Going Solo Available for Pre-Order at 99 cents!

GScoverfullYes, that headline is correct! Going Solo, book 3 in the Tales of Uncertainty series is now available for pre-order on Amazon and as a thank you to all of Dare’s fans and my loyal readers, it’s priced at 99 cents for this pre-launch period. Once the book goes live on December 23, it will move to its regular price of 3.99. So, get in while the gettin’ is good!

Here’s the back cover teaser:

As a member of the Heisenberg family, I was taught to value analytics and the doctrines of logical thought. The life I’ve led for the past year or more, however, has been one that makes Dorothy’s Oz look like a sedate convention of elderly physicists.

Now, a bit like that lost and forlorn Kansas girl, I’m on a mission to bring a scarecrow and a brain together. Only, instead of the scarecrow as a companion, I have the brain. Kim’s core programming is lodged within a sleek, new time machine that is easy on the eyes, but atrocious in the gas mileage department. Nothing short of a load of antimatter will do to get us where we need to go.

Fortunately, our path forward seems as easy to follow as Dorothy’s. Pick up the fuel and get Kim installed in her star. Yet, my experiences as a time traveling agent have shown me one thing above all else.

Even yellow brick roads are littered with cavernous potholes.

And here’s an excerpt from Chapter 1. Warning! Possible spoilers ahead!

“It needs a name,” Lauri said.

Five of us, Lauri, Dr. Lansing, M’sang Tah, Bob, and I, stood in the currently dim light of the cavernous hangar within the pahsahni home ship. In the distance behind us, a small crew performed repairs on one of the dozen scout vessels parked in neat rows — an occasional barked order or clank of a tool reached my ears. Otherwise, the space was quiet, save for the ever-present thrum of the massive ship’s ventilation system. Work had finished on Bob and Dr. Lansing’s collaborative creation only an hour or so before. The pahsahni technicians had filed out of the hangar, weary but proud of their efforts, yet nearly all had been ignorant of the true purpose of the machine they had built, which floated before us, a few inches off the deck.

Names like Enterprise, Millennium Falcon, and even T.A.R.D.I.S. ran through my thoughts, but while the vehicle’s function might be similar, it looked about as far from a blue police call box as it could get. Blacker than the inside of a cave at night, the triangular ship sported a cockpit that could seat two in comfort and three in a pinch. I guessed it measured barely more than twenty feet from tip to tip and bore no markings of any kind. Rivets or lettering would have offended its flawless obsidian lines to the point I couldn’t imagine any ever existing there.

Nevermore,” I blurted out, remembering a haunting poem I’d read in school.

Dr. Lansing nodded. “Hm. Edgar Allen Poe. The Raven, right? Seems like an odd name for a time machine, but the raven imagery certainly fits.”

“I like it,” Lauri said with a smile.

“A designation is inessential to its function,” Bob said through his translator device. “But I am becoming familiar with the human desire for monikers. Nevermore it is.”

M’sang Tah grunted. “Regardless of what it’s called, it still requires a power source.”

I looked over at my hairy mentor. “I don’t understand. I thought neutron stars produced gobs of energy. Won’t the piece of Kim that Bob brought be enough?”

Bob answered my question. “Most of the energy generated by the programming core is currently being used to counteract its gravitational influence within the ship. Once you’re in space, that will not be necessary, but the energy required to transfer that much mass from one thread to another is monumental. Additional power, beyond what the core produces, is required.”

“There are stores of anti-matter in the Hub,” Dr. Lansing said.

I chuckled. “Yeah, I remember. Hope tried to blow us all up with them.”

“That confrontation didn’t occur in this thread, Dare,” M’sang Tah reminded me.

“Right,” I said with a nod.

Dr. Lansing continued. “Anyway, we’ll collect what’s there and hope it’s enough to make the jump.”

“Wait,” Lauri said. “You converted the Hub into a hydroponics farm. We saw that when you brought us here.”

“We did,” Lansing confirmed. “But sections which produce power were left alone, along with a handful of others, including my lab until we made that last trip to fetch you two.”

I turned to M’sang Tah, “All right. So, we go down to Mars and get the anti-matter, then we switch threads so we can plug Kim’s core into her star. Is that it?”

My mentor inclined his head to the side. “Essentially, yes.”

