Eileen asked about how much control I have over covers, versus other parties involved in the creation process, so I decided to chat a little about that today. Covers, as you can probably guess, are really complex and subjective. Not everyone is going to like every design, and trends are finicky and time-specific. Aesthetics are not easy. It always comes down to target audience and what else is selling. You always want to make it akin to whatever else is working, but not copying it. It's a fine line.

There are a million different decisions to make right up front that alter design needs:
- format: whether it's hardcover or paperback, maybe even paper-over-board, which is more prominent in kids books now. You want the format to suit the market
- trim size (trade, digest...), which of course will dictate whether you want full-bleed art/photography, or if you have room for borders, etc.
- photography vs. illustration - this of course ties into the subject material...I had a series which was Arthurian legend based...could you ever imagine that being photographic? (the other trick with art is that you need to make it age appropriate also...we had a series with artwork that geared too young and the whole series never found a target audience because of the discrepancy)

So what usually happens first is that we talk with the publisher about what they want. Mostly that already happens when my bosses settle the agreements for what we're delivering. Then we hire a designer, give them the materials they need to understand the series, and talk about what we're looking for. It's important to stick within a publisher's aesthetic and really hit home with the design. As a packager, we go through a round or two of designs first, and send the best selection to the publisher for them to choose between. After they pick a design we proceed with the artwork or photography. Sometimes we'll do a photoshoot, sometimes we'll use stock.

Now, I personally have some input about the covers, but largely it's up to the publisher and the sales department. We've had covers get approved all the way through sales, but then when Barnes and Noble saw it, they said "We're not taking it with this cover" and we had an emergency redesign. (The big booksellers hold the real power.)

In my niche of the industry, authors rarely have input on their covers. But I do know of authors who have approval rights. You have to be decently high profile to get that. The artists probably have the least amount of control, since they're just work-for-hire. But good artwork can really make the series. I couldn't imagine Lemony Snicket without Brett Helquist's art, and he's been able to really become a name all his own.

I have a harder time with photographic covers myself. I find it more limiting in a way. And I loathe photoshoots. But that's just a personal preference. I've talked about it before, but by and large I hate working on covers at all. I have a really tough time navigating other people's tastes, and I've had a few real tough projects lately where no one was seeing eye to eye. It's the one thing I'd gladly never work on if given the option.

ADDENDUM: Reading back over my post, I realized I forgot to talk about a HUGE part cover design in my job. I work on SERIES. That means the cover has to work across many books, and still look different. You have to have consistent elements and those that change. And it has to make sense. There's a series title AND a book title to contend with. Each book has to stand apart, but also makes sense in context. Talk about a twist...

I have a plethora of items today. Lucky you!

First, I wanted to answer April's question in the comments of the last post. If I understood it correctly, she wanted to know how long we give artists to work on cover art. It's not really an easy question because art schedules are notoriously finicky. Covers have to be done well before any other part of the book. We need them for catalogs, sales proofs, press proofs, any other marketing, advertising...you get the idea. Usually when I start a book series, I'm already late on the covers before I even get started. Usually I get more screwed over on the design stage, because publishers envision things their own way, and it's tricky to get that to match up. Then in picking an artist...well, that can be annoying also. I had a series where I hired an artist, had him approved by the publisher, and after he started on sketches they decided they wanted to use someone else. That was an unhappy artist. And an unhappy me. But anyway...

If you mean how much time we give an artist to do work, it ranges. For a cover, it's usually 2 weeks for a sketch, a week for revision, and then I try for 3 weeks to do the finished art. And I need it well before I have to get started on a mechanical for the cover. Interior art is a different story. Ideally it's a 3-4 weeks for sketches, 2 weeks to revise, and 2 weeks to finished. (They usually aren't color, so it doesn't take as long. But this depends on how many pieces are involved also.) This doesn't account for approval time and extra revision stages. So sometimes from start to finish on one cover, it can be 2 months give or take.

Next, I saw Pirates last night. Indeed--mostly middle, very little ending. But a good time had by all. Dear god, I love Johnny Depp.

