Oached Pish [entries|archive|friends|userinfo] Sherwood Smith [ website | Sherwood Smith ] [ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ] [ archive | journal archive ]

writing, rewriting, and writers [Dec. 25th, 2009|04:46 pm] I hope everyone who celebrates is having a lovely day today. I am stealing time while the food cooks, before the relatives get here, swapping off between a new project and rewriting an old. Something that barbarienne said a few days ago sure resonated. I don't think what she says applies just to beginning writers, I think it applies to all of us. Or, maybe I should say, those of us with more drive than talent--like Yours T. It's really come home as for e-book purposes I've been going over Exordium the first volume, Phoenix in Flight, and absolutely cringing at some of the craptastic prose that got by us. No, by me. Most of the worst of the writing is mine, not Dave Trowbridge's. Rewriting this thing has been both freeing and also intensely humiliating. I think I cut at least ten thousand words of solid sludge larding up sentences, without changing anything that actually had content. In fact, probably more like 20 k. I added a couple of short scenes to the beginning in an attempt to make it more accessible, but the whole is still shorter than the original length. Anyway, learning never stops for some of us. It might take some time between awareness of a problem and figuring out how to deal with it, but never stops, never never never. (And each time I close that file, when I open Banner of the Damned I jet back looking for ways to tighten it up yet again.) Link 44 comments|Comment?

Love [Dec. 19th, 2009|04:30 pm] [ Tags | animals, links ] Anyone who needs a dose of creature love check out that link ( where a one-legged dove cares for baby animals, such as wounded rabbits). [Thanks to Dave Trowbridge for the link] There is more about Noah and fellow rescue animals here. Link 16 comments|Comment?

Authors vs Readers [Dec. 17th, 2009|07:26 am] Yesterday coraa asked if anyone had ever seen a case where an author responded to a slammer review and came out looking good, and I remembered one linked to by burger_eater a day or so ago. When subsequent commenters say they are going to buy the book just because of the author's awesome response to the stinker review, I'd say that author came out lookin' good. It also makes me wonder if the generally understood wisdom that authors should not respond to reviews is going to change, like so many other aspects of publishing custom are changing. I find myself ambivalent because there are instances where I would love to engage in dialogue with an author of a book. And people are talking to one another across the world via all these social network connections, from the lightning blips of Twitter (which I still refuse to engage in--I think it would drive me crazy. Ur, crazier) to longer discourses on things like LJ and so forth. People Google on interests, old friends and family, towns they lived in, schools, workplaces, cons they went to, all kinds of things. And jump right into the discussion. Authors with more guts than I have Google their names every day, and many link to the tiniest mention of their names, in case their friends want to follow those as assiduously as they do. Yet the etiquette still states Thou Shalt Not Engage. It's relatively easy when the review is praise--do you thank them and seem like you are the stalker you actually are, or pass quietly on by and pretend you didn't see it? When it's a stinker, the question is tougher, especially when you know right down to your chitlins that the review is "unfair." Only . . . what's unfair? Link 122 comments|Comment?

