(no subject)
Apr. 5th, 2006 04:04 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
I think RWA is (generally speaking) a great organization. I think a lot of times it's extremely helpful. I think RWA has done much to help romance become a genre that's taken seriously. I think RWA refuses to be shunted aside by people who say, "Oh, it's just women." I think that is awesome.
However. The number one thing I see from RWA members that makes me cringe is this "Pro" thing. Really. Stop it. I don't care that you have a pro pin. It doesn't actually make you a professional at all. In fact, I sort of mentally groan and roll my eyes and think to myself, "Great, yet another person who has no idea what she's doing."
It's not your fault -- RWA encourages you to think this is important. That's fine. But here's a reality check: it doesn't matter. If you're sending me a proposal, I care about your words a lot, and your publishing history/contacts a little bit, and your RWA status not at all.
(If you don't know what I am talking about, here's a quick definition: RWA offers something called a "Pro pin" to its members who have finished and submitted a manuscript. Since 999 times out of 1,000 (999,999 times out of 1,000,000?) a first-time submission won't get published, you can prove that you are a "pro" by showing them your rejection letter. Seriously. I have run into more than one person who writes and submits a crappy ms. just for a pro pin, and more than one person who thinks that a pro pin means something to editors. It does not. Obviously.)
La la la. Moving on. Yesterday when I woke up, Vincent was dragging his back legs. In fact, I woke up because he was making weird noise. It was like he didn't have the use of his hips, but he wouldn't let me look at his legs. So I called my vet and left a message and called in sick to work. I kept calling my vet. To make a long story short, she couldn't see me, so I went with both cats to the ghetto vet near the Williamsburg Bridge. Vincent was fine -- by the time we got there, he was totally okay. But it turns out that Shiksa's got conjunctivitis!
I felt kind of hysterical and ridiculous -- yet at the same time absolutely vindicated because something was wrong.
Then I went to the office, because I am a compulsive workaholic, and, before going out for supper with some of my friends, I stopped in at a B&N near my office. I was kind of appalled to see that romance only had two bookshelves, whereas mystery had five, but whatever. I picked up six or seven books, and read one of them while drinking a mocha -- The Admiral's Bride by Suzanne Brockmann. She's one of my favorite writers, and this is a reprint (originally published in 1999), and I loved it. And when I was finished, I realized that I shouldn't have done that. I should have saved her for last.
Because the other five books or however many I had? Were crap. I flipped through them on the train on my way home. The most egregious errors were ones the copyeditor really should have caught (like the heroine who first graduated in 1996 and then in 1998, and either way, there was no way that she was a successful sociology professor!). I hated so many of the characters. There were a lot of clumsy beginnings -- dossiers instead of character development, etc. Totally boring stuff that actually kind of upset me. Why so lazy, writers?
Not to even mention that 99% of the time, when there's a dossier to introduce characters, they're always accurate. I hate that. I think it would be much more interesting to do something like what
cesperanza did in her story MVP and have the dossier actually be inaccurate (or not entirely accurate, anyway). Come on, shake things up.
Jeez.
I don't mean to sound so vehement, but.... blah. I had high hopes. I always do. I just hate everything! I can see why other people would enjoy some of it (sometimes I can, anyway), but I just... Hm. Like my userinfo used to say, I am interested exclusively in things that are interesting.
Things I have tried and failed at in the last few days: to set up a "real" blog using movable type (that shit is hard!), Trackbacks, PB Wiki (
scratchyfishie and
2muchexposition both have one, but I can't figure out what to use it for!), the Xvid codec, the DivX codec, and to teach myself to compress video files without losing too much quality.
I have, however, suceeded at eating a lot of burritos, listening to a lot of Kane, watching a lot of Supernatural and Criminal Minds and Grey's Anatomy and The Evidence, and planning out what I am going to do with my life, which includes opening a roadside truckstop diner with my friends where we will serve pie.
In conclusion, Christian Kane is hot. There's not much more I can say about that.
However. The number one thing I see from RWA members that makes me cringe is this "Pro" thing. Really. Stop it. I don't care that you have a pro pin. It doesn't actually make you a professional at all. In fact, I sort of mentally groan and roll my eyes and think to myself, "Great, yet another person who has no idea what she's doing."
It's not your fault -- RWA encourages you to think this is important. That's fine. But here's a reality check: it doesn't matter. If you're sending me a proposal, I care about your words a lot, and your publishing history/contacts a little bit, and your RWA status not at all.
