JacketFlap connects you to the work of more than 200,000 authors, illustrators, publishers and other creators of books for Children and Young Adults. The site is updated daily with information about every book, author, illustrator, and publisher in the children's / young adult book industry. Members include published authors and illustrators, librarians, agents, editors, publicists, booksellers, publishers and fans. Join now (it's free).
Login or Register for free to create your own customized page of blog posts from your favorite blogs. You can also add blogs by clicking the "Add to MyJacketFlap" links next to the blog name in each post.
Blog Posts by Tag
In the past 7 days
Blog Posts by Date
Click days in this calendar to see posts by day or month
Viewing: Blog Posts Tagged with: Chasya, Most Recent at Top [Help]
Results 1 - 25 of 32
How to use this Page
You are viewing the most recent posts tagged with the words: Chasya in the JacketFlap blog reader. What is a tag? Think of a tag as a keyword or category label. Tags can both help you find posts on JacketFlap.com as well as provide an easy way for you to "remember" and classify posts for later recall. Try adding a tag yourself by clicking "Add a tag" below a post's header. Scroll down through the list of Recent Posts in the left column and click on a post title that sounds interesting. You can view all posts from a specific blog by clicking the Blog name in the right column, or you can click a 'More Posts from this Blog' link in any individual post.
Hi blog readers! Now that both Jane and Chasya have so kindly introduced me, it’s my turn to chime in. I guess the best way to begin is to give you a little information on my background here. I may be new to the website, but I’m not entirely new to the blog. In fact, I have actually been puttering around this office for longer than you think.
I began at Dystel & Goderich over a year ago as an intern. I was determined to find myself an internship in publishing, particularly during the latter half of my college career. I hadn’t had much luck early on, so by my third year at NYU, nothing was going to stop me. I applied and interviewed for the internship with DGLM all while living in London, where I was spending the spring semester of my junior year. Fully aware that my geographical gap could create a handicap, I knew I had to be persistent. And luckily for me, according to Lauren, I was persistent enough that it exhibited my determination, but not too persistent that it made her want to burn my application and any remaining evidence of my existence. So with that, I was offered the chance to join DGLM that summer as an intern. The semesters passed, I continued to stay with the agency, and before I knew it about a year and a half had gone by and I had graduated from NYU. Then I was lucky enough to be given the opportunity by Jane and Miriam to take over for Chasya as she looks to begin a new chapter in her life. I knew that the timing was right; I felt comfortable here, and I had spent enough time working on the less essential tasks that I had developed the desire to explore the business further and carve out my own place in it. And as clichés go, the rest is history.
In giving this blog post some thought, I remembered something Rachel had said in her welcome post: “I think the one thing I truly love about working in a literary agency is that I get to see the entire process of publishing, from a rough manuscript to a finished book on the shelves.” I might make fun of Rachel for her love of Vegemite, but her words are very true. I’m very excited to finally get the chance to dive in and take on my own work. My time at DGLM has allowed me to expose myself to an industry I have always wanted to be a part of, and now it’s allowing me to embark on a new journey in my life—one that will allow me to build the career I’ve always wanted.
The bottom line is, I’m excited to take on this new responsibility within Dystel & Goderich, because now I get to hear from you. Yes, you. I look forward to hearing your ideas, your thoughts, your opinions. You all have stories to tell. Trust me, I’ve read a lot of them. But now I’m ready to do something with them. Turn them into the books they deserve to be. There are certain subjects I’m particularly interested in reading, which you can find in my bio on our website. So let me hear from you. I can only rearrange the pens on my desk for so long….
5 Comments on Welcome to DGLM, Stephanie DeVita!, last added: 8/10/2010
Congrats on the promotion, Stephanie! So, considering your interest in the young adult genre, what is your favorite young adult novel? And has there been a book (or books) that inspired you to join the agenting world?
Over the years, Dystel & Goderich has grown from literally just two of us—well, actually, we did have a part-time person when we began so it was two and a half—to nine. We have also had interns working with us for a number of years and, over time, many have been promoted to full-fledged staff members.
Working at any organization initially as an intern is good for the intern and for the company, in my opinion. It enables the intern to learn whether he or she wants to continue on this career path and at this company and it enables the company to evaluate the intern’s ability and enthusiasm. In the end, the intern system is good for everyone.
Four years ago, I hired one of our interns to be my assistant; Chasya Milgrom had recently graduated from college, didn’t really know what she wanted to do, but thought giving our company and the business of literary agenting a try might be interesting. In fact, over the years, she has done very well—developing new systems for us and growing enormously herself. Last year she began building a client list and also began overseeing royalties (a big job) when Jim McCarthy was promoted to Senior Agent.
Now, sadly for us, Chasya has decided to move on. She will be attending graduate school in an area that she is passionate about. We know she will be terrific at whatever she does and we are excited to watch her succeed.
I am delighted to say that our very bright and energetic intern of the last year and a half, Stephanie DeVita, has just joined us as a junior agent; Stephanie has learned so much about our agency and the business of being a book agent in the time she has been with us that I have no doubt she is going to make a very successful career out of this. She will be taking over the royalties position as well as Chasya’s client roster and has already begun to talk about building a list of her own.
I am always excited when new people come on board and I am especially excited when they are as determined as this young woman is. I know you will hear from her soon and I know you will enjoy it.
4 Comments on We're moving right along!, last added: 8/10/2010
Congratulations Stephanie! It's a new beginning with great opportunities and endless outcomes. Life is for living, working, and spending every moment as if it were your last:-)
With the advent of digital card catalogues, artists are recycling those little paper boards into the coolest of creations. So, you crazy bibliophiles, want to carry a bit of the library everywhere you go?