STEAMPUNK--Review, Interview with Beth Bernobich [Dec. 16th, 2009|12:02 pm] [ Tags | interview, links, small press, steampunk ] Ars Memoriae by Beth Bernobich. Commander Adrian Dee (who is pestered by false memories) is sent by her Hibernic Majesty to investigate some mysterious political machinations in Austria and Montenegro, though the trouble might actually be treachery closer to home. One of the elements of steampunk is clocks, and while this story does not contain an orrery, it has balloons and mathematical mysteries concerning the nature of time, as well as spies and action. I compare it to Shostakovich's 11th--deceptively slow beginning, as Dee waits upon the young queen with whom he has some sort of past, and visits each member of her inner council. Then he travels to Europe, using disguises and code words set up according to diplomatic useage . . . which gets him into trouble. Somewhere along the line, he's been betrayed. He has no idea if he's been sold out locally--or back at the capital, so he can trust no one. Communicate with no one. As he travels on, using his wits and experience, he's still pestered by weird memories. The story builds to a crashing crescendo, like the Shostakovich piece, which was inspired by politics at that very time. There is easily enough material here for a full novel; readers might wish the climax was explored more fully, but overall I am left longing for more about this world, how it works, and above all, more about Commander Adrian Dee. I asked the author some questions about this novella and about steampunk in general, in hopes that our exchange might spark off some discussion. Smith: Why is steampunk sexy? Beth: I've wondered that myself. I think it's because of the contrast between the strict, staid Victorian era and the exuberance of steampunk fiction. And the technology used in steampunk is so very rugged and physical and... *pauses to fan self* Smith: Heh! ‘Rugged and physical’ and stylish. My son was watching the Back to the Future Trilogy recently. I walked in just as the last film was ending—and there was the Doc and his teacher wife and their futuristic flying train. It hit me that that picture absolutely captured Steampunk—the immensely stylish retro clothing, the beautiful pre-art nouveau design work on the train, the combination of steam and magic. BethYes! Trains and flying machines are both romantic images that frequently show up in steampunk. I think that’s because they combine science--the idea of progress which is another characteristic of the age--and great style. Smith: My understanding is, steampunk is nor just about steam, but about fin de siecle styles, and nascent governments breaking the economic and political as well as cultural traditions of empire. It seems to me that breaking the hold of super-powers is relevant today. Same with the sense of the working man feeling helpless against those powers—and finding ways to harness it. And as for the sense that machines are one step from magic, as tech changes accelerate rapidly . . . well, I see parallels. On the other hand, some say Steampunk is all about clocks. Gears. Wheels and time. One of the strong draws of your stories set in this milieu is how you use numbers and time. Did your exploration of mathematics and the limitations of time arise out of the setting, or did the idea come first, and you imposed the vaguely Ruritanian, pre-WW I setting? Beth: As usual, the whole thing came to me backwards, and in pieces. I had never heard of steampunk, and I had no grand ideas about addressing the limitations of time. I just had an image of a young woman whispering prime numbers. Eventually, after quite a few false starts, that image turned into the first Eireann story ("A Flight of Numbers Fantastique Strange"). Smith: That is one of my favorite stories of the past ten years. Beth: It was Oliver Sacks’s book, The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat, that gave me the image I described. There’s a chapter where Sacks tells about his encounter with two brothers, twins, who could visualize multi-digit prime numbers--and this was back in the days before supercomputers. I decided to write about a different pair of twins, mathematical geniuses who were obsessed by prime numbers, to the point where the sister was driven mad by them--or so her brother and the doctors believed. At first, I set the story in the real world in England, but as I struggled through the first draft, a second image came to me--that of a red balloon drifting through the sky--which gave me the story of the queen and her lover. From there all the details of the alternate world just spilled out. Smith: Purely for the fun of the history geek, did your timeline diverge around 1603? Beth: Further back, actually. I decided that Henry II’s invasion of Ireland didn’t succeed because the Irish formed an alliance with the Danes of Northern England. They divided England between them, with the southern part of England becoming the Anglian Dependencies. Smith: I so hope there going to be a novel about these people and this setting? Beth: I am currently waiting for word about a proposal for just that. The plan is to base the novel on the existing three Eireann stories (“A Flight of Numbers,” “The Golden Octopus,” and Ars Memoriae), with a fourth, new segment that will finally address the problem of the Anglians, tie up all the loose ends, and bring Eireann fully into the 20th century. Link 15 comments|Comment?

