Writing 101: How to Add a Table of Contents to an eBook

Let's face it: ereaders are awesome. They're lightweight, they're easy to hold, they can store thousands of books...they totally look like those electronic pads the characters on Star Trek walked around with all the time. I'm practically having a relationship with my Kindle. But if there's anything about reading ebooks that's not-so-awesome, it's the navigation. You can fix all that, and make the best parts of your book more accessible, by including a table of contents.

The TOC in the Modern Age

Many authors and readers consider the Table of Contents to be a bit of a wasted page in print books. Why tell me the names and location of every chapter, if I'm obviously going to find them while I'm reading anyway? But in the world of ebooks, the TOC is anything but a waste. For navigation's sake alone, you need to include it.

In ebooks, each entry in the TOC also acts as a link. Readers can very quickly and easily access a specific chapter anytime they wish...and don't you want them to keep coming back to your book, again and again? If they have to sit and page through tons of text, they're going to get frustrated and give up. Electronic things are supposed to make life easy.

Adding a Table of Contents also gives ebooks another invaluable feature: a bulleted read meter. Open an ebook, go to a random page, and look to the bottom of your ereader. See the line telling you how many pages or what percentage of the book you've gone through? When a TOC is in place, little tick marks will appear that show a reader when they're approaching a new chapter. It's a nice little feature, one that makes things easier and helps to naturally separate your text.

And if you still aren't convinced that you need a TOC for your ebook, then let this sway you: it's really easy to add one.

How to Add a TOC

 Adding a Table of Contents is no big deal, but it makes a big difference. There are approximately two ways you can go about it.

• HTML

Yes, it's almost always the answer to any ebook problem. Want to add something to your ebook? There's a code for that. And when it comes to adding a TOC, it's this: 

<div id="toc"> <p>Table of Contents</p>

<p><a href="#chapt1">Chapter One</a></p>

<p>a href="#chapt2">Chapter Two</a></p> 

and so on. 

Within the text of the book, you should place these tags around each chapter to link them to your TOC: 

<mpb:pagebreak />

 <h1><a name="chapt1">Chapter One</a></h1>

If you're using chapter titles or some system of your own, substitute "Chapter One" and all the rest with whatever you've used for your chapters. 

Frankly, it can be a pretty drawn-out affair, and if you get a single character wrong when you're writing out your HTML the Table of Contents won't work correctly. This is why I use my ebook conversion software, MobiPocket, instead. Load up your file, and simply hit the "Table of Contents" button to create it much more easily.

• The Easy Way

Luckily, there's an even easier way to create a TOC for your book: use Smashwords. There is no easier way to convert a .doc file into an ebook than this system, and if there is I haven't found it yet (but I'm open to suggestions). You cannot make use of this system if you're going to enroll your book in the KDP program. But if you aren't going the Amazon KDP route, Smashwords is absolutely the easiest way to go about doing this. Simply submit your .doc file to the system, go through the automatic conversion process, and download the Kindle-friendly copy of your own book free. You can get it in .mobi, .epub, .pdf and other formats. Here's the important part: Smashwords automatically generates a Table of Contents.

New Review: Falling in Love with Justice

 "I liked how thrilling and mysterious everything really was." Justice (Deck of Lies, #1) recently received a rating of "loved it!" at Livin' Life Through Books. Read the full review for more tidbits about the first book in the Deck of Lies series.

Writing 101: What, Exactly, is a Dystopian Book?

 It has come to my attention, during my various adventures in writer and reader forums around the Internet, that lots people -- even some authors -- don't actually know what a dystopian society is. It's not really a big deal...until you start incorrectly marketing your work as something it's not. It's true that a lot of readers might not know the difference, but plenty of them will. The readers aren't the ones who are going to look bad for not understanding the genre...you are. It's time to find out just exactly what makes a dystopian book dystopian. Don't assume you already know; you might be one of the people who made me sigh recently with a forum post. 

Dystopian Society

 If you want to get technical about it, calling something "dystopian" isn't altogether accurate anyway. More properly it ought to be referred to as a dystopian society, and that's the first piece of really important information you need to know. Dystopian books and stories of all kinds are deeply rooted in the society itself; often, authors will present the readers with a world view of this society through the eyes of a main protagonist.

 What's characteristic of a dystopian society? For starters, the people who live within it are being oppressed and usually wholly controlled by some sort of all-powerful government or collective. Control is the most important word here, and one of the defining characteristics of a dystopian society. In many cases, there are at least two distinct classes present in such stories: the people who are being controlled, and those who are doing the controlling. This type of society is also called anti-utopian, and the word itself is derived from the Greek word for "bad."

