Mar 2, 2006 | Uncategorized |
I think one of the things you have to admit to yourself when doing a writing blog is that unless you've got a book contract, you aren't going to get much traffic. I think it's human nature. We go visit the blogs of people who've published books, or recently sold books, because we're looking for the secret. (This is not to say that all published author blogs get a lot of traffic.) There's no secret here. Not yet anyway. When we head over to JA Konrath's blog, for example, we're looking for things to amaze and inspire us. Joe manages to do that pretty regularly, by the way.
I'm always trying new blogs, refining my list, but I do have some must reads (and yes, I think they're all published/contracted). Many of them you'll find in the sidebar: Alison Kent, Murder She Writes, JA, Miss Snark, Pub Rants, Paperback Writer, Tess Gerritsen. I also like Diana Peterfreund's blog, though I haven't put her in the sidebar yet. Inevitably, from these blogs I find others. Romancing the Blog is great too (see sidebar).
I also have friends' blogs to read, and I love keeping up with them and reading their posts. One of the best for general interest to a wide audience, however, is I See Invisible People. Terry's my friend, but also a great blogger.
So, what makes you want to read a blog? Do you find any value in the blogs of the unpublished? (I have short pieces print published, but by RWA standards I am unpublished. This is fine with me because I don't see it as permanent.) Or do you prefer to read blogs by published writers? Is this simply another way to portion out what may be already limited blog time? If you visit other people's blogs, do you expect them to visit you in turn (I'm not talking about the popular bloggers because they are too busy to be expected to visit everyone who visits them)? Does it bother you if you visit people and they don't return the favor? Do you think there's a club mentality at work in the blogging world? (PBW once likened it to high school.) Any other thoughts?
And thanks for reading. 🙂
Mar 1, 2006 | Uncategorized |
I am not a Da Vinci Code fan simply because I couldn't get past the prose to the story underneath. That's the snotty English major in me, I admit, and it's not very nice. Tess Gerritsen had a great post over at her blog about why even the very successful can get upset over bad reviews:
You'll never catch me saying anything bad about Cornwell or Dan Brown because I know that, despite their successes, they're also human beings who probably feel the stings as acutely as I do. Or maybe not. Maybe I'm just a weenie, but I suspect not. I suspect that even those at the top of the bestseller lists — Patterson and Crichton and King — still die a little when a reviewer says “their latest book stinks.”
So you won't catch me bad-mouthing DB anymore. It's not nice and though I doubt he gives a flip what I think, I'm just not going to do it.
But today, I think I'm on his side. From the NYT:
“The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail” (published in the United States as “Holy Blood, Holy Grail”) posits that Christ survived the crucifixion and went on to marry Mary Magdalene, that the couple's descendants are still flourishing today, that factions within the Catholic Church are eager to suppress this information, and that the Holy Grail is far more mysterious and far more complicated than anyone ever imagined.
The three authors spent five years, from 1976 to 1981, researching the book, they say, before arriving at what they call the “central architecture” of their argument. It is this architecture — the trajectory of the case they make in “The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail” — that they say Mr. Brown appropriated, rather than individual words or passages.
Holy crap! You mean DB did some research, read some non-fic stuff and some stuff that claimed to prove–or at least posit–a theory about Jesus and then used his research to write a novel? OMG! Do authors really do that? Do we come up with ideas from watching CSI or from reading about how Henry VIII battled a pope for the right to be the titular head of EVERY institution within his borders? Do we make up our own stories using these ideas and then write them as FICTION? Can you do that?
And hey, where the crap were ALL these guys when Nikos Kazantzakis was writing The Last Temptation of Christ (English translation, 1960)? Didn't that book have something to do with a certain divine person's relationship with a certain lady person, huh? Apparently, this idea has been on the cooker before.
I don't know everything about the case, sure, but darn if this doesn't sound ridiculous and frightening. Ridiculous because it's an idea and someone used it to write fiction. DB even admits to using that book for research, as well as several others. Frightening because if somebody gets a lock on ideas, where will it go from there? Do writers need to live in fear that Steven Spielberg will sue them because they wrote a novel about a German guy who helps Jews escape the Nazis?
