Jimmy, Boardwalks and Backstory

I'm so late today with my promised post and I suspect it will be short.  But this week's Boardwalk Empire got me thinking about the calculated timing of the backstory reveal once again.

Whether you're writing a novel, or a TV series that might go over several seasons, timing is everything when it comes to revealing backstory. And if you've thought up cool, dark backstories for your characters, the temptation is to make sure the reader/viewer knows and sees all that great stuff. But holding it back is so, so much better. They did this well on Battlestar Galactica. And really well in the movie Shame, to the point where they never really did reveal the backstory, and now Boardwalk Empire.

I loved how they revealed the stuff about Nucky's childhood in the first season, and how Margaret got to America in this season (although frankly, that was a bit of a letdown) but the reveal of Jimmy's backstory was perfect for me.

Yes, with hindsight, we've known some of that all along, and we knew a few details... We knew he'd been at Princeton, but never finished (but didn't know why). We knew he'd been in the war, so I assumed his enlisting had been what cut his University career short. But no... We knew he'd gone to war when  his girlfriend was pregnant. We knew his mother is super young and super pretty and there was some  super creepy sexual energy between them, but wow. What great timing to explain some of the missing pieces in Jimmy's background.

And to add layers to his already very complicated relationship with his mother. Not to mention his wife.

When things like that get revealed in second or third seasons I often wonder when the writers knew... Is this something they thought of after the fact or knew all along and held back. And in this case, I think it's deliciously obvious that they knew all along. And that the director told the actors from the start. Every look between Jimmy and his mother.... The awkwardness between Jimmy and his girlfriend/wife once he comes back from war.. That, I assumed, was just due to the time they'd been apart, (and then the fact they reveal she's a lesbian). But no. So much more delicious. They barely freaking knew each other.

And his mother got him kicked out of Princeton. Or he did because he was freaking jealous of a professor hitting on his Mom. Wow.

All of it delicious. One of my favourite episodes yet.

Why Must I Like Them? Really Really Like Them?

So this weekend, in a fit of laundry-folding, filing of papers and other organizational chores, I watched a lot of television. On Friday night, I watched Cedar Rapids. Ed Helms plays a total shnook of an insurance salesman who gets sent to the big regional conference. My expectations were pretty low, but still it was funnier and way sweeter than I expected. There's a moment where Ed Helms explains why he became an insurance salesman and it all has to do with helping people and being there for people when their lives are falling apart. So through all the goofiness and even John C. Reilly walking around in his boxer shorts, I hung in there because I wanted Ed Helms to win.

I also watched Web Therapy. My expectations were a little higher for this one. I love shows with psychologists. To keep it simple, I hated it. Lisa Kudrow's character had, from what I saw, absolutely no redeeming qualities. She was a narcissistic, selfish, self-absorbed, greedy twit. I didn't even make it all the way through the first episode because there was absolutely no one to root for. Not even her clients.

I can't decide if this need to have someone to root for is a failing or not. There seem to be plenty of shows and movies where everyone else is perfectly happy that the heroes aren't heroic. Chicago, anyone? I hated it. I wanted them all to be executed. On the other hand, though, I get so sick of the perfect heroines who are always smart and kind and blindingly pretty. I need a good middle ground.

So what drives you nuts more? Having no one to root for or having the person you're rooting for be too effing perfect?

A conversation about category romance and effective promotion

I've done some blogs about category romance and royalties and while I am still very much a middle of the pack Superromance writer, sales as a whole have gone down. It's still a great place to write I adore Wanda Ottewell and deeply respect her eye for story. It's been a great place to write. It's pretty much anything goes over that at Superromance and while I think there are authors who sell better than I do because they might have branded themselves better in terms of the stories they write - or they stick to one kind of subgenre that appeals to the category reader, I have enjoyed writing pretty much whatever I want - probably to my detriment.

So, for those of you focusing on Superromance and for Stephanie whose first Superromance comes out in April - here are some tips for making the most of your career at Superromance (from someone who probably didn't, so take all of this with a grain of salt).

Cowboys and kids sell. And they sell pretty well from what I can gather. So if you can get that cowboy hat and a baby on a cover, chances are you'll see some sales. I've never managed to get this kind of cover - although maybe in July since I have a cowboy and some kids. I'll report back. Without that selling feature, unless your cover is different and really pretty radically different - I think covers are just covers. People aren't impulse buying like they were - they go by name recognition and recommendation - more on that in a second.

Yes, you do have to do social networking. But only do what you like. Readers want giveaways. Who doesn't? Do a little blog tour - there are a lot of websites out there who would LOVE to have guest bloggers. Do the blog. Giveaway some books. Be on Facebook - do some giveaways. Are you going to see sales - can't say. No idea. But giving away books in my opinion is the best promotion there is. Especially if you're proud of the book. I did a Good Reads giveaway, which is free - I do recommend that, they pull from a huge pool and get a lot of rabid readers who might not know your name, or romance.

Paying for advertising - be it on Facebook, Good Reads or Romantic Times - I honestly don't know if it makes a difference. I've stopped doing it for my category books because I just never felt like there was a huge result from it. If I would recommend one I'd say Good Reads - it's concentrated on readers and it's not outrageously expensive. Once again, no idea if it resulted in sales.


I have not done a bookmark or a trading card. I print up business cards for conference - which inevitably I forget to hand out. If I get my act together I think I'll do a trading card for my single titles, but for category...I probably won't do it.

Consistently, the best promotion you can do is write great books that your editor loves. Because your editor is your best sales force.

Now, the real surprise from my royalty statement is the number of ebook sales for my Feb book - HIS WIFE FOR ONE NIGHT. There were over 1,000 sales. The rest of my ebook sales hover between 200-400. Now, perhaps a contributor to this was my Good Reads ad and giveaway. I'd never done that before this book. So again, Good Reads - check it out. Another contributor might be that at Christmas there were a whole lot of new e-readers in stockings.

But the real factor I believe comes down to Internet buzz and the hand-selling of one very important librarian. I got a great review on Dear Author and it was before the book came out, most of my reviews have been long after the fact. So a good review at the right time. And Wendy the SuperLibrarian raved about this book practically door to door. Can not thank her enough.

We all know there are blogs in this business that have some clout. It takes some guts to send your book to Dear Author, Smart Bitches and All About Romance for review - because they might trash it and trash it hard. But if you can get over that - great. Do it. And maybe you don't approve of what they do on their sites - fair enough. But Internet buzz has become - in my opinion - the game changer and no one does Internet buzz like those sites.

That's my takeaway this time around. Thoughts?

Stretching credibility

I will go a long way with a show or book that is exciting and keeps me guessing, or makes me laugh, probably past where a lot of other people will fall off. I'll accept if there is more good than bad.

I'm just past the point into bad with a show right now. Did anyone out there watch the first season of Camelot? I did, mostly for Joseph Fiennes and the clever, clever episode where it twisted the legend regarding how Arthur came upon Excalibur. The show is clever in some ways. They know that Fiennes is chewing scenery in a truly memorable performance. They know Eva Green is also chewing scenery, but like Fiennes she brings such energy to the screen that it elevates the show. Both actors are more interesting than the actual script and any scenes with them together are really fun to watch.

Then there is the plot of the actual King, Arthur and his love for Guinevere, a pretty blonde who's hair styles look like they came directly from the 1980's, not the distant past. Arthur is supposed to be a youth, growing into his responsibilities and that I buy. What I don't believe is the instant sizzling attraction between Arthur and Guinevere. In the show she is betrothed to Arthur's right hand man, a man easily ten years older than Arthur, one who is far better looking and more interesting and quite frankly, the moment he removed his shirt, the show lost me.

There is no way I believe Guinevere would ever be more attracted to Arthur than her fiancee, and this is the central concept of the romance on the show.

So even with Fiennes and Eva Green and some cool twists to well known legends, I'm done. There isn't enough good about the show to overcome the way they mishandled the subplot.

Anyone else watching? Are you more patient than I am?

Getting my ducks in a row...

As writers we often have to worry about our creative process. We need to think about structure characterization, conflict and plot, blah, blah, blah…
But sometimes we also need to focus on the business. That’s where my head is out now. I’m almost ready to announce my new website that has all the bells and whistles it needs. Links to things… links are good.

I’ve dotted every I and crossed every T on my indie publication which will be released in December. (Where I will post a big splashy picture and ask everyone who is anyone to please buy this book because I really like it.) I’ve made decisions about branding, cover art and book titles. Yeah me!

Now I have to sit down and think about 2012. I have a book to finish and a new proposal to write, that’s for certain. But do I want to write 2 or 3 category books? Do I want to schedule time to try and fit in my new historical? Do I want to focus more on the indie work and see if I can gain any traction in that market?

Hard decisions. And not creative at all. It brings home to me again that as “authors” we need to be both things – creative writers and logical business people. I’ve met author’s whose work I thought was okay – but did an amazing job of marketing themselves. I’ve met author’s whose work is amazing, but so few people have ever heard of them. Either group can get lucky – but I think long term success requires a blending of both skills.

