tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24701144443264989322024-03-21T05:53:55.274+00:00Ian Kingsley Author BlogAbout my writing, plus thoughts and ideas that might help other writers and readers.Ian Kingsleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15461755918545707035noreply@blogger.comBlogger75125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2470114444326498932.post-28187505847561975342018-08-27T15:24:00.003+01:002018-09-07T12:09:12.677+01:00INSPIRING WORD: A Message for Agnostics[BROADCAST on my Radio Show INSPIRE on 6th September 2018]<br />
<br />
This is a message for agnostics. But before I begin with that I’d like to give a dictionary definition of an 'agnostic' so we’re clear what we’re talking about. An agnostic is: ‘A person who claims they cannot have true knowledge about the existence of God - but does not deny that God might exist’. In other words, they allow that it is possible there is a God but remain unconvinced because insufficient PROOF has come their way. I would suspect that most agnostics would like proof so they could believe – otherwise they would plump for being an atheist. Maybe they even think their agnostic stance would be regarded in a better light by God – IF there is a God! Well, if they think that, they are sadly deluded. Here's why. I’ll get to the message for agnostics in a moment, but first, a fast rewind.<br />
<br />
If you listened to INSPIRE last week you might have heard the piece I did called ‘Does God Want Everyone to Believe in Him?’. If you missed it and would like to catch up on what I said, I have put a link to this on my website at <a href="http://www.iankingsley.com/soundcloud">iankingsley.com/soundcloud</a> and a text version in the previous post in this blog, which you can also access from my website, <a href="http://www.iankingsley.com/">iankingsley.com</a>. And I’m telling you this because that message was a precursor to today’s message. In a nutshell it explained that if God unequivocally made it clear to everyone that he existed, then this would nullify the need for FAITH in your belief in him. And that HAVING faith is the ultimate assessment God has to identify His chosen people: those SAVED, and thereby rewarded with eternal life in Heaven. And if everyone believed in God – without the NEED for faith – then the only way to judge people would be by their deeds: the Old Testament way. And no one can measure up that way because we are all sinners. <br />
<br />
But because Christians BELIEVE – through FAITH - that Jesus died for the sins of all believers, then it is this FAITH which allows then access to eternal life: through the GRACE of GOD rather than deeds. So the conclusion of all that was that God is not interested in offering absolute PROOF of his existence. Instead he prefers a method which clearly separates evil from holy people: that is: the need for faith.<br />
<br />
Right. Back to ‘the now’, and my message to agnostics. If I was a gambler – which I’m not – talking to gamblers, I might say that it would be sensible for an agnostic to believe in God and so increase the odds of them being saved – rather than disbelieve and stand no chance. But this is a Catch-22 situation. You can’t just say, “OK, I’ll blieve in God,” because belief only comes through faith, and these are states-of-mind. We’re talking about TRUE faith here, not a CLAIM. If you TRULY believe there’s a God – with not a single doubt in your mind – as I do - then you have achieved FAITH – and hence salvation through God’s grace.<br />
<br />
The point is that, so far as God is concerned, belief – or not – is a bistable condition. You either believe or you don’t believe. You might like to occupy a middle ground of ‘maybe’ I could believe, given proof. I’ve tried to explain there can never be positive proof because, if there was, there would be no need for faith. And God requires faith. So, to any agnostics, I say this. Either pray for the added strength you need to achieve faith, perhaps assisted by this logic, or settle for unbelief, and know that Heaven is not for you. Just the OTHER THING, whatever you might believe that is. Nothingness? Ghostly form on Earth? Reincarnation? Take your pick!<br />
<br />
I admit I was once an agnostic. Over 30 years ago. And because I was from a scientific and technological background I decided to investigate it further. It took me years and years, but in the end I got to sufficient evidence – NOT PROOF – that I accepted there must be a God, and then I was what is termed ‘born again’ in the spirit because I attained FAITH. And once I had faith I not longer needed the evidence. So, agnostics, I suggest you either carry out your own investigation so you can reach one of those bistable states: belief or not. And if you want a shortcut to that, you could check out my website at <a href="http://www.iankingsley.com/">iankingsley.com</a>, and my eBook called ‘<a href="http://www.iankingsley.com/reality-check-science-meets-religion.html">Reality Check: Science Meets Religion</a>’ to see the evidence which convinced me. Maybe it will help to convince you.<br />
<br />
So that is my message to agnostics. Why walk down the middle of the road, only leading to death, when you know that if there is eternal life, that is not the road that will lead you there. The narrower route marked FAITH is the only way, but if you need to take the longer route of considering all the evidence and then applying logic, then that is also that option that might also led you to faith.<br />
<br />
But only IF you LIVE long enough! Ian Kingsleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15461755918545707035noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2470114444326498932.post-36846941857426046692018-08-21T14:51:00.003+01:002018-08-27T15:16:18.578+01:00INSPIRING WORD: Does God Want Everyone to Believe in Him?[BROADCAST on my Radio Show INSPIRE on 23rd August 2018]<br />
<br />
I recently had a conversation about the Bible and God with someone whom I know would like to fully believe in God. The big point he kept making to me was that there were so many flaws – or contradictions – in the Bible, and that there was no proof of God.<br />
<br />
I said that yes, there were some contradictions in the Bible, and that while the human effort put into recording God’s word were as accurate as possible, it did open up the possibility of human error here and there. For if a human being thinks something is not quite right he is tempted to ‘make it right’ - in his (possibly flawed) view. That is also why it took human-input to decide which were the most accurate books to be incorporated into the Bible. Also, translation adds a further complication. But after those admissions, I went on to explain how there was plenty of proof about the authenticity and uniqueness of Jesus, and evidence that, through his virgin birth, miracles, and resurrection, he was truly God’s representative on Earth: the Son of God. <br />
<br />
I pointed out that the disciples who wavered after his crucifixion and death were immediately changed into enthusiastic preachers – Christians – after Jesus’s resurrection, and after the convincing evidence of the Holy Spirit’s presence in their Pentecost experience. (Read Acts 2 for that.) And I pointed out that historical evidence, and the fact that so many people saw Jesus after his resurrection, was really good proof. 1 Corinthians 15:6 says: ‘Then he appeared to more than 500 of his followers at once, most of whom are still alive, although some have died.’ So, at the time this was written, there were still hundreds of people living who had witnessed his miraculous resurrection.<br />
<br />
But this was not enough to counter the objections of the person I was speaking with - who answered that there was no proof God existed.<br />
<br />
Although I already well-knew key verses from scripture, which I will get to in a moment, at the time, I was defeated to offer a better argument to this claim that there was no positive proof of God. So I did what I always do when stuck over scripture, or something involving God’s mysterious ways. I asked Him <i>directly</i>! In my prayers that evening, I asked why God did not provide definitive proof of his existence to all human beings: so there would be no doubt. And his answer came <i>immediately </i>into my mind. When this happens, and you are given an entirely new train of thought that had not occurred to you before, I believe this is adequate proof that God is talking to you. Where else could such lucid – and <i>new</i>– thoughts come from?<br />
<br />
I believe God wants me to deliver that message to you - as well as answering my question. Is this a secret? Not if I tell you! But I think it is <i>not </i>a secret – just a point-of-view we miss. Only God has the Big Picture, and that is why we <i>miss</i>– and <i>miss</i>-understand – so much that affects Him. He seemed to tell me that if he did something which would completely convince everyone on the Earth that he existed, most people would thereafter live in fear of Him. IF they obeyed him, it would be through an undercurrent of fear, not through love or faith. <br />
<br />
I truly believe this is His answer to the question of why he does not offer definitive proof. And it makes sense if you think about it. The means God uses to identify those whom he will <i>save </i>– that is - to offer forgiveness of their sins and a life after death, in Heaven – is to look for complete <i>faith </i>in them. When they have that they are ‘born again in the spirit’. And that is reflected in the passage of scripture I will give you at the end of this. If he did something to convince <i>everyone </i>he existed he would <i>nullify </i>faith! Definitive proof would mean that faith is no longer required. So by a Big Reveal, He would nullify the principal factor that marks a true Christian. Remember that one reason Jesus talked in parables was so that only true believers – those exhibiting faith – understood what he was getting at. Some were never expected to attain that position. Evil people have no place in Heaven, for example.<br />
<br />
When Jesus spoke in parables, He only explained them to His disciples. But those who had continually rejected His message were left in their spiritual blindness to wonder as to His meaning. Jesus made a clear distinction between those who had been given “ears to hear” and those who persisted in unbelief—“ever hearing, but never actually perceiving, and always learning but never able to acknowledge the truth” (as 2 Timothy 3:7 puts it).<br />
<br />
A good human father likes to have faith his children will live a good life without his direct intervention or control: because of the advice he has given them. His children like to have faith that their human father trusts them to do just that, without being ultra-controlling. That is a mutual bond of faith. So it is with our Heavenly Father. This world contains good, bad and evil people. There are those who are <i>born </i>to be <i>saved</i>, but it is up to them to follow through with faith – for only then are they ‘born again’ into the reassurance of God’s saving grace.<br />
<br />
So those born again attain the gift of the Holy Spirit who will help them to understand God’s word better. There is a <i>God-filter</i> that ensures only those intended to understand actually ‘Get It’, if I can put it that way. And that is why God does not produce a mighty miracle that gets him onto BBC and Sky News. He uses a discrete method to select those chosen for eternal life. The <i>strength </i>of their faith. <i>That </i>is his holy barometer.<br />
<br />
And the piece of scripture which backs all this up – which I already well-knew before God kindly gave me this clarification - is from Hebrews 5. All of Hebrews 5 is about the importance of faith, but the two verses I particularly remember, and which are most relevant here, are these. Verse 1: ‘Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see.’ So <i>that </i>is God’s definition of faith. And verse 6 says: ‘Without faith it is <i>impossible </i>to please God, because anyone who comes to him <i>must believe</i> that he exists and that he <i>rewards </i>those who earnestly seek him.’ So there is the scriptural assurance of what I have been saying. Faith is the key to eternal life.<br />
<br />
Does this offer any proof there is a God? No. But it does explain why you will <i>never </i>achieve that proof <i>unless </i>you have faith – the secret key - and you will thereby <i>experience </i>the proof of God in due course. Or in ‘<i>quicker</i>-course’ if you let the presence and peace of the Holy Spirit into your life and become aware of its presence and guidance throughout your life. <br />