Maybe there's more to it, but for now, I'm with DB. Writers make things up. They use facts, spin them, throw in their own twists, and come up with a story. The world is our well. If someone manages to argue that an idea is sacrosanct, then writers are in trouble. And so is the reading public because the books on the shelves are about to slow to a trickle.
Feb 28, 2006 | Uncategorized |
I'm lazy today. I'm in editing hell for the newsletter I do every month, I feel the pressure to get this novel written, the thesis has been languishing for two weeks now, I had an article due today, and I've got amendments to write for my chapter's by-laws (the meeting is Saturday). Oh, and I'm leading my reading group in discussing To The Lighthouse in two weeks. So much as I might wish I could write an intelligent and original blog post, it ain't gonna happen.
So please see Miss Snark on Word Counts:
When you submit your work to an agent, and you need to indicate word count, click the little button on your word processing program that says “word count” and use that number. That's it. Do NOT start counting up pages and multiplying by 25o. Do NOT start obsessing about whether Times New Roman font is bigger/smaller than another font and thus can't adhere to the “250 rule”.
I've been using computer word count forever now, but I still get these questions from friends/fellow writers and we end up discussing it again and again. One friend strongly believes that her 420 page TNR 12 pt manuscript is 100,000 words. But since she's got the chapters in individual files, she hasn't added them up. Now, since I've got a 286 pg TNR 12 pt that has 90,000 by computer count, I'm guessing she's over just a bit. 🙂
Another post worth reading is here.
Bookstores should be a place of debate—learning—where the books on fascism can sit side by side with Marxist socialism and invite discussion. Where Right and Left can come to find the words written by not only those they agree with but those who differ in their opinions (if only to arm themselves against what “the enemy” is saying). If I claim to be for Free Speech then I have to be for all speech, even if I don’t agree because as I bookseller I’m not selling books to myself, but to the customer.
I have to agree, even if I think that shelving that particularly strident and annoying woman in the Kook section is accurate (this is a non-political blog, so you'll have to go over there to find out who's a Kook–er, who's shelved there I mean). 🙂 But that's just me. I do see Bookseller Chick's point however. Just because the bookstore in question thinks she's a kook doesn't give them the right to foist that opinion on the customer.
OTOH, I own a copy of Mein K*mpf (you can't get much kookier, in my opinion–and I decided I don't want the hits for that particular search phrase). Not because I agree with a single word in it, but because I have a minor in history and actually read it for a paper. And I bought it while in Germany, where it's banned. Since I had an American military address, Amazon.com could ship it to me. If I'd had strictly a German address, no dice. I'm not sure if that appalls me or not. It is a really awful book. I felt somewhat illicit possessing it, going so far as to turn the spine toward the back of the bookcase (red letters on mustard yellow background really stand out) so none of my German friends would know I had it.
Then again, if I had a copy of The Joy of Sex lying around, I suppose I'd hide it when the priest came for a visit. Nah, probably not. 😉 He's a pretty cool priest (attention: gratuitous flattery alert! I don't want him abandoning me during the Bananas Foster preparation tonight).
Feb 27, 2006 | Uncategorized |
In romance writing, there's this little thing called the Big Miz. It's a bad thing. Lord Lovem-n-leavem marries Virginia Vicarsdaughter for some strange reason. They fall in love. And then one day Virginia sees Lord L&L groping the chambermaid. She packs her bags and leaves, never to return. Lord L&L vows to hate all women because Virginia, that cruel minx, left him all alone and unloved. She used him. She never loved him, and he knows this because his cousin, I. Wantthetitle, told him so. Then, of course, the lord and his wife are reunited, reluctantly, and spend 350 pages hating each other because of the transgressions . Eventually, the veil falls from their eyes when they have a conversation (ha, never!) or when others who are in the know reveal the truth (she always loved him and he was only helping the chambermaid because she'd darn near fainted as he was innocently walking by). Happy Ever After.
