The Behemoth Blinks
Published November 20, 2009 | 
As has been noted pretty much everywhere on the publishing blogosphere, Harlequin has caved in the face of general censure and sanctions from the RWA, SFWA and MWA.
Also, my crit partner — the ever-stylish and fabulously talented Barb Caridad Ferrer — answers Harlequin editor Stacy Boyd’s personal — and not associated with Harlequin in any way (see comment below) — blog on the topic of RWA/Harlequin relations in the wake of the HQN Horizons debacle here.
Questions remain. Will Harlequin further distance itself from this vanity press hot mess by removing all references to it from the eHarlequin site? Will they forbear from including solicitations for the vanity operation in rejection letters? Will they scrub the Horizons site clean of all “be a Harlequin author!” propaganda? Will any of this be enough to restore their standing with the various professional organizations they’ve managed to antagonize, not to mention the scores of authors — the legendary Nora Roberts among them — whom they’ve disappointed and disgusted?
And will the RWA — specifically those members who are also Harl authors — pay a price for their tough stance on this issue?
Tune in next week/month/year to find out, I guess. Same batshit crazy time, same batshit crazy channel.
My disillusionment, let me show you it.
Published November 19, 2009 | My first romance novel was a Betty Neels-penned Harlequin titled BRITANNIA ALL AT SEA. My second, also by revered Harl author Neels, was called RING IN A TEACUP. I don’t remember a lot of titles after that, but I do recall buying Harlequin romances like bags of corn chips and enjoying them with just as much gusto.
As I matured into a snotty adolescent pursuing a degree in English Lit and an elitist attitude, I considered my own addiction to romance novels a sort of guilty secret. My friends read Angelou and Cather and Atwood. I snuck Harlequin novels under the covers in my dorm room.
In the last several years, I’ve made plenty of jokes — here and elsewhere — about the ludicrous titles to be found in the Harlequin Presents line, as well as the antiquated and misogynistic values they too often represent (particularly the fetishizing of female virginity).
But never — no, not EVER — did I disparage the IDEA of the largest, most respected publisher of romance in the world. A company run primarily by women, for women, catering to the reading needs of the average woman who wants to lose herself in the fantasy of love conquering all, in all its many flavors.
Indeed, there abides on my hard drive even today a half-finished manuscript I’d planned to submit to Harlequin (Blaze? Superromance, maybe?) sometime in the near future, plus another intended for Spice Briefs. I observed the opening of Carina Press with interest and anticipation, and wondered how big the slushpile would grow before I felt comfortable subbing a manuscript to an untested publisher (especially in the wake of the crash and burn of Quartet Press, the revolutionary new epub that never was).
Unless I can figure out how to restructure that unfinished manuscript to single title length, it will likely never see the light of day. The story meant for Spice Briefs will go elsewhere. I will delete my links to the eHarlequin site, where I shopped at least a few times a year and frequented the boards as a lurker.
Apparently, the RWA feels much the same — and hallelujah for that. Yes, their removal of Harlequin from the list of eligible publishers and their branding of the company as a vanity press has the potential to hurt their members who are also Harlequin authors, but rumor has it that most Harl authors have come down squarely on the side of RWA’s decision. This action alone has restored a chunk of my faith in RWA. They’ve done nothing more or less than told the truth, and then acted according to their own, much debated bylaws. If I were a member, I’d be proud.
There are those who say the confusion over this new venture of Harlequin’s will not dilute their brand. To them I say, “Have you seen The New Yorker today?” Oh, it’s elitist? An organ of East Coast snobbery, and never supportive of genre fiction anyway? And therefore doesn’t matter? Was it also elitist several months ago when it did that glowing piece on Nora Roberts? Can’t have it both ways, folks. The brand dilution has begun, and with it another round of ghettoizing romance as a genre.
How did Harlequin/Torstar fail to see see this coming? The loss of stature, the loss of respect? The derision flung by those both in the industry and outside of it? The reader confusion, the author betrayal? The rejection by the largest professional literary organization in the world?
Were they truly so blinded by the prospect of making money by selling a vanity press option to rejected authors? And through the owners of Author House, no less — one of the very least respected vanity press operations in business? How lamentably short-sighted.