<br />
So the next time someone says to you there’s no proof that God exists, just remember this reasoning - which squarely puts the onus back on them!<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">If this article helped you, please feel free to contact me via my website at:</span> <a href="http://www.iankingsley.com/">iankingsley.com</a> Ian Kingsleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15461755918545707035noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2470114444326498932.post-56422073229060230392018-06-21T16:24:00.001+01:002018-06-21T16:26:28.176+01:00The No-Reply Email Customer Service Runaround!A common big company website problem is their general reluctance to engage in dialogue with their customers - whilst still doing the best and most polite job they can of appearing to care. Their no-reply, extra-polite, emails are an example, and Amazon.com are experts at this. You fill out a form, get their stock but unsatisfactory generic answer, are unable to reply to it to maintain any continuity, and then you have to go all round the same loop again.<br />
<br />
I had an interesting variation on this today with Accors Hotels, the parent company of countless hotel chains. Having experience of dealing with their global customer services based somewhere in Africa, I seem to remember, I tried their contact form instead. Clearly there is no email address to use. Now the form specified an Attachment field as Mandatory, meaning you MUST use the field or else the form will not work. Surprise, surprise, I didn't need an attachment. But there was no way round it. So I created a little text document telling them how stupid it was to always demand an attachment, then I tried to attach that file. And guess what. It would NOT attach! So it was a Catch-22 situation. Attach a file if you want to send the form, but there is no way to attach the file.<br />
<br />
How about that for an elegant solution to avoiding customer contact? It brings a whole new meaning to Trial and Error! Ian Kingsleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15461755918545707035noreply@blogger.com21tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2470114444326498932.post-5060085398488879322018-06-04T23:41:00.002+01:002018-06-06T17:02:45.637+01:00Companies Need to Realise Email Addresses Actually Change!Companies need to realise email addresses actually change. Yes, really! After a couple of decades using an email address tied to a website that I ran I sold the website and had to cope with changing my email address with numerous company websites. Fortunately I had them all listed on a spreadsheet, together with usernames and passwords, etc. Even if it had been a straightforward matter of going to each website, locating the contact information, changing it, logging out, then logging back in again to make sure it had really changed, this alone would have been a mammoth task. Trust me, the number of sites I'm talking about is well into three figures! But that would have been easy - IF the websiste owners actually catered for someone trying to do something so dastardly and inconsiderate as changing their email address. 'How <i>dare </i>they!' seemed to be the general attitude.<br />
<br />
Here are SOME of the problems I encountered, and this is not even an exhaustive list!<br />
<ul>
<li>Some sites used email addresses as usernames as well. This means that even if you manage to change the email address for communications, you are forced to use the old email address to logon. (Never good idea for organisations to have the same information in more than one location. Asking for trouble - ie a human interface. This is what databases are for: one location for one piece of information so it only needs changing once!)</li>
<li>Some sites allowed you to change the contact information except, when you logged out and back in again - it was stuck on the old information. (Waiting a week or so to see if a human was involved never seemed to bear fruit!)</li>
<li>Some sites had NO PROVISION to change the email address at all! (Data protection, folks! Are you going going to send data to the wrong people because you cannot be bothered to sort the problem out? Couple this with the tendency to avoid giving any contact information and you reall run ito problems. Both the user and the data protection defaulting website owner.)</li>
<li>There are sites which actually name your account after your email address. For example, <i>Microsoft</i>, no less, do this and, although I successfully changed my email address and deleted my old email address in my profile, the account name is still named after my old email address! (How weird is that for one of the world's biggest companies?) </li>
<li><i>Travelodge </i>already knew my new email address and their alternative one. So that prevented me adding it as my primary one. But it is not possible to delete the primary one - or make it the same as the alternative one. So this is a Catch 22 situation. No way to change it without personal contact - and past experience at doing this is that it is not worth the hassle. Easier to open a new account! You see? Even the big players make changing your email a nightmare! </li>
<li>Some sites asked you to contact them to change things - then did not respond (or maybe responded you an old and invalid email address.</li>
<li>Some sites manage to communicate with the new email address but still also sent copies (or ALL communications) to the old email address - and a new owner of the domain, hence going against new data protection requirements be disclosing private data. (Data protection, folks) </li>
</ul>
Given that some of the sites involved intensive security measures to be undertaken it felt like the Krypton Factor to undertake a few hours of this work.<br />
<br />
I'm not just talking about the little guys here. I've had troubles with
Amazon, Npower, Accor Hotels, Autotrader, and other big names. <br />
<br />
Are website owners aware of the huge fines they can face for infringing data protection requirements now. So: HELLO! EMAIL ADDRESS CAN CHANGE! <br />
<br />
So, bottom line. WEBSITE OWNERS: PLEASE ALLOW USERS OR CLIENTS TO CHANGE THEIR EMAIL ADDRESS ONLINE. OK, sure, there are security issues. But knowing the security answers should allow users to prove themselves. The hurdles are generally quite high already where it matters.<br />
<br />
Guys, get your acts together! Ian Kingsleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15461755918545707035noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2470114444326498932.post-81733113134347387762018-05-09T12:02:00.002+01:002018-05-09T12:02:52.730+01:00UK Retirement StandardsIt's said that when you get to your wit's end, you'll find God lives there. I'm starting out with a joke, because what follows may bring tears to your eyes in you're British. And, if you're at your wit's end about money, maybe take this as a GREAT INCENTIVE to SAVE REGULARLY from an early age... to protect yourself in retirement.<br /><br />I'm going to to give you a few worldwide stats about pensions and retirement - always a tricky issue. But it's SO good to think the UK's not a Third World country when it comes to things like this, isn't it? Or is it? <br /><br />I've got some shocking facts for you, of which younger folks should take note. Believe it or not, there are some countries where pensions actually EXCEED earnings! ... Yes! The Netherlands, for example, typically get 101% of earnings. I'm here to give you the shocking fact that in a table of 45 countries before me, we come NEXT TO BOTTOM at 29%. ONLY South Africa, is worse, at 17%. Can you BELIEVE it? Turkey gets 102%, and Croatia - the HIGHEST - gets - wait for it - 129%! So they get more in Croatia by retiring than working. Here are a few more figures: Poland 39%, Ireland 42%, Switzerland 45%, US 49%, Germany 51%, Estonia and Slovenia 57%, Lithuania 71%, Brazil 76%, Cyprus& China 83%, Bulgaria 89%, Italy 93%, and India 99%. BELIEVE it or NOT!<br /><br />So, still think we're NOT a Third World economy? THIS, a country in which many in their late sixties and seventies, find the need to work on. So what is going on? And, you know what? It gets worse. Those countries with the highest pensions also have the highest percentage of home ownership. Here are some examples: Romania, 96%, Croatia and China 90%, India 87%, Poland 84%, running down to US and UK both at 64%.<br /><br />So, I repeat. What is going on? How do we improve our world sensibility rankings? I'm guessing that the people in countries with higher pensions and home ownership focus more on acquiring what they can actually afford to BUY, as opposed what they can afford to RENT. Prior to the financial crash, the banks were inviting us weekly to borrow more and live for the day.The result is repenting in the morrow.<br /><br />Do you remember a radio show where the farmer's phrase "I think the answer lies in the soil," was famous? Somehow, I don't think that's the answer to this problem. I think the answer lies in avoidance of debt, rather than collective heads in the sand. And, maybe, no longer thinking our country is responsible for policing the rest of the world. Those top rankers only focus on their OWN country. Time to think about our FUTURE standard of living, I think, rather than just our PRESENT one.Ian Kingsleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15461755918545707035noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2470114444326498932.post-84441475974377372932018-05-03T16:26:00.004+01:002018-05-03T16:26:27.781+01:00Go[o]d v. EvilThis post is about good and evil... and God and evil. <br />
<br />
How
can God allow evil people and organisations achieve such powers of
destruction? Whether we're talking Hitler or ISIL, it is hard for people
to contemplate the juxtaposition of such things and a loving God. Even
the Archbishop of Canterbury recently admitted to struggling with his
faith over such matters. (Not sure that helps a lot, <span class="st">Justin.)</span><br />
<span class="st"><br /></span>
<span class="st">Things like this are responsible for many people NOT believing in a loving God - or <i>any </i>God,
for that matter. Take the tragic death of a spouse or relative. The
murder of a child. Bad things done by members of the Church. How can God
<i>allow </i>such things?</span><br />
<span class="st"><br /></span>
<span class="st">Well here's my view on the matter, in case it helps
anyone. The world is as we see it. That's pretty much the way scientists
see it - except in matters of fine detail where their 'beliefs' tend to
change with time. And that word 'belief' is an important one. Science,
you see, 'believes' what it has theorised or thinks it has proven so
far, but frequently new theories come along and those beliefs have to
change. Given this, a scientist should look more kindly on those whose
less complex belief is in God. A scientist can prove little of what he
believes, and he cannot disprove what a Christian believes - except
perhaps a few of the fine details like the <i>method </i>of creation.</span><br />
<span class="st"><br /></span>
<span class="st">The world is as it is. As we see it. And that is the
way God created it. In a masterpiece of creativity, his thought became
our universe, our realm of creation, and that is where we exist. Clever
stuff? Yes, but hang on. You create worlds which seem just as real to
your perceptions on a regular basis: in dreams!</span><br />
<span class="st"><br /></span>
<span class="st">Yes, evolution has played an enormous part in our
physical selves, and that was all part of the natural development of the
world God created. There are different levels of 'good' within it, no
matter how we define the term, and another term used to describe the
negative extreme of good is 'evil'. Through the graduations of behaviour
we label as good or evil, it is inevitable there will be evil. That is
all part of the free-flowing nature of creation.</span><br />
<span class="st"><br /></span>
<span class="st">God created a system which appears to follow rules or
theories. But almost anything can appear to have rules if you go to
extremes of modelling it (like weather forecasting). The fact we have
weather forecasting models that boil down to rules does not mean the
weather actually follows any rules. God does not chose to interfere with
this realm of existence, although he has given us guidelines, which
religions document: as guidelines or 'rules'. God is, no doubt, <i>entertained </i>by the evolving nature of this creation but, like a human father, he prefers to let his children - <i>us </i>-
make our own way in the world. Why would he want to control everything?