If you are reading this blog – you know that we never say the easy things about writing and publishing. Was it you, Molly, who said realistically hitting it big in publishing is not all that different from winning the lottery? And that’s the truth. But know that writing the great the book, crafting the best query, landing an agent, publisher, whatever… all those things are great things. Once you've done that, then it’s… okay what’s next – Are you tweeting?

(I am tweeting and some day I’m going to figure out how to tweet my blog – 2012 to do list!)

Tense and Tension and Night Circuses

I was talking to a writer-friend this past weekend who also recently read The Night Circus, by Erin Morgenstern. I loved this book and I'm 99% sure I would have loved it whenever I read it, but I do think I looked at it slightly differently as a writer. Writers often notice things readers don't.

The book is written all in present tense. Mostly in omniscient third person present tense, except for a few sections in 2nd person. But I'm pretty sure all of it is in present tense. (I don't have the book with me and I'm out of town, so I can't check.)

The present tense was a problem for the other writer I was talking to because the events in the book are happening in the past not the present so she didn't think using present tense made sense. She also said that although she couldn't stop turning the pages, she didn't end up caring about the characters or thinking about them much after finishing, and she thought present tense was to blame.

I thought for this for a while after our conversation and instead of e-mailing her with my opinions, I'll just post them here. :)

First, clearly not every book is going to speak to every reader. It's subjective. And full disclosure: I've written 3 books in first person present tense, including the ones I'm working on now. And I have a partially completed manuscript in 3rd person present tense. So I'm not totally unbiased here. :)

But I would assert that a lot of the tension and the rapid pace of The Night Circus comes from the author's use of the present tense. I don't think it would be as creepy or fascinating or as immediate in past tense. Present tense can make you feel as if you're watching a scene unfold. (Rather than hearing someone tell you about something they saw in the past.) I think present tense can pick a reader up and swoop her into a scene, even if that scene is in the past. I do assert that the present tense was responsible for creating tension in that book and it would have been flat in past tense.

I think that the omniscient viewpoint is a more likely culprit for the detachment she felt. In hindsight, I felt detached from the characters too. We're never fully in any characters' POV, so we never fully feel any of their emotions. Now I'm not meaning for a second to argue that this was a "mistake" or "bad choice" on the part of the author -- just a different one. I think in this particular book, the omniscient viewpoint had the advantage of creating mystery and allowing the author to show many, many points of view, but the disadvantage of emotional detachment. It worked for me. I also liked how it clouded things or kept the reader from immediately seeing which characters were the most important. Experienced readers know that when a character gets a POV they're going to be important for some reason or a major player. But in a book where virtually every characters' thoughts are disclosed, there's almost another layer of mystery to figure out who's important and who's not or why I'm being told about a little boy sent on a dare, or a German clock maker.



I also loved how the description of each circus tent/act was done in 2nd person, (but also present tense, I think. Again, I don't have the book on me.) These short 1-2 page chapters are scattered throughout the book and are presented almost as if the circus itself had written them as ad copy to entice people to visit. Or more likely as if one of the rêveurs (avid night circus fans) had written about his or her experiences. eg. You walk through a curtain and.... (I'm not quoting. Just giving the idea.) PS. This trailer was clearly done based on an old cover.... I kind of like this first cover better, but maybe they didn't think men would pick it up? UPDATE: It's the UK cover... Here's a link to an interview with Erin Morgenstern I just stumbled onto at Writer Unboxed. BTW. Erin and I are at the same literary agency which freaks me out to no end.

All of this also got me thinking about how and if a writer using present tense might use different techniques depending on whether she's writing in first or second or third person... In first person present, I'm of the opinion that you need to keep description of scenery and action simple and minimalistic or the reader will no longer be "in the moment" or believe that events are unfolding in real time. But in third person, I think you have slightly more leeway--especially when it's omniscient--but still, during scenes with action, I'm pretty sure she kept her sentences clean and clear and easy to parse. There's a ton of vivid description in this book, but I suspect not during actual action scenes. I see myself reading this book again to study it. :)

I have heard some people say they do not ever enjoy reading in present tense, but usually this comes from other writers and I suspect some English majors who were told by their professors that it was infantile to write in present tense. (A reviewer "informed" me that I was using an infantile style when my first person present tense women's fiction manuscript was in that Amazon Breakout Novel competition a few years back.)

Does present tense bother you?

Ambition

So I've been thinking a lot about structure lately and how I'm a little tired of the fact that every book I write starts at the beginning and goes to the end, over and over and over again. Beginning, middle end. Beginning, middle, end. Beginningmiddleend.

I've read two books recently whose structures blew me away. Sister by Rosamund Lupton (I think I've mentioned it before) and Secrets of Eden by Chris Bohjalian. They both mess around with the timeline. Starting at one point, hopping into the past, coming back to the present until both timelines meet up and then charging into the present/future. They were both awesome.

I had also been watching the first few seasons of Damages with my niece. The writers for that show also used a structure where you're in the present and then hopping into the past and then back to the present until the timelines merge near the end and pull you along to the conclusion.

We just started season 3, though, and they're even a little more ambitious with the timeline. There's the past then a mid point and then the present and frankly, I'm confused. They got too ambitious with their fancy storytelling technique and it's all gotten muddy.

I really want to try to do something more in my next book (not the one I'm writing now, I'm too committed to how that one works, but the one after that assuming there is one after that), but the idea of biting off more than I can chew is scary.

Have you seen that before where the writer or writers go too far in a book or a movie or a television show? Where they get too ambitious and instead of being intriguing, it's muddy and confusing?

Happy American Thanksgiving...

This will be a short post as I'm traveling. Just wishing everyone who is celebrating today a happy T-Day.

My sister is already panicking that she doesn't have a big enough bird so we are off to the store to see what can be done.

We're thinking of using a rotisserie chicken and just mixing it in with the turkey. I mean really, who is going to notice!

Anyway to echo what Eileen and Maureen said... ditto about being thankful for good friends.

Wish us luck!

Giving Thanks

Like Eileen, I too am very thankful for this blog and my great friends. (She said it so well, I'm simply going to say, "Ditto.") I'm grateful that I finally discovered (admitted?) what I wanted to do with my life and I'm thankful for all of you for keeping me going and not letting me quit the many times the going has gotten decidedly rough.

To give credit where credit's most due... I am especially thankful for Sinead. She was the first of this group whom I met and her determination and talent and encouragement inspired me to keep writing  past just taking a class. Then she introduced me to Molly and the rest is history so to speak.

I'm also feeling grateful for my family and my health. Breast cancer claimed another of my cousins this week, way too young. She never even had the chance to be middle aged and that's just not fair. But I'm thankful to have known her.

I'm also always grateful for the many turkeys and pumpkins and cranberries and their contribution to Thanksgiving dinners -- even though I had mine back in October. ;)

Thankful

I'm going to keep this short. I have a house full of relatives and more arriving by the day. We're having 25 for dinner on Thursday and I'm not entirely sure how I'm going to seat them all and we still haven't practiced getting my mother in and out of the van we rented to squire her around for the week. I wanted to make sure this was said, though.

I'm very thankful for this blog. I'm thankful for a place to put down the random thoughts I have each week about writing and to be able to do it in a community who understands what I'm talking about and why I want to talk about it. I'm thankful for the support. I'm thankful for the way you all make me laugh and think and stretch.

For those of you celebrating this week, have a safe and wonderful holiday. Hugs to you all.

Eileen

Standing up for our rights or career suicide

One of the websites I love to read on a regular basis is Dear Author . Great website, thoughtful reviews, and always interesting information on publishing in general.

This week they had a brief article on an author suing her publisher for including promotional materials for other author's books at the back of her book. There was nothing in her contract against cross-promotional material, but she felt it went against the terms of her contract and because of this she has refused to hand in the third book in her three book deal.

There are lawyers involved, it's gotten ugly and for anyone interested, check out Dear Author's midday links for the details. Me, I read it and my immediate thought was this author is shooting themselves in the foot. Every other publisher will find out about this and would anyone agree to publish and author who had sued their publisher over something as common as cross-promotion. For more examples of this, see almost every Harlequin paperback.

I admire this author's self-confidence, her ability to speak out for something she thinks is wrong. I do think this is career suicide, but as writers, going through the critique process, through submitting to agents and editors, getting reviewed, there are so many ways our egos can be battered and I'm jealous of any author who can maintain their confidence through all of that.

Authors that will wait for the perfect agent rather than leaping at the first agent to offer representation, or can wait for the big deal rather than just accepting publication, the authors that believe inherently they are worth better treatment. Because I know I'm not that author and I wish I were.

Anyone think the above author was right in her stance? Would you have done the same?

The Weekend That Changed My Life...