Steampunk and Edwardian-era Magical Reading [Dec. 16th, 2009|10:53 am] [ Tags | edwardian romance, links, small press, steampunk ] Shadow Conspiracy Offered by the Book View Café. A group of authors with long and award-gemmed publishing histories put together a Steampunk idea and timeline. Basically, in the Year Without a Summer, the Shelley and Byron ménage halted in Geneva, hemmed by rotten weather, as we know. In addition to the days and nights of creativity this anthology has posited that early scientists, including John Polidori, who accompanied Lord Byron as his physician, are working on a radical invention that might preserve the soul of a diseased person—permanently. The result spawns secrets, destroyed lives, and hidden coded papers. Years later, Byron’s daughter Ada Lovelace meets up with Charles Babbage, inventor of the analytical engine; she invents the “automatic sciences,” allowing the creation of machines that mimic human action, and even human thought. Once again, history has changed, as politicians and economic manipulators as well as adventurers all try to discover the secrets of Ada Lovelace—and she carries on her dreams. The stories are quite different, ranging from Steven Piziks’ dark, tense “The Soul Jar” to Jennifer Stevenson’s lighter, mannered “A Princess of Wittgenstein.” I enjoyed them all, especially Sarah Zettel’s “The Persistence of Souls,” which captures the period tone, verisimilitude in period characters, and blends tension, scientific and emotional conflicts. Judith Tarr’s “The Sister of Perpetual Adoration” begins with what one would think (and enjoy, if you’re me) is a fairly predictable turn-the-tables tale. A young Victorian lady who is trying an experiment permits a really nasty rake to draw her off of a walking party, though she suspects he’s up to no good—though in truth she can handle herself. But when a storm overtakes them and they find themselves in a secluded monastery, things take some very odd turns. The overall effect is a delicious world, if you like a fictional orrery powered by retro-Victorian style, science, and magic. The possibilities make me hope that there will be more stories using this setting. Lovers’ Knot, by Donald Hardy. Jonathan Williams has inherited an estate. With his best friend Alayne Langford in tow, Jonathan leaves London for the country to take possession, and learn what it’s like to live as the landed gentry. He’d been there fourteen years earlier, the hot summer days filled with wandering, swims in the sea--and the pleasures of discovering a new friend, Nat. That was also a summer of rumors and strange happenings, romantic triangles and wronged lovers. By the summer’s end, one young man was dead, and another haunted for life. Now Jonathan is determined to start anew. Until he starts seeing the ghost of his former friend everywhere he looks. Hardy is an experienced RenFaire and Shakespearean actor, which informs his ability to evoke mood and time. I read this story in beta, and thoroughly enjoyed the characters, the attention to detail, and the subtle way Hardy wove in magic before one was aware it was there. The central romance is delightfully done, and very much in period. Link 18 comments|Comment?

Mansfield's Mummery and humor [Dec. 15th, 2009|06:54 am] [ Tags | austen mashups, links ] Reviewer Leigh Kimmel talks about why MANSFIELD PARK AND MUMMIES: Monster Mayhem, Matrimony, Ancient Curses, True Love, and Other Dire Delights works. I was thinking about humor and how it works for me. The zombie mashup kept the characterizations intact because so much of the text was left alone, with sentences of zombie craziness inserted, after which the story reverts right back to Austen's early nineteenth century wit and situation. One reads along in the familiar text, which is left untouched for a page or two, then suddenly the well-known characters in the well-known quiet country town once again explode into zombie action and manic exchanges. It's as if someone took a well-known kiddie cartoon and inserted bits where the cute bunnies or whatever pull out kalashnikovs and blow away all the bad wolves--then revert right back to lolloping about the countryside sniffing flowers. For me it got old fast--no one seemed to have a memory of zombies attacking England--there were none of the what ifs that make alternate universes fun, and there was no effort, or little effort, to reproduce period language. Zombies in period would have tickled my sense of the ridiculous. I suspect part of the great popularity is because it doesn't try for period tone, which makes it more accessible for modern readers who've heard of P&P and maybe sat through the Colin Firth film a time or two, but otherwise don't know the book. The Seamonsters book was tedious to me because the writer took great pains to alter just about every paragraph, turning the south of England into a nightmare jungle of sea-related horrors . . . and so skewed the characters that none of them were recognizable, except for their names. The delicate interdependence of wit and irony balancing real emotion was totally gone, replaced by dripping grue, smells, and various agrossities. The characters distorted beyond recognition. Vera Nazarian gets just as ridiculous what with mummies, werewolves, vamps and all the supernatural, but she managed to keep the voices recognizable, choosing a monster self that fits each changed character. Of course Mary Crawford is a vamp--she's very nearly an emotional vamp in the book. And Mrs. Norris a werewolf? Works for me. Lady B. is still vapid, but maybe under a spell. Edward becomes more of a willfully blind stick than he already is, and Fanny gets to take agency at last. Comedy for me is a balance between ordinary people in extraordinary circs--or the converse, extraordinary people trying to cope with ordinary circs. The Mummies book begins with ordinary people in increasingly extraordinary circs, but gradually alters to extraordinary people trying to impose ordinary circs on escalating chaos. And that built the humor toward the payoff, for me. Link 30 comments|Comment?

Holidays Begin [Dec. 13th, 2009|08:07 am] [ Tags | links, story ] I love this season--the lights, the music. Around this neighborhood many Jewish folks put up Hanukkah lights when that festival begins, adding to the loveliness. I love surprise gifties, like Sarah Rees Brennan's story, "Nick's First Word." Note: the story has a spoiler for The Demon's Lexicon, but if you don't mind a spoiler, this story would actually be a great way to dip a toe into that world, if you were thinking of reading the book. Link 14 comments|Comment?