That task list would have sounded preposterous to me just a few months before. Part of me knew it was probably still preposterous, but I was anxious for an assignment. Lauri and I had arrived almost two days earlier and had to wait while work finished on Nevermore. Lauri spent most of her time catching up with Dr. Lansing, which left me alone with nothing to do since I had no skills remotely related to constructing space ships or time machines to offer. “Cool. How soon can we go?”

“We need to run some flight tests,” Bob said. “But that’s something you and Lauri should participate in.”

I grinned. “Awesome!”

M’sang Tah pointed to the closest doorway. “Go collect your things while we prep the ship.”

— — —

There you go! For more, you’ll just have to wait until December 23rd! In the meantime, if you’re in the Billings, Montana area, come see me at the Annual MSU-B Writers’ Roundup hosted by the Festival of Trees at the Shrine Auditorium this Saturday, December 6th from 12-5. I’ll be signing books and chatting with anyone who’ll stop to listen ;-) I might even have some goodies to give away!

Cover Reveal: Going Solo

As promised a few days ago, here is the cover for the upcoming Book Three in the Tales of Uncertainty series, Going Solo.



What do you think? Publication is slated for late November/ early December. It’s going through its final edits now! Dare’s newest adventure leads him back to Mars and into the far reaches of the universe. I should have a back cover blurb and maybe a sample chapter for you in a few days. Happy Monday!

Emblazoners Blog: A Certain Point of View

Hey all! I’m over on the Emblazoners blog today, talking about perspectives in writing. Come on over and say, “Hi!”


Coming soon: A Cover reveal for the new Tales of Uncertainty novel: Going Solo

Preston Responds

In the last blog post I wrote a letter to Mr. Preston and Authors United, which I also emailed to the contact address on the AU website. Surprisingly, to me at least, Doug replied with this: (Note, I’m posting these because I don’t believe he said anything in the emails that he wouldn’t have said publicly anywhere.)

“You’re making the situation far more complicated than it is. We’re simply asking Amazon to stop hurting authors and impeding the sale of their books as a negotiating tactic. We’re not for Hachette or against Amazon. We’re not taking sides. We’re not for or against cheaper ebooks. We have made no statement on book pricing.

We have every right to protest Amazon’s targeting of 2,500 Hachette authors, driving their sales down and hurting their ability to support themselves through writing. Amazon is hurting writers, Mr. Tucker. It’s that simple. Your justification of why it’s okay for a gigantic corporation to hurt writers to gain advantage in a dispute with another large corporation is a steaming pile of sophistry.”

I replied: I do sincerely appreciate you taking the time to respond, but I’m left wondering if you read the letter.

You absolutely have every right to protest Amazon. I in no way dispute that. In fact, I understand it. I said as much in the letter.

Nowhere did I bring up ebook pricing. Hachette has every right to ask whatever they want for the books they sell. That said, anyone can refuse to buy the books if they feel the price is too high, including Amazon.

Would you prefer it if Amazon simply removed all of Hachette’s books from their store until the dispute is resolved? Because I can’t see any way for Amazon to get Hachette to negotiate a new contract that doesn’t harm those authors. If you can, I’m sure a lot of people would like to hear it. You dismissed Amazon’s three different efforts to remove the injured authors from the equation, but offer no alternatives as to what would be acceptable besides just agreeing to Hachette’s terms. How is that not taking sides?

I don’t have a horse in this race. Honestly, it would probably be better for me, personally, if the dispute continued ad infinitum. But I also care about my fellow authors and frankly, they are being shafted by Hachette and the other large publishers far worse than anything Amazon is doing. I understand my saying so isn’t going to change your mind, but I wanted you to know where I’m coming from.

To his credit, Doug replied again: I appreciate you taking the time to contact me as well. I think we just see the issue differently. Amazon is the one that leveled the sanctions on us—not Hachette. That’s the bottom line. Of course Amazon, one of the largest companies in the world, has negotiating tools at its disposal besides hurting authors. For one thing, they have an outsize voice, hundreds of millions of loyal customers, and a respected corporate brand. The offers Amazon made were entirely disingenuous and lopsided, which would have devastated Hachette financially without affecting them much. Why should we help Amazon load its guns against Hachette?

I didn’t bother responding again because it would have been a complete waste of my time. The delusion is complete and pervasive.

This interview/debate with Authors Guild President Roxana Robinson and Bloomberg Contributing Editor Paul Kedrosky is more proof of that. Her refusal to acknowledge that books are products, coupled with her bristling at the term “special snowflake” shows these people have absolutely no understanding of the world outside their own sheltered bubbles. Publishing is an entirely different experience for them than it is for the rest of the writing community and we have no common frame of reference it seems to even have a discussion.

