Unlike the silliness I spread on evenings and weekends with the careless abandon of excess cell phone minutes, these are actual, bibliocentric links I'm slotting into the week proper.
1) In this WSJ article, Alexandra Alter has 17 diverse and accomplished authors briefly share their methods for How to Write a Great Novel. It proves again there's no right way, just what works. If you're surfing the web because your prose is stuck, you can give one of these approaches a try, and if you think your personal methodology's weird, you'll be comforted.
2) When Publisher's Weekly recently announced their top 100 book picks for 2009, none of the top 10 were written by a woman. That may simply be how the compilation of ratings randomly shook out this year, but around the webiverse, some people are explaining why they're considering it a boys' club weenie roast.
3) Harper Collins has launched a beta version of a new site and concept, authonomy. In their words, they hope to connect readers, writers, and publishing professionals
"...unpublished and self published authors to post their manuscripts for visitors to read online. Authors create their own personal page on the site to host their project - and must make at least 10,000 words available for the public to read. authonomy can comment on these submissions – and can personally recommend their favourites to the community. authonomy counts the number of recommendations each book receives, and uses it to rank the books on the site. It also spots which visitors consistently recommend the best books – and uses that info to rank the most influential trend spotters. We hope the authonomy community will guide publishers straight to the freshest writing talent – and will give passionate and thoughtful readers a real chance to influence what’s on our shelves."
If you like this idea, or are trying it out as a reader or writer, please let us know in the comments. Is this the future, another way to replace good individual editors, both?
BTW: I think this method, by Harper Collins, is surely a more transparent, less-exploitative way for a publisher to find new talent than the implications of, oh, say, Harlequin Horizons $elf-publishing arm. Just hearing about the latter, I didn't love it, and perceived lots of issues for both HH and traditional Harlequin authors. Well, this particular new innovation is also drawing fire from Mystery Writers of America, and more worrisomely for the romance mothership, from Romance Writers of America, too. This last link from Jackie Kessler's blog also gives a detailed explanation of why this isn't "self publishing" a legit choice if transparent but true "vanity publishing." Preditors and Editors agrees- look in the H's.
UPDATE: It's hard to keep up with this one as it runs, but I've been referring to Lee Goldberg's blog since working against deceptive practices in (self) publishing is one of his huge crusades as an author and MWA Board Member. I've learned that Science Fiction Writers of America have joined the fray, like RWA, in having removed Harlequin from their list of approved publishers. That means, if you're not aware, that having your work published there doesn't qualify as "pro" level per the organization's guidelines. I'm sure they'll make provision to grandfather in those authors who've made careers up to this point writing professionally for Harlequin. But as of now, future works are lumped with amateur or vanity publishing, and that matters.
Is it time for Harlequin to pull up the stakes and call it a circus already?
Posts
6 comments:
I need to read how to write a great novel.
I'm with you, Charles! And maybe I need to write How to Read a Great Novel. I'm already good at that.
I always enjoy your links, Clare. They are always informative and enjoyable.
BTW, terrific job well done last night at the SinC/NY-Tristate meeting last night. Superb panel and moderator; I truly enjoyed the topic and learned so much from our distinguished panel. Thanks for all your hard work and energy!
Ha! I'll have to point my family to the WSJ article. It appears that contrary to what they like to tell me, I'm normal, ahem.
Re Harlequin's latest innovation: Since I'm not a romance reader or writer, it kinda skidded along my peripheral vision. But after receiving and reading MWA's memo yesterday, I'm now appalled. As an editor, I've done a lot of work for iUniverse. What iU does never bothered me because it tells authors exactly what it is and isn't, what it does and doesn't do and can and can't do, and what authors can and can't expect. Harlequin seems to have the opposite policy, and it's not only deceitful but, to me, morally wrong. Shame on this company that I used to respect.
Kathy- Thanks, and let me salute our fabulous panelist and WoM, short story specialist, Terrie Moran! (can you hear the trumpets?)
Elaine- as a "normal" writer "We accept you, one of us!"
If that chant doesn't echo in your memory, it's from the very strange movie Freaks and is chorused by the sideshow performers.
Our own Laura was the first to tell me about HH, and the more she explained, the less I liked it. You're absolutely right- when it's clear what to expect and what you're getting, authors are protected and can make whatever choice suits them. What MWA, for example, specifically objects to isn't the HH program's existence, but the confusing language describing it online. Truth in advertising, even for such lowly beings as aspiring authors!
thanks for all this, I'm alerting people to your post. interesting note about Harlequin...people had mentioned their new e-publishing deal.
Post a Comment