It will be interesting to see if they continue to send their mouthpiece around to the blogs to defend this shameful endeavor. She’s been called a liar and worse. (Offering bound copies of vanity-pubbed books to authors for delivery to agents? ARE YOU KIDDING?? Way to completely discredit yourself as a knowledgable industry insider. Agents are pointing and laughing as we speak.) Will she show up again to try to sell this original sow’s ear as a silk purse of inestimable value?
Only The Shadow knows, and he ain’t talkin’.
In the meantime, here’s a fresh and growing list of links on the topic:
Agent Ashley Grayson (He’s a MAN, baby! /austin powers)
The Ballad of Pay-to-Play
Published November 17, 2009 | Most, if not all, vanity presses make the vast majority of their profits on fees collected from writers.
(Money flows to the author.)
Very few writers end up recouping their investment on vanity-press published projects.
(Money flows to the author.)
No matter what they tell you, if you pay up front to hold a copy of your book in your hand, you’re not published — you’re PRINTED. “Publishing” implies a vetting process and some sort of editing FOR WHICH YOU DO NOT PAY.
(Money flows to the author.)
Yes, even if you are traditionally published by a major house, you may pay to promote your book beyond whatever promotional support your publisher offers. That’s not the same thing as paying to have your book copy edited, printed and offered for sale. You can say, “Yes it is,” as many times as you like, but… it’s not. It’s really, really not.
And so my power ballad becomes a dirge. Hum along if the spirit moves you.
(MONEY FLOWS TO THE AUTHOR.)
Coda:
As to the issue of the RWA in this brand, spanking new venture of Harlequin’s… Well. I’m not a member. No dog in that particular fight. But given that approximately 70% of the RWA membership is comprised of unpublished authors, I think the organization has a responsibility to make sure its members know the difference between being “published” and paying to be “printed,” and to take a strong position in this matter according to their own, much touted, standards. It will be fascinating to see if this Board of Directors has the balls to put their money — and their relationship with the largest publisher of romance — where their mouths are.
Other blogs on this subject:
TeddyPig, EREC, SmartBitches (scroll thru comments for the good stuff)
Community building: Ur doin it rong.
Published October 25, 2009 | When I call e-pirates thieves? I’m not talking about that. I’m talking about sites like Asatalk and Demonoid that upload ebooks to file-sharing sites by the thousands. That’s not sharing a book with a few friends. That’s not “building community.” That’s ripping off authors, and making it harder for us to get compensated for our work. Reasonable people can agree on this topic, yes? One would hope so.
But then I stumble across readers making comments like, “Why should I care if authors make any money on their writing? It’s not my problem. I don’t care if their books are being pirated. I don’t care if Amazon rips them off. I don’t want to hear about it.”
And I begin to wonder about this whole “community building” thing. Especially when I’ve seen some of these same readers (in the comments of the same blog, too) say, “Where are all the new and interesting books? Why isn’t there anything good to read? I’m so bored. Everything sucks.”
Take those two statements together, and you’ve got something that smells an awful like entitlement. And I start to feel as if authors are being asked to do all the heavy lifting in this “community building” enterprise.
Here’s the thing: After you pay for my book, I don’t believe you owe me anything. Not a fan letter. Not a good review on a blog or elsewhere. Not a recommendation. Nada. As far as I’m concerned, our transaction is complete. Which is not to say I don’t love to hear from readers in all the ways I’ve listed. I just don’t expect it. I don’t feel ENTITLED to it, in other words.
But if you’re going to start bandying about the idea of building a community of readers and writers, then there has to be give and take on both sides. If I can get behind Kindle users sharing a book with five or six other buddies, surely readers can get behind denouncing the true pirates.
As far as I’m concerned, if you don’t care whether we are compensated for our work, you are not a member of any community I’d ever want to join.
(X-posted to Dubious_Virtue)
Making friends and influencing people: Ur doin it rong
Published May 26, 2009 | I’ve been avoiding the Romancelandia blogs in favor of writing, so I almost missed the “Avon editors diss online romance reviewers” kerfluffle. But while it doesn’t surprise me that mainstream NY print publishing isn’t 100% caught up on the marvels of the online reading/reviewing community and how it can be used to further sales and build reader enthusiasm, I have to wonder at the vitriolic tone in response to what seem to be rather innocuous and well-intended — if possibly ill-informed — comments.