Sounds dramatic no? But I really believe it to be true. At least my writing life. We’ll see in ten years or so if I’m right. But as Molly posted on Monday I was in Toronto this past weekend and it was awesome. A weekend of good food, good friends, beer and wine, book talk and let’s not forget Friday Night Lights.

But the game changer for me was the brainstorming session. I had never been part of a critique group before. For many reasons. I often tell people who ask me about my writing that I’m the least creative person I know. I write simply because I like to control things. So the idea of a group talking about my idea or changing my idea… I thought, no.

And then there was this element of … if you accept help does it make it less your idea? I’m not great at accepting any kind of help and writing help in particular seemed like a foreign concept.

But then I did it. I told everyone my idea and they all listened (thank you for listening) and it was like watching someone with a Rubix Cube. All the pieces of my story were still there, but with a few twists this way and another few twists that way and what might have been a story that only had 3 sides of all the same color now was a completely finished cube.

I was stunned and amazed. And thrilled. Then Molly did her magic with the high concept stuff and bammo – I felt like I had this great high concept pitch married with a fully cohesive plot.

Now sure – I have to do some more work. The annoying business of actually writing the book. But I will forever be sold on the idea that it is not only okay, but downright smart, to pitch your book to other smart writers and let them find the holes you just can’t see.

You don’t have to use every idea – for instance my hero is not going to be German – sorry Molly! But it’s not even like that really matters. Just throwing things out there made me think about things I hadn’t thought of before.

I’m sold. And I absolutely want to do this again.

Talent vs. Skill

I feel as if I've done a post on this topic before, but the previous one was more about whether or not you can learn to be a writer... Hmmm.. when was that? (I found it. A post I did on my other blog in 2006 about whether writing is a talent or a skill. I guess a five year gap is enough time to revisit. ;)

Something recently drew this concept to mind again--and it was partly Stephanie commenting last weekend that she was now paying more attention to craft than she used to. And I'd already thinking about talent vs. skill.

A few weeks ago, I was walking through a bookstore with the fabulous Debbie Ohi and we stumbled on a woman doing a signing and we listened to a small chunk of her presentation. From what we could gather, her book was a cookbook, but also had personal stories about the recipes and some cartoon-type illustrations. Someone in the audience complimented the illustrations and asked her about them.

The author was a tad shy about her drawings and said she wasn't an artist or an illustrator by any sense of the imagination, but she'd shown them to the publisher and they wanted to include them. She also showed them to an artist friend at the time, to ask her opinion (should I really let them publish these?) and the artist replied something like: you don't have much skill, but you definitely have talent. That made me nod.

I think you can go a long way in many creative pursuits relying solely on talent, but at some point, when the going gets tough, or when something isn't working, or when you want to push yourself to do something different or better, or when you need to continue to produce more and more books, faster and faster, it sure helps to have developed some skill. :)

What do you think? Do you rely more on talent or skill when you write? Which is more important?

Sometimes I Hate Romance

Most of the time I love love. Young couples smooching on the street make me stop and smile. I often applaud when the couple finally kisses in the movie or the TV show. I get all swoony when one of my friends' husbands steps up to the plate and surprises her with jewelry or a trip or anything that makes her feel fabulous.

So when do I hate romance? Apparently when it's in a commercial. Those "Every Kiss Begins with K" commercials that will be playing nonstop from now to Christmas make me want to puke. Honestly, does that dude think it will really help unpack all those boxes to give her a necklace? Forget the diamonds, man. Start putting together some shelves!

Truth be known, I also despite those Jared commercials and the Zales commercials and I've been known to turn the car radio off the second I hear Tom Shane's voice, so maybe it's just jewelry commercials that set my teeth on edge. Perhaps not, though, because there's a few perfume commercials that make me want to scream as well.

Maybe it's just the start of my usual hatred of all things holiday starting up because of the commercials. Or perhaps I'm becoming prematurely curmudgeonly.

Is there any place where you hate to see romance? Or is it good for you wherever you find it?

Figuring out High Concept

Big moment for some of the drunk writers - namely, me. For years when people have talked about High Concept, I have mocked them behind thier backs largely because I have no CLUE what high concept actually means. Is it JAWS meets LITTLE HOUSE ON THE PRAIRIE? What if we write straight up contemporary romance - where's the high concept in that? Don't I need zombies or post-apocolyptic drama to be high concept?

And, and this is ugly, I have always believed that the books I have adored you can not whiddle down to one line that manages to encapsulate all the tension, drama and nuisance of the character and conflict I love. Because I love those books, and emulate those authors, I thought my books were so damn special one line wouldn't do it.

I know, such a dummy.

Anyway, I had a slow-burning ah-ha moment after Lori Wilde's talk at the TRW meeting a few months ago, and in talking with Maureen and Sinead about the ideas they are working on and the rejections that they've gotten.

High concept doesn't encapsulate the book - it encapsulates the idea. It sells the idea. Shines it up to an irresistable gloss. The book is another thing entirely! (not really, but for this discussion, yeah it kind of is). And yes I think a contemporary romance needs a high concept line most of all. We've got to figure out why this book is different and get it out there.

I don't know about you guys, but after I've written a book, I could not come up with the high concept line to save my life. I'm all bogged down in the 100,000 words of nuance and conflict and backstory and mommy issues. In fact, as an aside, I could not come up with a high concept line on a book that I've written a proposal for.

But this weekend, Stephanie came to town to be a big timmer up at the Harlequin office and we got to do some brainstorming. Steph, Sinead and Maureen were all at the very beginning of brainstorming, they had some ideas, some plot and a character - all very fluid. But we decided for each of these ideas the brainstorming wouldn't be finished without coming up with this line...and HOLY SHIT! I am not kidding you, in all my years of writing and brainstorming - nothing has ever lit a spark under us like this. It wasn't just enthusiasm for the ideas - all of us wanted to pitch these books. We were excited about the part of the publishing process that every hates - submitting.

And the really amazing power of a great high concept line is that it shows the whole book. The world, the character, the external conflict, the twist - and if you choose the words right, you can even get tone and voice in there too.

It's freaking magic! Not kidding.

When are you fully committed?

It's time for a new idea and I truly don't know what to write. Brainstorming is my favourite part of this writing process, and at this point, everything is on the table. I'm committed to absolutely nothing, not even genre, so I'm really going where my best idea takes me.

I like to plan in advance, have a strong sense of the major plot points, but usually I jump into a book too soon, a mistake I'm hoping not to repeat.

So my usual process is, I brainstorm a general plot, the beginning, the end, the internal and external conflicts and then, when I should be thinking more of developing the relationships between the characters or how the character arc plays out, I get impatient to start and I write the first chapter and go from there. Once the first chapter is written, I'm pretty much committed to the idea and I rarely back off from there.

I know people, who are committed to the idea almost from it's inception, and others who can write three chapters and still back away from an idea.

But by the time I start the first chapter, I'm so excited about the prospect of the story that I get caught up. It's nice, it's a place for me that has little doubt, and that's about the only part of the writing process that lacks doubt.

Anyone gotten farther into a book and turned to another idea?

Building a Platform

I'm participating in a mentorship program through one of my online writers groups and my "grasshopper" recently asked me this question:

When did you start building your platform? Can you identify the major steps to take? What made a real difference?  

In answering her, I thought I'd just make it into a blog post.

First... I actually don't think it's essential for fiction writers to build a platform before they're published. I know or know of lots of very successful authors who had zero online presence prior to their first sale. A platform will not get you published in fiction unless it's a really awesome one. And wearing these shoes wouldn't count as an awesome platform for fiction, unless your name is Snooki or Lauren Conrad or Tyra Banks.

That said, I am someone who started to build a platform before I sold.

I used to be very active on several writers loops. I did this more to learn about writing and the industry, and to share what I'd learned with others, than to build a platform per se... but I did develop a fairly significant network of writer friends both via loops and via blogging. 

The keys with blogging are at least two fold. First, make your content interesting. And second leave meaningful comments on other people's blogs in the hopes that you'll gain readership either from those individuals or their readers. Or maybe that they'll link to your blog from their blog. It can be a lot of work to do both of those things consistently, so I only recommend this for someone who enjoys it and has time. Also, you have to be careful not to say something that will paint you in a negative light.

And I don’t think that either of those venues are as active as they used to be. More people are now on Facebook, Twitter and Google+.

I was a pretty early adopter of MySpace and Facebook and Twitter and Google+, but I don’t think it’s essential to do these things professionally before you’ve got a publishing contract. The trick is, unless you have really great content on those venues, why would anyone you don't already know follow you before you have a book out? It’s tricky. And is there any point in building up huge numbers of Facebook friends who are mostly interested in either hitting on you via skeevy messages, or asking you to buy them a cow for Farmville? (Asks the girl with 3800 Facebook friends. Do what I say, not what I do.)