Aww, the library where I work just uses them as scratch paper at the reference desk. I love the little set with the octopus, though. I just love cephalopods in general.
Happy summer, everybody! For the next while, there are going to be some absences from the blog as we take vacations, but we'd hate to leave you guys hanging. It's no secret that we blog much more now than when we started this baby, and there are far more of you reading than there were way back when. So we thought we'd bring back some blog entries of days gone by that you may have missed if you just joined us in the last year. We've cued up enough, but if you have any favorites you think your fellow readers might enjoy, give us a shout below!
by Chasya
We really enjoy reading the responses we get to our blog posts and finding out what our readers have to say about our ruminations and rambling on everything from book cover design to the state of the current market. These comments can also be excellent jumping-off points or topics that might be of interest the rest of our readers.
For instance, a couple of weeks ago, Miriam waxed romantic about the lack of sweeping, escapist fare in today’s book market; books that would allow us to get our collective minds off an awful economy and other goings-on in the world.
One of our readers responded, making the point that in today’s market a novel the length of Gone with the Wind or The Thorn Birds would get rejected immediately for being too long. The truth is we do consider submissions of various lengths including those that have a heftier word count, because, at the end of the day, a compelling novel is a compelling novel. Witness the most buzzed about debut this fall, The Story of Edgar Sawtelle. At upwards of 560 pages, this doorstop of a book surpasses your average page count. Despite that, it has been an enormous success, and as Stacey pointed out last week, it was a bestseller way before Oprah got her hands on it. People were moved by the story and bought the book in droves. Another example that instantly comes to mind is Denis Johnson’s Tree of Smoke, a 624 page tome which came out last year and shot up the bestseller lists. Our own Jacqueline Carey’s first novel Kushiel’s Dart comes in at 695 pages. Her most recent book in the series, Kushiel’s Mercy, is no slouch at 650 pages.
We absolutely crave the sorts of stories that grab hold of us whether they take 250 or 500 pages to tell. We would be remiss in tossing something aside simply because of its length. One of my own personal favorite books, Wally Lamb’s I Know This Much Is True comes in at a staggering 928 pages. I’ve read this one a few times and still get that sad feeling as I near the end.
Along similar lines, another reader pointed out an interesting practice – mock submissions, in which cheeky authors take the first ten pages of a classic and send it off to an agent and then wait for their form rejection to come in the mail. The implication here is that a) agents are idiots who often don’t know that what they are looking at is a classic piece of literature and b) agents wouldn’t know a good piece of fiction even if it was staring them in the face.
We aren’t going to lie. A couple of years ago one of our agents rejected Moby Dick (yup, you heard me). The agent admitted this to me freely. Thing about that is, this agent also pointed out that he hated Melville and absolutely loathed Moby Dick. So, just because the book is a classic, does not mean we are going to change our minds about liking it or not. And just because a form rejection comes in the mail, doesn’t necessarily mean that the agent does not know what is being rejected. Often the agen
1 Comments on From the Vault: Going long, last added: 7/6/2010
I used to go to the library and purposefully seek out the largest book I could find. I love a large, sweeping story with many characters and a whole new world to imagine. I prefer stories that are all about the challenges and heroic deeds, that might only have a hint of anything romantic in the background.
Meg Rosoff makes the point that Anne Frank’s trust has every right to be upset (and says that is, in effect, what they’re supposed to do). She points out, however, that writers should be allowed to write whatever they like so long as they do it well, though she herself doesn’t approve of what Dogar is doing. I, too, feel uncomfortable with the notion of Frank being used this way. As someone who’s read and enjoyed one or two Philippa Gregory novels though, I wonder if this reaction is due more to who the fictional character is based on.
So now I turn to you for your opinion: Has Dogar done something wrong, or does she have the right to use Anne Frank’s history and make it her own?
23 Comments on Fictionalizing Anne Frank, last added: 6/23/2010
Personally I don't think there's anything wrong with it. I mean yes she is probably cashing in a little on the name, hoping people will buy it because it's ANNE FRANK'S fictionalized diary rather than an unnamed girl. But writers can write about real life people and events so I think the problem people might have is more to do with Anne Frank's fame or how revered she seems to be rather than with the fact that she fictionalized someone's real life.
Anonymous said, on 6/22/2010 10:37:00 AM
My vote: She has the right. Just because someone died under horrible circumstances or was a historical figure or is put on a pedestal does not mean that their memory is sacrosanct. By this reasoning, Jesus would be off limits, as would Hitler, Ghandi, Sitting Bull, Mother Teresa, Queen Elizabeth I, you name it. In fact, how could you ever justify writing about anyone but yourself, and even then you might be accused of lying. If someone died under horrible circumstances, all the more reason to get it out in the open, to let the "truth" become part of the communal discussion. That said, she does have a responsibility to try to get it right and not misrepresent, as much as possible (depending on how she labels it).
I think the difference between Phiippa Gregory and Anne Frank is time. There are still living people who survived what Anne Frank didn't. Not to mention their children, who were wounded by their parents' horrors. And THEIR children.
Once this gift (yes, heavy sarcasm intended) stops giving, then the time will be better for this sort of thing. But right now?
The wounds bubble too close to the surface, still. We need more time, and then fictionalizing Anne Frank will be as necessary to the understanding for many as is the fictionalizing of Napoleon.
We've fictionalized pretty much all the queens of England, as well as many other historical characters. This is no different. HOWEVER, that said, this may still be a too recent era of history to work with. I don't know.
Anonymous said, on 6/22/2010 10:47:00 AM
On the flip side, would we want to tell people, "There are certain subjects you cannot write about"?