However, misunderstandings do have their place in romance writing (heck, in any writing I suppose). It's the Mars/Venus thing and it lends potential for a real misunderstanding. Characters can talk at cross purposes which can lend to the conflict. By no means should this be your only source of conflict, nor should it be so overused that the hero/heroine are always misunderstanding one another and getting mad. That can lead to Fight/F*ck melodrama, which ain't pretty either.
But a good misunderstanding of what the other is saying can lend to the drama and characterization. For instance, the heroine's talking about the time six years ago when the hero stood her up for a date, and he's thinking she's still mad, and she's just wanting him to say why he did it because he never told her the reason, but he's thinking he'd better not say anything because that'll only make her madder, especially when she finds out he overslept since he's CIA and she probably thinks he was rescuing the free world or something. (Bad example, but it's late and the brain isn't working so well.) 🙂 People don't always say what they mean or ask what they want.
What I mean is that one character can be talking about something, or doing something, and the other character has a definite impression of why and what he should do in turn. But he's wrong about it, and the character talking or doing only gets more frustrated. The cycle continues until one of the characters sees through this. Now you have an opportunity to move the relationship forward, even if only a fraction, because understanding builds closeness.
In summary, have them talking or doing at cross purposes, have one of them achieve understanding and reach out to the other. Bring them closer. Don't overdo or it gets ridiculous. Just think of the Mars/Venus moments between you and your SO/spouse and you'll know what I'm talking about. 🙂
Feb 26, 2006 | Uncategorized |
Earlier, I wrote a post on the racism in publishing issue that's being debated elsewhere (see previous post for links) and reported on one local B&N. Now, I can report from one Borders (we have three on-island, though I bet they all subscribe to the same corporate philosophy).
The AA books in Borders are indeed segregated, regardless of content (I didn't have my camera with me that night). AA sections have legitimacy when they are about history, culture, etc. But this section, two huge shelving units (which isn't a lot when you consider the size of the entire store), was crammed with everything under the sun by black writers. I did find ONE Walter Moseley title in the Fiction/Lit section. Know why? The dude on the cover was white. Walter's pic on the back was tiny, so whoever shelved the book looked at the front only.
I saw three BET books in the romance section, but I think it was a mistake. I looked for black romance writer names I'd recognize, but they weren't shelved in romance. They were in the AA section.
I stood in the section for a while and leafed through the romances. Oh wow, how dumb of me to miss these before! I was reading one by Brenda Jackson and thoroughly enjoying it. I made no purchases, however, because my critique group showed up and I ran out of time. I plan to get there early next week and buy a couple of books. For those of you who may have thought you didn't want to read books about black characters, you might want to reconsider. Ms. Jackson made no more reference to her characters' skin colors than I do when I write about my characters (well, I do talk about the hero's tanned torso from time to time–wink, wink). Not that skin is the only issue, and I hope I'm not digging a hole, but what I mean is that reading about these characters was like reading about characters in any other book. They were PEOPLE. Let's cast aside the stereotypes and be willing to branch out a bit.
I didn't get to speak to the manager, mostly because I had to meet with my group, but I'd be interested to know how they decided to shelve like this. Is it company policy, local policy, or just ignorance on the part of the staff (AA must mean ALL books with black characters on the covers or black authors, right?). Hell, even Toni Morrison was nowhere to be found in the Fic/Lit section. She was with the AA group.
So that's my report, and I am thoroughly incensed about it. If I were black, I'd be pretty darned upset about this too (like others elsewhere). Maybe it's not a conspiracy, maybe it's only ignorance, maybe it's dollar signs. I don't know, but damn, if I write a good book, why should the color of my skin or my gender (for another way to look at it) determine where the book is placed?
This is WRONG, whatever the reason and motive. If the publishers/booksellers think they make more money by targeting a specific demographic, then fine. But be SURE to also put the books in the section where they would be shelved if the author was white/Asian/Latin etc–i.e. with EVERYONE else. You can cross-reference them for convenience.
It'll only change when lots of people complain. So far, that doesn't seem to be happening.
