#(and also caveat I haven't read the books so I am not one to comment on that)

[sometinybees]

sometimes I think people equate “I don’t personally like this choice this character made” to “this is badly written” and it stops them from actually dissecting things with any nuance

[centrally-unplanned]

Since I am discussing anime academia today, I was reading another paper that was equally frustrating, along a different axis:

“Do female anime fans exist?” The impact of women-exclusionary discourses on rec.arts.anime

This as a premise is a good concept; someone mining the 90's Usenet anime communities for how the fandom saw female fans back then (the article title is quoting one such thread). So of course, the opening line of this article about the anime fandom in the 90's is....sigh....a reference to Donald Trump:

Commenting on the 2016 American presidential elections, multiple news reporters noted that a relationship could be found between Donald Trump supporters and online anime fans

It of course goes on to discuss Gamergate, 8chan, online right-wing radicalization, references to the "Fascist" themes of Attack on Titan, and on and on. The obvious problem with this is that it is irrelevant; the "methodology" section involves this aside about how they pulled this data from Google Archives but Google is an advertising firm and not a replacement for a real archive and we need to Fight The System and buddy my dude that is not germane to your sample size!!! But more importantly, it is backwards. I don't need to explain the argument here in detail; the article is positing a throughline from 90's anime discourse to modern right-wing internet politics through a sort of 'lock-in' effect of built culture norms around misogyny. Which is fine, you can make that argument - but why is all this future stuff in the first section? You haven't really presented the argument yet! This isn't a book, its not the intro chapter - literally 30% of the text of this article is stating a conclusion upfront, justified not through the text itself but citations to other articles about its truth.

This is something media studies pulled from traditional science - traditional science states "established facts" up front that the paper is building on. But that is because - a thousand caveats aside - in chemistry those facts are....facts. They may be wrong facts, but they can, ostensibly, be objective descriptors. This paper cites "anime is still synonymous with far-right ideologies of white and male supremacy, and events of anti-Blackness" like its citing the covalent bond count of carbon. That is not and never will be a fact one can cite, that is an argument; and its not one that is important for understanding this analysis of Usenet groups. This structure is pulled from other sciences, but it flourishes because it lets you pad the citation count of your peers. Its embarrassing how often you can skip the first 1/3rd of a paper in this field - really the worst possible thing to copy from economics (ding!)

This paper also does the insane thing of jumping between citations from 1992 and events in the 2010's like anime culture is continuous between those time periods. Its an extremely bold claim it just does in the background... but lets set that aside.

This hyper-politicization & hyper-theorizing leads to the second issue of extreme under-analysis. This is the actual value-add of this paper:

From this search, I was able to find the discussion threads “How many females read r.a.a.?” (135 messages; opened on July 13, 1993), “Question: Girls on r.a.a?” (23 messages; opened on February 25, 1994), “Female Otakus” (221 messages; opened on June 25, 1994), “Women watching anime” (72 messages; opened on October 4, 1994), and “Female fans - Do they exist?” (61 messages; opened on October 26, 1995). While these discussions may seem like they were spaces for marginalized users to discuss their experiences, they were often started and overwhelmingly occupied by identified male users. In total, I extracted 252 messages from 1992 to 1996 that were relevant to the gendering of anime fandom, and among those, I classified them as 7 kinds of negative networking discursive practices: (e.g. Table 1. Negative networking practices on rec.arts.anime).

252 messages, five threads - later on it will name other threads, so its more than this, but you get it. It has a bunch of data. And from that data, the article quotes...less than half a dozen examples. There are no quantitative metrics, no threads are presented or discussed in detail from this data set. Some other event is discussed in detail, but again it quotes essentially one person once. The provided "Table 1", the only Table, is a list of the author's categorizations of the data; the data itself is not present. Its file format is a CSV, presumably to mock me for clicking it.

There is, from top to bottom, a complete lack of engagement with the data in question. This would fail an intro anthropology seminar; the conclusion is simply presumed from 1% of the sample size while the rest of the messages are left on read. I just don't think there is any value in that, a handful of messages from 1996 divorced from their context and stapled onto modern politics as a wrap-up. What did the people on this Usenet value? How did they think of women collectively? As anime fans, as outsiders, as romantic partners, as friends? What subfactions existed? Questions like those would presumably be the point of this investigation, but they are treated as distractions.