What would be the value of a creation where he had to control the
movement of every grain of sand, the path of every falling leaf... or
the actions of ever-interacting human beings? He prefers to give us
freedom and to delight in those individuals who follow paths of good.
Good will ultimately prevail, for evil would be self-destructive, and
what creator wants to destruct his creation? So evil people and
organisations can exist. It is up to the powers of good in the world to
destroy them. How do we know what is good and what is evil? That is
where true and trusted religions come in: such as Christianity; in their
case they have the Holy Bible - which the believe to have been
'God-inspired'. (But since human beings wrote it, and had a cap on their
levels of understanding, there is scope for some misinterpretation and
human error here and there. (Not to mention the fact that powers have
changed its wording through the centuries.)</span><br />
<span class="st"><br /></span>
<span class="st">If you believe there is a devil as the ultimate essence
of evil then such an entity would most delight in fooling people who
start out believing in God and then turn their behaviour into the
opposite of what should be their true aims. What a laugh for the devil -
and what an achievement. ISIL is an example of this: religion gone
wrong to the extreme. And nations all over the world can see it is
wrong.</span><br />
<span class="st"><br /></span>
<span class="st">There are different ways to accept a God, and it it
wrong for a particular religion to disparage another if it also believes
in one God.</span><br />
<span class="st"><br /></span>
<span class="st">Christians believe there is an afterlife - Heaven - and
that, of course, is another realm of existence. Jesus told a repenting
criminal on an adjacent cross to him at his crucifixion that he would be
together with him in Heaven that very day. And if there is an
alternative existence for believers who die, one we are led to believe
is a better one than the physical world, that puts a whole new
complexion on people dying; they can move on to a better world. Our
point of view is restricted to this life, but God's is not. He can see
his other creations. He can see the better lives that exist for those
souls who had a bad deal in this world. And so must you. Think about the
wider picture, think about the freedom God gives us in this creation,
think about the promises he makes about a better life after death if we
believe in him, and just understand this world is a world of freedom. It
is up to use to identify and eliminate evil using the <u>uncorrupted</u>
word of God. And that is where things go wrong: when activists believe
in a corrupted idea about the word of God. And that is why God and evil
coexist. </span><br />
<span class="st"><br /></span>
<span class="st">It is up to each and everyone of us to determine the
right path. Deep within our selves God provides the means for us to
judge between right and wrong.</span><br />
<br />
<span class="st">When you 'get it' and add 'oh' to your understanding of God... you will see the Good. </span>Ian Kingsleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15461755918545707035noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2470114444326498932.post-42861128696825720182018-05-03T16:24:00.002+01:002018-05-03T16:24:43.591+01:00Allergies - Modern Living and MeI watched the BBC <i>Horizon </i>programme called <i>Allergies - Modern Living and Me</i>.
Its interesting conclusion was that in order for a human being to be
healthy it needs to be subject to to the right bacteria from birth in
order that it can educate our bodies. We need the right amount - and <i>diversity </i>-
of good bacteria if we are to be healthy. Amazingly, normal birth
through the vagina envelops a baby in important bacteria right from the
start. So those born by Caesarean <br />
section immediately get off to a
bad start - especially since they are often then exposed to a less
beneficial bacteria in intensive care wards. And if infants - especially
those younger than 1-year old - are given antibiotic courses, while
these might be necessary to kill off bad bacteria, the collateral damage
they do of also killing off good bacteria can lead to life-long
allergies. It also explains why we should try to avoid antibiotics at
any time, if we can. We need those health-giving mini-beasties, and
antibiotics work like a sledge-hammer to squash them all.<br />
<br />
It
appears that modern living in sanitised surroundings, often far removed
from the bacteria of the great outdoors, is also a factor, especially
for growing children. So getting them out there in the open air and that
outdoor bacteria that our ancestors knew and loved will help to
programme their bodies to live a happier and healthier life. This lack
of engagement with the great outdoors is almost certainly responsible
for less healthy individuals, so if you love your children, get them
outdoors poking around for beasties. <i>Horizon </i>showed that this
outdoor bacteria is easily brought inside, and then spread around, and
that the family dog is a great ambassador in doing just that. So get out
to the park, in the garden, follow the lead of that dog!<br />
<br />
This
is all particularly interesting to me because it helps prove just how
intimately we interact with the rest of creation. The billions of
bacteria we have on us - and especially within our gut - are not just
beneficial for our health: they are actually essential to life. And,
apparently, what is most important in all this is <i>diversity</i>. One
good bacterium is not enough; we need a variety. So while a given
probiotic might be great, a diversity of them is 'greater'. And fruit - a
'pre-biotic' - can help us to acquire them. It all begins to add up,
doesn't it, including that call for 'five a day'?<br />
<br />
So how diverse is your life?Ian Kingsleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15461755918545707035noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2470114444326498932.post-54855590378625188802016-06-21T22:45:00.001+01:002016-06-21T22:45:08.104+01:00SLS - a nasty chemical to know more about since you encounter it every day!'SLS for short' - or SodiumLauryl Sulfate for long. If you have the suspicion washing your face is making your skin
dry, or that shampooing is giving you an itchy scalp or making your eyes
sting, or that cleaning your teeth is giving you mouth ulcers, SLS is the likely cause. Read <a href="https://smartklean.wordpress.com/2011/09/08/top-10-reasons-to-avoid-sodium-lauryl-sulfate/" target="_blank">this article</a> on the ten top reasons to avoid using it and you will find it a bit scary. The most scary reason is that, whatever it's in, it helps other chemicals to penetrate your tissue; SLS is a penetration enhancer, meaning that its molecules are so small they’re
able to cross the membranes of your body’s cells. Once cells are
compromised, they become more vulnerable to other toxic chemicals that
may be with the SLS.<br />
Are you using it? Well not unless you use soaps, shampoos, toothpaste, detergents, mascara, mouthwash... the lists goes on.<br />
Why am I bothering to write up on it? Because this knowledge might help YOU as it did ME! For many decades I have frequently had bad ulcers on the sides of my tongue. Even when they were not making it painful to eat they were sitting there dormant, waitint to pounce. Then I read an article, did some reasearch, read the article I linked above, and then went down to Tesco to look at all their toothpaste and shampoos for the dreaded ingredient. I had come to the conclusion I wanted to try a toothpaste without SLS in case that was the cause of my tongue (and mouth) ulcers. The results of that were amazing. The only toothpaste I found without SLS was a range from Sensodyne; I now use their ProNamel. And guess what! Within a week my dormant tongue ulcers had gone! After decades of haunting me! Gone! Point proven?<br />
And if you would like to use a shampoo without it in (given it can permeate eyes, brain, heart and liver), then you might want to change from the usual ranges. Go for a kid's shampoo? Good try, but after checking every shampoo in the store I found it was in them all but one: yes products for adults AND children AND babies. The ONLY one I found without SLS was in a brown, pear-shaped bottle, callled Macadamia Oil by OGX Beauty Ltd (UK). (And it's nice to use!)<br />
So that's why I am going off-piste to tell you about SLS. Maybe, just maybe, this knowledge will help turn around someone else's health for the better.Ian Kingsleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15461755918545707035noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2470114444326498932.post-32790860225210193272016-05-06T12:03:00.001+01:002016-05-06T12:03:14.243+01:00If you can make your reader know how a character might react in a sitatuation they're real!<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjVNFZzLE_w1j9GBA729K0hbZPQhcfKXcpn95OpGEu-CO27V3RQslqSOoCMndRVsUM3WJl1EFvV_nSyHYH9jJjyhA2HrtlB9P4Ux06_Dzdtwx4zCczapbbxfiP1qtVhTZbDXUTbJMMpP-6B/s1600/JenniferLloydHerself.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjVNFZzLE_w1j9GBA729K0hbZPQhcfKXcpn95OpGEu-CO27V3RQslqSOoCMndRVsUM3WJl1EFvV_nSyHYH9jJjyhA2HrtlB9P4Ux06_Dzdtwx4zCczapbbxfiP1qtVhTZbDXUTbJMMpP-6B/s1600/JenniferLloydHerself.PNG" /></a></div>
Jennifer Lloyd - known as 'Jen' to her special friends, is the lead character in my new novel: 'The Grave Concerns of Jennifer Lloyd'.<br />
<br />
Readers will really be able to get into her head because she is both protagonist and first-person narrator. And she's a very strong 25 year-old with fierce ambitions to set aside a troubled past - which included sexual abuse in a children's home - and make a name for herself in her new career as a television presenter.<br />
<br />