Border Thugs [Dec. 11th, 2009|05:42 pm] [ Tags | government fail, links ] Many have already seen what happened to Peter Watts at the Canadian border. There is a thoughtful follow-up here. For those who have a few spare bucks, monies are being collected for what will probably be a costly defense, because Homeland Security has a rep for being nigh untouchable, though everyone I know has unpleasant stories. (None as horrific as this.) Here's what I want to add to the general outcry. I am dismayed when I see that people do not want to travel. I totally understand it, but at the same time, if we stay locked inside our houses, they win. Big Brother has you right where he can control you. If I were traveling to Canada any time soon, I would make certain to go with friends, and I would also make certain that we had tech equipment on hand to be recording the border crossing. No, that is not an excuse to be rude to border guards. I am sure there are decent people among them who do their best to make the experience efficient and even pleasant. But the thugs? Need to be exposed. I am very glad to be seeing as much outrage as I've seen today on Peter Watts' behalf, because he's standing for all those people who do not have vocal friends or connections. I would love to see this made as public as possible, and any other incidents like this exposed equally. Link 55 comments|Comment?

Small Press means music, too [Dec. 7th, 2009|07:34 am] [ Tags | links, small press ] Signal boost for my longtime friend Catholic Bibliophagist, whose brother is a rock guitarist, and who has issued these Christmas songs--one original. Link Comment?

Montana, Fame, and Angel [Dec. 6th, 2009|07:03 am] [ Tags | angel, links, tv ] First, via shrewreader this lovely story. I've been watching more TV in the evenings when my hands quit on me (sometimes the quit means I can't even hold a book for long); last night I watched Almost Famous, which I thoroughly enjoyed. For those of us young and on the edge of the music scene in 1973, so much of this film resonated with verisimilitude. The tension between journalist and band--truth and seeming--what people want to read and privacy--was handled nicely, though the film lightly skimmed over the issue of fame. It touched on the warped reality of fame, which can trick the unwary into thinking that the rules no long apply. But it skimmed the issue of creativity, and the fact that the white fire is not controllable any more than lightning is, and so the young musicians would try anything—any drug or guru or quick-fix superstition—to tame it. I watched that because I'm within two eps of finishing ANGEL, fifth season. I am considering not watching the rest, because I strongly suspect that my vision of how it should go will not match how it does (though I know about the very last scene, having been spoiled multiple times, and I had looked forward to that, actually). There will be spoilers below. Buffy and Angel are among the better things I've seen on TV, despite some jaw dropping moments. Series TV is written and shot on the run, they have to deal with all kinds of issues that blindside them, and they can blindside themselves, at least as much as one can believe the commentary on episodes. (I've gone back and listened to a lot of these.) In Buffy, the early days were constrained to monster of the week plots, but more than that, the trappings of Christian mythology (often utterly ripped from context, with a sometimes painful lack of awareness of historical and cultural b.g.) imposed on a secular world, sometimes with risible effect. Later on, when the makers reinvented mystical magic (AKA Handwavium) they had a lot more freedom to get into all types of magic--dimensions--death--souls--within an agnostic framework, with rare glimpses of the possibility of the numinous. (And I note much of the same worldbuilding, even language, when I watched SUPERNATURAL season four, and wondered if Ben Edlund had brought all that over from ANGEL.) But what really made the two shows great was when the makers could rip free of the constraints of episodic TV, that is contained plots that basically left the viewer roughly where he or she started. Season four was one long continuous arc, which was good--could have been terrific--individual eps were terrific, but overall? I'll get there. The greatness was in the characters, and how they developed and changed, how they began with distinct personalities, often superficial. Their experiences changed them. Take Wesley Wyndham-Price, the British stuffed-shirt, comically incompetent watcher, and compare him to the Wesley working through the night with a apparently calm countenance, but when one of his underlings makes a careless ref to not working on solving Fred's problem, Wesley pulls a pistol from a drawer and shoots the guy in the leg, orders his secretary to report anyone else not on the job, and goes back to work, leaving the guy lying there whimpering in pain. It's not just the violence, but the fact that his aim is so good, that caused me to sit back and whoa. The blend of comedy with horror, drama with quiet, intense personal moments, all woven into splashy action and supernatural razzle-dazzle, I just love that. So why am I avoiding the last two eps of Angel? Others might disagree, of course--tastes differ--but where the show dropped the ball most seriously for me was with Cordelia's arc in season four. It's weird, it was almost like a Samson thing was going on . . . almost the episode where Cordy got that horrible haircut that aged her about twenty years, her acting, her lines, became stiff and humorless. It was like a soap opera character had been stuck in the show--she didn't interact with anyone, she just uttered cliches at them. During the fights she mostly stood off to the side--though occasionally she reacted. The romance with Connor was painful to watch, though it was well set up, but the acting, the ridiculous things she said were straight soap. Until then she was one of the best characters, and talk about change! Her highpoint was when she faced down the evil Lilah in a verbal bullet-spray about shoes. (That and her awesome return for the 100th ep.) So the big reveal is that a monster got inside her and created evil!Cordy. Okay, I could buy that for the evolving storyline, though my pleasure--and my trust--had faltered. Then at the end of "Smile Time" Fred and Wes finally hook up, and I'm utterly back on board. I loved Fred--yeah, she's gorgeous, but within the definitions of TV normal, she's a brown haired, brown eyed, no figure science geek, but everyone loves her--with an interesting spectrum of loves. So what happens? We get yet another monster-inside-the-main female, and this one a drop dead boring cliche. We've already been there with every aspect of Illyria, the story not only stops when her bits are on the screen, they leach the tension out of the insidious battle with Wolfram & Hart from the inside, reminding me that I'm watching a TV show based on a ridiculous premise, and instead of wit versus wit and the moral conflict, scenes are stitched together by a lot of fights in their practice arena while Illyria throws people through walls. Ho hum. Why couldn't Fred have developed mystical superpowers which would strain the relationship, if the makers couldn't deal with a happily ever after? Or why couldn't they launch straight from Fred's death into armegeddon? There's a definite feel of falter after the cast and crew found out the show had been cancelled; the "go to Italy in seach of Buffy" ep had a couple of good lines, but most of it is painful because it feels unmoored. Well, that kind of speculation is tedious. I'm done with Whedon shows (already seen and loved Firefly, and refuse to have anything to do with Dollhouse) so I think I'll see what Whedon-inspired shows are doing, besides Supernatural. Maybe True Blood next. Link 161 comments|Comment?