(If you don't know what I am talking about, here's a quick definition: RWA offers something called a "Pro pin" to its members who have finished and submitted a manuscript. Since 999 times out of 1,000 (999,999 times out of 1,000,000?) a first-time submission won't get published, you can prove that you are a "pro" by showing them your rejection letter. Seriously. I have run into more than one person who writes and submits a crappy ms. just for a pro pin, and more than one person who thinks that a pro pin means something to editors. It does not. Obviously.)
La la la. Moving on. Yesterday when I woke up, Vincent was dragging his back legs. In fact, I woke up because he was making weird noise. It was like he didn't have the use of his hips, but he wouldn't let me look at his legs. So I called my vet and left a message and called in sick to work. I kept calling my vet. To make a long story short, she couldn't see me, so I went with both cats to the ghetto vet near the Williamsburg Bridge. Vincent was fine -- by the time we got there, he was totally okay. But it turns out that Shiksa's got conjunctivitis!
I felt kind of hysterical and ridiculous -- yet at the same time absolutely vindicated because something was wrong.
Then I went to the office, because I am a compulsive workaholic, and, before going out for supper with some of my friends, I stopped in at a B&N near my office. I was kind of appalled to see that romance only had two bookshelves, whereas mystery had five, but whatever. I picked up six or seven books, and read one of them while drinking a mocha -- The Admiral's Bride by Suzanne Brockmann. She's one of my favorite writers, and this is a reprint (originally published in 1999), and I loved it. And when I was finished, I realized that I shouldn't have done that. I should have saved her for last.
Because the other five books or however many I had? Were crap. I flipped through them on the train on my way home. The most egregious errors were ones the copyeditor really should have caught (like the heroine who first graduated in 1996 and then in 1998, and either way, there was no way that she was a successful sociology professor!). I hated so many of the characters. There were a lot of clumsy beginnings -- dossiers instead of character development, etc. Totally boring stuff that actually kind of upset me. Why so lazy, writers?
Not to even mention that 99% of the time, when there's a dossier to introduce characters, they're always accurate. I hate that. I think it would be much more interesting to do something like what
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
Jeez.
I don't mean to sound so vehement, but.... blah. I had high hopes. I always do. I just hate everything! I can see why other people would enjoy some of it (sometimes I can, anyway), but I just... Hm. Like my userinfo used to say, I am interested exclusively in things that are interesting.
Things I have tried and failed at in the last few days: to set up a "real" blog using movable type (that shit is hard!), Trackbacks, PB Wiki (
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
I have, however, suceeded at eating a lot of burritos, listening to a lot of Kane, watching a lot of Supernatural and Criminal Minds and Grey's Anatomy and The Evidence, and planning out what I am going to do with my life, which includes opening a roadside truckstop diner with my friends where we will serve pie.
In conclusion, Christian Kane is hot. There's not much more I can say about that.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-05 08:09 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-05 08:09 pm (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-05 08:16 pm (UTC)Cool.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-05 08:28 pm (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-05 08:18 pm (UTC)Okay, that is actually really strange. Was it the B&N at Union Square?
(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-05 08:22 pm (UTC)I was totally baffled -- like, who reads mysteries? *g*
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-05 08:20 pm (UTC)as for xvid and Divx, if you haven't already been to here (http://www.videohelp.com/), i recommend checking it out. Virtualdub is usually what i've seen suggested by people as one of the best to play with [though i remember it having a lot of options and thus not a n00b-friendly program]. there are also conversion programs geared towards portable players that could be good for optimizing web content [usually working on 320x240 and other lower resolutions]. a good such program would be iriverter (http://iriverter.sourceforge.net/), which is dreadfully easy to use. also, i use AutoGK (http://www.autogk.me.uk/) for other conversions [mainly backing up my DVDs], for its ease of use.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-05 08:24 pm (UTC)I have totally been to that link -- I am just sloooooow and cannot understand anything. It's not videotape, therefore I am completely baffled!!
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-05 08:20 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-05 08:25 pm (UTC)Hahaha, I am an old fart, it's awesome.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-05 08:21 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-05 08:28 pm (UTC)singing me to sleepsinging, SO.(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-05 08:21 pm (UTC)Can I have ice cream with that pie?
(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-05 08:32 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-05 08:21 pm (UTC)And strawberry rhubarb! Damn.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-06 10:01 am (UTC)You'd think strawberry rhubarb would be common all over -- but I haven't had a good one in decades.
