The Fatman in Briefs: Mind-Body Dichotomy

Will someone please explain to me why so many people believe that smart folks like doctors and researchers are expected to be constantly cold, dispassionate people with no human emotions or traits whatsoever? And why, for that matter, are my fellow nerds subjected to this even if they’ve never in their lives donned a lab coat? Do you really think smart, rational people are secretly robots? Or maybe you think they just don’t like sex?

Well, as a smart, hyper-analytical person myself I’ve decided to do the only logical thing, test this bizarre hypothesis via thoroughly documenting my vigorous experimentation. So far, my studies have indicated that I do in fact, very much enjoy stimulating my wing-wang. Currently, I’m working on a theory which states that there will be an even more pronounced response, including additional Southward bloodflow elevated heart rate,and an increase in the release of certain neruotransmitters if an appropriate second party were to stimulate my wing-wang on my behalf. I’m having a little trouble gathering sufficient data, however, so if any of you fine young fillies would care to join me and verify my findings, I believe you can be accommodated. In return I will gladly assist you in your own studies.


Note: The Fatman is clinically insane and cannot be held accountable for his ramblings. We here at Crewd Philosophy do not condone his thinly veiled innuendo. We feel innuendo needs no veil. It's already an innuendo and not dirty talk. What more do you puritanical boogey men want from us? Also, please don't sue me. This was nothing more than an amusing little hyperbole to prove a point.

Don't Call Me Shirley

I just shaved my beard. I know that means all of jack squat to you folks, but it means a lot to me. I grow that beard when YOU CAN’T STOP ME. I wore it in China and those were the best times of my life. See that tiny little picture of me over there? That’s me. Hangin’ out a boat in Guilin. Good times.

Shame the hair’s so light it barely shows up on camera. Anyway, because virtually everything I do at the McVeigh agency was remote, I had no need to shave it, and it can’t really be made kempt since it’s long, wiry hair that appears primarily on the throat. Or as I call it, a scraggly hobo chin-fro. Unfortunately, the search for a full time job has not gone well. I know enough supervisors, HR folks, and other people in my position to know that if a big publisher posts one job, they’ll get five hundred applicants within the week. No foolin’. They only want to bring in three for an interview. Only one of those will get the job, and they probably don’t need to search more than five or six to find three appropriately overqualified people. Meaning your chances of even landing an interview are literally something like one in two hundred. And so, although it pains me, I have decided to go to a staffing agency and look for any white collar gig I can find. I know, I know. What happened to all that Messianic, God-Complex, save the world through other people’s words stuff. Well, you can call this pussing out if you want. I prefer to think of it as a strategic retreat. I have not yet begun to edit!

If you think I’m being whiny about it, check out this Rejectionist post. Painfully accurate. Also, a picture of a shirtless man. If she was trying to rub my failures and inadequacies in my face, mission accomplished. Women are so shallow. Don't you realize that it's inner "hunkiness" that matters? Oh well. Here’s a true story for you- a few weeks ago I applied to a literary agency for a full time job. Nothing out of the ordinary, you know. Just same old. Virtually none of the jobs I applied to got back to me at all. This one actually sent me a note apologizing that they’d filled it that morning (well holy shit, seeing as how it’d only been posted the day before!). I thought it was hilarious. Most publishers care so little about applicants at this point that salaried jobs are handed to interns, and assistant editors are called “editorial assistants” so they can be paid 10,000 dollars less. Leave it to a literary agent to send every single applicant a rejection letter. I feel special now. Also: Rejected. Remember how I told you guys that sending a query letter is a lot like applying for a job? If this experience has taught me anything, it's that it's way easier to be on the other side of the letter.

On a totally unrelated note: here’s some stuff I’ve been wanting to show alls y’all.
Kindle with “special offers” - Seems like a terrible idea.

Yoho, yoho, a writer’s life for me.

Gender equality amongst dumbasses.

The situation from the front to the back.

The Fatman Weighs in: Osama Bin Laden

Subtle as a bomb and fat enough for two, the Fatman proudly proclaims “my application for membership in the Liberal Media Conspiracy has been approved.”

Okay peeps, let me apologize for how long this has been in coming. I didn’t want to interrupt literary talk just to hit you with POLITICS. And yet, I find that I must. I beg your forgiveness, and your VOTES.

Anyway, as I’m sure you’re all aware, a week ago now Osama Bin Laden, apparently the central most figure of the terrorist organization Al Qaeda was finally found and killed. Rejoicing ensued amongst many Americans. Maybe it’s just me, but I’m not all that thrilled about the whole thing.