Here's my twitter page if you're not already following me there. :)

Some people do social networking extremely well, but I don’t think it’s essential if it’s not something you enjoy. It's easy to get started on these social networking sites, and the main "tricky" thing for a writer is deciding whether to separate your personal identity from your writer identity. If I could turn back time three or four years, I would have set up Facebook differently for sure. Not that I really could have done it the way I wish I'd done it, because it's changed so much.... 

If you're starting on Facebook now, it's a good idea to set up a Page. But again, why would anyone "like" your page before you have a book? So, it's really just preparation and I wouldn't spend a lot of time trying to coerce people into liking your page. You'll just alienate them. Once you have a book out, they will come. ;) Especially if you have links for them to "like" you on your website and in various other places. :-)


My Facebook Page:

And here's a like button for Molly's new Facebook Page:

There are lots of great resources with advice on using social networking but I think the bottom line is be genuine. Be yourself. And again, be careful you don't tweet or post anything you might later regret. What you post online stays there forever. Minimize drunk tweeting. ;) Especially from an iPhone with autocorrect!


In terms of building a platform, one step I would advise writers to take before they sell is to buy the domain name(s) for whatever author name(s) they plan hope to use. There’s nothing more heartbreaking than realizing you can’t get “yourauthorname.com” when you want it. I reserved my website name in about 2003 and launched my website and blog after I got my first agent (in 2006) when I thought I was about to sell. I didn't get my first book contract until 2009. If I could turn back time, I’m not certain I would have put as much time/thought/money into my website. I do love the look of my site. My designer was very talented and really “got” me and my writing that I shared with her. Problem is, I ended up published in a different genre than I was writing at the time and while my website fits me as a person, I’m not sure it fits my current work... And I'll definitely need a new design with the books I have coming out starting next year (that I still can't talk about...)

One clear advantage I saw to blogging when I started, was that before I had a blog, when you googled my name most of the top hits weren’t me. After I’d been actively blogging for just a few months, and other writers had linked to my blog, suddenly most google hits for my name were actually about me and not some other person named Maureen McGowan. But again... that didn't get me published. I just thought it was cool.

If you know you’re going to use a pseudonym, then by all means start to create an identity online under that name, but know that things might not turn out as you plan. Maybe your publisher won’t let you use the pseudonym of your choice. Maybe you’ll change your mind by the time you’re published. Maybe you’ll end up in a different genre than the identity you’ve built up... 

All this said, I think unpublished writers should concentrate more on their writing and honing their craft than worrying about a platform. Platforms are only essential for non-fiction writers. For fiction writers they're just a bonus, not a necessity and won't get your novel published unless your platform is that you're a cast member of a big reality TV show. If you enjoy social networking and have time, by all means. But make writing your first priority until you have a contract. An agent or editor won’t sign you or publish your novel because you have a gazillion facebook friends or a pretty website. In fact, unless they already love your book, they won’t even check to see.

Cutting the Squirrel

No. It's not a euphemism for something dirty. Trust me. I double-checked on Urban Dictionary. It might, however, be my new Cutting One's Darlings equivalent.

I had a lovely chat with my adorable and way-too-perceptive-for-her-age editor about my WIP. I'd had a chat back with another editor at Ace when we went to contract for the book. She'd really had only one real objection. It had to do with the squirrel.

I hate squirrels. I'm terrified of them and I'm pretty convinced they're out to get me. They're constantly dashing out across the bike path trying to knock me off my bike. I know people think they're cute, but they attack children, set cars on fire, cause car accidents and may even be involved in espionage.

It was one of those happy writing accidents when I was researching Norse mythology for my third Messenger novel and stumbled across Ratatoskr. He's supposed to be quite the gossip and I figured he could help me get information from one place to another and would also help me work through some of Squirrel issues. I mean, isn't one of the points of writing fiction to basically get cheap therapy?

Alas, I must cut Ratatoskr. Apparently, he doesn't "resonate." Also, I already have crows and some oxen in the book and my editor felt like it was turning into a something like a Disney movie gone terribly wrong. I don't think it will be terribly hard to fill the plot holes his disappearance will make, but I have to admit I'm a little bummed to leave him. I mean, just because he didn't resonate in a synopsis doesn't mean that he won't resonate just fine in the actual book. Sadly, he won't have the chance. I must cut the squirrel.

Have you had to cut any personal squirrels?

COVERS!!!

Well, here they are my first single title covers from Bantam! I've never had the naked guy cover before and while initially it threw me for a loop - I have to say I've grown fond of his abs. Very very fond. And I think you will too. So: Can't Buy Me Love

I love the look on the woman's face behind the model. She's the perfect representation of my heroine: Tara Jean Sweet.

And my personal favorite of the two, the cover for CAN'T HURRY LOVE not because we see MORE of his chest, but I love the cowboy hat and the fact that his shirt is wrinkled? I adore it. I really do. Not to perfect, just perfect enough, sort of like the hero: down on his luck cowboy Eli Turnbull.

Let me know wht you think!

Vampire Diaries and the surprise plot revelation

Welcome to my ongoing fascination with the Vampire Diaries. It's pretty much the only show in the week that I watch in real time, and if I have to PVR it, I do a back up recording at another just in case my PVR screws up. Because you miss a show in this series and you miss a lot. They somehow manage to keep it moving at that pace, without losing the central relationships either.

And this week was no exception. They surprised me (pleasantly) twice with revelations I didn't see coming, but made absolute sense within the framework of the story and the plot, and more importantly the revelations made the external plot tighter and added some lovely character drama to all of it. Essentially, they kept it all within one family and did it brilliantly.

Lovely surprises happen when you write, really lovely twists and turns, but I'm still a big believer that the important twists, (like the big bad also being the big daddy) is usually something that takes some advance thought. I do some of this, but I never feel as though I do enough, and the Vampire Diaries, on a weekly basis, is convincing me to to do more advance plotting before I ever type a word.

Because it's not just the plot twists, it's the time they take with the central relationships. They seem to understand that because they have so much external plot keeping everything moving along, they can really take their time and develop relationships slowly, build to them and trust the viewer will follow along. And I'm in, and for the first time since the show began, they have two male leads that are fascinating.
Damon and Stefan, because one walks the edge of the line and the other has to be all or nothing, and the show is more about their relationship than it is about the romance between Elena and Stefan which was never that interesting to begin with and the writers seem to understand that as well.

And just finished the Night Circus and it's amazing... loved it, every page.

New Girl... She's weird but I like her

Okay so is anyone watching this show? This is the Zoey Deschanel show on Fox. When I watched the first episode I thought… I don’t know. I watched the second and wondered… do I like her or is she just weird?

I watched the third show and I thought she’s weird… but I like her.

This isn’t some show where some actress is trying to be quirky and cute but going over the top and failing at either. This is either a) Zoey is weird and she’s playing herself or b) Zoey is doing very well as an actress playing a weird girl.

Now the impact of this is sometimes she’s adorable. But sometimes she’s so weird it’s uncomfortable and I love that. We’re not going for the “semblance” of a character. We’re going for a real person who could be like this. I have a friend who shares many characteristics so maybe that’s why I can see the real through the weird.

But you’ve got a guy who played in Europe League Basketball who is trying to figure out who he is. You have the “player” who thinks he’s great with the ladies but is desperately insecure. You have the lead guy who will eventually be the romantic foil to Zoey and does a great job playing her straight man and you have her with these guys just being herself. Last night she brought out a “feeling stick.” When the main guy broke it (predictable) she pulled out of her purse a smaller similar stick. She called her travel size feeling stick. (Totally cute and funny.)

I think it’s a great show. It’s grown up. It doesn’t always go the way you think it’s going to go and I just love that either the writers or Zoey are not trying to sugar coat her. TV does that so often. They don’t give me real characters they give me –character-lite.

We should always strive in movies, TV and books to go full monty. Will it put some people off – sure. Will everyone watch this show – probably not. But at least they’re going for it and in going for it they might find success.

Happy November!

Those of you who are writers probably know what November is. Sure, there's that big American holiday near the end of the month, but writers who really know how to party know November as the month of insanity, aka NaNoWriMo.

According to the NaNo site I've been a member for seven years and that sounds about right. I've even donated money to them (they're a not for profit) and bought a few of their t-shirts (to wear to the gym). I like NaNo so much that I've signed up this year, even though I just finished a first draft and my goal is to complete a second draft in November. But I might use the progress meter anyway. It's not cheating. ;) I won't apply to "win".

The idea, is that everyone who participates starts writing a novel on November 1st, and finishes their first draft of said novel, at least 50,000 words, by November 30th. If you accomplish that, you are deemed a "winner". It started in 1999 with 21 writers in the San Francisco Bay area, and last year there were over 200,000 participants all over the world. (I would have guessed more... but that's what their site says.)

The rules state that you can't have started the book before November 1st and that you must finish a first draft by November 30th. That is, you can't just write 50K of an ongoing WIP, or a 50K start of a new book... So while I have written 50K most Novembers, I haven't applied to "win" very often because it's rare that my timing works out that I can start something new in November.

