Are The Blacklist Writers Sexist?

by L.J. Sellers, author of provocative mysteries & thrillers

I’ve been watching The Blacklist because I’m a James Spader fan from way back. The show has a variety of plot-hole problems, which I mostly ignore because it's fast and engaging. But recently an episode irritated me so much, it made really dislike the character. But it’s not her fault, of course.

I’m talking about the episode in which the FBI’s secret location is attacked by a group of machine-gun wielding thugs who want to capture or kill Reddington. In one scene Agent Keen encounters an evildoer who has just murdered several agents—and she has seen the bodies. She demands that he drop his weapon, then punches him in the face. He conveniently falls down and she walks away. Without cuffing him or taking his weapon or anything. WTF?

First, it wasn’t rational human behavior. The bastard would have killed her in a heartbeat, so the only move to ensure survival is to shoot him dead. No conversation necessary. It also went against law enforcement training. They train for shooter/siege scenarios, and once they’ve determined the person in front of them isn’t an innocent bystander, which takes only a second, they shoot. Their job is to protect human beings—citizens or other law enforcement personnel—from imminent danger, and they are trained to shoot to kill in those circumstances. I've volunteered to practice with law enforcement groups in those scenarios, so I've seen the training. They even handcuff dead suspects.

I know Keen killed one of the invaders earlier, but she also waited and gave him too many chances, including standing way too damn close. Law enforcement training also teaches cops and agents to keep twenty feet back from an armed suspect until their weapon is on the ground and kicked away. (Which doesn't make for good video, I know.) Not only was the whole scene stupid and unreal, Agent Keen has been reprimanded for that kind of bullshit before.

 But she’s just a character, an actress doing her job. I blame the writers. More important, I think it’s sexist. Would they write that kind of crap for a male agent? I don’t think so. Male protagonists are allowed to shoot the bad guys. Sometimes, we see a male lead knock people out, take their weapons, and secure them somehow. But that’s usually in a milder one-on-one scenario. In the case of an assault on an FBI building with multiple shooters, with several agents already murdered, I don’t believe writers would have forced a male agent to act so weak and stupid.

I’m not going to give up on the show—because  I still love James Spader—but I am going to write the producers and let them know what I think. For the record, the female FBI agents in my stories would have shot the man dead, as would have I. What do you think? Was it sexist and stupid? Or just lazy and stupid?

Boycotting Agent-Focused Conferences

by L.J. Sellers, author of provocative mysteries & thrillers

Every year I think about going to Thrillerfest, but this time my reason for not attending is different. In the past, it was always a financial issue—an expensive conference and an expensive flight. But now that I can afford it, I've decided to pass for ideological reasons that recently become more pressing. The short answer: Agentfest, a sub-conference within the larger gathering.

Last year, I was invited to teach a workshop at Willamette Writers conference, and I turned it down because the conference is focused on writers pitching to agents. Agentfest is the same thing: hopeful authors trying to sign contracts with agents. This choice, of course, is for the author to make, but I can't, in good conscience, support a program that encourages new authors to sign with agents. (For established authors, it's a different decision.)

I don’t have anything against agents personally. But their role in publishing has become mostly obsolete. Yet, the 15% forever commission hasn’t changed. What has changed is how they earn it. Now many agents are helping their clients self-publish by performing tasks that authors can do for themselves or contract to professionals for a flat fee.

This practice seems unscrupulous. And that perception has been supported by recent blog revelations. Barry Eisler posted about the nasty reaction of agents to his self-publishing talk, where he sought to empower writers with specific information about the changes in publishing.

And David Gaughran recently blogged about the pitiful performance of Argo Navis, a digital distributor favored by agents who steer their clients into those contracts. Agents talk about how the Argo Navis distributor is a guarantee of quality independent publishing because it only deals with books submitted by agents. Yet, according to Gaughran's research, Argo Navis books don't sell. Hundreds of real indie authors sell more books in an hour than agent-supported Argo Navis clients do in a month. And the distributor takes 30%...in addition to the 15% paid to agents and the 30% to the retailer.

I would discourage authors from signing with an agent who makes self-publishing deals. I encourage authors to take charge of their careers and self-publish…in a way that allows them to keep most of the profits.

So for me, it doesn't feel right to attend—and spend money on—a conference that matches new authors with agents who may steer them into bad financial decisions, which, in my opinion, includes most contracts with traditional publishing as well. Especially now that big publishing owns the most notorious author-scamming vanity presses out there. 

The main reader part of the Thrillerfest conference takes place on the last two days, and it would be great fun to hang out with thriller writers and readers. But spending my money on Thrillerfest indirectly supports Agentfest, and I just can't do it.

I would love to see Thrillerfest drop the agent portion of the conference. Many of the conference founders are now self-publishing, and it surprises and disappoints me that they still offer the old model to new writers. I hope it's only a matter of time before agent-based conferences become obsolete. They're a disservice to authors.

Readers, writers: What do you think?

Should I query agents or self-publish?

By Andrew E. Kaufman, author of psychological thrillers

As soon as I started selling a lot of books, I also started getting a lot of emails from other authors, and one of the most frequently asked questions (besides "what’s your secret?") was whether they should self-publish or query agents.