Leaving the moral questions about whether or not it’s right to be happy that someone else is dead, at the same time people here are celebrating the victory, other terrorists are vowing revenge. It’s astonishing that so many people think that in the long run, this event really changes anything. Even more astonishing is how this works on the conceptual level. And you know what? Maybe it is me. Maybe I’m in some sort of crazy upside down world and I’m the one that doesn’t make sense. But in general, fighting fire with fire results in a larger fire, not a smaller one.

Now, I don’t mean to sound like we should be calling up terrorists and having tea and biscuits as we discuss our mutual grievances. And I’ve got no problem with the concept of a death penalty etc. (which is not the same thing as being glad that it gets used) but here’s the problem as I see it-

“They’re a representation of all their people and trying to reason with them is like reasoning with snakes and scorpions. They’re mindless savages and this is the only solution.” A direct quote from my father, a historian and very smart man (with a distinct tendency to warp facts to fit his world view, and who, like as not was parroting Bill O’Reilley or someone.)

One of my biggest problems with the “war on terror” since its conception was that ultimately it was going to foster exactly this attitude. That before long people start thinking that the entire region is full of savages, and more broadly the religion. Therefore, perpetual violence is the only answer and we’re justified in doing it because of that same savagery. Doesn’t that strike you as more than a little reminiscent of the message conveyed by their own extremists? If we sound the same and we act the same, then by our own definition, we are *also* savages, a paradox which brings all our reasoning down around our ears.

I’m a carrot and a stick guy. I know there have been some attempts. Building schools and hospitals and stuff. Carrots are good things. I don’t deny that the stick is necessary too, but I put that love of history my father demanded of me to use. I sat back and I said “By gum. 75 years ago Dr. Seuss himself was drawing political cartoons depicting the Japanese as irrational, buck-toothed, brutal hive-minded fiends beyond redemption. 60 years ago, which is less than a generation later, they were an ally and they’ve continued to be our ally since and we’ve only become closer to them over time.” I guess what I’m trying to say is that declaring categorically that a group of people are unreasonable or violent or untrustworthy or irredeemable is kind of ludicrous and it isn’t helping anyone. Quite the reverse, that mentality is at the center of all the other conflicts in that region. And many in Africa. And India. And what makes those conflicts so brutal is that it’s all backed by religion. When God is on your side, you’re justified in anything. Even the more even handed folks seem to “concede” that they’re extremists but generally still blame Islam itself without understanding or concern for the fact that Islam is virtually identical to Christianity and Judaism from a doctrinal point of view. If we start reveling in the violence, if we think in absolutes, or if we let it become about religion, whether it’s ours or theirs or both, the war will never end.

The Dirty Truth

If you were to poke around, such as by reading the excellent book Editors on Editing you’d be ahead of the game in understanding the publishing business and how editors think. I can say from experience though that there’s something they don’t tell you. Whenever an editor is interviewed or tasked to write down what they think, or their process, or how they got into the business, they always stress certain things. A love of books as a medium. An understanding of your target audience. A rapport with your authors. And of course all that boring mundane stuff that you need talent and training for. An eye for ideas, an ear for dialogue, and an obsessive nature to fix comma splices and shit. But that’s as far as the editors go. Oooh, they’re obsessive. Scary. That’s right up there with the job interviewee saying their biggest flaw is that they’re a perfectionist. Please. ‘Sides, that stuff gets foisted off on the copy editors. Editor editors note it, fix some of it, but they’re concerned with fun stuff. Development. Plot. Characterization. Consistency of concept and character. The real nitty gritty- double checking the time line, fact checking, when to use a dash and when to use a semi colon and all those boring jobs are left to the copy editors. I mean, should I have used a dash there? Fucked if I know. I could surely figure it out. But proof reading? Man, that is soooooo beneath me.

Of course, I say this a bit facetiously. Copy editors have a tough job and they work their asses off. Also, if you ask them, the best editors have some experience in copy editing. What I’m driving at is that the great strength of editors is also their great weakness. Consequently, they don’t want to share it for fear of looking weak, but with the industry as it is, I say editors should keep it transparent. It will only improve rapport with authors and show people just what it is you really do and why you work eighty hours a week.

The truth is simple: Editors have a god complex. Yes, every single one of them. And anyone who wants to edit too. Indeed, in my experience dealing with editors of books, trade journals and my professors when I got my MS in publishing (as well as my classmates) most people with an interest in editing are just like you, the author. Since I can’t (or more accurately I probably shouldn’t) speak specifics about others I’ll just use myself as an example. I decided I wanted to be a writer at the age of five. I built up a writer’s mentality, the way I thought it was meant to be. Keep your eyes open. Never know what could make good story fodder. Listen to the way people really speak. Never take criticism personally. Be prepared to fight tooth and nail for or against something for logical, consistent, demonstrable reasons.