But I have a special place in my heart for NaNo. The first "longer" book I wrote; that is, the first novel that wasn't targeted for one of the shorter Harlequin lines, I wrote during NaNoWriMo 2004. That book still might not be published, but it did land me my first agent and won a lot of awards and more importantly, it was the book that made me think I could actually be an author.

I also wrote most of Cinderella: Ninja Warrior during NaNo 2009. Yes, I kind of cheated that year. I had a December 31st deadline for that book and so started it as soon as I knew I had the contract, on or about October 20th, and I finished the first draft before the end of November. But I definitely wrote more than 50,000 words of that book in November. I wrote the bulk of during NaNo and swear competing on word counts with a few of my extextremely prolific erotica writer friends mates really spurred me on. (If she wrote 4,000 words today, so can I!)

And so Nano is inidrectly responsible for my first agent and my first published book. On different books.

What about you? Do you NaNo? Do you like to write fast first drafts or take your time to get it right?

Very Drunk Writer

I am in San Francisco with the fabulous and gorgeous Serena Robar. She's in town for a conference and I am hanging out with her, doing some writing, doing some shopping and tossing back some drinks.

I had a lovely hangover run on the Embarcadero (where were you, Molly?) and then had total sticker shock at Bloomingdale's. Thank God for Macy's and the 40% off rack where Serena found me the perfect dress for an upcoming event. Then tonight it was dinner at Zingari's and off for an end of the evening cocktail at the Redwood Room. Where we took this awesome photo in the fabulous giant chair in the lobby:



In case you can't tell, I had a Manhattan which had LOT of bourbon in it. I am not, sadly, feeling brilliant, but am quite content. Wish you all had been there drinking with us!

Effing things up for yourself...

For the last few years I have been a head of my deadlines. And not just a little. But like, months ahead of deadline. I seemed to keep having these events that I wanted to get books completed by - biths of babies, American Thanksgiving, Conference, Drunk Writer Talk. So, I had real deadlines and then I had my own.

And let me tell you, this has been great. I am heroic in my editors eyes. I have so much good will built up in this department that if I could somehow transform good will into shoes I would be Maureen.

And I've liked it too, I feel on top of my game and focused. I was really diligent every day despite being ahead of the deadline.

But OH! Oh the times they have changed - my deadline is November 15 for my Harlequin Superromance (I thought it was Nov. 22, why? No idea). And it's doable if I stick to my word count goal every day and work on the weekends and in the evenings...really, it's not even that hard. But what have I been doing? SLACKING OFF. Watching TV - in the middle of the day. Eating cookies? (That's effing up this no cookie diet I was on for about ten minutes. The second I said "Molly, no more cookies, what did I want? Ten cookies.) Friday Maureen and I had a writing date and what did I convince her to do? HAVE A BEER!

I am so far away from my word count goal that it's actually funny. Like ludicrious. Like a Monty Python sketch. And it's not my children, or my husband, or fate conspiring against me, it's me. %100 me. Though Maureen could have been a bit more firm on that beer thing...

Do you do this? When the pressure is on, do you go to sleep? Because I've been doing that too.

How much attention should you pay to the market before you write?

I've been actively watching the YA market for a while now, but never as much as now. I've always been a firm believer in write the idea that grips you, makes you smile and excited to sit at the computer. And I still believe in that to a degree, but there was a point where I would have done so without being really aware of what else was out there.

Now, as I check author/agent/publisher blogs and learn what people in the industry are saying, I realize what a mistake that can be. In YA right now, according to most agents, trying to sell a vampire/werewolf/angel paranormal would be almost impossible. It would take an incredible book to break into that market. Similar with dystopian YA. Two years ago, a dystopian would have been requested by most agents out there, three years ago, vampires were still something publishers were excited about.

As a writer, locked in my writing cave, would I have known that I most likely couldn't sell a vampire book right now. I'm not sure and it is why most agents/publishers say don't write to trends, but be aware of them. I just don't feel as though I've ever been really good at that. Looking at the market and seeing what I shouldn't write. Because like most people who read the Hunger Games, I saw tremendous appeal and potential in a dystopian world, and the potential to create drama in that kind of setting.

So is the answer to be aware of the market? To be aware of what's selling in your genre and ensure that what you are writing is different, but with the elements that still remain true to the essential nature of the genre?

I go back and forth, especially now that I'm submitting, where if you'd asked me a year ago, I would have emphatically stated that the book is the only thing that's important. Now, I'm not entirely sure.

Revenge

In keeping with the theme of mindless entertainment is anyone watching this show? It was absolutely not something I thought I would be interested in. Soap opera level drama in the Hamptons (been there/done that) But here is the thing. The actress who plays the lead is really good.

She’s completely convincing when she’s pretending to play the innocent girlfriend. Then completely convincing when the audience sees her plotting her revenge against the people who did her father wrong.

It’s got it all. Emotional conflicts, sticky situations… murder. You can’t really figure out who likes who but there are all kinds of romantic connections. Each week the heroine (who we are sympathetic towards because of how she lost her father) sets up these elaborate cons to take down the people responsible for setting up her father as a patsy. The cons are sometimes silly. The drama is a bit over played. And I’m not really sure how this can go for more than one season.

If anyone remembers the summer murder mystery series Harper’s Island – this feels a lot like that. Over the top – but completely watchable. Kind of like a Sydney Sheldon novel.

It occurred to me how often this can be true in books as well. The plot can be done to death, there can be holes and gaps everywhere, the writing might be flawed but if the voice of the author is good, really good - it can still make the book enjoyable.

I recently read a book by an author and it was just like that. I kept telling myself this… this is bad… this isn’t good… this isn’t right… I must keep reading. Is there a book two? … I must by that as well.

Ever done that with a TV show or a book?

Pure Entertainment

Eileen's post yesterday about Bridesmaids had me thinking about fun movies.

This fall, after all the dark and difficult movies at TIFF -- and some that weren't dark or difficult but didn't really inspire me all that much -- I went to a few movies just for the pure fun of it.

One was Our Idiot Brother which I found adorable if forgettable... But I've loved Paul Rudd ever since Clueless so I enjoy just about any movie he stars in, even if he's cast as an irresponsible and naive stoner.

But the film that inspired this post is Real Steel. It seems as if they were showing the trailers for this film for close to a year before it came out... Which often is not a good sign... And I have to admit, it did not seem like the kind of movie I'd like. More like one Molly's son would like. But writer-friend and movie-critic for Hard Core Nerdity,  Adrienne Kress saw the film at a press screening a week before it came out and she told me it was worth seeing so I thought I'd give it a shot.

And you know what? I was completely entertained. There are some completely corny cliche lines like, Son to Dad: "You can do this. I believe in you." (or something. I'm paraphrasing.) And while I might have rolled my eyes once or twice I had to do my eye rolling quickly, because mostly I was just too busy being entertained. :)

And if I have to watch boxing... there'd better be either a great story to offset the violence, or the boxers getting beat up had better be machines and not people. This movie delivers on the second for sure ;) and the first mostly. The story is simple, but I admired that simplicity...We know exactly who the protagonist is, how he has to change, what his external goals are... and we see him change and get what he wants and deserves.

I have a bit of a love-to-m'eh sliding continuum thing for Hugh Jackman (as opposed to Sinead who is fully in love). And this was a movie where I swung to the love side of my continuum. (As I did the night Sinead and I went to see him perform live this summer.) It's like Hugh can either be the most masculine and most feminine man on the planet -- and I heart the masculine Hugh. (Without facial hair and with his shirt on, ;) he comes off too pretty for me) But he was definitely masculine Hugh in this movie. Yowza.

The only thing that would have made it perfect for me was a tiny more emphasis on the romance, but then that would have turned off their key demographic -- twelve-year-old boys -- so I had to be satisfied with a few kisses and some clear chemistry. I'll say one thing about Evangeline Lilly -- she can look at a man and convince me she loves him. And she looked at Hugh like she looked at Sawyer.

I've read reviews that criticize Real Steel for morphing together movies from the past like Rocky and The Champ and Transformers... But I think the filmmakers were smart enough to take what worked from each of those movies: underdog triumphing, heart-breaking father-son relationship, big robots -- and combine them into pure entertainment.

I saw the movie in one of those enhanced theatres, with a bigger screen, better sound and comfy seats (with built in speakers...) and I was thoroughly entertained. And really, that's exactly what I wanted.

Bridesmaids

I just watched Bridesmaids with my darling and talented niece. I really really liked it. We laughed really really hard, but I also liked the fact that I felt a little verklempt more than a few times in the movie.

I really related to Annie. I know that awful feeling of not being able to afford to do what everyone else can and feeling like the least successful one in the room. I know the feeling of watching a friend leave me behind for greener pastures. As funny as the scene on the airplane was, I think the real reason people like this movie is that everyone has had that sinking feeling in their chest that those moments create.