And lastly, a fun article sent to me by the boyfriend. Please note the following paragraph:

So, where do prescriptivists get their rules? Either they repeat what they were taught, or they refer to "authoritative" style guides, like Elements of Style, by William Strunk and E.B. White. Liberman and Pullum delight in pointing out that traditional prescriptive grammar is riddled with bizarre rules that are known by thoughtful people to be baseless in English but live on like prescriptivist zombies to plague less-enlightened writers everywhere. There is no reason to always avoid splitting infinitives; Pullum notes that in the headline "New SAT writing section aims to better reflect needed skills," the "to" cannot be moved without changing the meaning of the sentence or making it awkward. Yet the rule, which should have vanished long ago, is enforced today at the Economist, where I work. (Our style book notes that "the ban is pointless. Unfortunately, to see it broken would be annoying to so many people that you should observe it.") Similarly, there is no reason not to end a sentence with a preposition--the best writers have done it in English for centuries--but most educated adults have been taught this rule at least once and still try to observe it in formal writing. To follow such rules, simply because they are rules, is to say "nothing is relevant." Forget what every native English-speaker does and what the greatest writers ever to use English wrote. No evidence from centuries of actual usage is relevant. It's a Rule. Look it up.

His comment after this: "I shall now split infinitives with glee."
My response: "And ending sentences with prepositions is something I will delight of."

I win.

We got some cover artwork in today for a book in a series that is incredibly fun to work on but also incredibly complicated. One of the major problems is the schedule. It's a 12 book deal that was originally supposed to be 4 books pubbing per year. However, it got bumped up to be 6 books a year (new title every othermonth) and the art schedule just never caught up. Essentially everything has been delivered late.

This would be okay, if we didn't keep trying to rush the artist, who used to like us, and now doesn't. So when this art comes in today, my one boss shows it to another, and this is the subsequent conversation:

Boss B: "How is our boy these days? Is he talking to us?"
Boss A: "No, not really."
Me: "No, I only talk to the agent, and that's only when she calls to yell at me."
Boss B: "Well, welcome to the job of an editor."
Boss A: "That's just what agents do."
Me: "Yeah, but instead of just being business-like, this one takes 'offense' to everything. I just asked for some artwork. Did that really offend her somehow?"

So, I'm not sure where I'm going with this...I suppose to say that I don't mind agents doing their jobs. I'd certainly want someone tenacious fighting my battles for me. But, it does bother me when the tactic is unreasonable. This agent is just plain mean. Does she think that's doing to do her client any favors? Yeah, not so much.

Now I just screen my calls so she can only yell into my voicemail.

Note: I tried to post this yesterday, but Blogger was sucking.

This contest is one of my favorite things every year...
Check it out.


My personal favorites?

"I know what you're thinking, punk," hissed Wordy Harry to his new editor, "you're thinking, 'Did he use six superfluous adjectives or only five?' - and to tell the truth, I forgot myself in all this excitement; but being as this is English, the most powerful language in the world, whose subtle nuances will blow your head clean off, you've got to ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel loquacious?' - well do you, punk?"
Stuart Vasepuru
Edinburgh, Scotland


It was a dreary Monday in September when Constable Lightspeed came across the rotting corpse that resembled one of those zombies from Michael Jackson's "Thriller," except that it was lying down and not performing the electric slide.
Derek Fisher
Ottawa, ON

I will have a real post about something substantive later. In the meantime, enjoy the purposefuly (godwilling...) crappy writing. And remember, first sentences of books really are important. I have picked up recommended books and set them back down because the first sentence make my skin crawl.

Happy Pirates Day, y'all. Yes, I am excited to see Johnny Depp in eyeliner once again. Drink up me hearties, yo ho!

But of course this is only my lead in. I eagerly awoke to read A.O. Scott's review of Pirates #2 in the NYTimes. If you don't read his reviews, you're missing out. (I heart A.O. Scott. He makes me very happy.) While it is not a stellar review by any stretch of the imagination, it is funny. And though his invocation of Spongebob SquarePants and hamster wheels is certainly enough to tickle my funny bone, what I really want to talk about is a very very important point he makes about plot.