Then again, that may be where I live. I was raised in Florida when it was a southern state (left when Disney arrived) but my parents were transplants from New England. Unfortunately, I was too macho as a kid to learn how to cook. Learned living on my own, of course, but the family recipes weren't easily adapted to my eat-from-the-pot no patience personality and are now gone forever.
My wife is from coastal South Carolina and she *tried* early on to fix some of the meals I described from my youth. Made a mincemeat pie from some stuff in a can. I ate it because we were still newlyweds, but my mom would have died before serving it. I didn't try to explain hard sauce. (And don't get me started on sweet potato pie/pumpkin pie.)
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-05 08:24 pm (UTC)I can sort of understand why they do it. But I think SFWA's pro definition is a lot more useful to me in terms of measuring how I'm doing. (Even if they *did* put the rate up to 5c/word just before I sold a couple of stories that would have made the 3c mark had they been the right genre.:-)
(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-05 08:33 pm (UTC)YES. Frankly, people who have been published generally know better.
My favorite cover letters are the ones who say, "I am a published author with five books to my credit" but never tell me the titles of the books or the companies. Anywhere. So I google search the author and almost always, 99 times out of 100, the author was published by a crappy e-press.
SIGH.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:RWA Pro Status
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2006-04-08 01:23 pm (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-05 08:27 pm (UTC)The point of PRO, from the members' point of view, is that apparently all the good solid debate and information is in the PRO-only areas. But "had one manuscript rejected" is a very odd definition of "professional".
(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-05 08:35 pm (UTC)I think what RWA is trying to do is encourage the writers -- it's the same reason that unpublished writers are told to call themselves "pre-published" instead of "unpublished". Also a total indicator to me that someone doesn' t have a clue!
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-05 08:29 pm (UTC)A LiveJournal *is* a REAL blog! This is a community where you can set up a friends list (more properly called a reading list) and just click on that "friends" page link to read 'em all. Can't do that with blogspot. I have to make a special effort to remember to go read the blogspot writers I like. It's SO much better here, and easier to use. Don't ever let 'em tell you this isn't a REAL weblog!
I'm glad to hear that the kitty with pinkeye is being treated. I would still keep an eye (any color will do) on the other kitty, though, because my cat Mischief had a problem with the ligaments in his hip joints, and we had to keep him from jumping on the furniture for a couple of weeks so they could get better (and then the vet looked again and said things were OK, but it could've been a problem.) Mischief had to stay in our sunroom for a couple of weeks, and he thought he was being punished and sentenced to prison. I had to take all the furniture out, and he must have spent the whole time wondering, "Why me? What'd I do?" Poor baby! But anyway, it sounds a bit alarming, so I'd definitely watch for any other symptoms. You probably already ARE, but just thought I would nag. I'm really good at nagging. Are there job descriptions that include nagging? (Other than "mom" and "spouse.")
I agree with you that many of the books I pick up now seem to be lacking. I think this is colored slightly by my various experiences trying to sell my own manuscripts, but that's not all of it; so many books just don't measure up to what I think they could be. Don't know if there's anything to be done about it other than wait. If we don't become a post-literate society, maybe there'll be a sea change. Maybe proofreading will come back in fashion! I hope so! *grin* One of the problems is that critique groups and how-to books and so forth are teaching a One True Way to write. It's making everything too much the same. You have to be politically correct (or so I am told by one online instructor), you can't do THIS and you can't do THAT, and you have to do A, B, and C within chapter one. Within such restrictive guidelines, people turn out books that are (or edit their books to become) vanilla and isn't-this-one-I've-read? The exciting new voices are damped down after the first round of critiques and rewrites. Anything that could be interesting goes away in those new drafts. It's alarming, but when I chime in to say that perhaps the problems could be fixed without losing the freshness and the voice, I am told that The Rules Rule. No matter that the rules did not come from any editor! No matter that someone just made them up! The Rules are promulgated across many critique groups and workshops. They can be useful, but other times they are taken in the wrong spirit. I miss "Book" books, the ones that weren't part of a brand or part of a genre, but just books. (That ship has sailed. Or it crashed on the rocks.)
I know you're trying to support and buy the good "Book" books. Keep it up.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-05 08:38 pm (UTC)One of the problems is that critique groups and how-to books and so forth are teaching a One True Way to write. It's making everything too much the same.
Yup. It is sad. It makes me sad. I don't like it when everything sounds the same -- that is BORING!!