Signal boost--Vera and Mummies [Dec. 4th, 2009|07:16 am] [ Tags | austen, links, mash-ups ] I mentioned MANSFIELD PARK AND MUMMIES: Monster Mayhem, Matrimony, Ancient Curses, True Love, and Other Dire Delights a week or two ago. Unfortunately, the whole story behind this mashup is a desperate attempt to avoid becoming homeless, thanks to a new bank strategy of Screw Those in Trouble. Read this--note the comments, where it's plain this really is a strategy--and if you want to help, order the book--or just talk about it. MUMMIES is funnier and better written than the zombies and seamonsters mashups. Their advantage is brick and board distribution plus a sizable publicity budget. But word of mouth can be spread by ordinary people. Vera is not asking for cash--just for a signal boost, or if you know someone who gets a kick out of these mash-ups, consider getting them a copy for the holidays. Link 24 comments|Comment?

Semaphore in December [Dec. 2nd, 2009|06:13 am] [ Tags | links, small press ] From New Zealand comes the latest issue of Semaphore Newsletter, in which there's a reprint of my December story "And Now Abideth These Three." Last issue they had a reprint from Janni Lee Simner--check out their back issues! Link 8 comments|Comment?

Cultural cri de coeur [Nov. 30th, 2009|06:30 pm] Fashion is supposed to change, right? Aren't we in the era of instant alteration? Yet clothing fashions seem to be curiously running like watercolors, all blended together. Mostly I am all right with that, especially since I can get away with wearing scruffy stuff thirty years old and no one arrests me for smiting their eyes. Oh, but why, WHY does this horrible fashion of young men wearing their jeans hanging down below their butts, so they are forced into a prison shuffle, persisting now close on twenty years? Maybe it's male revenge for a couple of decades of girdles, cone bras and helmet hair. Link 125 comments|Comment?