Dystopian vs. Post-Apocalyptic Societies

It seems to me, after wading through all the confused readers and writers on the forums (which shall not be named), that the big stumbling block in all this is post-apocalyptic societies. People who don't fully understand the idea of a dystopian society seem to think that dystopian societies are identical to post-apocalyptic societies, that in fact the two go hand-in-hand. This is patently incorrect.

A post-apocalyptic society isn't necessarily dystopian. In this type of society, some horrible event has occurred which has fundamentally changed the world on a global scale. Nuclear war, catastrophic weather events, alien invasion -- take your pick. Often, a new society rises in this new world in place of the old society...but there's no reason to presuppose that this new society is dystopian simply because the Apocalypse has occurred.

The Necessary Separation

I'm going to go ahead and blame lots of the current confusion on The Hunger Games, though let me add that I have nothing against Suzanne Collins or her work or her fans or anything else that has to do with her books. In The Hunger Games, a society which is both dystopian and post-apocalyptic is the setting for the events which take place. However, readers and writers should not take this to mean that all post-apocalyptic societies are dystopian, or vice versa.

I recently saw a list of "favorite dystopian movies" which included such films as Waterworld. This is not a correct classification of this film, based on my somewhat hazy memory and cursory research. As I understand it, the "bad guys" in this film are pirates...and not government officials. People are not being controlled. They're just trying to figure out life on the water. Also on the list: The Postman, The Book of Eli and Repo! The Genetic Opera. Two of these films are post-apocalyptic, and there is little to no mention of the government in them. One of these films is dystopian, but not post-apocalyptic. 

Your Role as an Author

What do you look for if you want to know the difference? Control. Catastrophe marks post-apocalyptic stories; control marks dystopian stories. Knowing the difference is important if you're going to write a story that's one, the other, or both. If I go shopping for some all-hell-has-broken-loose post-apocalyptic fare and find a bunch of dystopian stories instead, I'm not just going to hate you as the writer who got it wrong. 

I might hate all indies, because I might think that none of them have any idea what they're talking about. So don't be that guy. Know your business, know your genre, know your categories. Know what the heck you're writing, and how to identify it. If you don't identify it properly, you're not going to like the way you get identified as an author hack. Never forget that the title author is absolutely necessary for the word authoritative. That is not a mistake.

Plagiarism and Copyright Violations: What to Do When it Hapens to You

 Okay, I Google myself. I'll go ahead and admit it. It's not narcissism, it's a really good idea for indie authors and bloggers of all kinds. You want to know what people are responding to, what they're not responding to, what's working and what isn't. But even if you don't want to know all that, you should still Google yourself. How else are you going to know that someone out there is stealing your content? 

Content Theft

Content theft is incredibly common on the Internet, though you may not be aware of it until it actually happens to you. And if you aren't actively checking for it, you may never become aware of it. Some thefty site out there might be copying every single one of your blog posts, verbatim, and reaping the benefits of your hard work. Unless you're doing regular checks, they're going to get away with it.

• Copyscape. Check your URLs through copyscape. Always run your recent URLs through the site, not just the main URL of your home page. 
• Online search. Run your name periodically through your favorite search engine(s). If you suspect that your content is being copied but you can't find it, add one or two of the words from the title of your post. For example, I might search for Jade Varden, writing 101 to see who's stealing my posts.

Online Copyright Violations

I'm not just an advocate of protecting oneself against copyright violations -- I'm a victim. This particular post was born several days ago, when I happened to stumble across no less than nine different sites that had copied one of my blog posts, in whole, and posted it without giving me so much as a by-your-leave.

It's illegal for them to do that, you know. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act, DMCA for short, says that it's not cool for one site to copy content from another site and re-publish it without the original poster's knowledge or consent -- and obviously I'm paraphrasing here. The point is, you have rights. One of them says that if you don't want someone taking content right from your site and putting it somewhere else, you don't have to take it. 

But you're going to have to really, really work for it if you want to make things right again. 

What to Do About It

First, identify that the content is indeed yours, and that you never gave this other site permission to re-distribute it. Locate the original content on your own site. Make note of the URL where it appears on your site, the full title and the date on which you posted it. When you're sure the theft is genuine, roll up your sleeves.