Books — all literature — are an art form and a vehicle of entertainment. As such, they are no different from movies, television shows, games (be they card, board, or video), sporting events, music … the list goes on and on. All these things are consumed to occupy leisure time. They all have their place and their fans and none deserve special attention or government regulation or subsidies. If the writers of Authors United can’t accept this basic premise, how can we — much less Amazon — ever hope to have a reasonable discussion with them?

A Letter to Doug Preston and Authors United

Dear Mr. Preston, et al,

You don’t know me. Still, I feel like we have something in common: we love books.

I’ve been a voracious reader ever since I was a little boy. I read detective stories, science fiction, and fantasy novels by the hundreds. While I haven’t read any of your books, I have read many of the writers listed in the Authors United letter and I’ve greatly enjoyed the vast majority of those. I feel confident in assuming that they, too, love books. I’ve found it’s a largely universal reason why writers write.

Yet, it is here, with that very love of books, where the disconnect begins.

Along with loving books, you, Mr. Preston, also love your publisher — and why not? Your publisher has made your tremendous prosperity possible. In your shoes, I’m sure I would love and admire the entity that gave me such an opportunity just as strongly. If I felt they were being wronged, I would come to their defense, just as you have done. I understand your feelings and the actions that resulted from them.

What I don’t understand is this: equating books with publishers.

Why do I make that leap, you ask? Let me explain. The letter you originally penned claimed you were not taking sides in the debate between your publisher and Amazon, even though you only called on Amazon to take action to stop hurting authors. However, when Amazon made proposals to compensate the injured authors, the first of which MacMillan agreed to after their heated negotiations with Amazon a couple of years earlier, you dismissed them as being unfair to the publisher. You even called the idea “blood money”. Suddenly, the focus shifted from authors being harmed to the publisher. The underlying idea becomes what’s good for the publisher is good for the authors and their books.

Is that really true?

The big publishers have recorded larger profits for the last year or two. Random House even gave bonuses to all their employees because of the success of the Fifty Shades novels. Did authors get better terms in their contracts across the board? Was more money spent in marketing the slower selling titles because of the windfall publishers received from strong ebook sales at high profit margins? Were a larger number of new authors taken on to grow and nurture during this time of prosperity? The answer to those questions is no. You might point out that some authors, like yourself, received bigger advances for upcoming work and that is certainly true. At the same time, however, advances for new authors have shrunk to shockingly low levels. Would you sell your book to a publisher today for $5,000, paid over the course of a year or more? It would take more than twenty such advances to pay for the ad Authors United placed in the New York Times recently. Think about that. Twenty new books that those authors toiled over for months or even years. I submit that the economic gulf between you and the authors in harm’s way you purport to advocate for is much wider than you realize.

Mr. Preston, Amazon is a business. So is Hachette Book Group. This fact does not make either of them good or evil, sinners or saints. It simply means that both are trying to win a deal they feel is best for their company. End of story.

Now, I could ask you and your organization to use your influence and champion better contract terms, royalty rates, and accounting procedures for all authors from big publishing, but I won’t do that because it’s not a cause you believe in, as evidenced by your words and actions to date. What I will ask is for you to be truthful. Quit hiding behind straw men and come out and say what you really mean. The dispute between Hachette and Amazon is hurting your sales and you want it to stop. Accept your, and every other Hachette author’s, role as the child in a messy divorce case where there are no winners, only losers. Authors United has taken a side, despite your protestations of not doing so. Own it. By not asking Hachette to be equally culpable in settling their differences with Amazon, you have sided with your publisher. Your stance is emotionally understandable, as I stated earlier. Stop acting as if you’re championing authors everywhere by wielding your fortune and clout to rail against Amazon.

I love books. Books are created by writers, not agents or publishers. Certainly, editors, illustrators, and proofreaders can make a book better, but the book itself is written by a writer. Who, out of all the people I just listed, should receive the lion’s share of money from that creation? I think anyone who loves books will have a similar answer to that question.

I’ll say again, you don’t know me. I’m nobody. You’ll probably never see this letter, but if you do, I hope you’ll take into serious consideration some of the things I’ve said. Books don’t need publishers to exist, in fact, it’s the other way around. It seems to me publishers have forgotten that fact. Maybe you have too.

Alan Tucker, Lover of Books
(written in response to the Publisher’s Weekly article “Authors United Preparing New Amazon Initiative”)