 |
So I’ve just discovered that my webmail has been down for the last few days. If you’ve sent me an email and I haven’t responded, that’s why.
What’s even more annoying is that, though my mama always said I should keep a printed out address book, I don’t, because heck, that’s what massive online storage space is for, right? Fortunately, the email people say that they are cache-ing or whatever the correct term for it is while they get the server back up. And that when they do, the backups will go into effect and I won’t have lost anything.
Which is good, because, well, I use my email backups for everything. Maybe I shouldn’t do that anymore. In case one day I don’t have a cache.
But that’s preposterous! I can lose it all, but I still possess heaps of cache.
Even in times of trouble, the puns must flow. 
So I’m preparing for my first conference workshop:
CAREER PLANNING AFTER THE FIRST SALE
Which will be given at the Spacecoast Authors of Romance STAR conference in Cocoa Beach, Florida from February 3-5, 2006.
There is going to be some seriously world-rocking stuff in this workship, I’m telling you. You will leave that conference room with your hair blown back. We’re talking mind-expanding, life-changing, atom-colliding landslides of information. You will never look at the publishing industry the same way. You will never look in the mirror the same way. This workshop will put hair on your chest (if you like that kind of thing), get rid of wrinkles, and make you look ten pounds lighter.
At least, that’s what it’s like in my head.
But seriously folks, I’m going to cover it all. And you don’t need to have sold yet for this workshop to be worthwhile for you. And even if you’ve sold ten books, this workshop will be worthwhile to you. This is about having a fluid and flexible career plan. How planning doesn’t mean set in stone, and how to be smart about your career. Career planning isn’t something you do once. It’s something you do every time. Every time you make a sale, you’re being propelled in a certain way, but the landscape changes, and new trajectories open up to you. This is about how to evaluate and choose amongst your options.
Like I said, atom-colliding.
And yes, because this is the inevitable question, what do I know about successful career planning if I’ve made only one sale? I’ll tell you — at the workshop. Can’t let out all my cool secrets now, otherwise, what would I have to say in Cocoa Beach? I am living this workshop right now, even as we speak.
And if I haven’t convinced you to come party down in the Florida February yet, I will add that i’m giving away a really cool prize at the workshop. REALLY COOL.
People who call it “chic lit.”
I can’t decide which is the most likely cause of this most disturbing development.
1. That the person does not know how to spell “chick.”
2. That the person does not know how to pronounce “chic.” (Scenario: do you suppose they actually think it’s “sheik lit?” Would that be like, Lawrence of Arabia, or any one of a dozen Silhouette Desires?)
3. That the person gets all of their literary genre and industry information from the typo-ridden racks at Target, which is where I first came across this cringe-worthy misspelling.
4. That the person, like those who are amused by the facetious pronounciation of the aforementioned store “Tarjaaay” (and I count myself among that number), is actually using “chic lit” ironically. And if so, joke ain’t gelling, hon.
5. That the person thinks that all chick lit novels should be chic and fashion-conscious, like Devil Wears Prada. Alternately, is speaking of a specific sub-sub-sub genre with a cutesy title, the kind all those aggravating newspaper articles insist upong coining and foisting upon us as if we wanted them/cared/did not find them demeaning, like “dick lit,” “hick lit,” “out of work lit,” “celeblit” “nestinglit” “chickadee lit” “pollo lit” “etc.” I’d argue that “hen lit” is one of these, but the damn thing seems to have caught on, much tot he detriment of everyone involved.
6. That the person is one of those that enjoys adorable misspellings, names their children complicated, pseudo-Celtic names like Cthlywlucthannhthl (pronounced, “Susan”), dots their “i”s with hearts, and thinks that txt mssg speke is rite. sux.
7. That the person actually doesn’t understand what chick lit is at all, and so the word “chick” seems plucked out of the ether, and would therefore be easily substituted with anything that sounds and/or looks remotely reasonable.
Is anyone else as bothered by this as I am? I swear I have to physically restrain my fingers from firing back emails to the tune of “It’s CHICK lit! CHICK CHICK CHICK! As in ‘a young woman!’ A chickkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk!” Except for more politely, of course. (Ahh, the joy of a blog, where I am always free to vent my spleen.)
Am I alone in my cringes? In my eye-rolls? In my fervent desire to abolish forever this bizarre happenstance? Discuss.
1. There should be more appreciation for the art of lying on the couch and moaning. I think it takes real skill. Sailor Boy does not agree, to judge by the snide eyerolls he has been casting my way.