Although I think she has a right to write anything she likes, I wish that she would have written an entirely fictionalized account that didn't feature Anne Frank or Peter van Pels.
Not because people in the past should be forbidden subjects, but because I don't feel that Anne Frank or Peter van Pels are far enough in the past. They have family members and friends still living.
They're not a history lesson to those people, they're loved ones. The fact that only in the last 15 years did we find out that their last name was not van Daan, but van Pels, indicates pretty clearly that this is not yet the past.
I think we *can* write about anything we like. I just think, as a writer and a human being, there are some times when we should show restraint.
Writers can--and should--write about anything they want, but putting it in the marketplace and making money on it can be construed as exploitation. Is it in this case? I'm thinking yes.
Susan, I definitely don't agree with you. While having survivors/children of survivors of the Holocaust alive makes the topic more painful I don't believe it makes it off limits! By that logic we would have to be outraged by all media that describes the Holocaust or the surrounding events, Schindler's List or The Burning Times, The Boy in the Stripped Pyjamas or novels or films about more recent historical events like Apocalypse Now. Should we not have had books like At Risk or the play Angels in America because AIDs sufferers still live among us? The fact is she isn't even rewriting Anne Frank's Diary, she's writing Peter's. What is most insulting perhaps is that the outrage over this book is not because it "desecrates" HIS memory but that of someone he once knew!
What did anyone think of The Boy Who Loved Anne Frank, by Ellen Feldman? The premise was Peter surviving the war and moving to America, so it didn't cover the time of the diary, but Anne was certainly a character (in flashback).
To me, the essence of being a grown up is just because you have the right to do something, doesn't mean you should.
Given the fact that every year some people claim that Anne Frank's diary is fictional, I think this was a bad idea.
Anonymous said, on 6/22/2010 12:55:00 PM
For those who say not to write it, not enough time has passed: When you were a kid, were you told, either explicitly or implicitly, "Now, don't you tell anyone about what goes on in this family?" "You SHOULDN'T tell." I've heard that there were German people who knew what was going on in the concentration camps, but they tacitly agreed not to talk about it. When we don't talk about things, that's when they have power. So by saying she shouldn't write this, you're privileging power, control, shame, and guilt over truth, honesty, justice, and societal health.
I was never too fond of fiction based off of real people and their stories.
Anonymous said, on 6/22/2010 6:28:00 PM
Suzi McGowen's comment has the gist of it down.
While writing a fictionalized diary of someone real is not that big a deal as long as it's clearly stated as fiction, Anne Frank's diary is a special case because holocaust deniers are constantly declaring the original fiction to begin with. Here you have something that people refuse to accept as true and something like this complicates matters more.
An author can't be held responsible for what a few crazies do with what they have written, but I feel they do have to responsible enough to be aware of the circumstances surrounding the subject they write about and consider seriously the impact of what they publish.
Hell, the book could mean nothing to anyone and fade out of memory without anyone caring. The idea of it just tickles me the wrong way.
WriterGirl, I'll not argue with your disagreement of my opinion.
I'm just going to say that I don't think you're part of a survivor family whose scars show oh, so clearly. To compare these scars to AIDS or to the attempts to show the greatness of common people (although was Schindler really common? Hmm.) in the face of such horror shows you don't understand the depth of the survivor phenomenon. There is such outrage among the second generation that Jews -- that their RELATIVES -- were led like lambs to the slaughter that books and movies of people who fought back are necessary. The truth remains vital, especially in the face of so much disbelief and distrust the doubters bring to the table.
Heck, author Steven Beeber was brash and brave enough to show how the Holocaust birthed an entire genre of music, one that is still vital and alive today. This is the power of the survivor phenomena. An entire genre of music. Think about that.
As for your other examples, the other Holocaust stories/movies have a validity because they seek to help with the healing process. This book, as I've seen it presented thus far (and frankly, I had a hard time dealing with Holocaust lit before realizing the depth of the dysfunction the event left behind, so I will not be reading this book, either), takes a REAL person and twists things around.
That is where the pain comes in. Remember the fuss over the book The Apple? A survivor made up a story that he passed off as real because he needed to heal, to prove there is kindness in the world, even if he had to invent it.
I'm sorry. The time isn't right. Yes, we should talk about this stuff. Yes, it belongs on its own shelf in the fiction section. Yes, further down the road, we can tout Historical Holocaust Fiction as possessing the same validity that Historical Queen Elizabeth holds.
Once the bulk of the pain has passed. And it is. Studies are showing that the third generation does not wear some of the trauma of their parents and surviving grandparents. Those scars are healing over. But I wonder. The pain, the horror... I thought I'd become immune to it until I heard it out of the mouth of a survivor who means a lot to me. Looking at someone you love and hearing these tales... it changes your life. It truly does.
There will be a time and a place for this sort of fiction. As someone for whom this event, which happened years before my birth, is still so very real, I'm just stating from the trenches that the time is not now.
I've read Meg Rosoff's article and I agree with her. People have the right to write these books, but that doesn't make it right or mean that the families of victims will be thrilled. My biggest fear here would be what another commenter said: that people unfamiliar with the story (and the history) will imagine that Anne Frank's diary is also a work of fiction.
I could give Rosoff a big hug for being another reader who wasn't enthralled with 'The Boy in Striped Pyjamas'.
I don't mind at all reading Shakespeare's Juliet long before she met Romeo or another angle of her that was not part of the original story. I even like Johnny Depp's release of Alice. It will be fun...imaginative...