• Look for contact info. First, you're required to contact the owner of the theft site and request (politely) that they remove the unauthorized content. Perform a thorough and complete search of the site to find this contact information. If it's there, send your email and sit back and wait. If the owner does not respond to you after a week, or if they do respond and tell you to go screw yourself, take further action.
• Look for the owner. Don't be fooled by templates. When you go in search of the owner of a website or blog, it's easy to get led astray. Many sites, particularly those that make it a habit of stealing content, use templates from popular blogging sites like Typepad, WordPress and Blogger. They do this in order to make it look like they're running through these sites, but in some cases they actually are not. You're going to have to investigate. 
• Look up the domain. Go to a domain-finding site to find out to whom the site actually belongs. Lots of people advocate WhoIs, and it's fine if it works for you. It doesn't work for me, and that's why I use BetterWhoIs. Enter the URL of the homepage, and find out the actual domain name of the site. You should also be able to see from where the domain name has been registered. GoDaddy, for example, is a very popular domain name registrar. Make a note of the domain name and the registrar. 
• Report them. You've got to let someone know that your rights are being infringed upon. If the site in question actually is powered through WordPress or another popular blogging site, visit that site's homepage. Look for the Support menu or Contact menu to find an online form or email address you may use to report copyright violations. Blogger websites are very easy to report; just look for the "report abuse" link right at the top of the website. For purchased domain names, you may report copyright violations to the registrar itself. Visit the registrar's homepage and look for contact and/or report links in order to locate the appropriate form or email.
• Make it a thing. If all else fails, and you've followed all the steps above and done everything else you can possibly do, report the thieving website to the government. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act says that this content theft site stole your intellectual property, and you don't have to take that sitting down (unless you're typing an email, in which case you kinda do). Use the online form to report it to the right people, and protect your content. Read everything. Making false statements through this form is illegal, and you will be liable for the consequences of violating those laws.

That Sounds Like a Lot of Effort...

The steps above all very tedious, I know. It is, after all, just a little content. Is it really that big of a deal if another site takes some of it?

Yes. Not only is it against the law for other sites to steal your content, but by reporting them you're helping all the other bloggers out there. A site that steals content from one blogger is probably going to do it to another. A site that gets away with all this theft is going to keep on doing it -- to as many people as possible. The only way to stop them is to report them. If content thieves find that they're continually being reported, and every domain name they start up gets shut down, eventually they'll move on to a new scam...and one day, maybe the Internet will be safe for all bloggers everywhere.

It's not a waste of time to report content theft. It's the right thing to do. 

Blame Science: Muscle Memory Causes Typos

Now, I am not a scientist. I'm a writer, so I tend to look at every situation from a writer's point of view. Maybe I'm obsessed with typos lately because I've been hunting them (I'm working on editing Death, Book 3 in the Deck of Lies series, right now), but in moments of obsessive-compulsive behavior sometimes true insight is born. And lately, I've been thinking about typos and muscle memory -- and I've decided that typos just aren't my fault or yours, either. We can blame them on our fingers. More specifically, our finger muscles.

Muscle Memory

Scientists have studied the way muscles work, and if you're into science it's actually pretty remarkable. When you build your muscles through exercise, they create new nuclei, DNA-rich little particles, that don't diminish even after muscles atrophy.The nuclei forms a muscle memory that makes it easier for once-muscular people to re-build their bodies after muscles have atrophied.

Muscle memory isn't a myth, and you probably prove it every day without knowing. Did you ever learn how to swim? Once you knew it, did you ever have to learn it again? You know that phrase it's just like riding a bike? That's really a shout-out to the power of muscle memory. Some skills need only to be mastered once, and your body will not forget how to do them. Typing's like that, too.

Blame it on the Muscles

The QWERTY keyboard is used as an industry standard for computer manufacturers using the most popular operating systems, among which are Apple and Microsoft. If you live in the United States or another English-speaking country, the QWERTY layout is probably what you use. It's been in use since the 1870s, when a Milwaukee-area newspaper editor invented it. If you've taken typing lessons or taken a typing test, you probably did it using the QWERTY layout.

And if you're also a writer, you probably use the thing every single day of your life -- even when you're between books. Whether you're answering emails, conducting research or working on promotion, you're probably typing. And if you're a serious writer, you're probably typing the right way. Meaning, of course, that you rest your fingers along the home row (asdf jkl;) and stretch your digits as needed to type out the words you choose. Resting one's eight digits along the middle of the keyboard, and two thumbs near the space bar, is the standard method of using a QWERTY layout.

So it stands to reason that if you do something the exact same way for hours and hours every day, you're probably pretty darned good at it. And you're probably pretty used to it. And, even if you don't know it, you've likely been a victim of muscle memory, too.

I know I am. Some words in the English language are very common; we use them all the time. Barring the obvious, some of these most common words include that, have, with, this, from, say, would, their, number and know. They're common, and that means you're used to typing them. So when you're typing along, you may be thinking there, but end up typing their as a result of muscle memory.