I’m never quite sure how to answer that question, because it seems like an extremely personal choice--kind of like, “Should I go to college or try a trade school?” Only a qualified counselor can help answer that question, and they need a lot of information to help you make an informed decision.

Besides, what’s right for one person certainly isn’t right for the next, and I always feel hesitant to give advice when it seems so subjective. I don’t know an author’s circumstances, so it’s difficult to help them decide. I’m not an expert; I’m just another author, and all I can really do is speak from my own experience, which really is just one perspective of many.

But having said that, I did learn a few things along the way, and I’m always happy and willing to talk about them, because I know how frustrating and heartbreaking it can be to have something you’re proud of and then struggle to find others who will feel the same enthusiasm.

First, there are some questions you should ask yourself, ones I asked too, that helped me choose my own path. Here are a few of them:

What stage are you at in your process?

Have you already gone the querying route and found little success? If so, self-publishing may very well be a good option.

I tried for traditional publishing at first, because back then it was the only option available. I wanted more than anything to find an agent and publisher, but after receiving hundreds of rejections, I gave up. Then, once e-publishing (specifically, the advent of the Kindle) came along, I decided to try that. 

Within a few years, I was selling a lot of books, making a nice living, and most important, was doing what I loved. Even better, I was the one in control. It was a great feeling, and suddenly having a publisher didn’t seem to matter much at all. 

As it turned out, I was eventually approached by agents asking if I was interested in representation and ended up going with one of them. So in the long-run I ended up exactly where I'd been trying to go in the first place—I just found a different door. 

How important is it to have a publisher’s name behind your work instead of your own?

Once I found success as an author (which incidentally, is a relative word, and in my opinion, should be defined by much more than sales) I realized that having a publisher’s name behind my work paled in comparison to the strides I was making on my own. Were there people still snubbing their noses at me? Absolutely. Did it bother me? Not so much because I knew I was achieving exactly what my “legitimate” counterparts were. I was just doing it in a different way.

For some, it’s still important to be associated with a traditional publisher, but I believe that’s quickly changing, and eventually, it won’t much matter. For me, getting my books into readers' hands was all I wanted, and now I'm doing that.

Are you willing to give up certain things?

If you go the traditional route you will make sacrifices—at least if you’re just starting out—and depending on which publisher you go with, the degree will vary. For one, you won’t have as much creative control over your work. Largely speaking, most traditional publishers have the final word over the content of your work (including your cover). As an indie author, it’s all up to you. For some, that's a big bonus.

Same thing goes for your profit margin. Being an indie author gives you far more leeway in this area. KDP currently offers a 70% profit on gross sales (for books $2.99 and up). Being with a traditional publisher will likely get you far less.

For some, this is extremely important. For others, not so much. So you should ask yourself how much control you’re willing to hand over to a publisher, and even more important, understand the terms of your agreement before you sign with them.

Can an agent help you reach your goals?

First of all, what are your goals? This was a question I struggled with before making my decision to finally work with an agent. When mine approached me, my first question was, how will I benefit from this relationship? His answer was that he wanted to help take my career to the next level, which made sense because that was also my own goal. Right now, he manages the foreign, audio, and television/film rights for my work, as well as those for U.S. publishing. I’ve recently signed a lucrative deal, which I hope—at least from my perspective—will indeed take my career to the next level.

The thing to keep in mind is that whatever decision you do make, you should be fully aware that this industry is changing at breakneck speed, and you have to think on your feet. What works for me—or anyone else—is likely going to change sooner rather than later. Do I think going indie is a great way to go? Absolutely. Do I think it’s a way to open doors that were previously closed off? You bet.

Do I think it’s the best route for you?

That’s for you to decide.

Andrew E. Kaufman is the author of The Lion, the Lamb, the Hunted and While the Savage Sleeps, both Amazon top 100 bestsellers this year. His books are the most borrowed, independently published books in the Kindle Owners' Lending Library, and his combined sales have reached well into the six-figure mark. He is represented by Scott Miller, Executive Vice President of Trident Media Group in New York. For more info about his work, please visit his website at: www.andrewekaufman.com

No Longer Looking for Agents

by L.J. Sellers, author of provocative mysteries & thrillers

Last weekend I was the keynote speaker at an e-publishing workshop in Ashland, Oregon, where I also participated in panel discussions. The author on the panel with me kept talking about agents and publishers and what they could do for writers—as a counterpoint to my indie focus. I finally looked at the group of hopeful writers and asked, “How many of you are looking for agents?” Not a single one indicated they were. 

This is a radical change from just a year ago, when so many aspiring writers I interacted with were still “holding out for a traditional contract.” Those Southern Oregon writers, of course, don’t necessarily represent authors everywhere, but I think more and more writers are finally realizing that querying agents is a colossal waste of time and that publishers really aren’t necessary, and in fact, may be counterproductive to a successful novelist career.

This is not true for everyone, but then, playing the lottery is not a waste of time and money for everyone either. A few people get lucky every year. I’m just glad that aspiring writers, in general, are no longer counting on it. They’re attending conferences to learn about e-publishing and taking control of their own destinies.

I did what I could to inspire them.