Maggie Shayne, who has been published for over 20 years, is re-releasing her book originally titled "Out of this World Marriage" as "Dr. Duffy's Close Encounter". And, MONDAY ONLY, it's $1 off. If you're looking for something good to read, check it out:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B007NOLF8M/maggieshaye
Louisa May Alcott
An American writer
Sunday, March 25, 2012
Thursday, March 22, 2012
Contests and entries and finaling--oh, my!
Writing contests run year-'round, but this time of year is when the finalists in Romance Writers of America's (RWA's) Golden Heart Contest are announced. I just read a pretty interesting blog discussing what finaling in this contest can do for you, and I think, in a lot of ways, it's a lot like anything else in the writing biz. If you work hard, have a little luck, and position yourself to take advantage of opportunities that come your way, you can get published.
However, the Golden Heart gives little to no feedback, and while I appreciate that the contest is now considered "prestigious", I think it's good to keep a bit of reality in the back of our heads. Outside of RWA, very few people have even heard of the thing. Finaling or even winning the contest is no guarantee of publication, of getting agented, or even of having someone agree to read your manuscript.
I've finaled twice and seen people achieve their dreams with the help of this contest, and seen dreams dashed, as well. I think contests--especially the Golden Heart--are tools, and maybe by looking at them that way, instead of looking at them like some magical Golden Ticket, we can keep ourselves grounded enough to realize that one contest is unlikely to bring about fantastic changes.
Does it give you an opportunity? Yes. But exactly what opportunity it provides and what you do with that opportunity will remain to be seen. After finaling twice I decided to go back to school, so that finalist status pretty much wasted away. I'm a better writer now, both for the contest experience and the school experience, but in the end, being a GH finalist really hasn't changed my life. Nor do I think it should have.
What do you all think of writing contests? And am I being too harsh on the GH? What people, contests, or events have had the most impact on your writing career, whether you're published or not?
However, the Golden Heart gives little to no feedback, and while I appreciate that the contest is now considered "prestigious", I think it's good to keep a bit of reality in the back of our heads. Outside of RWA, very few people have even heard of the thing. Finaling or even winning the contest is no guarantee of publication, of getting agented, or even of having someone agree to read your manuscript.
I've finaled twice and seen people achieve their dreams with the help of this contest, and seen dreams dashed, as well. I think contests--especially the Golden Heart--are tools, and maybe by looking at them that way, instead of looking at them like some magical Golden Ticket, we can keep ourselves grounded enough to realize that one contest is unlikely to bring about fantastic changes.
Does it give you an opportunity? Yes. But exactly what opportunity it provides and what you do with that opportunity will remain to be seen. After finaling twice I decided to go back to school, so that finalist status pretty much wasted away. I'm a better writer now, both for the contest experience and the school experience, but in the end, being a GH finalist really hasn't changed my life. Nor do I think it should have.
What do you all think of writing contests? And am I being too harsh on the GH? What people, contests, or events have had the most impact on your writing career, whether you're published or not?
Saturday, March 10, 2012
Blogging Meaningful Content
Stumbled across this blog post by Jonathan C. Gillespie regarding blog content. My writing chapter has been discussing promotional efforts and which ones work and which ones don't, so this caught my attention right away.
All writers know that content is subjective. There are some books I don't read because the subject matter doesn't interest me. A fiction book where the main character is restoring a car, for example, would probably have to have someone I trust recommend it to me, and even then I'd probably read a few pages to see if I'd buy it. Some people ONLY read specific content--Regency romances, for example. I'm a pretty broad reader, but WWII battle descriptions or someone's trek to the North Pole isn't probably going to be high on my reading list. Don't know why, but it's not.
I'm pretty sure the same thing applies to blogs. A blog readership will hopefully be interested in what the blogger has to say, but I'd venture a guess that few bloggers just ramble on about any old thing. That's what Facebook is for. A blog has an audience just like a book has an audience, and if the blogger wants to maintain that audience, he or she will address subjects that the audience wants to read.