And this article was, in anime academic circles, a pretty well-trumpeted one. I'm not cherry-picking a bad one here, it was the "hot paper" of the month when it came out. Its just that the standards can be so low, its a field that simply lacks rigor. Which doesn't stop a ton of great work from being done btw, that isn't my point at all. My point is that the great work is not selected for; it goes unrewarded, bogged down by academic standards divorced from discovering real insights.

(I do not think the question "why are they misogynist" ever crossed the author's mind. That should be your literal thesis, and its a ghost. Just ugh.)

[copperbadge]

We recently got into a discussion of producing audiobooks for small press, indy, and/or selfpub authors on another post, but we had strayed pretty far from the original post, and @genedoucette very kindly gave permission for me to slice his comment off the end of that post and put it into a new one.

genedoucette

I have been very, very lucky when it comes to audiobooks, so I'm hesitant to offer advice without adding a huge YMMV caveat at the top. For most of my self-published novels, I used ACX and paid a narrator out-of-pocket (rather than 50-50 proceeds split), which just means I'm paying an agreed-upon X dollars per finished hour, prior to making any money off f the audio editon. Every book I did this with paid for itself, sometimes within the first two or three months, sometimes longer. (YMMV: I did a lot of this during what I would call the audiobook bubble, when demand was higher than supply.) I had another novel series--Tandemstar--that I brought to an audiobook company, who brought it to their distributor, who agreed to pay for the production costs of the book and to pay me a (small) advance. To date, the royalties from that series have not made up the cost of the advance, but the good news was that none of the production costs came from my pocket and the advance meant I did make something out of the deal. The rule-of-thumb I always heard was, don't expect books that haven't sold well to sell any better as audiobooks. But my experience, with ACX/Audible, is this: about 50% of my monthly earning come from audio sales. How long is the book in question (word count), and what is the genre? Because it is absolutely possible to get a not-terrible narrator at a not-terrible cost on ACX. If it's a low word count book with a decent sales record, I'd 100% do it. If it's a high word count book with few sales, maybe not.

Thanks so much for this! I am admittedly always suspicious of Amazon writ large, but it's not like I've never partnered with them before, and often for indy authors they're one of a very few games in town.

50% of sales via audio impresses me a lot -- I'm not really in the industry so my sense of scale may be off but my eyebrows went up at that. And looking at ACX, a split-profits model would be appealing. I'm more interested in providing the reader with more options than I am with making royalties, so I don't mind low payout, but I also don't want to exploit a narrator if I can avoid it.

I doubt I'm selling near the level you are, but it's pretty consistent, at least -- for the last literary novel I published in 2021, and for the four genre romances published in the past year-and-change, it's generally 200-250 copies (epub and paperback) in the first 6 months, and about 40 per year after that. None of them are over 100K words -- the first of the romance novels, the one I'd be most likely to have done as an audiobook to trial, is around 50K, and the other books are all between 60K and 90K or so.

There's some fine print I'm not nuts about -- exclusivity to Amazon/Audible/iTunes for example -- but I can see why it's a necessary business model for them. There's not a ton of clarity on cost per hour for a book, but it looks like for a flat fee it starts around $250 per finished hour? So I'd probably be looking at minimum $1K out of pocket, which is probably roughly (I haven't done the math) royalties per book for a full year. It could be fun to give it a swing regardless, although reading the ACX site made me realize I'd actually have to give notes and feedback to a reader which sounds nervewracking.

It looks like the readers for ACX are repped by SAG-AFTRA, which means that for now I have time to consider while the strike is going on. (Obviously not all of them are union but if it's an entertainment format where the union is involved, I don't want to cross the picket.) And the ACX site is pretty comprehensive in terms of figuring out how it all works, so if I did want to source a narrator elsewhere and perhaps not distribute exclusively through ACX, I now have a grounding from which to research other options too.