I'm a bit late to the conversation, but I agree that time is the real issue here. Of course any author has the right to do this, but how soon is too soon to avoid being seen as opportunistic or cruel or any other negative adjective? Caesar and Abraham Lincoln were fictionalized long after their deaths. There are still people alive who went through the same thing as Anne Frank, who knew Anne Frank. Will writing about her in a fictionalized manner ever become tasteful, and if so, how long will it take? The comments here alone show that there's still dissension to the idea that we've already reached that point.
Just as long as nobody writes an "Anne Frank--Zombie"novel. There are lines of taste that I think shouldn't be crossed. Now, I must get back to "Abraham Lincoln--Vampire Hunter."
I'm slightly torn on this one. On the one hand, I think writers should be able to write whatever they like and it's up to the reader to choose whether or not to read it. After all, in in the end, it's the reader's choice, so there's no sense in blaming a writer for writing a book if you're going to pick it up and read it anyway.
On the other hand, I do agree with everyone who's said that the history is too painful and too near still. That said, everyone seems to be writing about and making films about Nazis these days; and people have fictionalized more recent historical figures, even if those historical figures had less horrific stories behind them.
So I suppose in the end, I don't really know. But I am certain that it's a reader's choice to read or not to read.
I don't think you can say that the book shouldn't be written without reading it. Even if it's a paradox, it's a knee jerk reaction. Why are we SO quick to accuse someone of "twisting the story" and "taking advantage"? You need to read the book before you pass judgment on it, especially when the author has gone to such pains to ensure its accuracy as much as she can.
Also, some people are saying its "too soon." Why? Why are we only allowed to discuss (because that's what this book is: a discussion) touchy subjects after everyone who can remember them is gone? Wouldn't it be better for us as a society to bring everything out in the open when there are still people who can contribute to the discussion first-hand? And who decides when "enough" time has passed?
Especially for those of us who aren't Jewish, I think we should welcome anything that brings the Holocaust to the forefront. I know, for me, we read maybe a paragraph in a history book about it and - that was it. Couldn't discuss it or try to figure out how something like that could have been so accepted. Wasn't allowed, wasn't important. Or maybe it was too horrible, too 'real.' Even as a child, it pissed me off. So maybe that's why I'm defending the book now.
I say let the discussion happen. And to be clear, the discussion needs to be about the events, the culture, how this happened and how to make sure it never happens again - not about whether or not someone should have written a book.
I do love dissecting a good book, and even more so, it’s characters. Which is why this piece by the Wall Street Journalhad me at hello. Turns out I’m not the only person who diagnoses fictional characters using the DSM-IV, the bible of psychiatric diagnosis (I also tend to do this to historical figures, just FYI). Turns out, this is a very good teaching tool for psychiatric residents, too. Various universities are now picking apart the neuroses and ticks of your favorite fictional characters. Turns out Twilight’s broody vamp Edward may have a serious case of arrested development, and your favorite Winnie the Pooh characters suffer from everything from generalized anxiety disorder to dysthymia.
I mean, what was up with that Don Quixote? Hearing voices? Believing he’s a knight? Fighting windmills he thinks are actually giants? Clearly delusional disorder, right? As a reader, I find this added layer in character dissection just an interesting topic for discussion. What about you? Any literary characters you would diagnose?
5 Comments on And you thought you had problems...., last added: 6/18/2010
As a psychologist, I conduct psychological evaluations of clients where it's my job to diagnose using the DSM-IV. An unfortunate side effect of my career is that not only do I automatically diagnose literary characters, but pretty much every single person I have contact with--luckily, my hubby is a psychologist as well!
I analyze characters all the time- only in my case it's typing them with Keirsey Temperament Theory which has been a passion of mine for more than a decade now. It's facinating to see how each of the types are really represented in every novel including the classics (for example Jane Eyre was an Idealist Counselor, Rochester a Fieldmarshal Rational...I'd lay bets St. John Rivers was a Guardian Supervisor...) but it becomes an obsession beyond literary characters.
You just haven't lived until you've spent an hour on a road trip typing Muppets by category: Idealists (Kermit and Gonzo) Artisans (Animal and Piggy), Guardians (Sam the Eagle and Scooter ) and Rationals (Bunsen Honeydew and Beaker)...
Prince Myshkin, from The Idiot, who suffered from incurable naivete and delusion. There is nothing as depressing as reading about a thoroughly good human being who takes altruism and honor in others for granted.
Last week on the blog, Stacey touched on children’s summer reads which got me thinking: what exactly makes something a good summer read? I mean, I’m no stranger to parking myself on the beach with a good book. Last year while reading a manuscript I managed to burn myself so badly I had trouble sitting for a week. Suffice it to say I’ll be back on the beach a lot this year (albeit with a lot more sunscreen and maybe an enormous umbrella for protection—weekend weather permitting) and enjoying holidays with some tome or another. In the past all sorts of things made it into my pile: literary fiction; thrillers; chick-lit; light mysteries; the most touted and well-publicized book of the month; a less obscure book a friend just happened to own and love. There was no rhyme or reason for why something made it into my summer reading pile.
So this year I decided to do some more research to determine what I should be reading. What qualifies as a “good summer read?” Is it the breezy, fast-paced thriller that you can consume in one sitting or the literary epic you don’t have time for all year and finally—finally—get the chance to pick it up on your staycation or on Independence Day weekend?
Well, I did do some research, and suffice it to say that it seems like everyone and their grandmother has submitted their lists for the summer. Salon’s got it’s “nail biting summer reads” made up of riveting thrillers. Here NPR lists 15 summer picks of a decidedly more highbrow variety. The Los Angeles Times has got its exhausting and varied 60 Titles for 92 Days list, comprised of new releases. Nina Sankovitch has got her list of six which include both thrillers and epics on HuffPo. According to her, good summer books “tell great stories about unique characters; evoke vernal landscapes of abundant, lush growth or of hot and dusty cobblestones, or of languid humidity; and end with a bang.”
