what's the plausibility of this?

[preyer]

can you sell one book, edit and re-write it, and sell the 'revised' version again in a different genre, in effect getting two-for-one (or two-for-one and a half)? there's one i've got on the back burner where i've thought that i could go several different ways if i just leaned towards one genre more than another. without throwing it all in there and having this monstrosity, i rather hate leaving out the things that would, for instance, make it a romance as opposed to an adventure story. if you could work it out creatively, would an editor go for this assuming you're not creating a slew of legal issues?

[veingloree]

It isn't really an issue until you've sold it at least once ;)

On the whol;e it would be about as easy and rather more interesting, for me, to write up one of my other unfinished books rather than rewrite an exisitng one. So it may be possible, but tricky and probably unecessary?

[macalicious731]

i rather hate leaving out the things that would, for instance, make it a romance as opposed to an adventure story.

I think you should just write it once, and include everything then and there. Don't sacrifice story for genre. Genre is something which can be labeled after the book is written by an editor or publisher.

[James D Macdonald]

Tell the story the best way you can, and let someone else figure out what "genre" it is. (Actually, I think you mean "marketing category," which is a way of saying "Hey, reader! You'll like this book!")

Fritz Leiber's Conjure Wife has been marketed as fantasy, science fiction, horror, and romance, without a word changed in it. The differences were in the cover painting, the back cover blurb, and the logo on the spine.

(To be totally pendantic about it, there are four genres: poetry, rhetoric, drama, and prose.)

[Writing Again]

We used to do that with short stories. Take a basic plot, basic characters, change names, genres, etc: send it out under one PN to the western mags, the other to the SF mags, etc.

As they were seldom read by the same people or published at the same time, the chances of getting caught were almost nil, and it increased your output tremendously.

Not so sure about trying that with a novel.

[Jamesaritchie]

I don;t think this is something to worry about, and if it could be done, it would probably be a bad idea. It isn;t like novel ideas are in short supply. Just write each one to make it the best possible novel you can write, then go on to the next.

[maestrowork]

If you've already sold it, I don't know how it works as far as rights go if you're telling the same story with the same characters (but telling it differently)...

But why would you want to do that? There are so many stories to tell. Or sequels, series, etc. if you want to tell more stories about the characters. But why write the same thing again, only to target different genres?

[Writing Again]

Jamesaritchie

It isn;t like novel ideas are in short supply. Just write each one to make it the best possible novel you can write, then go on to the next.

Very much to the point.

[preyer]

to be blatantly honest about my motivations for wondering about it amounts purely to money. if someone will give me a few thousand bucks for it, i'm not above saying no considering the amount of effort involved. if the quality of the story is good, there's nothing wrong with it, per se. it's not like i ever set out to do it, most of my junk is pretty locked into a genre, but it occured to me there was that one story that could go several different ways. too, in my mind, the more people who reads what i write the better off i am, right? how bizarre it would be to have the same book appear twice on the same bestseller list simutaneously.

i'd call it greed and good business in the same breath, at least in theory. it could even be a good writing excercise. why send a ms in unless you want to make money from your effort (generally speaking)? are we not all whores to a certain degree, not even a little? given the idea that for newer writers, especially, that our labour doesn't even amount to minimum wage, from a purely economic standpoint is there a fault to be had in the idea? hey, if you can double or even triple your income, go for it. okay, so it doesn't exactly speak to my creative side, but it sure does make sense from a practical one.

[Tish Davidson]

The same book can be marketed as belonging to several different genres. However, to re-sell a minimally reworked book to another publisher by claiming it is another genre is simply going to bring down the copyright lawyers after you. I suspect you have never read a legitimate book contract.

You've breezed into the Water Cooler asking multiple questions about how to make a lot of money by writing.
Truth is, if there were a formula, none of us would be hanging around here. We'd all be churning out novels to fit the formual instead.

[preyer]

suspect i never read a legitimate book contract? that's why i was asking, if it was plausible. do i detect vitriol in your response? i never said a thing about getting rich quick, i wanted to know the feasability of minimizing 'working' for almost a waitress' salary minus the tips. i've 'breezed' in asking for some magical formula, when i know there's not one? outside this thread, where? all i've done was tried to stir some interest, sorry if you don't like it, don't know what to tell ya.

[dannyne330]

Are you familiar with the playwright Tom Stoppard? Or rather, have you seen the film Shakespeare in Love?

Think about what he did with Romeo and Juliet in the movie, and more importantly, exactly how he did it. Two different genres that are polar opposites; the play is a tragedy, the film is a comedy(both are romances). They are about the same story and yet, so very different from each other. Both are absolutely brilliant.

Now go do something like that with your story.
For further reference on this idea, check out Adaptation, written by Charlie Kaufman, who also happens to be the main character. You have to see it to understand. Works within works is the way to accomplish what you're trying to do. It may not be the easiest method, but it's darn fun.

