(no subject)
Apr. 5th, 2006 04:04 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
algI 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![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
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
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.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-08 04:05 am (UTC)RWA Pro Status
Date: 2006-04-08 01:23 pm (UTC)Sincerely,
Sandy Marshall
Yes and No
Date: 2006-04-08 02:07 pm (UTC)I do understand that a writer having or not having Pro status is irrelevant to an editor.
However, I don't think the Pro status is *for* editors.
It's RWA's creation, and I think it is for RWA.
They offer many workshops, email loops, retreats, and so on, and I think they needed some way to separate the masses into three main groups: published authors, writers-who-have-actually-finished-manuscripts, and people-who-would-like-to-be-a-writer-someday.
Admittedly, any manufactured sorting criteria is bound to be less than perfect.
However, I do think that these "broad stroke" separations help RWA to better group writers in similar places along their career paths.
There are those who have "made" it, those who haven't even begun, and those in the middle. The Pro pin writers are part of that middle.
While I agree that it is a vast middle, ranging from the next best seller to infinite monkeys at a keyboard, I do understand RWA's goal in providing some sort of delineation.
What might be a good workshop/loop/etc for Jane-Smith-who-hasn't-written-anything-yet would not necessarily be a good workshop/loop/etc for Nora Roberts, or even the not-yet-discovered Neo-Nora.
That said, I do agree that writers mentioning their Pro status in queries to you (and other editors) is meaningless, because even if they weren't Pro, they would be by the mere fact of querying you.
Perhaps we should all remember that Pro status *is* useful for RWA, but the rest of the world doesn't necessarily care. =)
Just my two cents...
Thanks!
Pro Status
Date: 2006-04-08 03:35 pm (UTC)That having been said, it never would have occurred to me to tout my Pro status in a letter to an editor. I became a Pro for the benefits, not to have a "designation" and I think that's the way it is for most Pros.
PRO
Date: 2006-04-08 04:31 pm (UTC)The way I see it, PRO tries to prepare writers to be able to hit the ground running when they make a sale. PRO bootcamps have trained writers in how to read publication contracts and how to build professional relationships. PRO has provided access to in-house and private publicists so that PRO members can learn how that part of the business operates. And so on, the point being that a PRO member will hopefully be more prepared and knowledgeable as a result of PRO's benefits.
Does that provide any tangential benefit to the publishers? You say no, and I have no reason to disagree, but frankly it's beside the point. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that in some ways, the PRO mission and the publishers' objectives are opposed to each other -- for example, in the area of basket accounting. Thankfully, these oppositional points are few.
But otherwise, I'd think it would be easier for an editor to work with a writer who has at least some foundational knowledge of the business end of the business. I guess you would disagree.
Out of the Pro and into the PAN
Date: 2006-04-08 04:34 pm (UTC)Now it remains to be seen whether being a member of PAN (RWA's Published Author Network) will do me much more good. Triskelion has just received RWA approval as a publisher (recent blog entry on Starfish and Coffee). I'm not going to National this year, either, so unless the PAN boards have something terribly profound to offer me by way of writerly education, I think the best thing to do is just...write the next damned book.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-08 09:30 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-09 12:42 am (UTC)Pro Criteria - Hmmm...
Date: 2006-04-10 02:18 am (UTC)What's the point of giving it away to anyone with only ONE ms? That's just a practice ms.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-10 09:04 am (UTC)Vincent, Kane and Pie...Sounds like a bad law firm
Date: 2006-04-13 08:32 pm (UTC)