2. Saturday mailmen who shove my netflix deliveries into my teeny tiny mailbox rather than dropping them off at the front desk like the regular weekly mailmen do should realize that they have cracked my delivery and therefore deprived me of any opportunity to watch Joan of Arcadia: Season 1, Disc 3 this weekend. Cue lying on the coach and moaning.
3. If one has plans to spend the whole weekend lying on the coach and moaning, one should not watch Gandhi, as suffering of Indians and Gandhi in deathfasts make one feel mildly guilty about own activities. If Gandhi does not moan (much!) under much more wretched circumstances, why should one with much less strife?
4. I think it must be difficult to date someone with a blog. I’m glad Sailor Boy doesn’t have one. Would be decidedly worse if was merely *going* on a date with blogger, rather than setting up domestic partnership with them. Was reading a blog recently where girl described disaster hook up with a college student, where managed to ridicule his taste in clothes and decor, kissing style, and fact that he was rather sexually inexperienced. I think that way lies datelessness. Think about it: would *you* go out with Carrie from SITC, knowing that shit would be plastered all over the news? Neither would I. I think Natalie Krinsky had a rough social life at school, as well.
5. If Gandhi lived now, would he have a blog? If Gandhi lived now, would he have the same impact?
6. Moan. Moan. Moan.
7. Maybe people share too much on their blogs.
On one of my email loops, there is a discussion raging about whether or not an agent should reject something that isn’t her cup of tea. One bestselling author who was formerly an editor said she found the practice unprofessional.
What I find unprofessional is someone willing to be an advocate merely for the money. My own agent, for instance, has said that she won’t take on a client simply because one comes up with a deal in hand. She will definitely give the project her full and immediate attention, but she needs to believe in it. There are a ton of agents out there, and others might love it. Isn’t that only fair to the author, the agent, and any potential agent who might truly love the work? Aren’t we always arguing for passion,a nd not the bottom ine? Not to get all Jerry Maguire about it, but seriously!
There is so much more to agenting than simply making sure the royalty rate is fair and cashing the checks. An agent should truly be an author advocate, should be willing to go to the mat with you if the publisher wants to take the book in a bad direction. And how can you fight if you don’t believe int eh cause. Yes, sure, the agent may miss out on some publishing phenom because it’s not his or her cup of tea, but isn’t everyone better off if they don’t just advocate you because they think you are going to sell, but because they think you are going to sell because the work is so damn great?
Granted, it’s impossible to expect your agent to absolutely adore every work you have them sell. Some they like better than others. Some they like an aspect of it that others don’t readily see. Sometimes they like you and your past work and maybe this isn’t their favorite of your projects but they fight for you and your history and how every book you sell makes that backlist they love so much more valuable.
But for an agent to take you on that very first time, especially when they know they’ve got an uphill battle before them to sell the work, to submit for you and fight for you and try to convince a skeptical market that THIS is the voice they’ve been looking for? Yeah, don’t you want someone who loves it?
Otherwise, I can’t imagine how those sales calls would go.
Editor: Why should I read this story?
Agent: Beats me. I think there’s probably a market for it though. To be honest, I wasn’t a big fan myself. Not really my thing. But other people might get totally into it. I guess.
Editor: Yeah, I wasn’t into it either, but it will probably sell. Some people might like this kind of thing. I’m going to go trudge to the sales conference now and put aside other projects that I’m really excited about for this one which doesn’t thrill me so much but could be decent if it’s read by someone who likes that kind of thing. Do you have anything else on your list?
Agent: Oh lordie, yes. I have this project that I’m so so so thrilled about, it’s a gorgeous story, heartwarming and heartbreaking. I couldn’t put it down, I really think it’s going to be huge. It was so funny, and sad, and true. But let’s talk about this other one that neither of us are crazy about but probably has a halfway decent market somewhere.
Nielsen Hayden calls that the “someone might buy this, but why should it be us?” level of rejection. It’s a good level, but what it means is, find soemone else who *loves* it.
And of course, we’ve skipped over the part where we don’t know if the project was simply not the agent’s cup of tea or if, even aside from her personal take, she objectively didn’t think it was all that great. The original poster seemed to take the most umbrage at the fact that the agent cited her personal reasons for not being passionate about the project.