Cheers.

P.S.- In both of these examples, a writer changes the work of another writer. A writer retooling his own work may come off as conceded (see George Lucas and the special editions of the original Star Wars Trilogy)

But I say unrelenting arrogance is the quickest way to make it. Seriously. My two cents.

PPS- if you're unfamiliar with Tom Stoppard's work, check out the play Professional Foul (made for TV) for a glimpse.
The man WILL be studied 100 years from now.
cheers again!

[preyer]

i have 'shakespeare in love' on dvd. should get that back out and watch it again. i loved that movie. 'adaptation' i saw, too. well, not a fan of that *movie*, but i catch your drift.

unrelenting arrogance as a key to success? is that a talent, you suppose, or is there an 'arrogance for dummies' book i can pick up? (gawd, if that half-ass joke isn't just opening the doors wide open, i don't know what is.) that statement does probably have some credence. 'fortune favours the bold,' 'it's better to ask forgiveness than permission' and all that, eh?

[dannyne330]

Preyer-

Yeah you got my point on the 'arrogance,' comment, whether you agree with it wholeheartedly or not.

To answer your question, there is a book titled "A$$hole No More: In 10 easy steps," or something like that. I gather that's its a 'humor' book from the cover, but i'm sure you can figure out how to be arrogant by reading it between the lines. I've received the book twice, once from an ex-girlfriend, and once from a step-sister. Naturally I re-gifted both copies without reading either.


Ferris Bueller once said, "If you put your mind to it, you can accomplish anything." Fortune does indeed favor the Bold. Don't let anyone tell you different or you've lost before you've started.

A zillion teachers once said, 'don't let anyone tell you that you can't succeed.' They're teachers. Listen to them.

Cheers to all!!!

[preyer]

right or wrong, the effects can't be denied.

[dannyne330]

I like that sentiment.

cheers!!

[Writing Again]

dannyne330

A zillion teachers once said, 'don't let anyone tell you that you can't succeed.' They're teachers. Listen to them.

Not what my teachers told me. If I'd listened to them I'd have suicided long ago and made the world a better place with my lack of presence.

[katdad]

Once you've sold your book it becomes the property of the publisher (for print purposes) and you would not be allowed to sell a revised version to another source, without the publisher's permission.

And such a revision would probably fail in a literary sense, because such a rewrite would likely be stale. Better to write a totally new book in the other genre.

[Tish Davidson]

Info and sample contracts here that should answer many of your questions.

www.writing-world.com/rig...tzer.shtml (http://www.writing-world.com/rights/glatzer.shtml)

[BitchyEditor]

You do sense vitriol. I got it, too.

Guess I shoulda picked another place to offer bylines and columns to talented people, eh?

[preyer]

thanks for the link, td, i'll check that out in-depth.

be, i figure talented people are where you find 'em. don't be put off by this. i bear no one ill will up until they start calling me names or try to be cute and insinuate a lot of untrue things through poorly worded veils. i have a rather polarizing influence on these boards. sometimes misunderstandings occur, more often my humour isn't appreciated, and then again sometimes a person just doesn't like me (there's actually a demographic for the last one, and td meets most of the requirements as far as i can tell, so i'm hardly shocked that's she's not my biggest fan). so, don't hold it against her, or me, and especially the board in general, eh? that's just the way personalities sometimes play out. it would be the heigth of unfairness to hold the entire community liable for the embarassing antics of a couple of posters.

[Tish Davidson]

Hey preyer, I don't dislike you at all, but some of your questions came across as someone who saw writing as a way to get rich quick. Those types abound on the fringes of writing and usually find it easier to ask questions rather than do a little elementary reading and web searching for some pretty obvious answers. If I misread you, I apologize. And out of curiosity, what demographic do I belong to?

[preyer]

were writing all *that* easy, everyone would do it. i'm not sure which questions you're referring to, so i can't comment on whether i was being coy, a smart-ass, or was honestly ignorant. asking even elementary questions not only gains me the information, but hopefully makes someone feel good that they could help. just spreading the love using pretty basic means. only the most cynical would argue it's manipulative. at the same time, few of us really *need* to be here: any practical information we want could be looked up, so, i mean, that's not the entire point all the time, eh?

i tend to not really get along well with democrat women 18-25. you 'feel' older than that to me. the ones i particularly don't get along with are the self-righteous ones without any concept of their own hypocrisy (not that you are one of these, just further describing the worst). the more hippie-oriented a person is the less i tend to get along well with them.