Jen takes risks, and one of them was to say she had a Masters Degree in Ecology on a CV seen by her primary source of income: the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC). She fears that if they discover this her career will be over. So she has a plan. Make herself famous and they won't want to lose her. And that plan? To unmask a murderer: LIVE on-camera!<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiGba_FErIpLC9ErFOTuEzSqJKA3jC5-dpm9yo5kmWtgvZ-HMAvCuSoMFy9k8l7SZQuvS3HT9jqi1PsojXpf_X0NuM4Uv7QLW51PLU2M396r5injtj_8WcsAmsQvP4dmnyRpvrO4kw33Wt7/s1600/characters.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiGba_FErIpLC9ErFOTuEzSqJKA3jC5-dpm9yo5kmWtgvZ-HMAvCuSoMFy9k8l7SZQuvS3HT9jqi1PsojXpf_X0NuM4Uv7QLW51PLU2M396r5injtj_8WcsAmsQvP4dmnyRpvrO4kw33Wt7/s320/characters.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
Jen is just one of a number of very real characters, and this image is one I use on Twitter to introduce them - and to take people to<a href="http://www.iankingsley.com/books/jennifer-lloyd/characters-in-the-grave-concerns-of-jennifer-lloyd.php" target="_blank"> the page on my website which gives you far more detail</a>.<br />
<br />
I believe in strong characterisation, and I will tell you more about Jen herself in a future post. But here is a brief rundown on those you can see in this picture.<br />
<br />
Ami is Jen's best friend and confidant. She is Chinese and shared a room with Jen in the children's home. They've always been there for each other.<br />
<br />
Digby is owner of the Dorset house and gardens attraction called Solent House and Gardens. His wife died under suspicious circumstances with the police believing he was her killer. But lack of evidence got him off. Yet his handman disappeared the same night - and a pet do there also died. Far too many coincidences, and the reason why Jen feels there is a huge story to uncover: one that will make her famous.<br />
<br />
Susie is Jen's adored little poodle, Robin is Digby's son, Eric is Jen's boss, and Vera is Digby's housekeeper: very aggressive towards Jen's intrusion in the 'big house'. To find out more about them <a href="http://www.iankingsley.com/books/jennifer-lloyd/characters-in-the-grave-concerns-of-jennifer-lloyd.php" target="_blank">click here</a>. It will show you how real these characters really are.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhzLOXgP_JKC7jUsg5soTfFhXwJfm6526xHpSBhoGC2iJ_ML1xydBDhO4p1OykW34lGdkKc4JdUNURgwA5K1ALUmkBVV14jVnVvBL6kAjJ12E7xDc_Xcd9mfgdWYgRQdgHOOhIpyXticCoN/s1600/3%25263_Reviews_2200pxat100dpi_V1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><br /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgeOBIk5AtgDfFrfCpvE8UPM8kQroIDMH-f_OT-ruBAWBwcNm8gdHD272_xg91gcaZOw0CtG5bDfrJAechQ-lnOacp_MiFlCRbVr0wjFy00opP3mI0JhWD6YYht-PORFHMdbDmizl-anALh/s1600/characters.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><br /></a></div>
<br />Ian Kingsleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15461755918545707035noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2470114444326498932.post-19871489502684936692016-05-06T11:44:00.002+01:002016-05-06T11:44:32.179+01:00Strong characters are needed to engage a reader<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhCZR2K58zzvAKImLn5-9nArEL3EiChQuVbEmgkhu6SWNhkAdcbTYR576WWMITlb_nNHH_UP3A58jVwrY8XGWXoUXwrUK7xTJU2YVOL2ysOCyQh-lAuKhUmcJ4zEeCLdOh184umiJN4FpeH/s1600/JenLloydCover9p.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhCZR2K58zzvAKImLn5-9nArEL3EiChQuVbEmgkhu6SWNhkAdcbTYR576WWMITlb_nNHH_UP3A58jVwrY8XGWXoUXwrUK7xTJU2YVOL2ysOCyQh-lAuKhUmcJ4zEeCLdOh184umiJN4FpeH/s320/JenLloydCover9p.jpg" width="209" /></a></div>
My latest mystery thriller is now available from Amazon, Barnes & Noble and Waterstones. Select your favourite online store <a href="http://www.iankingsley.com/books/jennifer-lloyd/index.php" target="_blank">here</a>. It is mainly set in the real UK location of Christchurch, near Bournemouth.<a href="http://www.iankingsley.com/books/jennifer-lloyd/Christchurch-and-Bournemouth-locations.php" target="_blank"> I've published a couple of walks in the area</a> so you can walk in the footsteps of its protagonist and narrator, Jennifer Lloyd.<br />
<br />
It's getting some great reviews so far, so that's a relief - after at least 18 month's work.<br />
<br />
BookViral said it is: 'a fine melding of mystery thriller and contemporary fiction'. I agree it is a cross-over in that it offers far more character-depth than an ordinary thriller. That was my aim: to make it a really interesting read. I believe that while plot is the driver of a novel, strong characterisation is needed to engage a reader - and hence make a novel memorable. The same review also stated it was 'exceptionally entertaining'. Again the aim!<br />
<br />
So please check it out on my <a href="http://www.iankingsley.com/books/jennifer-lloyd/index.php" target="_blank">website </a>to discover why it is already on the 'To Read' lists of over 500 people on Goodreads.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />Ian Kingsleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15461755918545707035noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2470114444326498932.post-29712897196973550932016-03-24T22:31:00.000+00:002016-03-24T22:31:11.404+00:00'The Grave Concerns of Jennifer Lloyd' can now be pre-ordered from AmazonAn exciting day today. My upcoming mystery thriller, '<b>The Grave Concerns of Jennifer Lloyd</b>, has just appeared on Amazon. Fullest details are on <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1786106892/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=1786106892&linkCode=as2&tag=synergisebookwor&linkId=XNUBPDOVXSYVDBZV" target="_blank">Amazon.com</a> but it is also visible on most other sites including <a href="http://www.amazon.co.uk/Grave-Concerns-Jennifer-Lloyd/dp/1786106892/ref=la_B003Z1AXI0_1_5?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1458832961&sr=1-5">Amazon.co.uk</a>. So it shouldn't be many days before you see stock available. The Amazon sites allow you to pre-order. They email you when it is available and only take your cash then. So if you want a copy, get your order in now: and that will expedite them getting in the stock and will mean a quicker delivery.<br />
<br />
I can't wait for you to meet Jennifer Lloyd. She's been my preserve for far too long now. A constant companion. <br />
<br />
To find out more about this novel, read pre-pub reviews, etc, vist my website at: <a href="http://www.iankingsley.com/books/jennifer-lloyd/">www.iankingsley.com/books/jennifer-lloyd/</a>.<br />
<br />
If you enjoy reading this novel - and I've put a lot of effort into trying to deliver something entertaining and unusual - then please post an Amazon review afterwards. That would not only be very kind - it would be very helpful! I don't have a big publisher behind me - just an Indie - so your endorsement is the best kind of promotion I can hope for. Thank you so much!<br />
<br />
<br />Ian Kingsleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15461755918545707035noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2470114444326498932.post-4315940877573762592016-03-23T23:44:00.002+00:002016-03-23T23:44:45.207+00:00When A Character Takes Over!My third novel, a mystery thriller called <i>The Grave Concerns of Jennifer Lloyd</i>, was the most unusual writing experience I have ever had, and that's after decades of writing one thing or another - and of making a living out of writing. Why?<br />
<br />
Firstly, it is first-person, from a woman's pont-of-view (POV). Yes, I have always been comfortable with scenes having female POV - although male is first choice, where this works best. But I have never before had the notion of using a female narrator for an entire book. (Thankfully, a female reviewer of 'Grave Concerns' said I created a 'charming young woman'. So that was a relief. Although, I should say, she is far from charming when push comes to shove!)<br />
<br />
But even that wasn't the reason this was my most unusual writing experience. The reason is that Jen - yes the titular Jennifer Lloyd - came into my mind fully-formed right from the outset of the story idea. More than that, she virtually dictated the direct manner she wanted to be presented on the page. She comes from a broken background and is short of friends, and she wanted the reader to be her friend: a confidant to whom she can relate, speak, joke.<br />
<br />
I could have tamed her, stood back and controlled her, pushed her around via third-person, but it is a real gift when a character comes to the fore like this, so I went with it. It proved to be a delightful experience, and it led to a great depth of character.<br />
<br />
Normally a novelist gets to know their characters gradually, as a novel progresses, so this really was unusual. My first (failed) attempts at writing novels when I was a teenager were beset by cardboard characters. I was plagued by not knowing how to make them seem real. In those days it seemed as if Sherlock Holmes' style observations - characteristations of a man with a limp, poor eyesight, and worse - were the things which distinguished character, but how wrong I was. I now know that it is their <i>psyche </i>which characterises them: how they think, what the want, what has moulded them...<br />
<br />
I now like to allow my readers to peep into their heads to understand what makes them tick - or, at least, figure it out from their behaviour and dialogue. I believe each novel has taught me a little more about achieving this, and 'Grave Concerns', and the deep knowledge I had of its protagonist, feels like an achievement because of the intimiate involvement I had with its lead character.<br />
<br />
When you boil it all down, you could say its all due to experience. But I think it's something more than that. It is a case of understanding how to <i>understand </i>(your characters)!<br />