Refer to the following:

"Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest" is not just a movie. It's a glistening,
sushi-grade chunk of franchise entertainment, which means that maximal enjoyment of it comes with certain obligations. It is the second episode in what will be at least a trilogy -- the third installment is scheduled for release next summer -- and full appreciation of its whirligig plot will depend on thorough acquaintance with the first "Pirates of the Caribbean" picture, conveniently available for purchase on DVD. And since "Dead Man's Chest" brazenly dispenses with the convention of an ending -- it's pretty much all middle -- you will, by virtue of buying that ticket, have committed yourself to buying another one a year from now if you're the least bit curious about how the whole thing turns out.

All middle and no ending. The standard problem of the second installment of a trilogy. If anyone out there is planning on writing a trilogy, take heart to my plea. DO NOT SQUANDER YOUR BOOK #2.

Here's what usually happens with trilogies (and please note I'm not going in order on purpose):

Book 1 - You've created great characters, and given them an arc and a victory, which a makes you want to read on. This book/movie can almost always stand alone nicely. Consider the first Star Wars or the Godfather. You could more or less stop after the first one. There's certainly enough of closure. But...you have those great characters, and you of course have that larger evil to destroy (i.e. Darth Vader). This of course leads to...

Book 3 - Wherein the ultimate evil is destroyed. You certainly don't want to do this any earlier. It is a trilogy afterall. This book always brings together everything great from the first two installments. And then the good guys win.

Book 2 - Simple a bridge from Book 1 to Book 3. It's almost always a transitional book. Hero en route to the danger of Book 3. Think about Lord of the Rings #2: they're still traveling. Nothing happens to Frodo and Sam. (Well, in the book it does...and you get that awesome cliffhanger of Sam leaving Frodo for dead with Shelob and taking the Ring himself...but Peter Jackson moved that to Movie #3 because that's really where nothing happens to Sam and Frodo except for throwing the damn thing into the lava.) Almost nothing crucial happens that is needed for the denouement of Book 3. You could axe the installment and miss nothing.

So...DON'T DO THAT. Think instead of Empire Strikes Back. This is really the only second installment to not fall victim to the Book 2 Curse. Why? Because it gets so much worse for the heroes at the end. You think they're totally screwed. They then start Book 3 at a serious disadvantage. How much more dramatic can you get? (It's why that movie is even the best of the 3. It's just so much more distressing.)

When you plot a trilogy make sure each book has an arc. Make that Book #2 count for something. It's not just the second act of a three-act play. It has to stand alone.

But rant as I may, will A.O. Scott's warning of "all middle and no ending" stop me from going to see the movie? Yeah, definitely not.

Following up on a post over at Brooke's blog about editing and tightening your writing I wanted to share a sign, which my grandfather used to have hanging in his office, that I now keep in mine. First rule of editing: cut unnecessary words. If you think you'll lose your voice and flare? You won't. Just trust me.



To this day, I'm still not sure whether those edits were made by my grandfather in black magic marker or not (my only evidence is that the handwriting at the bottom is his). Whether he did or not, I'd like to think he added to the wit of the concept.

Now do you get it?

Y'all are awesome. The comments did help. All of the suggestions about the parents, and getting used to living together will make great details that fuel the plot and help breed tension.

But here's where I'm going with this. The more I thought about it, there are some basic areas of contention between siblings:
1. Tattletelling
2. Rivalry
3. Sharing

This could easily create three different books, but two plots stood out at me, both sort of around the idea of having a best friend who can now "tell on you." Certainly that would be a hell of a thing to get used to. Let me know what you think about each of these:

PLOT 1
At the beginning, Sister A (side note: books will be written in POV of Sister A) does one or two little things that her new step-sister (Sister B) tells on her for. Sister A is kind of pissed. Her best friend never told on her before, but now she's in a little trouble. But Sister B never lies to her parents, so she had to tell. Sister A now doesn't really trust her best friend. But then Sister A screws up a little worse, and she hides from Sister B, thinking she can correct the mistake before the parents find out and she gets in super-big trouble. But of course, as these things go, she makes it worse for herself. Finally Sister B finds out, and Sister A begs her not to tell. Now their friendship is on the line. Will Sister B tell? Can Sister A work her way out of the mess? And will she forgive her best friend for possibly getting her into huge trouble?