I could go on and on but I’ll stop here. In short, I discovered rather quickly that I’m on a fool’s errand (it’s not the first time, and I doubt it will be the last). When it all comes down to it, it’s what you want to read the most and what will keep your eyes glued to the page for hours that will really lead you to your ultimate summer list. As for me, I love my breezy effortless reads as much as I love hunkering down to those endless and enthralling books that can keep you from getting out of bed for days. I’ve started Kathryn Stockett’s much touted and much lauded novel The Help, which I can already tell fits these criteria and is going to keep me busy for a little while.
So now that I’ve scoured reading lists galore, tell me what’s on yours! I’m also open to suggestions, because there’s no better way to build your reading list than by word-of-mouth!
4 Comments on The perfect summer list?, last added: 6/8/2010
At the moment I'm reading a David Webber book. And here in NC, we call summer reads "easy beach reads," which implies to me light fluff that is easily devoured in a couple days.
I took a look at the NPR link you provided, and I definitely need to check out "The Lonely Polygamist." I've read a few reviews of the novel and it sounds really intriguing.
I'll probably be re-reading this summer. Wen Spencer's Ukiah Oregon series. Wen Spencer's "A Brother's Price". Patricia Briggs Mercy Thompson series. Gail Carriger's "Soulless" and "Changless", while figuring out how in the world she's going to resolve the story in "Blameless".
Anything by John D. MacDonald. Most books are set in Florida, he wrote Cape Fear, originally called The Executioners (If you've ever seen the movie with Bobby De niro). The Travis McGee series is wonderful; The Deep Blue Good-by, Nightmare in Pink etc etc. Lots of suspense, good gin and great tans. One of my favorite Trav quotes : "People who censor books are usually illiterate."
Also, anything Carl Hiaasen is fun for the beach, especially if you are into plots jam packed with crooked politics and zany characters. Nature Girl was a recent favorite of mine :)
Moby Lives poses an interesting question in their delightfully titled post “When Your Favorite Writer is a Dirtball.” The quandary is pretty self-explanatory: whether to read books by your favorite authors even thought they have unsavory personal views and habits. I, for one, am in the camp that believes that if we limit ourselves this way there would be nothing to read, particularly when it comes to a lot of less contemporary work, written when it was perfectly acceptable—nay expected—to have sexist, racist and homophobic views. William Faulkner, for instance, was a sexist alcoholic, but that doesn’t make The Sound and the Fury any less brilliant in my humble opinion.
Do you agree or disagree, readers? Should we also perhaps be looking at this on a case by case basis?
9 Comments on Reading bad authors, last added: 6/9/2010
It's definitely a case-by-case basis for me. I don't tend to be too judgmental of writers of earlier eras, though their lifestyles often color their works for me.
I'm more judgmental of modern writers. I pay for books, which means I'm supporting the author. If the author is a person I despise, the last thing in the world I'm going to do is give him money. Sorry, but that's tacit support of his views. If someone says or does something awful and the adoration and money continue to come, why oh why would he have ANY reason to reconsider his behavior or position?
I'm equally judgmental of movie actors. I haven't watched a Mel Gibson movie in years, and probably never will again.
I think it depends on what your personal values are and how firm you are on them. For example, I wouldn't want to support someone who was a hate-filled racist/extremist - because by purchasing their books, you are directly supporting them and their goals.
I do the same for movies made by people who hold views I strongly disagree with.
At the same time, however, I do not research each author I read to find out their views - in this case, ignorance may be bliss.
I guess it would be case by case. but I don't really know that much about the personal lives of authors. but i agree with the others, I do boycott movies of directors/actors I don't agree with eg I wouldn't watch a polanski movie but then information about their personal lives/beliefs are plastered everywhere so I'm more aware of them.
It poses an interesting quandary and I would have to say the answer difficult. For instance, I enjoyed the movie The Outlaw Josey Wales and thought I might enjoy the book, Gone to Texas, and The Vengeance Trail of Josey Wales upon which the movie was based and written by Forrest Carter aka Esa Earl Carter. Enjoyed the books. Later discovered Forrest Carter, real name Asa Earl Carter was a bigot, racist, liar and just about any other kind of terrible person you can come up with. Example: He was a member of the Ku Klux Klan, he wrote the George Wallace speech that included the phrase: 'segragation today, segregation tomorrow, segragation forever'...though Wallace denied he ever knew Carter it is generally accepted Carter wrote the speech. Also, as Forrest Carter he wrote the best selling 'memoir' The Education of Little Tree purported to be his memories of growing up as an Indian youth educated by an Indian Shaman. Totally bogus. Never happened. It is now classified as a 'fictional memoir'...guess he pre-figured the more recently infamous James Frey's now semi-fictional (what a joke) memoir A Million Little Pieces. I will not read Frey and had I known beforehand I certainly would not have read the Josey Wales book. There are times when you simply need to draw a line in the sand. My life would not have been the poorer for not reading these guys. Will I ever read Adolph Hitler's Mein Kampf? I doubt it. It would simply be too much for my soul to stomach.
I've put down a novel in a book store because the back flap detailed other work the author had done on some political websites. The book had nothing to do with his politics... but still...
It really depends. Someone above mentioned Mein Kampf. If I wanted to know more about how Hitler thought (perhaps if I was researching him), then I would read it, although I'm sure I would disagree with everything in it and probably be pretty offended.