Flashing Past [Nov. 30th, 2009|07:31 am] [ Tags | links, reading ] Had a California Thanksgiving--driving two hundred miles to eat dinner. At least the car has air conditioning! What I wanted to point out is that I took along a small zine called Not One of Us (I linked the order form instead of the zine site, which is horrible white print on black, an instant migraine for me) Not all to my taste--it's bent toward the dark--but a lovely story by Marissa Lingen, a couple of standout poems (Sonya Taaffe and J.C. Runolfson) and a story I just loved--and wish people in SFWA would discover for the Nebula, called "Love in Another Language," by Eugene Mirabelli. I loved that story so much I had to read it three times over. Link 23 comments|Comment?

Fun with Jane Austen [Nov. 23rd, 2009|07:56 pm] [ Tags | austen, links ] I wonder what that quiet clergyman's daughter would have thought about all the mash-ups, continuations, and imaginative treatments of her own life. Judging from the sometimes quite wicked wit in her letters, she would probably have laughed. Anyway, there are three of them I wanted to point out--especially if you know an Austen fan who doesn't mind liberties taken, and the holidays are coming up. First MANSFIELD PARK AND MUMMIES: Monster Mayhem, Matrimony, Ancient Curses, True Love, and Other Dire Delights, written by Vera Nazarian, who crams a whole lot of mythology in with Austen's text, to hair-raising and crazed results. Werewoves--vamps--mummies--you name it, Mansfield Park gets them. I kept hearing this one read aloud, in suitably Monty Pythonesque voices. If you liked the zombies and the seamonsters, you have to try this one. (And Fanny gets to take action.) Jane Bites Back, by Michael Thomas Ford. Due out later next month. Unlike the awful Darcy Vampyre book, this one showed evidence that the author was at least familiar with Austen's books, even if the supposed lost Austen novel showed no hint of either period flavor or Austen's style or wit. Maybe it was supposed to be leaden and cliche, which is why it had been rejected over a hundred times. Not quite sure where the writer was going there, unless a commentary on the bad taste of the popular reading public, but that's a tiny portion of an otherwise quite funny book about Jane Austen living in modern times because she is a vampire. Who turned her, why, and who else got turned makes up part of the plot as Jane Austen enters the literary scene again after a two hundred year hiatus. I really enjoyed it. Looks like the book sets up for a sequel. Wise idea, as I'm certain with "Jane Austen" as a character, plus vampires, this will be an instant best-seller. James Fairfax, by Adam Campan, I've mentioned before. I love how skillful Austen's text is subtly altered, at first with tiny changes that build to a different perspective on the familiar story. If you look at its Amazon and B&N reviews, you'll note that some homophobic busy bodies made it their business to tromp all around and slam it for daring to mix the "ew gay!" with Austen, though there is no evidence in the slams that anyone actually bothered to read the book. But Deborah J. Ross did read it. Re Austen, I mentioned elsewhere a vague theory I had. Probably doesn't hold up much but it occurred to me that the relative popularity (or unpopularity) of Austen's heroines has more to do with the popularity of the men they picked than with the women. Fanny's stuffy cousin Edmund being the most boring, and Fanny the most hated; Mr. Knightley being ambivalently regarded because of falling in love with her when she was thirteen, urk, ugh, ew, and Edward being just plain dull. But Darcy and Wentworth gain their heroines major popularity . . . of course Lizzie Bennet is fun and funny, but Fanny Price actually exhibits more sense of humor than Anne Elliott, ethical objection to home theatrics while Sir Thomas is away notwithstanding. Link 57 comments|Comment?

Whizz by . . . [Nov. 23rd, 2009|10:07 am] Small beer Press offers instant best seller opportunities, priced for your pocket book! BTW, any SFWA folks, or even just readers, don't forget one of the best books Small Beer put out this year, Greer Gilman's Cloud and Ashes. peake's review. Link 5 comments|Comment?

Signal Boost--Polyphony [Nov. 23rd, 2009|07:34 am] [ Tags | links, small press ] This award-winning small press series of anthologies is struggling--so to try to get through the recession, they are going to subscription the way that so many magazines and books did in the late seventeen hundreds and early eighteen hundreds. The quality of the stories is consistently lauded--here's hoping they can bring out the next volume, and rev up again. I'd really hate to see Wheatland go under. Link Comment?