Yeah, it makes sense to say, “Dude, you might be a tad behind the curve on this,” and provide data to support your point. Less with the sense-making is the whole, “OMG, you took a piss in my Wheaties ON PURPOSE and I’m TOTALLY GOING TO CUT YOU,” thing.
I thought the intent was to educate the industry on the joys of the online community, not score Imaginary Intraweb points by launching attacks and fomenting bad feelings. Doesn’t look like those Avon editors will be standing in line for any “education” anytime soon. Counter-productive, much?
But what the hell do I know? I live in jeans and dirty sneakers, and my style-quotient is WAY below the norm. Maybe sporting a massive a chip on your shoulder is the new black?
Yes. THIS.
Published March 30, 2009 | Kerry Allen has the last word on e-piracy. Everybody else – and that includes “industry professionals” who tell authors to quit bitching about being bent over and buggered without benefit of lube by scumbag thieves because it might “alienate readers” – can just suck on this for a while, yes? Yes.
Also, have you visited Romance Cooties lately?
Jenny Crusie FOR THE WIN!
Published January 7, 2008 | Anybody who’s even marginally acquainted with me must know I couldn’t keep my grubby little paws off this one, right?
Cassie Edwards has allegedly plagiarized some work, apparently from a number of sources. If these allegations are true, then Ms. Edwards deserves whatever consequences are coming to her. No author has the right to steal, no matter how popular – and Cassie Edwards IS popular, which is part of another point that I’ll address later (and I’m sure you can’t WAIT).
So it was the Smart Bitches who outted Ms. Edwards’ shenanigans, and that’s all well and good. Keeping the masses informed, one Bitch at a time. Works for me.
But there IS a finer distinction to be made here, and Jenny Crusie stepped up to bat and knocked it right outta the park.
After acknowledging that plagiarism is wrong, and Edwards deserves to face the consequences if she, in fact, has done it, and also acknowledging that the SBs have every right to hunt down the facts of the matter AND every right to review as “savagely” as they can, Jenny went on to say:
“I also think this site has made Cassie Edwards a scapegoat and a whipping boy, taking gleeful delight in pointing out how bad she is over and over and over again to the point where it’s close to harassment. The woman is a bad writer, we get it, we get it, so why did Candy give her friend one of Edwards’ books when she knows what outstandingly good books there are out there? Because it’s Cassie Edwards, and she’s so much fun to kick. The only thing I do not like about this site is the way Edwards is treated.
So when I saw another ‘Cassie Edwards, ohmygod’ post, the fact that it was about plagiarism is not what annoyed me first, it was that it was another shot at Cassie Edwards, discovered because people were reading her to make fun of her again. She plagiarized, I hope she goes down for it. But she doesn’t deserve the constant humiliation this site heaps on her, nobody does.
I realize this will enrage SB fans. I realize this will make some people think even less of me than they already do and that opinion was pretty darn low to begin with. I’m good with that. Have a nice day.”
And OHMYGOD, I nearly had a spontaneous moment of sexual ecstasy there. Pardon me whilst I recover.
Okay. So.
Criticize the work. Criticize the author for producing the work. Everyone can learn from good, solid, insightful reviewing. But when the criticism slides into round after round of bashing, whom does that benefit? The segment of the audience who are in it for the cheap thrill of getting to be nasty virtually anonymously and with no consequences? The blogger who gets to vent and have her adoring readership tell her again how very clever she is?
I’m glad to know I’m not the only one who’s left feeling queasy by that behavior, especially when it’s practiced by folks I know to be otherwise intelligent enough to appreciate the distinction. And it saddens me when the only defense they can seem to come up with is “I never said I was a nice person.” Lame.