<br />Ian Kingsleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15461755918545707035noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2470114444326498932.post-26134858181653840342014-02-14T11:24:00.000+00:002014-02-14T11:24:43.336+00:00'IF' by Rudyard Kipling<div id="body">
<div class="stanza-1">
If you can keep your head when all about you<br />Are losing
theirs and blaming it on you,<br />If you can trust yourself when all men doubt
you,<br />But make allowance for their doubting too;</div>
<div class="stanza-1">
<br /></div>
<div class="stanza-2">
If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,<br />Or being lied
about, don't deal in lies,<br />Or being hated, don't give way to hating,<br />And
yet don't look too good, nor talk too wise:</div>
<div class="stanza-2">
<br /></div>
<div class="stanza-3">
If you can dream - and not make dreams your master;<br />If you
can think - and not make thoughts your aim;<br />If you can meet with Triumph and
Disaster<br />And treat those two impostors just the same;</div>
<div class="stanza-3">
<br /></div>
<div class="stanza-4">
If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken<br />Twisted by
knaves to make a trap for fools,<br />Or watch the things you gave your life to
broken,<br />And stoop and build 'em up with wornout tools:</div>
<div class="stanza-4">
<br /></div>
<div class="stanza-5">
If you can make one heap of all your winnings<br />And risk it
on one turn of pitch-and-toss,<br />And lose, and start again at your
beginnings<br />And never breathe a word about your loss;</div>
<div class="stanza-5">
<br /></div>
<div class="stanza-6">
If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew<br />To serve
your turn long after they are gone,<br />And so hold on when there is nothing in
you<br />Except the Will which says to them: 'Hold on!'</div>
<div class="stanza-6">
<br /></div>
<div class="stanza-7">
If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue,<br />Or walk
with kings - nor lose the common touch,<br />If neither foes nor loving friends
can hurt you,<br />If all men count with you, but none too much;</div>
<div class="stanza-7">
<br /></div>
<div class="stanza-8">
If you can fill the unforgiving minute<br />With sixty seconds'
worth of distance run -<br />Yours is the Earth and everything that's in
it,<br />And - which is more - you'll be a Man my son!</div>
</div>
Ian Kingsleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15461755918545707035noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2470114444326498932.post-7299250897858923082013-10-16T11:07:00.001+01:002013-10-16T11:07:24.379+01:00Having Faith... in Faith Itself<br />
<div style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;">
<br /></div>
<br />
Christians can sometimes find faith difficult to sustain. It's easy enough to celebrate your faith when things go well, but what about when they don't? What about when you don't feel you're getting through to God?<br />
<br />
As a Christian with a very strong faith, I believe that if things go wrong it's my fault, and if things go right, God has a hand. Some would say that is naive - certainly non-believers would. As a Christian you should know that God is only walking beside you when you are on the right path. But what about when it is difficult to know which path to take?<br />
<br />
Just consider this for a moment. Put yourself in the place of a loving father (or mother, if you prefer). Your child has grown to an age where they understand right from wrong and need to make it a bit in the world on their own. You have given them guidance through their formative years, and they are venturing out in the big wide world. Do you believe that giving them advice on what to do at every step is the right way forward? Or do you think it might be better to encourage them to make their own decisions?<br />
<br />
Now if God was visible next to you, telling you what to do all the time, would you be leading a life of your own? If he spoke to you so clearly you had 100% certainty he was telling you precisely what to do all the time? At first you might think that would be cool, but would it? How would you develop as a person - as a soul - if you did not have to work out anything for yourself? As a parent you want to see your child making decisions and celebrate when they are right, and your teaching has paid off, or perhaps give them a hint at your displeasure if you see them straying from the right path. That is what God is doing with his children: with all believers. He gives us guidance through the Bible. As believers, his ways are in our hearts.<br />
<br />
In Old Testament times God was more proactive. People like Moses knew precisely what he wanted. Today God has stepped back. That does not mean he is aloof. It means he wants to see what you're made of. (Doubting) Thomas didn't believe what he heard from his close friends, the other disciples, about Jesus having appeared to them. He wanted to see for himself before he would believe. When he later saw Jesus, lo-and-behold, he did believe. He only believed when he saw the wounds in the resurrected body of Jesus. So Jesus told him, "Because you have seen me you believe; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed." (John 20:26-30). John 20 ends by saying that 'by believing you may have life in his name.'<br />
<br />
By retaining your faith you signal your belief to God. And when you retain it through difficult times you all the more strongly show it and get God's blessing as a result. God will be there to advise you when your faith is strong, your questions right and not just self-serving, and when you are wanting to walk along <i>his </i>path - although you might have to wait for him to be your guide if he does not think conditions are quite right for the journey. If he is not responding to you, ask yourself whether he is waiting for you to show a bit of initiative - while retaining your faith.<br />
<br />
If there was 100% certainty in God there would be no such thing as faith. Everyone would believe in a visible God and do as he directed - mostly out of fear of repercussions if they did not - and <i>you</i>, a believer, would no longer be unique to him. If you are able, think back to the pride you have when your children do well, make good decisions and set great examples - especially to their own children.<br />
<br />
Now that God requires faith as <i>evidence </i>of believe, he knows his sheep: the ones who follow,<i> in faith</i>. So do believe in Faith itself.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
_________________________________</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
My novel <a href="http://www.iankingsley.com/books/flying-a-kite/index.php" target="_blank"><b>Flying a Kite</b></a> is entertaining fiction that is aimed at providing
insight into faith for Christians who may sometimes wonder how belief
in God can be upheld against the findings of modern science. It is also
an easy-access read for non-believers, gently leading them to a position
where they consider the concept of God and make their own decision as
to whether the case presented by its protagonist makes logical sense in
the modern world. Please read it. If, as a result, you think it would
help others to develop their faith, then please write an Amazon review
to attract more readers whom it may also help - and tell your friends. </div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Please click the image below for more information, including a video trailer. Thank you!</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<a href="http://www.iankingsley.com/books/flying-a-kite/index.php" target="_blank"><img border="1" height="222" src="http://www.iankingsley.com/pics/flying-a-kite/kite-web-page-cover.jpg" width="147" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />Ian Kingsleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15461755918545707035noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2470114444326498932.post-71240900634227654172013-10-16T10:02:00.002+01:002013-10-16T10:02:27.007+01:00Sorry I rarely post. But I do frequently tweet as @authorkingsleyI'm so sorry that I rarely post. But, this is to inform you, I do tweet several times nearly every day. Which forces me to get to the point in 140 characters!<br />
However, I will try to post on this blog a little more. Starting today!Ian Kingsleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15461755918545707035noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2470114444326498932.post-32897614732479194432013-03-08T15:26:00.000+00:002013-03-08T15:26:13.714+00:00Defined: prologue, epilogue, foreword, preface, introduction, afterword, postscript, footnotes, end notesThere is great confusion between the names of material used to sandwich the main portion of a book. Here are some brief guidelines to distinguish between them. It is based upon my own research. Apologies for any errors!<br />
<br />
A <b>prologue</b> or <b>epilogue </b>is only used in fiction.<b> </b>All the rest are names for different types of material used in either fiction or non-fiction.<b> </b><br />
<br />
<b>All these things are optional. None of them presume the need for any other.</b><br />
<br />
<b>Prologue. </b>Only use a prologue in <b>fiction</b>. It comes BEFORE the actual beginning of the story to introduce characters or to explain past events or history that might need to be
explained, or to generally intrigue the reader. It's a great place to
provide information relevant to your story without have to go through
flashbacks or torturous dialogue in your first few chapters. Keep it short. Bear in mind many people skip it!<br />
<br />
<b>Epilogue.</b> Only use an epilogue in <b>fiction</b>. It comes AFTER the story in order to provide some conclusion when the story leaves something hanging. Don't include plot spoilers in case someone reads it before the story!<br />
<br />