Before I knew it, even though I couldn’t honestly say I liked my own writing or thought very highly of my chances of ever being published, I had classmates and coworkers hunting me down to edit their stuff. Short stories. Novels. Novellas. Comics. Screen plays. Stage plays. Even research papers. I’ve actually edited a couple of award winning theses, believe it or not.

The point is, when I tried to train myself to write, I wound up teaching myself more than anything about editing. I learned to like it. This is how editors are. They want respect because that gives them power. Power to influence your work. Their ability to influence means they can make things better. Making them better gets respect. See? A beautiful circle, isn’t it? It’s really very messianic. You know how many writers start out thinking they’ll save the world through their words? Yeah. That’ll happen. And editors certainly love to disabuse people of that notion. You’d think editors would be the authors that wised up, who were too pragmatic for that. You’d be wrong. An editor is a writer who never gave up on saving the world. And you’re right that they’re pragmatic, which is why they’re torn and ultimately realize that one book, nor ten or however many they might conceivably be able to pen is not going to save anything. So instead they hedge bets, diffusing their abilities into hundreds of books as editor rather than a handful as author, always on the search for that world shaking perfect book.

Consider my Eyebrows Raised Part IV

17) Apologies. I know I’ve said it before, but they drive me nuts. A sense of humor and a basic knowledge of the process helps. I neither need nor want authors to demean themselves, but there have been some amusing iterations of salutations such as “To Whatever Poor Bastard Has to Read This,” or lines in the query humorously acknowledging trouble they’ve had being placed, time they spent in the industry themselves, or why they’ve suddenly switched from technical manuals to books for eight year olds (which is more common than you’d think.) Again, played right it shows you’ve got a leg up. But never, ever apologize. Seriously. Don’t. Thanks are good. Apologies, not so much.

18) Ms. Crew- So now I’m the bearded lady, am I? Well, why not? Probably more money to be made in the circus than in publishing anyway.

19) Let’s talk lengths real fast. Here’s what the average book SHOULD be: 20,000 for MG, 40,000 for YA and 60,000 for Adult. Each CAN be about twice as long and still be relatively safe. I mean, any of you guys ever read Stephen King’s book on how to write? I didn’t, but I was there during the lunch break when he wrote it. Seriously though, one of his rules is a good one. Whatever you write, you should expect, indeed, you should self enforce a mandatory 10% reduction in word count after the fact. And if you’re Stephen King, I’d recommend a 30% reduction because GODDAMN. Anyway, I can’t really give you a magic cut off point, but going more than double my rough estimate of averages is VERY bad. Can you sell a 150,000 word adult novel? Yeah. But your agent will want to cut 10%. And the editor will want to cut 10% again after that. And that’s a lot of work. You’d improve your chances if you did it yourself. Can you sell a 75,000 word Middle Grade? Probably not. You may look at like, Harry Potter or Scott Westerfield and say “but they did it!” except that their books are targeted essentially at the 12-14 market. Regular middle grade is more like 8-11. Also, they’re established. Also, those books aren’t as big as you think they are. They may have page counts like giant adult novels, but the text is big, the leading is big (until later in HP when the books got so long on account of Rowling’s absolute refusal to edit that they had to shrink the text so the books were small enough to bind without going to specialized printers who normally do stuff like encyclopedias) the margins are big, chapter headings are big, and there are illustrations. Is Behemoth by Westerfield 500 pages? Yes. How many words is it? Less than 75K, I’d wager, and he’s already a big star. Like it or not, you can’t do what he does. It’s actually really simple math: the shorter your manuscript the less work it is to edit- when you edit, your agent, and your editor. The shorter it is when it’s done, the cheaper it is to print, which makes for better margins, which makes for happier editors. All other things being equal, when presented with two good books: One 80,000 word adult novel and one 130,000 word novel, which will they pick? The one that costs two dollars per copy to print or the one that costs three? And when you put this all together, remember that editors spend most of their time in meetings. The editing gets done at home. 50 hours a week is light in publishing and editors routinely work double shifts. One at the office, the other nights and weekends. Shorter books mean the editor can give what’s there more attention. Also, it makes them happy since they’ll have more free time. This circumstance also applies to many agents. Do you want your agent and editor to be happy? Yes. Why? Because then you can sell your next book more easily.

Consider my Eyebrows Raised part III

11) “I’m querying you because of your deep interest in spiritual literature.” And lo, Rumbling down from the Heavens and spilling across the mountains like an avalanche came a tumultuous boom, whose echoes rang for nigh upon three fortnights, sending rejections raining down across the land. The Book of Crew: Chapter 3, Verse six, lines 43-48.

12) Writing about native Americans- this is just an observation, but apparently 99% of American Indians are descended from the Cherokee and they’re all named Walker. I can understand if you don’t want to do Navajo because it’ll put you in competition with Tony Hillerman, and he’s an Edgar owning, Grand Master of Mystery, and not even death can take that from him. But seriously. No one wants to write about Iroquois? Or Algonquians or anything?