PLOT 2
Sisters A and B have just started high school and not used to the work load yet. They both study really hard for their first math test, and Sister A does not do well. But Sister B does. At dinner, the parents ask about the test, and B is so happy, that A can't bear to tell anyone how badly she did. So she starts lying about it, and hiding it from her best friend AND parents. She thinks she can make up lost ground, but just gets into worse and worse trouble. Eventually Sister B figures it out (she's not a best friend for nothing) but threatens to tell if Sister A doesn't. Again, friendship on the line, fueled by both the comparisons between the two and the hiding things.


I think #1 is a little fresher, but tell me what you think. Also, I need ideas for what a freshman in high school would screw up on and then make worse. Hit me with more ideas!

In other news, here I am back in my hometown in the suburbs of Detroit. I think tomorrow I'm going to the local parade, one of the last good small-town parades wherein I can get as many cheap plastic necklaces and Tootsie Rolls as I want. I haven't done it since I was at least 8 years old. Should be a great trip down memory lane.

Who's got fun plans for the Fourth?

Okay, I'm putting the call out. I need ideas. Help out a Young Adult series in its infancy.

A disclaimer: I clearly cannot credit you so much for any contribution, but my gratitude knows no bounds. Also, please don't write your own book which I'll see at some point and get all pissed off about. Not a nice way to make friends with me. And if you run into me in the future, remember that I'll know who you are, but you won't know who I am. (Oooh, that was ominous...)

The basic setup: It's a step-siblings series. I've briefly mentioned it before. Two best friends become step-sibs, with a small twist being one of them has had a crush on the other's older brother her entire life. (This isn't a plot line so much as a funny element that brings nice awkward scenes. Clearly you can't make out with your step-brother. Well, you can, but then you're asking for trouble.) The girls think it's the coolest thing in the world to be sisters now. There are so many perks. But something in the first book has to divide them and make them realize that being sisters changes everything.

The question is: what kind of situation would be different between you and a sister than it would be between you and your best friend?

The direction I'm going with this now is: maybe the girls each want the same thing, but they can't both have it. For the first time they are competing, which is made worse by parents who want to try to be as even as possible between them. But what are they competing over? Something at home? Something at school?

Let's assume the girls as best friends had no problem sharing or doing everything together. But what changes when it's your sister?

I need ideas. Majorly.

I'll mostly be away for the long weekend at home looking to my own merged family for inspiration, and also at a wedding I don't want to go to. But let's see where this takes us.

Eileen, Brooke, do your thing...

So, Brooke had a good suggestion in the last post's comments, but before I get there, I need to detour first.

After Amy mentioned Twilight by Stephenie Meyer a few posts ago, I decided to actually read it. She's right in that it's the kind of book that makes you just keep plowing through it until you hit the back cover. I had a few problems with it, but that's not really want I want to get into.

I want to talk about vampires.

Now, I should say that I've never really understood the appeal. But lately it's more and more clear how big a genre it is. I mean, think about how ubiquitous they are. We've done series about them in the past here, and now we have an adult vampire series launching soon. Anne Rice's empire speaks for itself, even now finding a place on Broadway. Blade, formerly of the Wesley Snipes variety, is now a TV series on Spike. A crappy movie like Underworld warranted a sequel, just because vampires are apparently sexy.

So maybe someone can explain it to me. What IS the appeal of a vampire? Why is blood-sucking such a go-to? And by all means, WHY is that so freakin' sexy?

Status Part 1: Up to my eyeballs in tractors. Don't ask.