<b>Foreword.</b> A foreword (NB NOT 'forward'), are words <b>BEFORE </b>the main text which are NOT written by the author. Someone else tell readers <b>WHY </b>they should read the book. This is the place for a guest celebrity or author to praise and introduce the book. It should make an emotional connection with the reader. A foreword should always be 'signed off' by someone other than the author.<br />
<br />
<b>Preface. </b>A preface explains <b>HOW </b>the book came about. It is similar to a foreword, but it is written BY the book's author. <br />
<br />
<b>Introduction.</b> An introduction does what it implies: it introduces <b>WHAT </b>follows as a concise overview for the reader.<br />
<br />
<b>Afterword. </b>An afterword is similar to a foreword except that it comes <b>AFTER </b>the main work instead of before it. Another purpose is to respond to critical remarks made about a previous edition.<br />
<br />
<b>Postscript.</b> Seldom used today, a postscript provides further information about the preceding work, perhaps containing brief information about a sequel or related material.<br />
<br />
<b>Footnotes.</b> These are used at the foot of a page to amplify topics raised on the SAME page. They are linked to by reference numbers within the main text. Ensure they are on the correct page in the final printed work! If you need more than a couple on any given page, perhaps you should consider using End Notes instead. Too many footnotes become tiresome!<b> </b><br />
<br />
<b>End Notes. </b>These are used at the end of a book to amplify topics raised within the main body. They are normally linked to by reference numbers within the main text. They are less intrusive than footnotes, but are less likely to be read.<br />
<br />
I hope you found this article helpful. Please visit my website, <a href="http://www.iankingsley.com/" target="_blank">iankingsley.com</a> to see what else I write!<br />
<br /><br />Ian Kingsleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15461755918545707035noreply@blogger.com41tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2470114444326498932.post-59873555714105754782012-12-17T16:27:00.005+00:002012-12-17T16:27:54.360+00:00Authors: Create a Simple Twitter Header to Look More ProfessionalTwitter now offers you the chance of upgrading the background image behind the header picture and profile description. Doing it makes your Twitter account look more professional. Check-out mine at <a href="http://www.twitter.com/authorkingsley/" target="_blank">@authorkingsley</a> to see what I am talking about.<br />
<br />
Just open your Twitter profile to Edit and you will see the 'Change Header' dropdown button offering 'Choose existing image'. OK, so you need to generate an image first. Here's how.<br />
<br />
I suggest you go for the maximum size they allow which is 1252 pixels wide by 626 pixels high. Use whatever graphics program you are familiar with to set up an image, remembering that: a) the default white text of your profile needs a dark area for the bottom half of the image to be readable; b) your photo will be superimposed centre-top, and you need to allow for that. Be aware that Twitter automatically darkens the bottom of any image you upload so as to aid a satisfactory contrast between the superimposed profile lettering and your image.<br />
<br />
Some people have managed to merge a head-and-shoulders into the profile full-face picture but the chances of you getting that to align well and look good are very small. So why try?<br />
<br />
What I did on my page was to plant a book cover image on either side of the profile picture, each at around 300-350 pixels high. You could use a straight black background on which to mount them. I used a stars background to add a little more interest. Putting cover images is a great way of signalling what you are and what you have produced. You get a preview during the initial phase of uploading so, if things don't look quite right, adjust the source image. Be prepared to slide the book cover images around to look their best.<br />
<br />
You know what they say about a picture being worth a thousand words - and Twitter will never let you have those!<br />
<br />
That's it! Just upload that image and there you go. If necessary afterwards, change the background image to better match the header, via Settings > Design and then the 'Change background' tab. (You can also upload your own image here, but beware of getting too clever and presenting a busy-busy appearance which can be off-putting. I believe simple background images work best.)<br />
<br />
Oh, and if you found this article helpful, please follow me on Twitter. And, as a fellow author, it would be fantastic if you re-tweeted the odd tweet about my books now and then. Thanks a lot!Ian Kingsleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15461755918545707035noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2470114444326498932.post-63930837643568797072012-11-22T10:34:00.000+00:002012-11-22T10:34:16.323+00:00Coincidence: a Great Pitfall for NovelistsI speak here mainly as a reader - but <i>to </i>writers. 'Coincidence' should be avoided like the plague.<br />
<br />
So what inspires me to write on this subject? What has riled me enough to warrant a new posting when all my attention is usually directed to my own writing or those few 140 characters required for tweets? It is my hatred of unbelievable coincidence as a prime mover in a novel. Coincidence is an error to avoid for would-be authors and a great pitfall for established authors. Let me give you an example from the book I am reading right now.<br />
<br />
Firstly, I am not going to tell you the (well established) author or the book title. Why? I do not like to put another author down. I wish them all well. I seek only to make a point about style to help other writers avoid this pitfall. Here is what has happened in this book as an example of what I am talking about.<br />
<br />
A married woman accidentally meets a recently separated guy she fancies in a supermarket, has a brief conversation with him, learns his name, and then they part. After that she longs to see him again. Fast forward. She accompanies her doctor husband for the first time ever when he makes a middle-of-the-night call to a patient and, from that incident, learns that hubby made his first ever house call to this same house, and also learns something about him she doesn't like very much. As a result she walks out of his house after a row, that night, still in night clothes, walks and walks, then, despite deserted dark streets, collides with her hunk putting his dog out for a wee. Yeah, right!<br />
<br />
Get the picture? <b>Coincidence 1:</b> The first time she does a house call with her hubby it is to the house he made his first house call to (and that is significant, in itself). <b>Coincidence 2:</b> As a result she learns of his unfortunate previous disclosure - immediately in brief conversation. <b>Coincidence 3:</b> Having longed to meet her hunk again, she collides with him in the dark. Three coincidence in the middle of one night! How real is that?<br />
<br />
Okay, coincidences happen, but in fiction, you cannot rely on that sort of thing - and fiction needs to be more real than real. In this case coincidence is responsible for inciting incidents upon which the story outcome hinges. As a reader, a coincidence as large as the last one - bumping into hunk on deserted streets in the middle of the night - is a warning. The author is lucky if I read on and, any more like this and I shall stop reading. My 'suspension of disbelief' has been broken.<br />
<br />
The author might claim it was essential the heroine meets her hunk. But how long does it take to come up with a more believable solution? In two minutes I thought of two alternatives. Knowing his name (as she does), what if she just found him in the phone book and went round there desperate to talk because she thought he would be sympathetic? Or, given the guy seemed to fancy her, what if he had given her his card with an invitation to call him? You see, it is not too difficult to find more plausible ways of bringing boy and girl together. It is lazy not to look for the best - and most believable - way to do it. Professionalism demands it.<br />
<br />
So I read on, with trepidation, awaiting the next coincidence - and it is unlikely I shall read another book by the same author. Authors have a responsibility to deal with their readers well, given they invest their time - and money - in the author's product.Ian Kingsleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15461755918545707035noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2470114444326498932.post-59114671183227230472012-09-10T10:48:00.000+01:002012-09-10T16:51:16.560+01:00Blurb for my forthcoming novel: 'Flying a Kite'Dear Readers, <br />
<br />
This post includes the rear cover blurb for my forthcoming novel: <b>'Flying a Kite'</b>. (There is a draft cover image at the bottom of this post.) <br />
<br />
If you are an avid reader interested in reading this novel prior to publication and then posting an Amazon (and optionally a Goodreads) review when it comes out, please contact me via my website <a href="http://www.iankingsley.com/contact/" target="_blank">iankingsley.com/contact</a>. I can send you a pdf copy. Please let me know the genres that most interest you when you do so. This book is 123,000 words (around 300 pages). I love to get early feedback. Please tell me your Twitter handle (if appropriate) and indicate to which Amazon site you would be able to post (eg Amazon.com, Amazon.co.uk, Amazon.ca, etc). My Twitter followers are especially welcome!<br />
<br />
<br />
Many thanks for the time you give undertaking this reader review. It is really appreciated. The way it will work is you email me your review after reading the book. Ideally I would like to get your feedback within 2-3 weeks. I will later advise you when the book is available on Amazon. After that I would appreciate it if you could post your review there within a week.
Looking forward to hearing from you if you can fit in with this request.
