UK Urban Fiction - HardPressed Publishing

If you're from the UK, or even Europe, ‘How to’ books may well be your undoing, and I’ll tell you for why. Swain, McKee, Blake Snyder are creative writing gurus in the industry. Most of what you’ll read in a ‘How to’ book is a complex paraphrasing of their words.

 All of these gentlemen are American.

Understand – Reading fiction is a Leisure activity.

Americans have a long history of importing a leisure product, repackaging and reformatting it, and trying to export it.

In this instance the product is English literature. The word English offers the faintest clue – it wasn’t theirs in the first place.

A brief look at the track record of export of semi-plagiarised leisure products reads.

Football / Rugby Football re-packaged as American Football. Despite a sustained attempt to market this product as NFL Europe – it has failed.

Rounders repackaged as Baseball. Only the Japanese bought this (probably under the threat of more nuclear bombs.)

Bowling repackaged as Bowling. There was a brief period during the eighties and nineties when a few bowling lanes opened in major cities. These have all since closed.

Summer camp, oversize refrigerators, Gerry Springer style confrontational freak shows.

It appears that what is ‘the American way’ is a passing fad to British public. Even the Evangelistic style writing seminars do not work over here.

So, no. I will not invest my time in the American way.

It is true, generally the statement 'Black People do not read', bears truth. There are many stories and theories as to why people of colour choose not to read. The average stupid white man will tell you that it is because black people are stupid.

It is true that African based cultures rely heavily on oral communication, hence they can sing and they can rap. Reading is not the most effective method of communication, the lack of inflection, tone and, dynamic attributes of written text sometimes make it a little difficult to make your point.

Apparently, back in the day there were two peoples. The Northern and the Southern. The Northern tribe were a nomadic people. They would hunt what they could catch with their bare hands and eat the fruits and shrubs available. When all the resources were depleted life became a STRUGGLE and they would go on a JOURNEY . . . This pattern has been repeated through generations. The Northern tribe ended up in Europe and then on to the Americas, Australasia, and Asia. Over centuries tales of JOURNEY and STRUGGLE were handed down from father to son and have become the standard format for all stories.

The Southern tribe were a little more innovative. They invented tools and weapons. With the tools they could farm, and re-plant the crops and shrubs. They could now cook, more of the vegetation qualified as food. With the weapons they could hunt larger beasts. The Southern Tribe never went very far. This theory is supported by the theory that many parts of Africa have turned to desert due to overfarming. They never left Africa. There was no need. They spent spend their entire lives swinging in trees, eating bananas and being HAPPY and GRATEFUL for the life they had. Over the centuries tales of being HAPPY were handed down from father to son. This became the standard format for all gospel music.

As time moved on the Southern tribe were forcibly displaced by members of the Northern tribe. Whilst gospel music still maintains the format of HAPPY and GRATEFUL it seems that they would rather invent new RAP songs speaking of HATRED and REVENGE. They will do anything not to have to listen to Northern tribe’s repeated stories of JOURNEY and STRUGGLE – In their culture, journey and struggle play no significant part.

Why the hell would you want hear the repeated story of somebody else's history?

Yeah, yeah, yeah . . .

So I've got a few issues with one or two hardcore techniquists - sue me.

Anyway, so I'm talking to my anger management therapist consultant and she asks me why I'm always abusing them. It turns out that I don't hate them, I just pity them because of their lack of scope.

At this point I'd like to introduce a chap called Dick Fosbury. You see for 2500 years the Olympic Games have been going on and everybody knew the best ways to high-jump, Straddle, Western Roll etc.

There are no other methods.

Around about the time Dwight Swain was lining his pockets by writing a book on writing, Dick was looking up at a high-jump thinking . . . There's got to be a better way to get over that bar. After giving some thought Dick Fosbury decided it would be better if he ran up to the bar, turned around and jumped it backwards.

Now everybody uses the Fosbury Flop.

My point is . . .

I write something in a story, maybe I get a character to do an infodump, followed a double head-hop into a telling back-story.

I ask a reader what they think and they say . . ."Wow, that was really exciting - I was gripped."

One them damn hardcore techniquists comes along as says "Do you know that's an infodump, followed a double head-hop into a telling back-story?"

And I say. "Hell yes, I should know - I wrote the fucking thing."

And they say . . . "Well those things are naughty, you're not allowed to do them. SO YOUR BOOK IS RUBBISH!

A respected acquaintance asked me for my thoughts on new writing, and if there are any new ways to write.

I have thought about this. Me, thinking is not normally a good thing – no good can come of it.