Status Part 2: I am in need of some ideas. I have a series proposal that I am totally stumped on. It's making me crazy.


So, I really hate to post about this, since I'm inclined to just close my eyes, put my fingers in my ears, and hum an annoying tune to block out all outside information, but as it's books, and children's books, and killing off characters, I must, because it's seriously pissing me off.

Our dear J.K. Rowling has unsurprisingly told us that main characters will die.

Well...no kidding. But do you really have to hint at killing off Harry? My gut tells me she won't do it. Kids would HATE her from now until the end of the world. I don't think she's really want to piss off that many people. In my humble opinion, if she were to kill Harry, that would sour the entire series for me. It would be a needless twist that would break the hearts of children for generations. Of course other characters will certainly die...but I've already engaged in three separate conversations about who I think it'll be. (If you really want to know, ask me in the comments.)

I guess I'm just kind of irritated that she's getting so many people riled up a good 2 years before we even get to read the book. (No way this book hits shelves earlier than next summer, but my guess is Summer 08. Though, she does know how it ends so maybe it'll be sooner...) It's so "spit in your face" for her to say "Well, I've known how it ends all along. Haha, why don't I just dangle it in your face again now." Like we aren't all rushing out to buy the book? Like I won't reserve my copy months in advance anyway? Like she needs to hook even more people onto the series? Like it won't already be a canonical series I read to my kids, and they read to theirs? Does she really have to be so cruel? We know people will die. You've made it clear all along that this is the price of battling Voldemort. I myself have talked at length about the value in killing of characters when it serves the arc. And I'd say 7 book is a nice sized (and in my opinion a brilliantly plotted) arc.

But come on...just shut up and keep writing.

Yesterday was a part of my job that I don't necessarily enjoy, but is kind of interesting nonetheless. It's Licensing Show here in NYC, and while most publishers don't do this kind of thing, we, as a packager that often does books for licensed properties, do scope it out. If you've ever been to the Javits Center you know that this is already an intimidating situation. Plus, just walking the floor of this kind of trade show isn't going to get you anywhere. The big boys' booths (Disney, New Line, other movie studios) don't even really have anything to look at--they already know who they want to meet with and their booths are just meeting areas often marked "Private."

And there's a huge range of stuff to look at. As my co-worker put it yesterday as we roamed the floor, "Licensing Show is where you get the people with established products, the people who actually have good ideas, and the people who only think they have good ideas." And it's pretty obvious who is who.

So, I was sent to meet with a potential new property. It's a preschool-age kids' television show until now only on public TV. It's been on the air 10 years and I'd never heard of it. But they're finally ready to get out there and want a publishing program. I went into the meeting going "Dear god, if they're sending ME to this meeting, surely no one at work is serious about the property." My second thought was, "Even if they are serious about it, please please please don't let me be the editor on the project. Clowns? I'll kill myself."

The kicker of it all was that they actually convinced me it could be a good property for us. How? I'm not entirely sure. But what I saw was people (granted, they were sales people) who believed in their product and really see a future for it. And with such a character driven show, we could do good stuff for them, since character-driven books are what we excel at. It's how you keep kids reading.

But I know my bosses will be hesitant about investing in this, since after 10 years it's only now going somewhere. They'll be asking "Why didn't someone pick this up before now? What's wrong with it?" So this begs the question: what makes a good licensed property to pick up? My company has worked with some really successful brands over the years and done well with them. But these were all established names already. What about a property that's established but not widely known? Is it worth trying? It's tricky. Usually for us, because we're a packager, we need big names on both sides. The publisher wants to know the property can guarantee a certain amount of sales, and the licensor wants to know that we can put the property with a publisher that will give it the right amount of attention. It's not hard when it's a good brand. But a brand like the one I saw? I dunno. But somehow I'll be in the position of telling my bosses they should really take a closer look.

There are times when I seriously begin to doubt my own intelligence. This is both a self-deprecating and egotistical statement. Yes, I consider myself to be a reasonably intelligent person with good problem-solving skills and common sense. I have a good grasp of a wide array of topics, with slightly better knowledge in a few specific areas thanks to my marvelous majors in college. But there are times when I just feel down-right stupid.