If I was reading for entertainment, then it would probably be a case-by-case decision depending on the bad trait and how much the author exhibited it. I don't generally do a lot of research into authors' personal lives or views, though, so they would probably have to make very large and well-covered statements for me to even notice they were horrible people. It's quite possible I'd be horrified to learn the true nature of some of my favorite writers, and if I really disagreed with whatever they did, I'd probably stop reading them just because I wouldn't be able to divorce them from the book.
Of course, I wouldn't stop reading someone just because they have a different viewpoint on some issue or a different religion or political perspective. They'd have to have some very hateful or destructive tendencies for me to stop.
Congrats on the 600 follower mark. I don't know why round numbers seem so festive, but they do.
So many classic authors were awful people--like Faulkner. And L. Frank Baum once published a horrible racist tract. And OMG--look at Lord Byron. But I read them all. Maybe what makes reading them OK is they're dead? We can partly blame the culture that spawned them, and also know they're not making any money off the sale.
"If they are valued for what is valuable about them, then all things are valuable. If they are despised for what is worthless about them, then all things are worthless." - Wen Tzu
One of the many galleys being distributed at BEA this year was the much-hyped Juliet by Anne Fortier, a retelling of Romeo and Juliet. I was skeptical. Really, I thought, how many times have we seen this done? I mean, I can’t go anywhere without staring at Amanda Seyfried’s face on either a poster or trailer for the film Letters to Juliet. Jim alluded to this in his post about knock-off queries, and I also can’t but help but wonder, can’t writers and artists think of something original for a change? (Harsh, I know.)
And then I stumbled on Cory Doctorow’s list of Pulitzer-winning works that came into existence by doing something similar—riffing off of something that already existed. I always knew that Rent, which is on the list, was a retelling of La Boheme (and for someone who’s not crazy about musicals, I’m crazy about Rent) but I didn’t really know there were so many others in this category that received the illustrious Pulitzer Prize.
Doctorow categorizes these award-winners as fanfic, and, as he says, provides the list “as a service to writers who believe that fanfic is ‘immoral, illegal, plagiarism, cheating, for people who are too stupid/lazy/unimaginative to write stories of their own.’”
Though I’ve never felt terribly offended by fan fiction, I’m no longer feeling the cynicism that tickled the back of my brain when I first read about Fortier’s new book.
What about you, readers? For you skeptics, has this article affected you? Are you willing to give these reboots another chance?
13 Comments on Retelling stories, last added: 6/2/2010
I love a new spin on an old story. As long as it's not too obvious what's going to happen, and the characters are well-formed, I don't care that it isn't the most original thing in the world.
I loved Peter and The Starcatchers- the story of how Peter Pan came to be, well, Peter Pan. Not so excited about the new Robin Hood. It all depends on the delivery.
I think it can be a gamble - but many of those gambles have paid off. Wicked is hugely successful. And though I didn't like Ash, a very different re-telling of Cinderella, it has had fabulous reviews. Like with all literature, there are hits and misses.
I'm torn. I understand being so in love with the original story you want to retell it your way, but so many times it ends up being a mistake, you only please yourself.
Once in awhile though, the author does succeed and adds real depth to the characters and creates a believable backstory that really enhances the original story. I'm hoping that's what Juliet is, but I'm not holding my breath quite yet.
It's been said many times before that there is nothing original, and I think to a large extent that's true. Even original stories borrow elements from various older stories, and they succeed because they combine those elements in new ways or disguise them so well that it's not immediately obvious.
Reboots, or obvious retellings, can be hit or miss. When they do succeed, they're awesome, IMO. There has to be something fresh and different enough to make it worth reading. (I think this is why retellings from the villain's point of view are popular. Like Dawn said, WICKED was hugely successful because nobody had any reason to see the Wicked Witch sympathetically before it came out.)
I am an admitted lover of fanfiction. If it weren't for reading XFiles fanfic, I'd have never started writing.
While my characters are my own now, I do borrow traits from some of my favorite characters.
I even enjoy reading fanfiction of fandoms I've never read/watched. For instance, Firefly and Stargate Atlantis. I read the fanfic before I ever saw an episode. One drives the other.
Would I read Juliet? Hmmm...not sure. I wasn't a big fan of Romeo and Juliet as it was force-fed to me my freshman year of highschool. But give me a re-telling of King Arthur and I'd give it a go. Heck, that sparks some ideas right there.
I don't know. I think if you go on to the LJ post the BoingBoing mention links to... the original poster there is using an awfully broad definition of what constitutes "fanfic" and I'm not sure the definition holds up. Is making fun of Sarah Palin on SNL "fanfic"? I'm unconvinced, but I'm also not sure where to put the line between retelling and fanfic, and whether something like historical fiction - which the LJ poster considers fanfic - is on that same continuum or not. It's an interesting question, though.
I think ultimately, it comes down to whether or not the story is good. A prime example is Finn: A Novel by Jon Clinch. I love the idea of retelling a tale from the POV of another character, especially when it's an antagonist from the original.
Melina has a good point. Rent and West Side Story aren't true fanfic. The characters are different, the names, locations, etc. They re-work the same themes and update them to make them relavent today.
Fanfiction takes the same characters, but perhaps tells the story from a minor character's pov, or takes the character to places the original couldn't or wouldn't go. A good example is Wicked. It is fanfiction, pure and simple. The characters are the same but a different character is the main character.
Redos can be awful or amazing. It's black and white. They either ruin the story or give it a whole new side. If you're sick of authors doing remakes, check out movies lately. Nothing new! But I will usually give them a chance because hopefully that author added their own imagination and turned over a new side of the story.