Well, that’s one argument for form rejections. If they don’t explain themselves, you can’t find fault with the reasoning. I’ve had plenty of rejections. Some said the writing wasn’t strong enough. Others said the story idea wasn’t marketable. A lot were simply form letters. Some said they didn’t have the passion to pursue this project in its uphill climb towards publication. And to all of those, you say THANK YOU. Thank you for being honest, and for leaving me free to find an agent who truly truly truly wants this work to become a book and be available for other readers to enjoy. Yes, in all likelihood, they might have felt differently about the next book I sent them, and yes, there are some agents who think, “no, this isn’t the breakout, but I’m going to snatch this author up now, because whatever she writes next is going to be IT,” but that’s the same thing. Either way, it’s passion. And passion is always personal. It can be professional as well, but it’s also personal.
I understand venting your frustration. I do it; in fact, I’m doing it now. And its obvious that the writer was VERY annoyed by the agent’s response. She found it biased. And guess what? It was. That’s the point. But it was not unprofessional. It was VERY professional. It was the agent’s professional opinion that her lack of passion for the project would not allow her to do it justice on the marketplace. Good agent! It was the agent’s professional opinion that another agent would do better by the writer. Great agent! She wasn’t making a value judgment on the story, she wasn’t saying it was crap, or a bad idea. She was saying it wasn’t her cup of tea, and if she had her choice (which she does, being a literary agent and not a court-appointed lawyer) she wouldn’t take ont eh project. It’s the mark of a consummate professional.
Less professional is venting your frustration on the agent’s other clients by ridiculing their pick of agents and the storyline that was obviously a better fit with that agent.
I’m just sayin’.
Today’s post comes courtesy of my guest spot at Romancing the Blog. Head on over and learn all about The Poisoned Nipple Theory.
A few answers to questions posted in the comments section of the cover post:
1. Yes the book will be a hardcover release. And yes, you can pre-order it on Amazon!
2. We dropped the “Confessions” part of the title, because it’s way overused these days. In fact, there have been articles about how that title has completely jumped the shark. (Can’t locate the link at the moment, but trust me, there was an article, and I read it, and I felt dumb.) I’m *very* happy with the change. However, the character in my book actually DOES have secrets to keep and she’s confessing them (which is kind of the point) unlike, say, a Teenage Drama Queen or whoever else might come up with the urgent need to confess something. But I think Secret Society Girl is a stronger title, and she’s still confessing, even if the title doesn’t say so. This way, it doesn’t get lost in the enormous sea of whatever other confessions are hitting the market.
3. Why yes, you can pre-order it on Amazon! Thanks for asking!
So it’s Day Nine of NanuNanu (sorry, couldn’t resist), and, as you can see from the sidebar, I’m a bit on the behind side of “doing well”.
Some of my friends are truly trucking. Others have quit. Others are busy experimenting with bizarre methods of food preparation (C.G., babe, I love you, but I’m not letting you near my steaks. Or my popcorn. Or my pasteurization).
Real life is intruding, and more than that, writerly business. I finally got Secret Society Girl off into copy edits. I wrote my first newsletter. I judged contest entries. Etc.
Monday night, I attended another “write-in.” I was giving the form one more chance, since I got more writing done on the metro home from the last one than I did the entire time I was there. This one worked much better. I wrote 1800 words. So that worked well. But in general, I’ve been majorly sucking. Howver, 6k in a week and a half is still pretty good for me. It would mean this book would be done in less than four months. That would be a record. So I’m going to keep at this NaNo stuff, understanding that I might never meet my goal… but that I can write novels, and I do write them, and maybe, due to this exercise, I’ll be writing them more quickly.
Plus, I’m sick as a dog. Did I mention the sick as a dog part?
PS: The Knight Agency is open again for general submissions. Ready, set, query!
PPS: Finally got my hands on a copy of Pretties. So when I go home later today, sick as a dog, I’ll have some comfort in the form of preternaturally beautiful futuristic teenagers. Wait, that came out wrong.
Gakked from Scalzi. I’ve bolded the ones I’ve seen.
(But first: ALL HAIL DEIDRE KNIGHT. She knows why.)
The 50 Most Significant Comedy Films of All Time, from The Rough Guide to Comedy Movies by Bob McCabe.
Airplane!