The major example? Investments and taxes. They completely mess with my head. We had our 401k meetings today, and when I start hearing works like "Roth IRA" and "pre-tax contribution" I stop understanding. It took me forever to understand how using a FLEX spend account for my Metrocard would save me money instead of paying for the damn thing twice which is what it feels like. I walked out of that meeting feeling so entirely idiotic, I had to find something to make me feel smart. So I told an author what was wrong with her outline.

What makes you feel dumb?

Since this won't be immediately obvious, my post title refers to absorption (ala paper towel), because that's what I've been involved in for the past 24 hours. Rare is the time when I get to read for nearly 24 hours straight, and rare is the book that makes me want to. Usually these reading marathons happen on Jewish holidays when I'm on lockdown for two days straight with only eating and synagogue to break up my day. And sometimes when I'm traveling and have long flights. If I'm uninterrupted, and it's not a sleep-related time, I can knock off a hundred pages an hour, which isn't too shabby.

So now that we're on summer hours, and close at 1 on Fridays, I have some more time. Yesterday I grabbed a book off the roommate's shelf, took it to Central Park for the hours before I had to tutor, and dove in. Last night I read more, and today I spent 3 more hours in Riverside Park near the water, and a few more hours just now at home, devouring this book. I just finished, hence the late post.

There's a feeling I have when I've been this deeply absorbed in a book and come up for air for the first time. Like this reality is calling me back, though I'm still half in the world of the book. Almost the feeling you have when you wake up from a vivid dream, and haven't quite adjusted to the fact that it wasn't real. And I probably will have dreams tonight about this book.

I love when a book does this to me. I wish it did it more often.

So, the book title? The Time Traveler's Wife, by Audrey Niffenegger. It's beautiful. If you haven't read it, go.

Now what books have done this for you?

Minor note: listening to Nick Drake at work makes you sleepy.

But the real business of today has been author bios. I've dealt with two different ones today alone. Writing them is funny, especially when it's for a series alias. I have two YA series written under aliases, so of course you just tinker the bio to fit with who you think the kids will expect to see writing this kind of book. And tying into this, what publishers want cute bios. Examples from a few different publishers (not necessarily anything I'm working on):

Zoey Dean (the pseudonym on the A-List series): Zoey divides her time between Beverly Hills and several small islands in the Caribbean. She is currently working on her next juicy A-List book at an undisclosed location.

Victoria Ashton, author of Confessions of a Teen Nanny: Victoria was born in New York and attended an elite private school. She has worked and played with the rich and famous and has seen it all--the good, the bad, and the completely outrageous. Victoria divides her time among New York City, the Hamptons, and London.

Even big-name authors go with the funny. In R.L. Stine's bio in his brand-new and very funny Rotten School series, it says: In sixth grade, R.L. won the school Athletic Award for his performance in the Wedgie Championships. Unfortunately, after the tournament, his underpants had to be surgically removed.

So, I'll write my own bio right now:
E was born in Michigan, but abandoned her Midwest roots for the bright lights of New York, where she edits, blogs, and plays. She's been known to bop her head on the subway along with whatever is playing on her iPod, and correct her friends' grammar whether they like it or not. E is currently at work on a brand-new series proposal that she hopes will become bigger than Harry Potter, even though she knows she's just kidding herself.

If you could write a funny bio for yourself, what random fact would you want included?

Today I am super-busy and can't really come up with my own topic, but I want to be blogging more regularly, so I'll leave you this email someone forwarded me to chuckle over today. Please now imagine me sitting alone in my office laughing sometimes silently, sometimes not at my computer screen.

Go nuts.

p.s. I'm pretty sure #9 is a straight rip-off from Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, but I won't be picky here.

Every year, English teachers from across the country submit their collections of actual analogies and metaphors found in high school essays. These excerpts are published each year to the amusement of teachers across the country.
Here are last year's winners....