I'd read Juliet. In fact I might just keep my eye open for it now. I quite like retellings. It's all in the telling isn't it? I mean we've heard time and time again that there are no new stories so really these retellings are just being a bit more upfront about their sources! I don't think a retelling is the same as fanfic. Like Mary McDonald pointed out you could hardly call west side story fanfic right? It has it's own merits. As long as Juliet has it's own merits too then I wouldn't have any problem with it and would probably enjoy it as I think the basic themes of the Juliet story are fascinating. Obsessive love and suicide? Count me in!
I have to admit, I personally love retellings, if they're done originally. I mean, if you're just going to rehash the same story in the same way, then it's boring and it's lazy. But if you do something creative and fun with it, I think it can be amazing.
I recently read and liked Alex Flinn's BEASTLY, which is a retelling of Beauty and the Beast. And I'm looking forward to reading Jackson Pearce's SISTERS RED.
These days we often advise our clients to get out there and build a presence on the internet. We may sound all broken-recordishonthisissue, but the free publicity an author can get simply by engaging in social media is becoming more and more necessary and invaluable! And, of course, we’ve been practicing what we preach right here on our blog and by spending time reading and boning up on social media ourselves. Which is why this great piece from The Awl caught my attention. Looks like the New York Observer is offering cash prizes for certain achievements made by their staff on the interwebs! Authors, take note, because the tips they offer to achieve these goals are fantastic and can be used to boost your own web presence. Check out their advice on how engaging readers in discussion and offering commentary on buzz-worthy topics can get your name out there.
Any other helpful tips you’ve come across in your own quest for internet domination?
7 Comments on Cash for pageviews, last added: 5/12/2010
Ironic that I read this just as I received an email from an old friend who found my blog. She's interested in doing some cross promotion - she owns a dance studio. She liked my writing style, is impressed by the blog traffic, and thought we could do a project together - and is offering some sweet incentives. I'd resisted doing a blog for so long...Glad I finally succumbed. Thanks for the link. Some great advice there!
Wow, I'm not sure what to think of that. Seems kind of... crass. Don't get me wrong, I have a blog and everything, but I'm not a journalist. It just makes me uncomfortable that "serious" journalist will be altering their work in hopes of getting more comments and page views.
Great timing for this post! I've just started an online workshop to develope web-presence. I will suggest others go to your page to get the link.... see, its working!
I started blogging a few months ago. I haven't held any contests yet or done anything too special, but I did get to interview a best selling author last month, just days before his sixth novel in a series was coming out. That was awesome!
There were a few times where I vented a few times, dealing with the whole querying mess, and oddly enough, those posts garnered the most hits and comments, beating out by a large margin, my author interview. That was kind of sad to me. I had even asked for questions from my followers to ask the author, so that they could be part of it, but only three offered questions. The interview was still a success as I'm getting outside hits from people looking for information on the author's books.
Today, I did some research into upcoming e-readers, and had just a few comments. Guess people like drama better than information.
I love blogging, but it does take time away from writing. Otoh, I've honed my writing skills in different ways when blogging.
Not to brag, but I appear to have written the definitive post on how to eat slugs and that has pretty much kept my blog alive during the dry (or actually, wet, months). For some reason, whether slugs are okay to eat, what their nutritional value is, how to make them tasty, etc., are compelling questions that people all over the world want answered. So, weirdly enough, writing about slugs has given me something of a web presence. I don't know whether that's a bad or a good thing, but I suppose there are worse ways to earn your five minutes in the limelight.
Mary Witzi--my daughter had a pet slug when she was 7. The neighbor kid stepped on it and my daughter came in the house literally sobbing. "Michael stepped on Sluggy!" It was so cute. I can't say I was sorry for poor Sluggy's demise, but I was sad for my daughter, but trying not to laugh at the same time.
In case you missed it, Bill Murray stopped by the construction site for Poet’s House last week to treat workers to the first poetry reading at the new location. And I thought my love for Bill could not grow deeper.
6 Comments on A poetry reading by Bill Murray, last added: 5/6/2010
How exciting! I love Bill Murray, he's always been one of my favorites. My favorite movie of his is probably a toss up between Ghostbusters and The Man Who Knew Too Little.
It brings us no greater pleasure than when we see tangible examples that prove that the bookpocalypse that is constantly being predicted is not imminent. Hence my joy at this wonderful PW article citing that this weekend’s Los Angeles Times Festival of Books was a great success that drew record crowds of 130,000 attendees. Nice going LA! The Huffington Post has a good recap of the events--uh, including a seemingly unrelated Tetris flash mob at the festival. But who am I to complain? I love a good flash mob almost as much as I love Tetris.
What’s your favorite thing about book fairs, readers? Aside from mingling with like-minded book lovers, of course!
4 Comments on The LA Times Book Fest, last added: 4/27/2010
Finding new authors and getting the chance to get old books signed by favorite writers, for sure. I'm so sad I happened to be out of town the weekend of the LA Book Fair. Next year for sure! I will fight the traffic to get there.
I have to say it's the sheer choice. I went to a book fair in Bangalore a few years ago and it was just tents and tents FULL of books. Many were books I'd heard of, and even more were books I was just so thrilled to discover for the first time.
I'm convinced my love of buying books will bankrupt me. But that's exactly why I think the 'bookpocalypse' is never going to happen. Too many people love to read far too much.
Book fairs are well-stocked buffets where I can sample the works of new authors, meet fellow book enthusiasts and continue stocking my already groaning TBR pile.