[Tish Davidson]

Well, I'm a 52 year old 4th generation Republican professional writer, so I 'm glad my Web personna "feels older" :)

[DanALewis]

Stephen King, from On Writing:
<BLOCKQUOTE>If you’re a mystery fan, you’ll want to write mysteries, and if you enjoy romances, it’s natural for you to want to write romances of your own. There’s nothing wrong with writing any of these things. What would be very wrong, I think, is to turn away from what you know and like (or love, the way I loved those old ECs and black-and-white horror flicks) in favor of things you believe will impress your friends, relatives, and writing-circle colleagues. What’s equally wrong is the deliberate turning toward some genre or type of fiction in order to make money. It’s morally wonky, for one thing–the job of fiction is to find the truth inside the story’s web of lies, not to commit intellectual dishonesty in the hunt for the buck. Also, brothers and sisters, it doesn’t work.</BLOCKQUOTE>

[preyer]

is that any more dishonest than using pseudonyms to write books in a different genre so people won't have preconceptions about a known horror writer doing romance? or worse than a male writer using a female psyeudonym for romance? aren't those deceptions deliberately done not to screw yourself out of selling as many books as possible?

[HConn]

Preyer, are you responding to the quote from King?

It seems that you are, but your response would be a total non-sequiter.

[DanALewis]

Preyer, I think King was talking about a world that is far removed from marketing.

[James D Macdonald]

King is talking about trying to write a genre you don't like, for readers you hold in contempt, in order to cash in on a trend.

As Rocky said to Bullwinkle, "That trick never works."

[preyer]

yeah, i was responding to the king quote, though technically i'm not sure if it's a non-sequiter or not. i wouldn't argue it other than saying i'm not drawing fallacious conclusions from irrevelant information. really, i was trying to see if there was any hypocrisy in the basic statements 'it's not okay to write for money be re-writing in another genre' (this is probably more of a non-sequiter, as it presupposes the writer hates the other genre and is just using his novel to exploit a different fan-base) vs. 'it's okay to use psuedonyms' which is, at its core, hiding your real identity. neverminding any artistic values or shady marketing, isn't it hypocritical to say one is okay but the other isn't?

mac, do you figure all writers who follow the trend are contemptuous? for instance, if your editor threw enough money at you to write a romance (let's just say you loathe the genre for some reason), would you do it? and if black romance for young adults was the hot thing, would it make a difference?

that trick never works? yeah, well, flying squirrels can't actually fly, either, lol. that's what boris gets for buying acme, anyway. crap, might as well buy your spy gear from wal*mart.

[James D Macdonald]

....if your editor threw enough money at you to write a romance (let's just say you loathe the genre for some reason), would you do it?

I'd try, and the book would be lousy. I'd do it under a pseudonym.

Here's why pseudonyms are useful: The author's name helps the reader decide whether this is a book they'll like. There isn't a lot of crossover between sweet romances and action thrillers. If I wrote both, I might use different names on 'em so that if one of the thriller fans picked up one of the romances he wouldn't put it down saying "What the heck is this?"

Another reason for using a pseudonym is, if you're very prolific, to avoid competing with yourself.

[preyer]

i've wrested with the idea of using pseudonyms. i did for my self-published thing just because i was a coward. now, though, i don't think it's right for me, personally. then again, i'm by no means prolific (if pressured and paid, i could do probably two decent books a year). i see what you're saying about a fan picked up your book of a different genre. i've thought about that before, though i always wondered what, if any, detrimental effect it would have. a lot of authors list their psyeudonyms in their books and i wonder what the hell the point of that is.

i'm not really sure what you mean by competing with yourself. you mean having two new books featured at the same time? yeah, i can see the problem there, but does that occur often?

[whistlelock]

Louise Erdrich re-wrote her first novel Love Medicine a few years after it was first published. I believe she used the same publisher, but she re-wrote it.


But if you want to write for big pay checks, I suggest screenwriting. But, that form has it's own pitfalls.

[Flawed Creation]

Preyer- i have idly considered your suggestion. i don't think it would work, and i currently have 4 or 5 novel ideas filed away anyway. OTOH, something very similar to your idea might.

i think that even if one tried to re-write the same story in a different genre, they would inevitably fail. let me tell you a similar story from my plotting experiences.

i came up with a plot for a fantasy book. it it is, in fact, the untitled mentioned in my sig. I loved everything until i got to the end- i love dhte end, too, except i had about 4 different possible endings in mind. this was an odd experience, because usually how a book should end is obvious to me. anyway, i picked one ending, but decided to keep the other one around. i though about writing the book over with that ending to see which version i liked better, but it realized that i would need to make small changes throughout for it to make sense. the more i though about, the more i realized a couple of things- one of them was that there was plenty of good material i threw away or cut. the other as that the different ending changed the significance of nearly every event. before i knew it, i had two completely different books, sharing only main characters and themes. well, i couldn't decide whether the protagonist should be male or female, so i tried it both ways- now i have two separate books. al becaus ei tried to change the very end.

in this way, i think if you tried to re-write a thriller as a romance, you would findthat the characters changed, the plot changed, the theme changed, until ultimately it was no longer the same book. at that point, i would not consider it unethical to try to seel both, since it's not really the same book twice but one inspired by another.