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-05 08:34 pm (UTC)Speaking of pie, I loooove Boston Cream Pie! If you opened up one of those trucks... that would be something...
& that thing about your future... You have one of my dream jobs... not just anyone can do what you are doing and be great at it. Although I don't know much about it, it seems very glamorous. Pies, on the other hand also seem glamorous, esp these hot guys that run this bakery in Camp Hill. And the pies taste as good as these guys look. Any pie. yum!
(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-05 08:42 pm (UTC)Dossier: http://m-w.com/dictionary/dossier
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-05 08:40 pm (UTC)None of this really has a point, I am just rambling because the internal operations of writers' organizations is way more interesting to me than banking products, which I have to go back to editing once I am done this post.
Wish they sold pie in the cafeteria...
(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-05 08:45 pm (UTC)(no subject)
From:PRO
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2006-04-08 04:31 pm (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-05 08:47 pm (UTC)I never figured being in RWA would do much for me, especially since there's no local group (not to mention I don't really write romance), but I still think it's funny and always will that some folks thing you have to be in it if you're a writer. *g*
(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-05 08:50 pm (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2006-04-06 06:09 pm (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-05 09:07 pm (UTC)That's it? I was expecting a lot more, frankly, as in "professional published". Someone who's got a book coming out from Tor, sure. :) But I tried sending out my first novel when I was 12...handwritten on notebook paper on both sides of the page...and I don't exactly think that merits a pin...
(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-05 09:23 pm (UTC)As for "Pro" status, I understand why RWA started it up -- there was such an outcry about "not enough being" done for the unpubbed that this really seemed the only way to calm the masses. While I'm going to apply once I qualify again (since my last rejection was a couple of years ago before I burned out and just wrote fic for a while) because I'd like access to the "boot camp" workshops they do on the PRO list, it's not something I'd put in a query letter. In fact, when I queried for a historical romance, my RWA membership was mentioned only in passing because I included that I'd done presentations on historical costuming at a couple of Nationals. Given how long ago that was now, I probably wouldn't even include that.
I've heard people in my chapter say one should just go ahead and submit any old thing to get the rejection so one can get the Pro Pin, but the idea of submitting something that I don't feel is ready is anathema to me. Waste of my time, waste of the editor's time.
I tried Moveable Type for my writing blog -- didn't like it and ended up with WordPress. Problem is, you end up spending a fair amount of time figuring out how to use SQL and manipulate CSS stylesheets.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-05 09:27 pm (UTC)I am definitely keeping a close eye on him. It seemed silly to think it then, but a little research on the internet (hah) makes me wonder if it's not neurological.
And as for RWA... there's always an outcry. First it's the unpubbeds, and then it's PAN, and... etc. People always think that not enough is being done for them.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2006-04-06 01:37 pm (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-05 10:01 pm (UTC)I have bigger issues with the notion of all the unpublished writers being referred to as "pre-published." You're either published, or you're not. Semantics, perhaps, but it's one of the things that's always chafed my knickers a bit.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-06 12:58 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-05 10:05 pm (UTC)WordPress is easier... except when it's not.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-05 10:14 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-05 10:33 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-05 10:37 pm (UTC)i keep thinking about what i would use it for. i del.icio.us my links, and i write everything in The Notebook, and i just email myself stuff! i mean, i guess everything doesn't have to work for everyone, but i wish my brain would catalog more. damn it.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-05 10:43 pm (UTC)I read a bit of both the novels you recommended to get a taste of what the paranormal romance thing is like, as I was hoping to submit under that and came to the realization that while my novel generally fits the category, it also doesn't. (are most romance novels written from a female POV?)
While they were definitely well written and wonderfully edited, as I generally just don't read romance at all because it's never been my thing. But now I'm not so sure mine fits anymore, even if you gave me quite possibly the most positive rejection letter known to writer-kind. Well, at least for a first timer.
I do not know what I'll do. Are ANY romance novels done from a male POV?
(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-05 10:48 pm (UTC)Hunter's Moon and Moon's Web by Cathy Clamp & C. T. Adams are the only two I can think of that are first person POV male -- and I edited them. :)
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2006-04-06 06:26 pm (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-05 11:04 pm (UTC)Hope your kitty gets better!!!!
Cece
(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-06 12:38 am (UTC)PRO
Date: 2006-04-06 03:52 am (UTC)Re: PRO
Date: 2006-04-07 02:14 am (UTC)- SandyC -
(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-06 05:21 am (UTC)