At least, that's the excuse I've been using lately when I come across my own bizarre typos. It seems that I don't exactly misspell words, I just use the wrong ones. It's why I have to be so careful about reading every word, because spellcheck just isn't going to help. But is that really my fault...or is it just science?

Why I'm Behind on My Reviews

So, I haven't posted a book review in a while, I know. Lately I've only been adding new books to the list instead of subtracting them, which is not good (because I happen to be massively behind as of the writing of this post). I've been sitting on The Super Spies and the Cat Lady Killer for weeks and weeks now, which in no way is a reflection of the talents of author Lisa Orchard. What I've read of her book is quite good, in fact, and really I wish I was reading it...because at this point, it's preferable to how I've been spending the little reading time I do get.

I don't know why, exactly, but I decided that I was going to create print editions of the Deck of Lies books. Because I have tunnel vision when I'm set on a goal, and because I'm such an exacting perfectionist, this naturally meant that I had to re-read all of Justice (Book 1) and The Tower (Book 2)...twice. This was quite necessary before I could approve the proofs, which I have done -- and I'll talk more about the print editions of these books in a future post.

It's not quite as obsessive-compulsive as it sounds, I swear! As I've mentioned, I've also recently finished Death, Book 3 in the Deck of Lies series. Of course, this means I've got to edit it -- which just means I have to read it while playing Punctuation Police and Grammar Guard (do the nicknames make it more fun?...no, not really). Since I was going to have to read Death anyway, it was a perfect time to re-read Justice and The Tower first. By reading all three books in a row before I sit down to write Judgment, I can make sure I have all my loose ends neatly tied up and every single question answered before the series closes. 

So instead of working on the long list of to-be-reviewed books I have waiting for me, I've been re-reading my own stuff...and that's why I'm behind on my reviews. I usually avoid trying to read more than one book at a time, particularly when one of them needs to be reviewed, so I don't muddy my own thoughts. I'm already thinking about books I'm writing all the time, and I don't need any more confusion in my head if I'm going to give someone a thoughtful review of their work. But eventually I will be finished editing Death (honestly I will, I'm working on the final edit now) and I'll carry on with all the books on my review list.

Get Half the Lies

One of the blogs I follow is celebrating a one-year blogoversary, and I'm participating by giving away half the Deck of Lies series during the month of June.

Sign up to win Justice (Book 1) and The Tower (Book 2) for free, and catch up on all the lies before Death comes out this summer!

Writing 101: When Do You Use Whom, Anyway?

Most of the time, you're supposed to use who in writing...but there are those rare sentences when you're better served with a fancier-sounding whom instead. It's difficult for many writers to know when to use which, but get it wrong and suddenly every reader is a language expert. Know when it's necessary to use whom, and you'll always sound like you know just what you're writing about.

The Subject-Verb Love Affair

To know when a whom is called for, first you've got to know how to identify the subject of your sentence. It's difficult, because who and whom are both pronouns -- but confusingly, they aren't both subjects.

You'll know it's a subject if the verb depends upon it to function. For example, if I write Sally searched for the answer online, the word searched is the verb. But without Sally, nothing makes any sense. Just try it: Searched for the answer online. Who did? Sally did; and that's the subject of the sentence. Police solve crimes by eliminating suspects. Writers solve word problems by eliminating subjects.

Who or Whom?

Look for the suspected subject in a sentence, and eliminate it to determine whether you should be using who or whom.

Who is looking for you? 

In the above sentence, is who the subject, or is it you? Let's find out. Eliminate you first, and re-read the sentence: Who is looking? Still makes some sense, right? Try it with who next: Looking for you? But this time, it doesn't really make sense. This means that who is the subject. Whenever who is the subject, it's always right.

But you're supposed to use whom when you're talking about an object.

Tell whomever you like. 

Tell is clearly the verb in the above sentence, because it's the action word -- it's the word that's making something happen. But whomever isn't telling anyone anything -- you is the one doing the telling. Whomever is who it's being told to -- and that makes it the object, not the subject, of the sentence.

Whom did you say is calling?

How do I know that I'm supposed to use whom and not who, in the above query? Simple -- because of you. Without it, the sentence has no subject: Whom is calling can't be used. The word whom is never a subject. You can always change the sentence to Who is calling, but not if you  comes along for the sentence. Who did you say is calling is incorrect, because the sentence can only have one subject -- and you is that subject. 

Figured it out yet? Make sure your whom-who decision-making is perfect with this fun Who vs. Whom quiz.