Oh, we suck it up. We plaster smiles on our faces, but hasn't their been a moment when you wanted to splash the chocolate out of someone's fountain and wrestle their giant love cookie to the ground?

If the movie had been an endless parade of women having diarrhea in the middle of the street while wearing wedding gowns, I don't think it would have been that big of a hit. It was, as my brilliant niece said, how relatable it was. I know Annie. I've been Annie. I knew the other bridesmaids, too. I may also be a little bit of the blonde bridesmaid raising three boys. I am the same kind of drunk as the sweet newlywed bridesmaid. And I've run for a buffet just like Melissa McCarthy did.

So did you see it? Did you like it? Did you relate to Annie? Or anyone else?

What a Literary Agent Should Do For You

A few weekends ago a NYT bestseller came to speak at our local RWA group and she answered all of our questions with utter honesty. One of the questions was about her relationships with different agents. She's had some good ones and some bad ones but she said with the one she has now it was the first time she actually felt agented.

This got me to thinking...do I feel agented? The answer quickly for me is a resounding yes.
But why do I feel agented? She sells my books - but is that enough? The answer quickly there was no. What are the elements besides selling my books that makes Pam Hopkins such a great agent for me?

1. She's not my friend. We're chatty. Sometimes we gossip, she's VERY friendly and warm and I like her a lot - but everything comes back around to business. I think this is important. Sometimes, after a glass of wine too many - I feel awkward, because I want secretly to be best friends with everyone, but it's business. Good business.

2. She subtly and not so subtly pushes me. I was having babies and writing Superromances and life was pretty good but after every book I turned in she'd send me an email saying - I know you're busy now, but you really need to think about single title. Every time. I never pushed her into thinking about my single title career, she was there all the time with the next steps in mind. An agent should see your worth and hopefully your trajectory. The NYT bestseller at the meeting had a conversation with an agent who had been selling a lot of her books but the writer wanted more and the agent said "not everyone can be a star." Your agent should think you can be a star...

3. She helped my work. Pam is not an editorial person and I didn't want an agent who was going to critique my stuff - I have lots of critique partners - I wanted an agent who would look at my stuff and critique it's salability. Her comments on my proposals were always things like "I don't think this works. This won't sell." She's the one having conversations with editors - she knows what they want and she helped me match my work to that need/want.

4. Respected in the business. Sometimes we don't know how our agent is viewed in the wider world - but considering the respectful and warm business relationship she has with me, I can guess she has the same relationship with editors. If your agent crosses a line in your mind with you or another author - red flags should go up. She hasn't burned any bridges. And as much as writers want to write for editors like Shauna Summers and Jennifer Enderlin, agents want to work with them too and should be building relationships with every editor despite being thorns in thier sides when it comes to contract negotiations.

5. As your career changes so should thier services. This is new to me. Moving into single title I am getting a whole different service from Pam. Wait...maybe that's not true. It's the same service but more of it. She's always been the middle man between me and my editors but now she is more so. In more ways. Tuesday she has a conversation with my editor about what the publisher is doing about promotion...that's never happened before. And I think it should. Promotion is a freaking big deal and a big freaking mystery. And almost no writer I know feels like they've gotten a great answer from thier publisher. Please, tell me if you have...

6. Despite how little money I made or make for Pam, I feel important. Writing catagory I wasn't making Pam much money - like almost none. But I always felt like I could call her. I might be uncomfortable doing it, but that was me, not her. We should feel like our agents - no matter if we're making NO money or ooodles of money - work with us. So many authors I know after a couple of manuscripts don't sell - the agents stop calling. Or returning emails. Wow. Really?

Now, sometimes questions in emails don't get answered. And sometimes it takes a day for an email to get answered. Sometimes I feel all alone in the world - but I'm a writer, I'm bat shit crazy on a good day.

Anyway - those are my thoughts. Do you feel supported by your agent? Why? What do you wish was different?

Fringe - come for the crazy mysteries, stay for the family dramatics

So I tried watching Fringe Season 1 when it played on TV and gave up when it seemed a little repetitive and kind of an X-files rip off. But then we got our hands on Season 2 and Entertainment weekly had been singing the show's praises and so I started at Season 2. (spoiler alert - I'll try not to give anything away, but it's going to be hard, so if you're planning on watching, don't read this)

Which is SO much better. They still have the bizarre monster of the week, and the overarching plotline of what are those things from the other universe, but the dynamics between the players is so much better.

And everything is underplayed. but what I've enjoyed the most is the dynamic between Peter and Walter, son and father. The father is a brilliant scientist, who spent 17 years in a mental institution and is utterly incapable of living independently, and in season 1 the character was nothing but weird and in season 2 he has developed this relationship with his cynical, clever son that humanizes the son and keeps the Dad tethered to reality.

And that relationship, in particular, is underplayed by the actors, a clever choice, considering the drama of the weekly mysteries and the strangeness of the overarching plot.

But then the show introduces us to an alternate Walter, one far closer in personality to his son and we see what Peter could have become had he remained on the path he had been on, and we see what Walter would have been had he not had his mental breakdown and it's brilliant and a great choice by the writers.

It's show I would definitely recommend, because they never forget the characters and the writer's choices are always interesting and usually different from what I'm expecting.

And I just started The Night Circus and so far it's pretty amazing. Has anyone read it? Is it this good all the way to the end?

So I'm doing it...

I’m actually starting to make decisions now about this book I want to self-publish. It really is kind of a crazy thing. Part of me likes it.

Most of me hates it.

I’m a worrier. When I write a book for another publisher all the worries other than - did I do a good job - lands on them. When you’re doing it yourself all the worry is with you.

Forget the obvious issues – are there any typos or inconsistencies that are going to make it seem like a “self published” book? Did the copyeditor catch everything? What about copyright infringement issues. What if I used a brand name I wasn’t supposed to?

I’m also dealing with cover art and title. I have ideas. I know what “I” like – but I’m no expert in this kind of stuff. What sells? Then of course there is the marketing. How much money should I put toward advertising? How many copies do I need to sell in order to cover the costs of the copy editor and advertising combined in order to make a profit?

Because as Maureen said so eloquently yesterday… it’s about the money. I’m not going to get rich – but I need to be compensated for the effort. Yes my love of writing and for whatever reason this story in particular carried me a long way but this a whole lot of work and worry to do this for free.

I’m still a couple of months away – but then I will use this Blog to shamelessly promote it and you can all go and look at the cover and read the title and tell me how you think I did as a publisher.

(And you know… while you’re there… maybe you could buy it... if you want to…)

Stating the Obvious

Can we all just stipulate that pretty much everyone in the publishing industry wants to make money? (Stipulate is what the TV lawyers say. ;)

There are some very popular bloggers who've gained disciple-like followings by railing against agents and traditional publishers. Also, some of my writers' loops have been inundated with posts from authors complaining about how publishers or agents or retailers (especially Amazon) are just in it for the money, and how these various entities are behaving in ways that support their own interests.

To which I say, "DUH!"

What I don't get is why some--not all--of these posters seem to think that wanting to make money and caring about books/authors are mutually exclusive.

Sure, not every person in the world loves what they do for a living. Lots of people work in jobs or industries because they landed a job there and need to learn money; and so they plod along, caring little for the products or services their employers provide. I used to be one of those people.

BUT, I would assert that this is less true in the publishing industry than most other industries. Why? Because frankly there just isn't that much money in it. Or at best, the risk/reward balance is skewed such that more people earn a very small living than a great living. You don't go into a business like publishing unless you love books. You don't become an agent unless you love reading and writing and authors and books. I read a discussion recently about how it's almost impossible to become an agent or editor unless you have a trust fund or spouse backing you, because the money's so bad or non-existent for the first many years... (That discussion was about whether this "wealthy white New Yorker" preponderance in the industry biases "taste" and what gets published... but I digress.)

It is also true that the big publishers are now mostly all owned by huge multinationals whose CEOs and shareholders probably don't care about books all that much... but editors and publishers, from everything I've observed, are fighting the good fight for books within these huge corporations.

All that said, I think it's the railing against agents that bothers me the most.

I'm not meaning to suggest, for an instant, that agents' motives are altruistic, but I am sick, sick, sick of hearing authors make anti-agent arguments using, "They just want to earn more money."

Of COURSE they freaking do!!! What kind of fairy tale land are you people living in?

Given all the changes happening in the publishing world right now, I'm very interested in discussions about the pros and cons of some of the recent developments... agents being publishers, retailers being publishers, and everyone trying to figure out what's fair in terms of splitting the proceeds from selling a book in the digital age, and whether agents should earn their normal commission if authors self-publish a book the agent once sold (many years ago) or tried and failed to sell, and whether a publisher can consider a book "in print" paying an author a tiny royalty on a book they aren't promoting, but have up for sale on their website...

All important topics. All interesting. Lots of turmoil and new industry "norms" will undoubtedly be worked out over the next several years, and yes, we authors have to stand up for ourselves and our interests as this all works itself out...