<br />
<br />
Kind regards,<br />
Ian Kingsley<br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>REAR COVER BLURB OF 'FLYING A KITE':</b></div>
<br />
Money had always solved everything for multi-millionaire Aldo Galliano. So when faced with his trickiest decision ever - whether to counter imminent death by cryonics or faith - he offers a one-million pound prize for the most convincing argument either ‘for’ or ‘against’ the existence of God. Enter Bruce Kramer, a dropout theology graduate, who takes on mankind’s ultimate challenge. But dangerous rivals will stop at nothing to prevent his success. <br />
<br />
Set in Bath, Rome, Lake Garda, Tenerife, Los Angeles and Santa Barbara, this novel sweeps the reader along in the wake of its numerous eccentric characters - all driven by their own hidden agendas. These include resolute yet romantically-challenged Bruce, canny but clown-like Bertie, geeky and gobsmacked Martin, flirty flame-from-the-past Carla, possessive and put- upon girlfriend Julia, stunningly sexy model Sofia and her pragmatic photographer boyfriend Luigi, prim and prickly mother Ada, smart and sassy PA Emma, psychotic psychologist Max, nutty ex-NASA engineer Victor... and maybe even God. (Or was that just in Bruce’s mind?) <br />
<br />
Combining the wit of Marina Lewycka, the spiritual insight of C. S. Lewis, and all the twists and turns of a great mystery thriller, this unforgettable novel is both entertaining and thought-provoking. But beware. Like one of Galliano’s favourite lattes, while it might appear frothy on the surface, a high caffeine brew lurks deep below that may keep you awake at night... thinking. In fact, you may never think the same way again. <br />
<br />
‘Very fluid, smooth and flows along at a lovely pace. Really engaging from the start. Like The Shack, there is a niche for this kind of book.' -Gillian McDade, author of Standing Man. <br />
<br />
‘Very good, and addresses a universal question in a much better way than Dan Brown in Angels & Demons where the God vs science debate is just another sub-plot in another ciphering book. In Flying a Kite it's the main plot thread, convincingly dealt with, and riveting.’ -Richard Pierce author of Dead Men. <br />
<br />
‘Characters are direct and effective. I enjoyed the pace which allows the reader to think about the important concepts by himself.' -Heikki Hietala, author of Tulagi Hotel.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg7LPylOzWhv62czIkNU1vX-ffjbl12cPjj5XoWanz1qUhIZmllIiFFics-ZF5_icn7HrfnLLq0uYkXZSd3CN7jsi0gou3tiS8Aqk32HseuOmNGczLptTf1A2YmEvwAlltg1CGpnAKAVqUg/s1600/_Cover-Proof_Thumbnail.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="300" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg7LPylOzWhv62czIkNU1vX-ffjbl12cPjj5XoWanz1qUhIZmllIiFFics-ZF5_icn7HrfnLLq0uYkXZSd3CN7jsi0gou3tiS8Aqk32HseuOmNGczLptTf1A2YmEvwAlltg1CGpnAKAVqUg/s400/_Cover-Proof_Thumbnail.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<br />Ian Kingsleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15461755918545707035noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2470114444326498932.post-70701898526556637612012-08-03T14:16:00.003+01:002012-10-16T11:40:21.451+01:00Guaranteed book promotion in return for a peer author reviewI am looking for a peer author review - or more particularly, a cover endorsement - for my upcoming book with the working title 'Flying a Kite' - to be published shortly. The bottom of this post contains the blurb. Any published authors of fictional works interested in undertaking this will be amply rewarded in return by way of a year's free promotion of any of their published books in the 'Departure Lounge Bookshop' of my popular travel website. This is the online equivalent of the departure lounge bookshop in an airport. People planning vacations on the travel site see four books on a bookshelf on each travel article page. Titles are chosen randomly to appear on any given page, so your title will appear on every bookself page in due course, covering hundreds of great travel articles. Every bookshelf display contains a bestselling title, so your title always appears with a bestseller. Purchases are spontaneous, with vacation reading in mind.<br />
<br />
The bookshelf display shows a good side cover image, a sell paragraph, and up to four buttons leading to sales, reviews or author website pages. The well-ranked travel website, <a href="http://www.synergise.com/">www.synergise.com</a>, gets over 8,000 <u>unique visitors</u> every week, and, unlike Amazon, the competition for your title to be seen is small. Typically we only cover around 50 titles at a time. For more information go to: <a href="http://www.synergise.com/books/">www.synergise.com/books/</a>.<br />
<br />
The blurb for the book I wish to be reviewed is as follows. It is a supernatural thriller...<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div class="MsoNormal" style="mso-pagination: widow-orphan;">
<span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;">Money has always solved everything for dying multi-millionaire Aldo Galliano, so when faced with his trickiest decision ever – whether to parry the sting of death through cryonics or faith – he offers a one-million pound prize for the best argument ‘for’ or against ‘God’. Bruce Kramer, a wavering theology graduate, decides to take on mankind’s ultimate challenge. With just 6 months in hand, his team battles to succeed against enemies who will stop at nothing to prevent him winning the prize and ratifying modern science with the Bible – a task only surpassed by the difficulty of sorting out his own tangled love-life! This thought-provoking and memorable novel will entertain and amuse with its array of eccentric but wise characters. It is an inspiration for the soul in a doubting and troubled age.</span><span style="color: blue; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"></span></div>
</blockquote>
If you are interested please contact me as soon as possible using the contact information on the following page of my author website: <a href="http://www.iankingsley.com/contact/">www.iankingsley.com/contact/</a>.Ian Kingsleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15461755918545707035noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2470114444326498932.post-56397087916997825752012-07-24T14:59:00.000+01:002012-07-24T14:59:10.685+01:00Looking for God in the Modern World<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if !mso]><img src="//img2.blogblog.com/img/video_object.png" style="background-color: #b2b2b2; " class="BLOGGER-object-element tr_noresize tr_placeholder" id="ieooui" data-original-id="ieooui" /> <style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) }
</style> <![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
</style> <![endif]--> <br />
Has science given us adequate grounds for assuming there is no God? Can there be no God because there is nowhere for him to reside? Can there be no Heaven because there is nowhere within the universe which would match up to what religion leads us to believe? Can we talk of God as ‘Him’ when there seems no place in the universe to contain him? And if God is a ‘He’, where IS He? Where could he be, since he could hardly be part of his own creation?<br />
<br />
Richard Dawkins argues it is illogical to assume there could be a God. But would Dawkins exist without there being a God? He thinks our world happened by chance. Yet, although he allows chance to come up with all the extraordinary coincidences that allowed for life, he does not feel there is any chance that he could believe there was a creating force behind it all. Yet even Dawkins creates worlds when he is dreaming - ‘dream worlds’ - yet they would not exist without the mind of Dawkins. Now ask yourself this. Where is the mind of Dawkins which creates those dreams? Where is your own mind?<br />
<br />
Perhaps you think your ‘mind’ and ‘brain’ are the same things, but they are not. In my book <a href="http://www.iankingsley.com/books/reality-check-science-meets-religion/index.php" target="_blank">Reality Check: Science Meets Religion</a>, I provide ample evidence they cannot be the same thing. For example, there is ample evidence of telepathy, and if that is true, how could thoughts pass between physical brains? Consider, instead, that ‘brain’ is merely the physical representation of - or interface with - ‘mind’. Imagine it to be a bit like a radio tuner. The electrical signals within the tuner reflect what is going on in the brain, but I am suggesting the thoughts giving rise to that activity comes from a separate mind - like the transmitter which transmits radio signals. Imagine mind is something quite distinct from space and time and that your mind is just an autonomous part of a bigger conscious entity. Telepathy is then explained as transference of data between different areas of that consciousness, just like data transfer from one part of a computer’s memory to another.<br />
<br />
As I relate in my book, I had a shared dream with my wife, confirmed when we awoke in the middle of the night and discussed the tremendous identical detail we shared. Again, I can assure you our brains never touched! Shared - or ‘reciprocal’ - dreams are further evidence of a consciousness that is separate to brain. And just like your own consciousness can create dream worlds in which everything seems real to us, so a higher mind - the Mind of God - can create the apparent reality of our universe.<br />
<br />
Imagine this to be correct for a moment. The universe - in fact the entire space-time world - then becomes a product of that mind since the original idea came into God’s mind: at the ‘Big Bang’. Science merely seeks to understand that creation but, growing ‘understanding’ and ‘discovery’ does not exclude the forces which created it. The creating force then lies beyond space-time, which is a more logical assumption than there being a physical God within our physical world, who created our physical world. A creator cannot be part of his own creation. The Bible tells us ‘man’ was created in the ‘image of God’. If the essence of us is our minds then we are in the ‘mental’ - not ‘physical’ - image of God. That makes more sense, doesn’t it?<br />
The more science learns about our world, the more it discovers it has yet to learn. Yet the ‘models’ science creates are no more than that: ‘models’. We might have originally imagined substance to be lumps of matter (molecules, atoms, sub-atomic particles). We may now imagine ‘wave theory’ better explains it today. Or that the latest advances in thinking about multi-dimensional worlds may be nearer the truth. But, in essence, our ‘reality’ is no more than an image within our non-physical minds. That is why this ‘apparent’ world and your dream worlds seem equally real at the time you experience them.<br />
<br />