Sorry, a lot of this is just me thinking aloud, but I truly do appreciate the info and also something to bounce off of in terms of considering it. And I appreciate the opportunity to share it with my readership too, thank you!

[iviarellereads]

The Plan, Such As It Is

tl;dr: System Collapse finishes the Murderbot series on Christmas. Last week of the year is a break, and then it's the Wheel of Time with likely between-book breaks for one-offs or shorter series, and someday maybe Alecto the Ninth.

I had a great time watching Desert Bus, and helping with the VST documenting and editing and uploading clips of the process of raising over a million dollars (over ten million in the lifetime of the event!) for a good cause. A most excellent week of "restoring my faith in humanity". But that's a little beside the point of this post.

I also got my hands on System Collapse, but because of how my brain works, I won't be reading it ahead, so we're going to have lots of fun as I read it for the first time in the format of the blog. Let's see if my style changes, if my predictions are well on or off the mark. (I have seen a few posts that spoiled a few moments and character bits, but I'm not concerned about those. I rarely feel like learning things that happen "ruins" anything about an experience anyway. If the story's well told, it's still fun to experience for myself.)

After System Collapse, well, that's the end of Murderbot to-date. And, I haven't run any polls for covering other things. That's because I'm pretty well set on rereading the Wheel of Time series, and revising my previous notes to this format.

It's something I could keep putting off, but the show has gotten so good, and it reminds me of all the things about the books that I loved so much (and how the show is fixing some things I didn't love). I'll also be very excited to do full-series spoiler posts again, Murderbot didn't have a lot that I felt needed commenting on, but the Wheel? Oh, buddy.

But, the caveat here is that the Wheel of Time has, well, fifteen very large books. Eleven thousand pages, over four million words. Coverage would take about three years if I didn't take breaks for other books in between, and I definitely will, so we're gonna be here for a while. I've said before that I was hesitant to cover Discworld for this, and I still am. Discworld has over forty books just in the main series besides the spinoffs, with a comparable total wordcount to WoT. Several of those, I have negative interest in ever rereading. Even if they're largely shorter than WoT bricks, they're also trickier to split, and I won't have as much context to share about them that isn't available elsewhere already. Whereas, the Wheel of Time lacks a lot of spoiler-free resources in print, despite the series being almost 35 years old. There was a huge influx of podcast coverage once the show publicity ramped up, but not so much blog style content. The few prologues and chapters that do need splitting, I've already calculated out from the first time I took the notes.

Mind you, I will be finding time for Alecto the Ninth coverage when Tamsyn Muir finally graces us with her presence, I'll just take a break between whichever WoT books I'm up to by then. And if something else strikes my fancy, I might alternate books. Like, making it through the Eye of the World might scratch the itch well enough, and make me want to dig into the Princess Bride as I threatened to once before, or perhaps when I reach my least favourite sequence of books in the middle, I'll alternate them with the His Dark Materials trilogy, though probably not its supplementary later materials because I'm still refusing to read the Book of Dust.

I totally understand if folks who followed me for other stuff want to jump ship when my WoT coverage starts. I love and can recommend it with some massive content notes and caveats which will be in my intro post for it, but it's not for everyone and treating it like a universal joy is nonsense. But, especially if you can get a library borrow of the first book, whether you get it in print or ebook or either of the incredible audiobook narrations (the full series by Michael Kramer and Kate Reading, or the first three are now available narrated by Rosamund Pike, who plays the character of Moiraine Sedai on the show), I hope you'll give it a try with me, and my analysis and commentary might help pull you into a series that's otherwise quite intimidating.

So, System Collapse will finish posting on Christmas, I think I'll take the last week of the year as a breather, and the Wheel of Time will kick off my 2024. I hope you'll consider sticking around and reading with me, especially my Locked Tomb girlies because I've said it before and I'll say it again, these two stories have SO much in common, hashtag Women's Wrongs and unreliable narrators. And, I am gonna try to break it up every so often since these are LONG books, most of them have 40+ chapters so will be two months apiece. But either way, if I'm gonna follow my heart, it's gotta be next.