dean & Georgina Talk Writing.

Last weekend, I braved a dodgy internet connection between myself, here in Adelaide, and the delightfully delicious Georgina Penney who was broadcasting from Aberdeen, Scotland, so that I could participate in Georgina's "Bookish Tarts Podsnuggle". 

In a roughly 20 minute interview, Georgina and I discussed writerly topics, including how my blog became my first novel (The Hambledown Dream), how my "Close Talker" tendencies have nearly gotten me a punch in the face and why I am drawn to strong, female characters in my writing. 

Not only that, but Georgina and her regular partner in debauchery, Rhyll Biest, kick on after my chat with a toe curling discussion about Toaster Porn. You have *Got* to stick around for that one.

Ours was a fantastic conversation and it can be heard now via the Soundcloud app which is available for Apple & Android devices, as well as PC.

Here's the direct link;

The Bookish Tarts Episode 24: Dean Mayes & Taken By The Toaster.  

The Bookish Tarts is fabulously racy podcast hosted by chick lit writer Georgina Penney and erotica and contemporary romance writer, Rhyll Biest.

DFA. 

Unrestrained by Rhyll Biest is available now.  (Click Image).

The Recipient - Update No. 3: Contract Day.

No matter how many times I've done it, putting the ink on a publishing contract remains a special moment for me.

It's a recognition of the work you have done so far, a nod that says "everything you have done is worth it." 

I wrote recently that we writers work in isolation. It's easy to lose perspective on what you are trying to achieve. You don't see things objectively. You often doubt yourself and the project. You fret that your effort is not enough.

Penning your signature on a document like this, gives so much reinforcement. It spurs you on.

While the hardest part of willing a story to life has been achieved, there is still more to do...

But you do it with a fresh sense of confidence.

DFA. 

The Recipient - Update No. 2: Revision 6.

After a while, it becomes apparent how treacherous revising and editing can be for an author. Looking at the same words on the same page in the same document over and over again can lead one towards losing perspective. The words blur into one another - as does the plot, the characters and their motivations - and you can't look at the document objectively anymore. And yet, as I've said before, this is the one part of the writing process that I profess to enjoying the most.

Draft 5 of The Recipient - the draft that went into my publisher - was returned to me a little over a fortnight ago, and I was excited (I know, right!) to see digital "sticky notes" plastered all over it from my Vancouver based publisher, Central Avenue. In short, while there was a lot of work to do on the manuscript structurally, the core story was sound and the characters were well cast. 

Over a couple of video conferences, Michelle and I discussed the notes, numerous minor tweaks to the manuscript and a couple of more significant ones and in the course of those discussions, she really helped to defragment my objective software and reboot my system. The subsequent round of revisions - which I've dubbed Revision 6 - allowed me to approach the manuscript with fresh eyes.

image credit alittlepieceofeverything.

So often, we write in isolation, without anyone to bounce ideas off. The first stage of my edits involving my beta readers was a great first step in getting a feel from a set of readers who came to the story cold. Their individual suggestions and comments helped me to refine the story, address glaring plot holes and gauge their reaction. But it was only the first step in the journey. Before long, I found myself back in the place where I was struggling with my objectivity. The process I am in now with my publisher Michelle has been my savior. With Michelle's astute eye for both the technical and literary aspects of story telling, I am in a space that is much more focused and I am relishing it. 

Late last week, Revision 6 went in for review by Michelle and the editing team. I feel confident that the story is pretty much perfect. Now, the polishing process begins. We'll go line by line, ensuring that we've eliminated any and all grammatical errors and we'll review the document after that to make sure that there isn't anything else to add or subtract. 

We've also begun to discuss the cover art for the novel. While these discussions are at their very early stages, we've already hit upon some ideas that really excite us. The eventual design will help guide the marketing effort we plan for the book.

So there is a lot happening, even if it doesn't seem like a lot is happening.

Stay tuned. 

DFA.

On The Consideration Of A Paid Review

Yesterday - being Monday here in Australia - I submitted my 2012 novel "Gifts of the Peramangk" to, arguably, two of the most recognized book journals in the United States - Kirkus Reviews and the San Francisco Book Review.

Both these journals offer, respectively, a paid service whereby I as an author can submit a published work to them, pay a fee and have my book reviewed by a professional reviewer which can then be published in their respective publications and used as promotional material by myself going forward. 

The catch with these service is that there is no guarantee that the review I receive for "Gifts of the Peramangk" will be a positive one, though I can choose - as a part of the conditions of each program - not to have the review published at all. 

Last year, I took the step of starting a crowd funding campaign via Pozible in order to raise funds to submit my novel to both publications. People could pledge to the campaign for a reward (of which I offered quite a few) or they could simply invest in the campaign. The campaign was successful and I did raise the funds fairly quickly. 

The programs offered by both Kirkus and SFBR have, as I have already mentioned, a fee attached to them and, in the case of Kirkus at least, the fee is considerable. To receive a review of my novel by Kirkus, with an 8 week turn around, costs $425(USD), while SFBR charges $125(USD). In the case of SFBR - if the review is negative, I can opt to take up an offer of advertising in their journal rather than the publication of the review. 

As part of crowd funding campaign, I made the commitment that I would proceed with the publication of the reviews in both journals regardless of the outcome - which is a significant commitment to make, given that the reviews in both cases could well be negative. What I am banking on, I guess, is the body of opinion that is already out there around "Gifts of the Peramangk" which is widely positive. 

So you may be asking - why then, submit to Kirkus and SFBR at all?

Both journals are considered to be major sources of learned opinion by all sorts of people involved in the publishing and book industry. Careers have been made (and in some cases broken) on the strength of opinion provided by these two journals alone. While I don't believe that their opinions about "Gifts of the Peramangk" will necessarily propel it into the publishing stratosphere, their stated commitment to providing a professional, industry recognized review makes me believe that they are both worth a shot. Garnering reviews from reputable sources is becoming harder and harder for authors like myself. Mainstream publications here in Australia avoid pretty much anything that hasn't been produced by a major publishing house. Believe me, months and months of working the phone, writing (yes writing) letters, physically visiting newspapers and magazines here in Australia have taught me that. Kirkus and SFBR at the very least, offer an alternative. 

Of course, I regard "Gifts of the Peramangk" as a significant literary achievement on my part. I believe in the novel and the work I poured into it. So, I'm approaching this with a certain amount of self belief. I don't want to sit by and pass on a chance for success if I can do something to help it succeed. 

The other question you may be asking is - is it unethical to pay for a review?

Believe me, I have mulled over this particular question a lot have looked through the body of opinion regarding the ethics of paying for a review. I opened up a veritable hornets nest over at Kindle Boards last year by posting about my intentions in order to see what the mood was. Though I won't get into the details here - you can click over and view the shit storm that I created subsequently. It wasn't very encouraging. 

Seeking a more level headed opinion, I had a number of conversations last year with best selling author and social media consultant Rachel Thompson - an extremely level head - who distilled the argument down for me succinctly by pointing out that both journals carry considerable weight in terms of the reviews they provide, that you as the author cannot influence the outcome of the review despite paying the required fee and both journals are required to review based on a set of guidelines that are regarded as industry standard. In my mind, the ethics here are clear. 

So, the submissions being in, all I can do now is patiently wait. Both journals have provided me with a tentative date of April 7th when the reviews will be available. At that time, I'll assess them both and plan for their release. 

Am I nervous? Of course I am. 

Am I committed to them? Yes. 

DFA.

Broken Pieces by Rachel Thompson - Available Now.