My other point? Clearly, Cassie Edwards — and Laurell K. Hamilton and a slew of other authors who are routinely excoriated online — have a large and devoted audience. What is the average book reviewer saying to THOSE people every time they not only diss a book or report on an event in the writing community – ALL of which is perfectly reasonable behavior — but savage the author to boot? Aren’t they saying, “hey, you’re too stupid to know a good book, AND the author with whom you may have a long-time literary relationship is pretty much a moron, too.” So when blogging reviewers (NOT necessarily the SBs) get all het up about authors allegedly bashing readers in these online dust-ups? Perhaps they should, for just a moment, consider the literally thousands of readers they routinely offend simply by being unnecessarily cruel to their favorite authors.
Do the SBs and their crowd have a right to bash? Sure they do. I’ve got a right to stand on the corner and berate my long-dead Aunt Marta for being an utter twat, too. Doesn’t mean anybody needs to hear that shit. Nor does it make me particularly classy to do it.
There’s a reason they call it the “high road” and it ain’t for the cannabis growin’ in the ditch.
And now I’m going to go write Jenny Crusie a note, thanking her for speaking up. I may feel the urge to propose marriage. I will fight this urge. I may not win.
Jenny? You’ve been warned.
'Atta boy, Clarence
Published November 8, 2007 | “She’d better keep her mouth shut or her sales will drop and her career will be in the toilet.”
That’s me paraphrasing something I keep reading over and over and over in various places using various sorts of language. But the thing is? In my case? Not so much, really.
I can’t speak for anyone else, but every time I let myself be weak and participate in a little Romancelandia free-for-all, my Fictionwise sales spike. This year’s post-RWA conference Battle of the Bloggers saw a rise of between 5% and 10% in sales of my work there. Which really? Isn’t saying much, because I’m hardly a bestseller on my finest day. But it does seem to point to the above statement being a crock of the ripest kind of bullshit.
So. I will continue to try to avoid this painful, pointless nonsense when I can, but not because I fear for my career. You know, every time a bell rings, an angel gets its wings…
In other news, the countdown to the end of the first round of the Brava novella contest has begun. I’m trying to be very Zen about the whole thing. I’m failing. Hold me.
Just when you thought it was safe to get back in the water…
Published November 7, 2007 | A quote from a famously long-winded commenter on a busy-as-a-bee romance review blog (to which I will not link because that might besmirch its pristine rep, and we can’t have that, can we?) :
“So now I start wondering things like: where does Caridad Ferrer stand in all of this? Her blog is linked on Ferfe’s page and she’s March’s friend. I have several question marks like that, around authors and bloggers who haven’t ever publicly indicated that they’re not on board with the mudfest. Not that any of those authors or bloggers may care one whit, but I can’t imagine I’m the only one asking those questions.”
I’ll answer that question with a question: So now busy authors juggling multiple professional commitments are required to keep abreast of blog-wars in which they have no interest AND make sure all bloggers linking to them are on the politically correct side of any controversy?
SERIOUSLY?? Dude.
Get. A. Life.
Buy one if you have to. Put it on freakin’ lay-a-way for the holidays. Anyone with that many “question marks” around the idea that an award-winning author doesn’t have better things to do with her time is in serious need of a hobby.
A note to all authors in my sidebar: that target on your back just got bigger. Want me to de-link? Drop me a note, no hard feelings. It’s Amnesty Day here at Dubious Virtue, in honor of folks with too much time on their hands and not near enough common sense.
What if they held a blog-war and nobody came?
Published October 3, 2007 | First — because it deserves to be first, and not buried beneath the rubble of rant I’m planning — Eva Gale gets 4 Stars from The Romance Studio for 101 Degrees Fahrenheit!
A quote:
“This is one erotic connection that creates a hot, dynamite, sensual read, packed inside this page-turner.”
That’s my girl. 
On to things less important in the larger scheme.
See Jenny Crusie discuss readers who turn their dissatisfaction with a book into a personal attack.
See Jenny further defend the rights of authors to respond to personal attacks.
This, in particular, resonates for me:
“So you handle it by looking at the whatever the attack was and telling yourself, ‘Deep breath, she’s her and obviously miserable or she wouldn’t be wasting her time spreading bile, and you’re you and you’re happy. Let it go. You win.’ And then one day, you don’t let it go. Because it’s not okay. You cannot insult me (or in this case, my friend) and feel betrayed when I respond; you can not take the low road and then be outraged when I come down to join you, you cannot call me names and then say, ‘Not fair!’ when I tell people that you called me names.”