The World of Publishing [Nov. 21st, 2009|09:13 am] [ Tags | links, publishing scams, small press ] Been trotting rather hard, got sick, am trying to catch up. I suspect the Harlequin ace play to cash in on their slush has pretty much made the rounds. I like Jackie Kessler's summation but find myself strongly resisting the utility of the term 'vanity publisher.' The meaning of 'vanity' here seems to have been sliding around a lot in the past few years. Ten years ago--five--it was pretty much synonymous with self publishing. Everyone could point a finger at that and define vanity publishing as the place for authors who couldn't sell their work anywhere else, for whatever reason--usually delusional writers who ranted about New York conspiracies to sell only crap, but wouldn't recognize brilliance, yadda yadda. But more people have been using Lulu and CreateSpace to bring out work that may have a limited audience--check out asakiyume's recent post about Gott'im's Monster which is by someone whose infrequent posts often resonate and impress me so I ordered the book. I really like it so far (fractured reading time), but I also grant that this little book would be difficult to place--the combination of Mary Shelley's Frankenstein story and a viewpoint character in Heaven would seem to draw antithetical audiences. Then there is the length, which I suspect is novella. I'm so glad that small press printing is getting easier, because there is a readership for this book out there, just as there is for a CreateSpace collection that I ordered and am thoroughly enjoying. There's the usual problem of small press: getting the word out so that readers can find what they are looking for. Back to the issue. Harlequin is pulling a sleaze act, no doubt about it. Their wording is aimed at clueless newbies who don't know how publishing works, who think that by paying a thousand bucks to get their book printed, they will somehow slide into Harlequin's stable. But they won't. However, it takes experienced writers to sift out the truth from the hype--but experienced writers aren't the target. I wish the word 'vanity', with its implication of moral high gorund, wasn't in use here. It seems to scold the writer for wanting to publish--but really, every single one of us who types up a manuscript and sends it out is indulging in vanity to some degree, with our assumption that strangers will want to take time out of their lives to read our words. The imputation of moral trespass should be aimed straight at RipoffAmerica and YiyiUniverse and this new scam to separate writers from their cash. Too many writers trying their hand at romance for the first time will only see that big splashy ad and have no idea that they can get the same product from Lulu or CreateSpace, which don't pretend to be anything other than self publishing venues. There should be better terms for crooked self publishing scams like this, and honest self publishing venues by which authors can create small press works. I'm afraid that new writers will balk at "vanity" by thinking, "It can't be vanity, it's sponsored by a real publisher!" and not see the trap. Link 47 comments|Comment?

SFWA: Andre Norton Award [Nov. 19th, 2009|08:03 pm] Just a reminder to any SFWA members that any book printed in English during the past year is eligible. The book is eligible for a year after its appearance. Plenty of books have been mentioned around, but I hope that some of the books with less powerhouse PR will get their fair share of attention, like K.L. Richardsson's Heart's Price. If you've read a YA book that you don't think is getting much attention and would like to give it a shout out, please link it here, and what you thought made it a standout! I'm hoping that members will nominate their favorites in order to offer a rich selection of choices. Link 8 comments|Comment?

Fundraiser: Tu [Nov. 18th, 2009|12:13 pm] [ Tags | fundraiser, small press ] I mentioned Tu Publishing in my WFC post. I met the editor, Stacey Whitman, whose credentials and goals jazzed me to the max, and so I've been keeping an eye out. Here's the wrinkle--if you click the above, you not only see Tu's vid, but also that the fundraiser is overseen by Kickstarter. The good thing is that this group is supposed to be on the up and up, and if a goal is not met, than contributors get their cash back. But in this situation, an auction, where the money is only collected if people win their item and make their donation, then what happens to the items if they get mailed, everyone in good faith? I guess the solution is for all donors to mail the won items if the fundraising goal is met, which means keeping them until right after December 25. If money isn't refunded, then mail time! (easier post office lines!) Anyway, I'm going to sort my stuff to see what people might want to bid on, and I encourage anyone interested in a new publisher focusing specifically on multicultural books for kids (get 'em reading when they are young!) please visit the above site, or the actual auction site in order to participate. There is a time limit of a month, so the sooner the better. There's a clicky for direct donations at the Kickstarter site, but these days especially, it seems easier when someone gets a goodie for their dough. So . . . now to sort and sift and see what I can find that someone else will want. Link 6 comments|Comment?

navigation [ viewing | most recent entries ] [ go | earlier ]