Follow my thinking: Sir Clive Sinclair invented that silly C5 thing. How ridiculous! Battery powered transport for urban dwellers – absurd. The man was a fool. Cars and motorbikes have internal combustion engines, the C5 will never work.

Retrospectively, he was a genius. Formula 1 cars are now part battery powered and all the major car manufacturers clamour to produce electric and hybrid powered vehicles.

You see it's all a matter of timing.

Enter the lowly audio book – a doomed silly idea. A failure on long-playing vinyl and a joke on multiple cassette tapes. Another disaster.

Books are written on paper, and they are far too long to be put into any convenient audio format.

For change and reaction, there is often a harmless catalyst, none forecast the effects of its presence.

Enter the arena: Messers Kindle and the e-reader gang. Well financed, these people are as I write, sowing the seeds of the destruction of the book as we know it, and in the finale, destroying themselves. For they will convince people 'a book' is not a permanent paper product. - And people will accept it.

Destroy the sanctity of the physical book and floodgates open, people become more open to new or other ideas.

Accepting that 'story is king', new evidence and the audio book come back into play and MP3 is in effect. How long does it take to read an average novel? You can get 22hrs of 64bit audio on a CD, and in all likelihood the DVD player in your lounge and the stereo in your car are equipped to play it. Not to mention MP3 players like the iPOD can also read your story.

What do we have? The Davinci Code read by Morgan Freeman. He'll read you a chapter before you go to sleep – just like mummy used to, and he'll read you the next chapter while you drive to work in your car. Have you every tried reading whilst driving – it doesn't sound easy, best let Morgan do it. The audio book has no competition, no more tired eyes while reading. Just think of it like listening to radio plays, but you get to choose. Old people love the Archers.

That's the old folk covered. The young?

No longer are you a nerd bookworm just because you like a good story. Nobody knows what your iPOD is playing you as you walk to school with Joanna Lumley reading you Harry Potter. And on the way home you listen to Henry V because it's part of the curriculum.

Young people used to love Jackanory.

So there you have it: people on their way to work headphones in ears with a best-seller being read to them by some celebrity.

Of course there will be those strange people who for some reasons like reading writing.

So yes, writing will change. Story will regain it's crown and once again voice will rule, and sell the product – but it won't be your voice.

"At the end of every month the five top ranked books over all time are delivered to the desks of an editorial board made up of international HarperCollins editors. The board read at least 10,000 words and deliver feedback to the author’s authonomy profile."

That's what Harper Collins said, right.

The silly boys on the Authonomy forum were commenting on a test posting made by a member named Laura some 18 months ago. - I took it upon myself to investigate what other 'comments' Laura had made.


Here's an example. . .

"A remarkable, thoughtful opening with some interesting imagery. I was reminded of Allende in the first chapter, something about the care taken in observing each character's thoughts and dialogue, and the seamless way the narrative creeps up on several characters in the space of a chapter. Would anyone agree?

I like Jane a lot- very refreshing to see such a strong female character in a piece of fiction set in this era (early C20th) and the mystery surrounding her engaged me really quickly. Is she a spy? On the run?

I thought the language was crisp and considered, certainly not a first draft. I would say that in places the descriptions are a little over done: the instance which springs to mind is when Jane "placed her backside carefully upon the smooth mahogany balustrade". It's not offensive as a sentence by any any means- I just felt the pudding was overegged slightly."

I compared this comment with some of the recent Editors reviews of the top 5. The reviewer seemed to be obsessed with the representation of female characters, refer to current authors, and often the recipient was left with the impression, the reviewer wanted a different book.


Here's an excerpt of review of "The IT Refugee."


"I think intentionally the author wants to show that, amidst a backdrop of war and suffering, women still have the same issues of career, love, shopping etc. but I don’t think the reader would see it that way. There is one particular scene where Maya is sunbathing in a bikini whilst Israeli helicopters circle above. Whilst this may genuinely happen (and may be second nature to women in a country dogged by war), I think readers (conscious of the suffering seen in the press concerning the region) may find this hard to believe. These women are in a fortunate strata of society and it is difficult to envisage this sort of lifestyle existing alongside one of abject poverty. These women are not what we would consider stereotypical refugees; some may find this the main strength of the novel but I found that it jarred and made the narrative slightly unbelievable."

Taking into account the age of the reviewer, and the reviews were written 18 months apart. I have come to the conclusion these 'comments' were written by the same person.

Further research reveals that "Laura" is not a member of Harper Collins Editorial board and has as musch influence with the commissioning editor as I do.

If all this is correct; there is no Ed's desk, and the review is written by one inexperienced and unqualified.