See many readers and authors support Jenny in her cry of “Foul!”
“…’mean girls’ … i.e. women who specialize in relational aggression count on the silence of those they attack. They need it to thrive, like e.coli on an agar gel (lab nerds will get that). So if the Y’s who attack others (and her letter was an attack, not a criticism) don’t like getting ‘outed’ they shouldn’t write letters that won’t humiliate them if they are published. No complicit silence for mean girls (and mean boys although male social aggression is usually in a different form). You don’t get a carte blanche to attack people just because you aren’t famous and they are. They are allowed to fight back.“
From the same commenter:
“In addition, I don’t think Y ‘messed up.’ I think she attacked … why should you expect privacy in an attack? If you are that certain you are right you shouldn’t care if your letter was printed. Unless you know you were being a flaming twit and don’t want ‘others’ to know you feel free to express your opinion as a personal attack on someone. If she had wrote ‘I think your book did a disservice to quilters and did not represent us fairly. Since others will read your books please consider the fact you may be damaging the reputation of our community.’ That would make it an opinion and a criticism. There is a big difference between ‘I disagree with you’ and ‘you suck, Yankee.‘
(The above is a point I’ve tried to make a few times with a few different folks and failed, miserably. I chalk it up to my own inability to communicate effectively, because it SURELY couldn’t be that although the concept is simple and straightforward — it’s okay to tell me you don’t like my shoes, it’s not okay to say ‘you’re an ugly ho-bag with no taste’ — these folks choose not to comprehend it because it runs contrary to their personal agendas.)
See some — including a few of The Usual Suspects — turn out to say, yet again, that authors have no business voicing opinions about others’ opinions of their work.
“I see Crusie’s post as a warning. Beware all readers who attempt to make criticisms of an author. If you aren’t as clever as us, it will go badly for you.”
(And yet again, the apparently conscious decision to conflate “criticism” with “personal attack.” It boggles the mind, doesn’t it?)
See Jenny be Jenny, much to the amusement and delight of her fans.
“I think trying to explain my position again or clarify some of the things you misinterpreted would be fruitless since our disagreement is based on that fundamental difference and that is not misinterpreted. I understand that you feel the post reveals a lot of unflattering things about me; they’re all true.”
And then see the crazies crawl out of the woodwork in full force. Jenny says:
“In other news, this discussion is now being discussed elsewhere as an anti-Christian rant:
‘Supporters of the Famous Author whose blog it is, took gleeful flight into really vicious anti-Christian ‘comments.’ Just, boom – let’s trash Christians. Let’s do it in an unlimited and really ugly way . . . . I do wonder how great the distance is between the virulent anti-Christian ranting on blogs such as the one I mention, and the rounding up of Christians for labor camps? Just wondering when the hate gets its legs under it and starts killing people. I mean, it looks to me as if some of the readers/commenters on that blog wouldn’t mind at all setting fire to a church full of Christians – well, white Christians. Wouldn’t want to be racist.’
Jenny again: “I did a search for ‘Christian’ of both Argh posts and the comments. Nothing. Then I did one for ‘God,’ and after adjusting for swearing, there were a couple of references to ‘god-fearing,’ playing off my comment. So I thought you all should know I’ve brought you down with me.
For the record, I’m Lutheran.
Isn’t it fun being a published writer?“
Go here to see some folks be appalled by a reader/reviewer calling an author a few truly vicious names in a review (and in later comments on the author’s blog).
See said reviewer strongly suggest that the author shut up and write. Because THAT’s new and original.
See me roll my eyes. (But not at you, Jordan. You ask the right questions.)
It’s all fun and games until somebody gets hurt, right? And it’s all downhill from here, because too many people — readers AND authors — are quick to jump on the bandwagon of “online readers/bloggers/reviewers are entitled to air their opinions, no matter how vile and intentionally hurtful those opinions might be, without repercussion or the kind of public confrontation that would, in the real world, tend to make them think twice about tone and intent.” In other words? The normal rules of civilized social discourse no longer apply, ladies. That thing flapping against your back? It’s not a cape, it’s a target.
So here we are.
Lie down with dogs? Get up with fleas.