But in these discussions, can't we all just stipulate that everyone involved is out to protect his or her interests and turf? That everyone wants to maximize their potential for earning a living? Including authors? Isn't that obvious?

Romance Writer Moments

I've had two in the past couple of weeks. The first happened in the grocery store. It was around 3 o'clock and I hadn't had lunch and I was starving. I figured it would be better to buy a little something healthy to eat and munch while I shopped rather devour a box of cookies in the car on the way home which was where I was headed.

So I'm eating my turkey wrap and steering the cart through the store with my elbows. There's mayonnaise dripping down my wrist that I'm considering licking off (did I mention that I was STARVING?) and this woman comes up to me in the meat department and says, "excuse me, are you Eileen Rendahl?" I said yes. And she starts clapping her hands and sort of squealing because she recognized me from the photo in the back of the book and calls her daughter over to meet me.

And I have mayonnaise dripping down my wrist and lettuce between my teeth. Very unglamorous. Not how I pictured that moment at all. I did, however, want to hug the woman, but refrained because I didn't want to pay her drycleaning bill.

The second one happened at our neighborhood block party. Andy and I were chatting with a new neighbor who lives sort of catty-corner from us when Felix who is our neighborhood Gladys Kravitz among other things came up. Felix has a VERY loud voice and a VERY thick Polish accent and is VERY nosy, but I don't care because he calls me Princess. I may forgive almost anything -- including, I suspect, some casual inspection of my recycling from time to time -- if you will just call me Princess on a regular basis.

Anyway, Felix comes up to us and says (really loudly), "You know, she write book! You can read! They have at bookstore! On shelf!"

New neighbor asks what I write and I tell him and he says, "Ha ha ha, I bet they all have Fabio on the cover."

New neighbor is now dead to me.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I found that so dismissive and denigrating. I wanted to punch him.

How do people react to you when you tell them what you do? Do you ever get recognized?

Credible Suprise and how much is too much?

So, I'm back at it. Rusty and antsy and unable to apply butt to chair for longer than an hour and half at a time. Maureen had to tie me to my seat to get to 46,000 words on Friday. But the time off has done all it should, the glaring problems are all right there, the big muddy mess I was in the middle of isn't really muddy at all - I was just going the wrong direction. So, fix fix fix.

But I had this thread I was pulling out and playing with in this Superromance I'm in the middle of. In my subplot I have a romance/friendship between an older couple. He has always loved her and is ashamed of it because she was his best friend's wife, he drank too much, he ignored things he should have stopped and basically was not a great man. He's working on that. However, in order for the romance to work and to get one of those gasp moments of credible suprise and to ramp up drama drama drama, I had her keeping a secret about her husband who died five years ago. She has no proof, they certainly didn't talk about it, but she suspects he might have been gay.

So, my question is this. How much is too much? Really. I think it would get a big gasp, and it's an interesting thing for her to have to deal with, having kept this secret and her anger and frustration with a marriage that wasn't at all what she'd wanted.

But is it more interesting to watch a recovering alcoholic and a devout catholic sort through thier stuff and feel honest things for each and just basically talk it out?

I think catagory romance lives for moments of credible suprise - in constant battles to stop predictability editors love these little suprises. I'm torn right down the middle. Securely on the fense, so I'm going to let you guys decide and I'm going to take a nap...

Everyone's a critic

Me included. When the drunk writers get together, we talk about books we've read, what we liked about them and what we didn't. We are critical, but I like to think we mostly focus on what we loved, rather than what didn't work. I read several review sites on a regular basis and most of the time the reviews are well thought out and lacking in personal bias.

And as writers, I think we all understand, that the decision to publish is partly putting your work into the world and getting that feedback, good and bad, and hopefully finding a way to mine the useful from the bad. I do honestly think it's part of the process of writing to publish.

But then sometimes I want to whine, why does no one understand how hard it is? I read a review today that basically said, book was OK, but not great. And my first thought was how does a writer absorb that? And I know it's not a reviewers job to tell us how to fix our books, but seriously, where do you go with that?

Writing is hard work, coupled with a ridiculous self-awareness of the words we put on the page, and throw in a little magic for good measure. It takes equal measure working everyday and being absorbed into the work, and finding other outlets to inspire creativity. As a critic I can easily see the great when I'm reading, but as a writer what takes the good to great feels magical.

And that's my whine for today. Great is really freakin' difficult and so for today, I'm celebrating the good books, because those authors are one little measure of magic away from great, and who knows, maybe it will happen in the next book.

Would you rather...

I was struggling for a topic today and we played this game at lunch yesterday so I thought I would bring it to the people.

The trick is you have to pick one or the other for the REST OF YOUR LIFE... So choose carefully.

Would you rather...

Be able to eat chocolate or cheese... for the rest of your life!

Ice cream or Cake - (this includes cupcakes as determined by the lunch table ruling)

Hot dogs or Hamburgers

Potatoes (any form) or Pasta

And since this is a writing blog...

Your favorite genre or all other books!

Classic novels or current bestsellers

Would you rather...

Write or read... (I'm still thinking about my answer to this one!)

Page Turner -- Compliment or Insult?

Before I started writing, I was a bit of a literary snob. Well, in truth, I think I was a wanna-be literary snob. (Maybe that's worse: a literary snob poser.)

While I was still in school (high school and university) I read mostly popular fiction for recreation--as opposed to the books I was required to read for class--many of which I enjoyed, too.

I read voraciously in high school but don't remember too many titles/authors, but I do remember Sidney Sheldon and Judith Krantz and Jackie Collins and Jaqueline Susanne... I think I read an article in which someone dubbed that genre/style of book from the 70s/80s as "glitz or glamor fiction". Precursors to romance, perhaps? Maybe. I think if there had been such a thing as single title romance when I was in high school, that's what I would have been reading, or would have been reading, too. I also remember reading multiple books by James Michener and Andrew Greeley...

So, while I was in school, my recreational reading tastes definitely skewed "popular" or "commercial" versus "literary". Then after I graduated, I read mostly what I considered to be more high-brow fiction than I'd read in my teens. This started when, on a beach vacation right after graduating, I was bored. Used to reading all day while I was studying I didn't know what to do with myself on a beach--one can only consume so many pina coladas, even at age 23--and I found Robertson Davies' Fifth Business in a used bookstore at the resort. I recognized the title, having seen it on shelves in my high school, and thought I'd give it a try. I was hooked and read through everything he ever wrote. Then I set out to read "more books like that" -- whatever "that" meant. I read a bunch of classics that I hadn't read (or barely read) at school... And also bought and read a lot of new at the time fiction...

But although I considered my reading tastes at the time to skew in the literary direction, looking back to the decade or so after school, I mostly bought and read books that got table placement in big chain bookstores -- so probably defacto the more commercial books in the literary genre.

As a Canadian living in the US at the time, I also made a point to read a lot of Canlit, and I suppose I also read books that other people were talking about -- award winners, great reviews in big magazines etc. And I have to say that the vast majority of those books were exceedingly readable. Some favorite authors from that period of my life include Anne Tyler, Robertson Davies, John Irving, Jane Urquart, Carol Shields, Tom Robbins, Margaret Atwood, Anne Rice... I sure I'm missing a lot; I'm doing this off the top of my head.

But because all these authors' books were incredibly readable and "page turners" for me, I get annoyed at some genre fiction writers/readers when they talk about literary fiction as if it's all boring, impenetrable and lacking in story. That was not my experience. I do agree that some literary writers could benefit from learning to plot... but not all literary books lack story. And some that lack story more than make up for it with voice and with tension/conflict. (Like Michael Chabon's first novel, Mysteries of Pittsburgh. Molly and I were talking about it on Sunday night...)

And so it never occurred to me that "page turner" might be ever levied as an insult. Even most of these so-called literary novels (at least the ones I finished--grin) kept me turning pages. I mean, isn't turning the pages what ANY author wants readers to do? Yes, some books are faster reads than others, but all great books, IMHO, are page turners by default. Even if each page takes slightly longer to read in some books... each page should still make you want to turn immediately to the next one.

Call me a slow learner, but only recently have I started to realize that some people consider the term page turner to be an insult (in the same ilk as "trash" or "bodice ripper" or "pulp".) It implies that if a book reads quickly it must also be bad or poorly written or not worthy of any kind of merit.

I do *not* like it when someone refers to my work as trash or fluff or pulp or formulaic... To me, words like that diminish all the hard work I put into writing a novel. But call it a beach read or a page turner or an airplane read and I'll kiss you. :) To me those terms reflect the hard work I put in, rather than negate it.

So why would anyone consider them insults? Color me confused.

Jonathan Franzen

I went to hear Jonathan Franzen speak on Saturday night. I went with some buddies from the best ever bookclub (word to the BDBC!!!). Not everyone wanted to go because several people still hate The Corrections with a passion. I hadn't read that one, but had really liked a lot of things about Freedom. Not the super bad sex scene(s). Not the bazillion pages about mountain top removal. I loved the characters, particularly Patti. I wanted to jump into the book and be her friend when she needed one.