Gillespie's post is a good start, but he never defines "meaningful content". I agree with him that status updates don't count--no one cares about all your submissions, because anyone can submit a manuscript and have it rejected. But that one submission that results in a sale--now THAT is one that others will care about.
Which brings me back to that unique perspective. I think it's that new twist on something, or a new way to look at something, or a new interpretation that catches readers' interest.
What types of content do you like in a blog? In a book? What draws you in? What keeps you there?
All writers know that content is subjective. There are some books I don't read because the subject matter doesn't interest me. A fiction book where the main character is restoring a car, for example, would probably have to have someone I trust recommend it to me, and even then I'd probably read a few pages to see if I'd buy it. Some people ONLY read specific content--Regency romances, for example. I'm a pretty broad reader, but WWII battle descriptions or someone's trek to the North Pole isn't probably going to be high on my reading list. Don't know why, but it's not.
I'm pretty sure the same thing applies to blogs. A blog readership will hopefully be interested in what the blogger has to say, but I'd venture a guess that few bloggers just ramble on about any old thing. That's what Facebook is for. A blog has an audience just like a book has an audience, and if the blogger wants to maintain that audience, he or she will address subjects that the audience wants to read.
Gillespie's post is a good start, but he never defines "meaningful content". I agree with him that status updates don't count--no one cares about all your submissions, because anyone can submit a manuscript and have it rejected. But that one submission that results in a sale--now THAT is one that others will care about.
Which brings me back to that unique perspective. I think it's that new twist on something, or a new way to look at something, or a new interpretation that catches readers' interest.
What types of content do you like in a blog? In a book? What draws you in? What keeps you there?
Sunday, March 4, 2012
Plagiarism
Since this has been in the news a bit lately, I thought it would be a good subject to explore. First off, I want to say that I just can't wrap my head around WHY someone would want to do this. Yes, writing is hard work and frustrating sometimes, but geez, the rush when things are going well. . . I can't imagine giving that up. Plus, you're going to spend the rest of your life looking over your shoulder, wondering when someone's going to notice that your words sound just like Big Name Author's. And when someone DOES notice (and they will, eventually), then you're embarrassed at a minimum and open to litigation as well.
But what I can't figure out is why the publishers who published some of these people (and they weren't no-name publishers) didn't use Copyscape or a similar program to check the work. I freelanced via Guru.com for a while, and almost all the employers on there say right up front that they're going to check your work. Doesn't bother me, but it must have an effect on some people since they obviously feel compelled to say that.
I want to look at something I created and know it was MY original work. Besides, aren't you doing just about as much work going through someone else's book and changing names and details and dates and locations. . . . ?
Someone 'splain this to me. Please.
For reference, here's an issue from 2008.
And one from 2011.
And, of course, the 1997 brouhaha between Janet Daily and Nora Roberts.
I've heard rumors of others, as well, that may be in the works. Whether they become news or not will depend on the authors involved (actually, the term would only apply to one of the parties, wouldn't it?), but this is clearly an issue that is going to need some attention in the digital age.
But what I can't figure out is why the publishers who published some of these people (and they weren't no-name publishers) didn't use Copyscape or a similar program to check the work. I freelanced via Guru.com for a while, and almost all the employers on there say right up front that they're going to check your work. Doesn't bother me, but it must have an effect on some people since they obviously feel compelled to say that.
I want to look at something I created and know it was MY original work. Besides, aren't you doing just about as much work going through someone else's book and changing names and details and dates and locations. . . . ?
Someone 'splain this to me. Please.
For reference, here's an issue from 2008.
And one from 2011.
And, of course, the 1997 brouhaha between Janet Daily and Nora Roberts.
I've heard rumors of others, as well, that may be in the works. Whether they become news or not will depend on the authors involved (actually, the term would only apply to one of the parties, wouldn't it?), but this is clearly an issue that is going to need some attention in the digital age.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)