1. Her face was a perfect oval, like a circle that had its two sides gently compressed by a Thigh Master.

2. His thoughts tumbled in his head, making and breaking alliances like underpants in a dryer without Cling Free.

3. He spoke with the wisdom that can only come from experience, like a guy who went blind because he looked at a solar eclipse without one of those boxes with a pinhole in it and now goes around the country speaking at high schools about the dangers of looking at a solar eclipse, without one of those boxes with a pinhole in it.

4. She grew on him like she was a colony of E. coli, and he was room-temperature Canadian beef.

5. She had a deep, throaty, genuine laugh, like that sound a dog makes just before it throws up.

6. Her vocabulary was as bad as, like, whatever.

7. He was as tall as a six-foot, three-inch tree.

8. The revelation that his marriage of 30 years had disintegrated because of his wife's infidelity came as a rude shock, like a surcharge at a formerly surcharge-free ATM machine.

9. The little boat gently drifted across the pond exactly the way a bowling ball wouldn't.

10. McBride fell 12 stories, hitting the pavement like a Hefty bag filled with vegetable soup.

11. From the attic came an unearthly howl. The whole scene had an eerie, surreal quality, like when you're on vacation in another city and Jeopardy comes on at 7PM instead of 7:30.

12. Her hair glistened in the rain like a nose hair after a sneeze.

13. The hailstones leaped from the pavement, just like maggots when you fry them in hot grease.

14. Long separated by cruel fate, the star-crossed lovers raced across the grassy field toward each other like two freight trains, one having left Cleveland at 6:36 p.m. traveling at 55 mph, the other from Topeka at 4:19 p.m. at a speed of 35 mph.

15. They lived in a typical suburban neighborhood with picket fences that resembled Nancy Kerrigan's teeth.

16. John and Mary had never met. They were like two hummingbirds who had also never met.

17. He fell for her like his heart was a mob informant and she was the East River.

18. Even in his last years, Granddad had a mind like a steel trap, only one that had been left out so long, it had rusted shut.

19. Shots rang out, as shots are wont to do.

20. The plan was simple, like my brother-in-law Phil. But unlike Phil, this plan just might work.

21. The young fighter had a hungry look, the kind you get from not eating for a while.

22. He was as lame as a duck. Not the metaphorical lame duck, either, but a real duck that was actually lame, maybe from stepping on a land mine or something.

23. The ballerina rose gracefully en Pointe and extended one slender leg behind her, like a dog at a fire hydrant.

24. It was an American tradition, like fathers chasing kids around with power tools.

25. He was deeply in love. When she spoke, he thought he heard bells, as if she were a garbage truck backing up.

Inspired by a project at work, I've been thinking about crushes today. Specifically the kinds of crushes that are unattainable. Dramatically unattainable. Not-in-a-million-years-even-if-the-world-started-spinning-in-the-other-direction attainable. The one I'm using for the project is a girl who has a crush on her step-brother. (Don't worry, she had a crush on him BEFORE he was her step-brother.) The funny thing about these unattainable crushes is that you somehow still see avenues for them to work out. But in the end, there's a reason they call them crushes...but that's what you always end up: crushed.

I of course remembered back to a few ridiculous, but predictable and cliche crushes of my own. The best example is from my freshman year in high school when I was in love with my English teacher. (Draw conclusions about why I ended up an editor if you want.) He was only 23, and gorgeous. But you had to feel bad for the guy because at my high school English and history classes were kept single-sex for freshman and sophomore years. (A throw-back to when the school was two separate schools for boys and girls.) The poor guy had a room full of crushing 14 year old girls, all lusting after him. Some were less subtle than others. I did really well in his class, and he wrote me really flattering comments on papers, which of course made me feel so special. And that's where the disillusionment comes into play. Of course he'll fall in love with me someday! 9 years isn't that big of a difference!

At the end of the school year he told us he was leaving to go to law school. And crush came to an end the only way crushes can.

What about you? Tell me about your biggest crushes.