13) Would you please, please, PLEASE stop calling it a “fiction novel”?

14) What I like to see: “Dear Mr. McVeigh (and Mr. Crew),I will not start this query with biographical information. Seriously, I won't. I'll take the highly unorthodox route of starting with my logline. Oh, it's too late for that now. Damn.”

15) Stop underlining everything. First of all, underlining stuff in a query letter looks unprofessional and like you don’t trust us to be able to pick out the important information. Besides, people who do this underline every third word which actually just makes the letter hard to read and it *usually* indicates a similar deficiency in the writing wherein the author either doesn’t know how to stress what they want to stress naturally or has no faith in their readers. That’s not a good thing.

16) Referencing Asia. Some of it is coincidence. Some people do it on purpose to get my attention. For the latter, bear in mind that I have very little power. I’m a standard, run of the mill assistant. Boss trusts me, but that makes little difference. Admittedly I’ve never tried super hard to pitch him on anything- we're so full I just give it the thumbs up and let him decide after that. Either way, know that it catches my eye. So like the mythology thing, you better do it right or it’s going to count against you. Seriously, when you start mixing up surnames with given names, I’m disappointed. And maybe it’s just me, but goddamn. You know how the “nerd” explanation of the unexplainable is that “a wizard did it?” (Yeah, thanks a lot, The Simpsons) well more and more often I’ve been seeing thrillers and spy novels…and conversations with living, breathing human beings where they will, with straight faces and absolute conviction just say “The Chinese did it.” Who hacked our networks? THE CHINESE. Who sold missiles to X? THE CHINESE. Who released that sex tape of the first lady? THE CHINESE. Who makes delicious, greasy take-out? THE CHINESE. They’re like gremlins just waiting in (on?) the wings for a chance to tear out your engines, apparently. Who knew? Funny how their Gremlin properties never manifested in any of my classes. Or the four months I studied there.
However, when there are such obvious, defining characteristics of someone you absolutely KNOW is going to see your thing, it actually doesn’t hurt to personalize on those grounds. In my case, for instance, it works well if you say that you too studied/worked in an Asian country, or something along those lines. Plus it means you can sneak it in without it being truly relevant. Played right, this can help a lot. Played wrong, it can hurt. But even a good writer’s chances are bad at best, so, IF you know who reads the queries and IF you have something in common, go for it. Just remember that it counts against you double if you say something stupid.

Consider my Eyebrows Raised Pt. II

8) One interesting thing that some people have tried with some success and others have totally killed their query by screwing up: writing the query letter as the main character from the book. The upshot- makes the letter stand out, seem more interesting, can itself be a testament to your abilities as a writer. The downsides- makes including biographical information difficult, can be confusing.

9) On a somewhat sad note: Highly capable professionals, even writers of other sorts of material who want to write children’s fiction. This happens A LOT. Teachers and lawyers are the most common culprits. Journalists will usually look to write books for adults. But technical writers and college professors also go for the kids books. You might think it’s because it’s “easy” to write MG books, but that’s not really true. And in my experience, many of them really have a love of it. Or at least, they love the idea of it. Not so long ago I got a proposal for a 45,000 word MG (little too long) from an active anthropologist whose book (which he thought was best suited to 9 year olds) takes place during the days of the Roman Occupation of England and their bloody battles with the Scots. Uh. Oh, and he planned to include maps, charts, and references. Because being an anthropologist by training, this is die-hard realism in historical fiction. I’m pretty interested, actually. Nine year olds? Probably not so much. If you’re out there dude, consider re-writing it as a YA. And be sure your hero is a teenager. Otherwise you face

10) Bizarre ages. A book aimed at 10 year olds should generally star characters no less than 9 and no older than 12. Why? Because that’s your audience. Okay, fine. The man who turned me to writing (and taught me how to raise my eyebrow quizzically- if you can identify this author from this description alone, you deserve a prize) wrote books for that age group that I read at five. But I’m awesome. And notably, I continued to read them until I was 12 because for God’s sake, I was a child. I liked reading light, goofy things about KIDS. YA books? Same deal. It’s possible, but very, very hard to write a book aimed at the YA market with a 24 year old protagonist. Consider 18 or 19 your practical limit. You can write an adult novel starring someone in their late teens, but these will usually have the air of a bildungsroman to them. It can get complicated of course. What about YA Adult crossovers? I would say: consider your PRIMARY audience. If it’s actually a YA that might appeal to adults, you’re talking about a cast primarily consisting of teens a la Harry Potter. If you’re talking about, say, Light Fantasy which is what I used to transition to adult books (and the reason I still have a fondness for genre fiction despite the majority of it being verbose, derivative and insubstantial) go ahead and make them anywhere from late teens on.