Wonder if there is a Heaven? In theoretical physics, ‘M-theory’ is an extension of string theory which assumes there are multiple dimensions; that ‘strings’ form the visible world - and invisible worlds. So Heaven could also be an invisible world which can interpenetrate our own world. Radio waves do that, we do not see them, but our radios and TVs prove they exist. When Jesus was asked by some Pharisees <em>when</em> the Kingdom of Godwould come, he replied, “The Kingdom of God does not come with your careful observation, nor will people say ‘Here it is,’ or ‘There it is,’ because the Kingdom of God is <em>within</em> you.” (Luke 17:20-21.) Please note that Jesus used the <em>present</em> tense, so it already existed, and the ‘within you’ could have been a ‘tongue in cheek’ remark to also mean it interpenetrated our world - <em>unseen</em>. Jesus loved word-play. Heaven need not have physical limits in another realm - so plenty of room for everyone.<br />
<br />
Our world - and potentially other worlds - are fantastically complicated, and the fact they co-exist in such stability does suggest they all stem from a single force. Indeed, the ultimate aim of science is to come up with a single ‘Theory of Everything’; so scientists even think that way. And if everything follows a single theory, it comes from a single source. And what do some people call that single force? Why, GOD, of course!<br />
If this line of thought interests you, please visit my author website and read about my book ‘Reality Check: Science Meets Religion’. It provides both the evidence to support the theory that mind is separate to brain, and that science is merely the study of God’s creation. With this new viewpoint, science and the Bible are seen to be complimentary, not contradictory. And if you can ratify science and God in your mind, you are in a favourable position to truly believe in God and thereby find your entire life changed, if you were not a believer. And if you were a believer who found it necessary to ‘be in two minds’ in order to ratify your faith and your belief in science, this evidence could be a great relief. I believe in God AND science. I hope this short argument makes you want to discover why you can too. And if this article interested you, please tell your friends to read it too.Ian Kingsleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15461755918545707035noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2470114444326498932.post-57260384432148040172012-07-05T10:50:00.000+01:002012-07-05T10:56:01.995+01:00Twitter needs a #timeshift functionThe term 'global village' might be 'old hat' but it does reflect the world as we see it today through the internet and social media. Especially so in Twitter. Yet the Twitter timeline means even fantastic tweets disappear into a black hole far too quickly - unless you take the trouble to check out an individual's specific timeline of tweets.<br />
<br />
That is why I am campaigning to Twitter to create a time-shift dropdown box on the home page. I suggest it has the following options: 'NOW, -6hr, -12hr, -18hr'. Talk about it on Twitter using the hashtag: #timeshift.<br />
<br />
For example, if I, in the UK, set it at say '-18hr', I would see my timeline as it would have appeared 18 hours previously: when the US was truly awake and I was asleep. I could respond to people who tweeted a given afternoon during the following morning. By using a tweet scheduler, so my tweets also appeared time-shifted, they could view my responses around the same time the following day: the time they are likely to be online. As an author it would put me in better touch with readers and potential readers in other parts of the world. At present I must remember to tweet when I am about to pack in after a working day in order to be seen on the Atlantic coast. Yes, I can use a tweet scheduler to be seen by them, but not to see their tweets.<br />
<br />
So how about it Twitter? In any case, a time-shifter would be great since it would give me access to the wisdom of people I would never otherwise see.<br />
<br />
Here is a tweet you could use to help promote this:<br />
<br />
<span class="tweet_tweet">#Twitter needs #timeshift function to open us to other time zones. Check this out to see why and then RT to trend: http://bit.ly/Pi0q28</span><br />
<br />
<span class="tweet_tweet">If enough people did this it could trend - and get Twitter's attention! Thank you if you support this through tweets!</span>Ian Kingsleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15461755918545707035noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2470114444326498932.post-56065875832983277682012-05-03T15:53:00.002+01:002012-05-03T15:55:23.878+01:00A New Role for Publishers?More and more authors will inevitably move towards self-publishing now the world is changing. After all, they offer little to new writers today, and they confirm this is true by closing their doors to submissions. They rely on 'heroes of old' to keep them going - and agents finding new blood. But agents will start to disappear as well if things don't improve for publishers. Agents cannot live on stagnation. Hello publishers! You do not have a sustainable plan.<br />
<br />
Conventional publishers should perhaps ask themselves the question of what their new role can be in such a world. Let's start with the fact that much of what is self-published is actually mediocre. There, perhaps, lies a clue. Perhaps the new role of a publisher should be to filter out the good writers from all that chaff. Make it worthwhile for new authors to consider approaching them. As more and more bookshops close, the old sale-or-return model is defunct. Instead, put exciting new authors on the shelves, go back to the old notion that bringing new talent to the fore was the way forward. Why not? Yes, it would force booksellers to choose their stock more carefully, but that is what all other retailers do, after all. New talent is, after all, the new way forward. And if conventional publishers get rid of returns, they can afford the extra cost of selling by print-on-demand methods. Do not despise it, embrace it instead! PoD is the ace which should be up your sleeves. PoD profits are not eaten away by returns. Sales actually mean SALES! And, guess what, as a result of greater numbers, PoD printing would become much cheaper for publishers - and further increase their profits.<br />
<br />
A new model like this can support publishing new authors: in both print and eBook. It could also lead to profits and, with profits, there is the opportunity to actually employ people to rummage around in a slush pile again!Ian Kingsleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15461755918545707035noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2470114444326498932.post-36048633398741023202012-04-30T15:54:00.000+01:002012-05-01T11:00:18.695+01:00OTT Security on Savings AccountsOK, I know security is a big issue today. I am not naive. But when my joint building society savings account was recently taken over by one of the Big Five banks it looked so over the top I bailed out before the transfer date. My wife and I were showered with letters about authorization numbers, pin numbers, membership numbers, plastic cards, even pin numbers for website, all different for internet and phone and for each of us, some ten letters to date, and still counting. It seemed as if they wanted to lock our money into their safe for *their* safekeeping, never to be retrieved again - they hope. Come on, let's be sensible about this. Life it too short.Ian Kingsleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15461755918545707035noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2470114444326498932.post-44666610734653511542012-04-11T11:14:00.000+01:002012-04-11T11:14:37.715+01:00Have Publishers Finally Lost the Plot?Have you stepped into a UK bookshop lately? Suddenly there seems to be an upsurge of trade paperbacks: you know, those large, weighty tomes the size of hardbacks. In fact, they are hardbacks disguised as paperbacks. And guess what. They cost a lot more than conventional paperbacks. You get larger print for your money, and more paper - if a heavy wad of the stuff is what you want - but what you don't get is something light and easy to carry around and read - like a Kindle, say. (Oh, and Kindle can do large print as well!)<br />
<br />
Yes, I think publishers have finally lost the plot. I imagine this is their desperate response to the trend towards the eBook reader. But if people want cheap and light reading material, as they get with an eBook reader, why would trade paperbacks be the answer to pull them back to print publications? I can see that the publisher expects to get a bigger profit because of the higher price, and there is no work to do if the hardback has already been published: just slap on different covers. But do readers want to pay a higher price and clog up more of their bookshelf? So, please, think on. I prefer paperbacks to Kindles, I like to see more than a paragraph at a time, I like the smell and feel of a book, I like books on my bookshelf, but I HATE holding heavy ones. I avoided hardbacks because of this (and price), and I shall avoid trade paperbacks for the same reason. And if that trend continues, it might well push me over the edge to Kindle!<br />
<br />
Publishers got themselves into this pickle when they went for quick profits - at the cost of not developing new authors to take them into the future. Now they are reaping a lean harvest as a return. We are now at another ground-breaking point, so might I now humbly suggest that publishers forget trying to re-invent print and embrace the eBook while establishing a sensible price that becomes standard. They do not, after all, have Tesco twisting their arm in this arena. Self-publishing authors are forced to charge peanuts for eBooks, but something significantly above the £1/$1 mark, yet below the paperback mark, would be ideal as a norm. It might allow self-publishers to charge something similar instead of working for scraps. And given the low production costs for eBooks compared with print, please can publishers then be fair with authors and give they a high royalty? And a budget towards promotion, too? After all, promotion is all the publisher can tempt the author with when the can quite easily publish an eBook themselves.<br />
<br />
The people who reap rewards with eBooks do so through bulk sales. Hear that, publishers? BULK SALES? Go for that - with a mid-price - and everyone can win: authors, publishers and readers. <br />
<br />
So far as print is concerned, the sale-or-return model that publishers have used for generations was never a good one, and that should now be trashed - instead of returned books. Offer retailers more profit margin as compensation for no returns, and offer authors a higher royalty when you don't have to build in the budget for recycling returned books to make motorways.<br />
<br />
Now, despite all this electronic stuff, we must not see the death of the printed book. And I am sure we will not. But we must embrace the electronic word as well. Now is the time to establish some common sense when it comes to pricing and royalties and in the way forward in both print and eBook. The trouble is, common sense is not all that common when it comes to breaking a mould.Ian Kingsleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15461755918545707035noreply@blogger.com0