All About Eve
Amelie
Annie Hall
The Apartment
Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery
Blazing Saddles
Bringing Up Baby
Broadcast News
Caddyshack
Le diner de con
Dr. Strangelove: Or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb
Dodgeball: A True Underdog Story
Duck Soup
Ferris Bueller’s Day Off
Four Weddings and a Funeral
The General
Ghostbusters
The Gold Rush
Good Morning Vietnam
The Graduate
Groundhog Day
A Hard Day’s Night
His Girl Friday
Kind Hearts and Coronets
The Lady Killers
Local Hero
Manhattan
M*A*S*H
Monty Python’s Life of Brian
National Lampoon’s Animal House
The Odd Couple
The Producers
Raising Arizona
Roxanne
Rushmore
Shaun of the Dead
A Shot in the Dark
Some Like it Hot
Strictly Ballroom
Sullivan’s Travels
There’s Something About Mary
This is Spinal Tap
To Be or Not to Be
Tootsie
Toy Story
Les vacances de M. Hulot
When Harry Met Sally…
Withnail and I
I’ve seen 32 of these, which is pretty good. Kind of skeptical about this list in general, though. The Ladykillers? Like, the one that was just out with Tom Hanks? I wasn’t aware that anyone found it particularly good. Or seminal. And I’ve already shared my opinions about Some Like it Hot and Tootsie.
Films Whose Presence in the Canon I’m Particularly Gratified to See (pick up to five): Groundhog Day (because I think this film is underappreciated), Strictly Ballroom (because a lot of people don’t find it as funny as I do), M*A*S*H (because too many are insulted by a comedy about war), Toy Story (yay, animation!). I’m glad to see a whole bunch of other faves in here, too, but really, who didn’t think Ferris Bueller or Dr. Strangelove or Animal House or Something about Mary were shoo-ins?
Films in the Canon Whose Presence Should Not Be: Austin Powers, Dodgeball, The Graduate. Ther are others, but I feel most strongly about these.
Films I’d Pick to Replace Them: I think I’d pick any other Mike Myers film over Austin Powers, which was cheap and derivative, as opposed to acerbic and witty. Plus I didn’t laugh, not even once. So I Married An Axe Murderer is a scream, though. Or Shrek. Shrek was hilarious. Dodgeball was funny and fine, but a dumb comedy. Not seminal in the slightest (plus we’ve covered Stiller, Ben with Something About Mary. If we’re doing the Gen X man-comedy thing, I’d vote Swingers (you’d get your Vince Vaughn in, then… ooh, or even Clerks. Or if you’ve simply got to go Frat Pack, take Old School which was much better. And the Graduate is a cool film, but not a comedy. Funny parts, but not outright. I’d go for The Princess Bride. You couldn’t have a Shrek without the Princess Bride. Without The Graduate, you wouldn’t have… wait, I’m thinking…
AND WHERE THE HELL IS HAROLD AND KUMAR GO TO WHITE CASTLE?!?!?!?!?!? THAT WAS THE FUNNIEST MOVIE I’VE SEEN IN YEARS! Actually, looking at the list, I’m noticing a decided lack of multicultural comedy here. Where is Chris Rock? Or Richard Prior? Or…anyone? Not even a lot of women, truth be told. Hmmmm…
That’s bullshit, man. Okay, forget whatever I said about Swingers. I want Auntie Mame and Harold and Kumar up there, stat.
John Fowles has died, at age 79.
I remember reading his book The Magus in 11th grade English class. Most of the students like it because it was “the dirty book” but this writer sucked me completely into his labyrinthine plot, and the complex, devious characters responsible for creating the maze. I must have read this book five or six times, and recommended it to scores of friends. It’s the first book I read written in the 20th century that I can remember truly LOVING. It definitely taught me that the types of books I like are not just “the old ones” or genre novels — that there was a literary life for me beyond Penguin Classics.
I thought of The Magus when I saw The Game, when I read Salamander and when I visited the island school on Spetses where Fowles set this most intriguing novel. It’s about history and sex and race and class and psychology and politics and detachment and love and mystery and action — in short, everything I like in my novels. At the time, I didn’t realize that the obvious next step would be to search down his other works. I know better now, a decade later.
I haven’t read the book in years. My copy was lost to a friend who never returned it. I think I’m going to buy another this afternoon, or maybe pick up The French Lieutenant’s Woman or another work I have not read.
Thank you, Mr. Fowles, for writing me such a wonderful book. Thank you for opening the door to everything I learned as a result of reading The Magus, and thank you for whateverinfluence you have had on my development as a writer.
Ave et Vale.
My cover is here. All hail Leigh Wells, the amazing illustrator, Paolo, the head of the Bantam Dell art department, and my wonderful editor, Kerri Buckley. I am physically incapable of not staring at this thing. You guys should see the back. You should see the spine! It’s tremendous.
Note: So this has been a hassle and a half. It should show for everyone now, but unfortunately, we had to convert it to gif format, which means that it looks a little… faded, which is MUCH better than the disgusting fluorescent mint green color that flickr was doing to it. I have no idea why we’ve been having these problems. The colors are actually much deeper than pictured here.
|
|
|
|
 |