Franzen was way more charming than I expected and significantly more handsome, too. He had this fantastic grin. He'd get lost in something or digress down some little rabbit hole, realize it and then look up and flash this fantastic smile and I found myself forgiving that whole ugly Oprah thing.

I so wish I had brought a notebook with me, though. He'd say things and I really felt like I needed to really look at them and decide what I thought about them, but then he was already talking about something else and I didn't have time. Of course, it appears I might have a chance since I saw a deal in Pub Lunch today for a book of essays from him one of which has the same title as the talk he gave.

Anyway he had this list of things he considered his enemies when writing a book and I'm pretty sure he did at least two of the things on the list in Freedom and I thought, well, well, well, people in glass houses shouldn't introduce pots to kettles. Just as I was about to start to feel somewhat smug, though, I started to wonder how many things I hate in other people's books I might do in my own and opted to cancel the self-righteousness for the moment.

One thing I couldn't quite stop myself from laughing out loud about, though, was when he was talking about writing The Corrections. At one point, he said he'd been working on one character for about a year and at the end of the year had 30 pages written. THIRTY PAGES!!!!!!! Jumpin' Jehosophat! That's not even a page a week. Can you imagine an active romance writer producing 30 pages in a year! Thumb your nose at our mechanistic plotting (yes, he said that, but not just about romance writers. He said it about all genre fiction writers.), at least we get the words on the page.

Has there been an author you've heard speak that defied your expectations? Or met them? Who?

I'm HOME!!!!

After six weeks in a camper, six thousand miles up and down and back and forth across New Zealand, five days in Fiji, a lost book, and what had to be one of the worst ten hour flights of all time -- we are home.

It took us about a year to plan this trip, and it seemed to go by so fast every day was quite literally full of adventure and fun and melt downs and pinot noir and rain and gorgeous vistas, hikes and runs and octopus and amazing food and and now, home since tuesday, it feels like it happened a year ago. Maybe to another person. That's the nature of vacations, I guess, they don't linger.

I also love how different this vacation was from what I expected. I actually expected to WORK. Like I was going to sit in a camper and write a few thousand words. Hilarious. I also thought I was going to do a lot of reading. That was pretty much a no, too. Too tired to read, perhaps a bit too drunk. I made up for that in Fiji - The Autumn of Jacob De Zoet - AMAZING BOOK!

So, what I'm saying is that I didn't read and I didn't write for six weeks. This vacation was a like a vacation from who I usually am. I listened to sports radio - with interest. I watched a lot of Rugby. This is not me. After the initial excitement of the New Zealand RWA conference - wonderful conference. Wonderful group of woman, so warm and welcoming - there wasn't even any writing talk. Or movie talk. Or book talk.

But now, I am looking at Thursday (my first day back at the office with Maureen) with serious trepidation. I'm going to be rusty. it's going to be ugly. But I am so glad to be home, so glad to get back to work. I know it's going to be ugly and I can't wait.

My ideal vacation

Ever since I've read Stephanie's post, I've been fantasizing about a vacation of my own. And as it's all I've been able to think about, it's what I'm going to blog about.

So here it is, my ideal vacation.

1) Somewhere hot, a gorgeous hotel, a pool and a lounge chair for during the day.

2) the drunk writers, because we have books to plot and by the pool is the ideal location for plotting new books.

3) time to write, quiet computer time to actually put into words what we've been working on during plot group.

4) books. The perfect mix, two great YA reads, a historical romance, a great contemp and perhaps a mainstream fiction.

5) the first season of Friday Night Lights, because I've wanted to re-watch it for a year now.

6) drinks... goes without saying, I guess.

7) A great movie in there. I would love to see Moneyball, or 50/50.

8) Sleep... lots and lots of sleep

9) more drinks.

there you go, my perfect vacation in a nutshell. Anyone else want to escape, maybe to Vegas?

Best Vacation Ever!

I have been on vacation now for what will be four days today. I didn’t go anywhere. I didn’t have to catch a flight. I didn’t have to pack. I didn’t have to set up care for the kitties.

Instead, I planned to have a back room carpeted. I needed to add an electrical socket to a wall. I wanted to organize my shoes. I wanted to get rid of all my old T-shirts which no longer fit and have stains on them. And of course I found time for a pedicure.

I also wanted to write. I had a new book to start and this was the perfect week to just sit down and start cranking out pages. So far forty pages in four days. Right on track.

Every time I think I couldn’t do this full time I have one of these amazingly productive and relaxing weeks and wonder. Now my career being what it is, I have no choice but to work and write. But I used to think even if someday I hit it big I would still want to work in my office.

As a single person with no kids I always imagined the solitary lifestyle would get to me. But after four days, six if you count the weekend, with only the workers who’ve come to the house to chat with and my cats naturally, I am in bliss.

Maybe I’m part hermit. All I know that having the day to write and think about writing and organize things – which I compulsively love to do – it’s been heaven.

Now if the Phillies could win the World Series… well that’s just icing on the top.

Did you like it?

While I was at TIFF this year, I got asked this question a lot by people in lines (one tends to spend as much time in lines for movies as in actual movies at the festival) and I realized it's not an easy question to answer about some books and movies. For me, movies (perhaps more than books) can be really great, and I can even say that I loved them, but not really be able to say that I liked them...

There are certainly lots of movies I've been riveted by and/or felt like I really got something out of, but that I can't say I "liked". Some stories are simply too difficult to like depending on the subject matter or style or whatever.

Here are some examples of movies I've seen in the past year or two that I would recommend to others, or that really affected me in some way, but that I can't possibly apply the "like" word to:

Shame (talked about that one here)

Meek's Crossing (a very bleak and quiet film I saw at the 2010 festival, staring Michelle Williams about a group of pioneers in a wagon train totally lost in the desert on the way to California and running out of food and water fast)

Rabbit Hole (a really great film with Nicole Kidman and Aaron Eckart playing parents mourning the loss of their four year old son)

Thirteen (not a film I saw at the festival, but one that will scare the crap out of any parent of a young girl, or basically anyone who knows or ever was a young girl.)

Hard Candy (just jumped to mind. First time I ever saw Ellen Page and she is no Juno in this movie...)

Beautiful Boy (a movie Molly and I saw together at the 2010 TIFF -- poor Molly, I picked her some tough films -- that was about an almost divorced couple coping with their son having done something horrific. Similar plot to this year's TIFF film We Need to Talk About Kevin, which I didn't see, but I'm sure I will when it comes out.)

Elles (A French film I saw this year, starring Juliette Binoche, about a journalist interviewing young student prostitutes for Elle magazine and then having a sexual awakening of sorts of her own)

Drive (The Ryan Gosling film about a stunt car driver who drives getaway cars for crimes on the side and gets caught up in some bad (and very violent) business because of a (married) girl. A lot to "like" about this film--Ryan Gosling for one--but ultimately too violent and bleak to apply the term "like" to, I think. But I was enthralled and would acutally see this one again.)

Irreversable (This one's not so recent, from 2002, but it immediately sprang to mind as I was thinking about "difficult" films I'm glad I saw but couldn't say I "liked".)

I'm sure I'll think of more movies from this year's TIFF tomorrow. Or moments after I press Publish on this post.

Interestingly, I can't think of any books to add to the list right now. Perhaps because I typically don't finish books I'm not "liking". Oh, maybe I could put Lolita on the list. Admired certain things about that book, but most definitely did not like it. Oh, and Sons and Lovers (I'm going back to high school English class now. Detested that book -- I'm convinced that D.H. Lawrence hated women), but kind of loved it, too.)

How about you? Any books or movies you kind of loved but really can't like?

Done!

I turned it in on Friday. I am done. Yep. The book that has had me tearing my hair out, gnashing my teeth and chewing my tongue in my sleep is done. I feel like an enormous weight has been lifted off my shoulders. I've already cleaned my closet, signed my child up for SAT subject tests and gone for 40 mile bike ride. Tomorrow I'm paying bills and straightening up the laundry room. Wednesday it's sweeping the patio and coffee with friends.

This will be my tenth novel, which I realize is pretty small potatoes in the romance industry, but feels like a big deal to me. I'm trying to come up with a way to reward myself. One of my friends has a necklace with ISBN number of her novel engraved on it. Another has a necklace made of beads that were formed from her book cover (don't know quite how that works, but it seemed interesting). I can't figure out how to do something with 10 ISBns, though and I don't think I have cover flats from all the books so I'd have to strip some to make beads from each one and that feels painful.

Any suggestions?

THE PASSAGE Update.

Sinead, I'm on 218 (out of 844). I'm still a little confused about what's happening and who's in charge and who's actually a good guy and who's actually a bad guy, but I can not put it down. I'm carrying my Nook around with me at all times just in case there's a minute of down time when I might be reading. I'm afraid my sudoku skills are going straight down the toilet.