One of the purposes of our blog is to provide helpful information to authors -- published and unpublished -- so that they are better informed of the variables that will guide them in this difficult and confusing industry. We’re not the only ones, albeit Penny Sansevieri, CEO of Author Marketing Experts, doesn’t mince nary a word in her list of why, as she puts it, authors fail. Sansevieri gets right to the point, asking authors to face the things that could be hindering them from potential success. Blunt? Perhaps. But nevertheless, excellent advice.
Dare you, authors, to read it in full and identify the behaviors that are sabotaging you? Any other advice, in your opinion, on why authors fail?
6 Comments on Self-sabotage, last added: 4/13/2010
Fascinating post. I'm glad to say I do plenty of research, but I could probably stand to get a few more people to give me feedback and critique. (I do trust the opinions of the few I have, though, at least.)
One thing I've known I need to do is blogging. I knew that even if I'm a ways away from querying, it'd be a good idea to start now. So I did today! What a timely post you've made!
I don't know how publishing works in New York! I've been slowly chipping away at my ignorance for the past two years; although I can't say it's a thrill a minute, I know I need to do this. Once upon a time I was guilty of a few of the other sins, but I've seen the light.
It’s time to take out the trash--literally. As the birds come out to sing and the bitter cold edge of winter fades into a distantly unpleasant memory, I’ve been spending the weekends wrapped up in a yearly ritual that’s both exhausting and fulfilling--the purging and cleansing of my apartment.
That’s not the only thing I suspect being cleaned up, and on this helpful page run by a group of romance writers, Sylvia Rochester offers some good starter tips on polishing up your manuscript. Anyone else have some great tips to share?
Let the spring cleaning begin!
5 Comments on Spring cleaning, last added: 3/24/2010
This is an excellent link. I am almost to the editing stage of my WIP and appreciate all the info I can get on the topic. I have another set of words to add to the "Are you using the correct word" section: peak/peek/pique. Here's a great link to check your usage. http://the-word-blog.com/2009/07/03/peak-vs-peek-vs-pique/
Anne said, on 3/24/2010 7:27:00 AM
Great post! I worked through my MS last night. At first I was afraid there'd be nothing left on the page once I'd swept out every That, So, Just, and Nearly, but I admit the whole thing is a lot more sparkly now.
We'll start with the query on its own, then the response after the jump:
Dear (Agent’s name):
When Elisabeth Starr was five years old, there was a day that changed everything, an irreversible moment that tore apart her family and sent her life and her sister’s life in two very different directions. For twenty years she has held on to the secret of what truly happened.
Now, returning to her childhood home in Western Massachusetts, Elisabeth learns that her mother plans to send her developmentally disabled sister, Kate, to an adult home. Determined not to let this happen, Elisabeth decides to take responsibility for Kate’s future and, together, they embark on a spontaneous road trip across the country. As she struggles with the dark secret about her role in Kate’s disability, Elisabeth discovers that it’s not Kate’s future that needs saving, but her own.
Spared is a 76,000 word work of Women’s Fiction about finding the right way just before it is lost forever. This is my first novel.
Thank you for taking the time to consider my submission. I look forward to hearing from you.
(Author's name)
Dear (Agent’s name):
When Elisabeth Starr was five years old, there was a day that changed everything, an irreversible moment that tore apart her family and sent her life and her sister’s life in two very different directions. For twenty years she has held on to the secret of what truly happened.
This opening feels kind of awkward to me, particularly “there was a day that changed everything.” There’s a bit too much happening in the first sentence. The element of mystery that you’re trying to convey here could be more dramatic if the opening were a bit shorter and structured differently. For instance: Elisabeth Starr was only five years old on the day her life changed forever. In an instant, everything she knew would be torn apart, etc.…
Now, returning to her childhood home in Western Massachusetts, Elisabeth learns that her mother plans to send her developmentally disabled sister, Kate, to an adult home.
This is not the first mention of her sister but the first mention of her condition. That threw me for a bit of a loop and I had to go back and reread this sentence. I’m also assuming this is the same sister, but is there a way to better clarify? Also, why is Elisabeth returning home? We don’t really know anything about her at this point and little more information might sell me on her character.
Determined not to let this happen, Elisabeth decides to take responsibility for Kate’s future and, together, they embark on a spontaneous road trip across the country.
Again, I feel as though this adventure could be conveyed in a more exciting way. The action she takes here is a pretty
15 Comments on Chasya's Slush Week entry, last added: 3/3/2010
Chasya, would you have asked to see more? What would you have said to the prospective author?
Anonymous said, on 3/2/2010 9:12:00 AM
instead of spending time critiquing the query, why don't you read the damn manuscript? after all, this author is trying to write and publish a book not give you a blow job ...
Anonymous said, on 3/2/2010 9:18:00 AM
yeah, i agree (not necessarily about the blow job, but I see what you're saying). it just doesn't make much sense that agents spend this much time dissecting every syllable in a query letter when they could be getting a better feel for the author's voice and the work itself by actually reading it.
Anonymous said, on 3/2/2010 9:25:00 AM
That is uncalled for. They are trying to help writers looking to get published, and most of us appreciate this contest! It's very helpful to see how they view the query letter. They aren't going to read the manuscript if your letter doesn't wow them. That's the whole point of the critique here.
Like Anon #1, I'd love to know whether you would have requested pages, Chasya. Could you post a follow-up comment and let us know?
Thank you so much for doing this exercise - I find it so helpful.
Anonymous said, on 3/2/2010 9:40:00 AM
Agree with Anon 12:25. Seeing an agent's reaction to a query firsthand is extremely helpful. Thanks Chasya and the rest of DGLM!
Anonymous said, on 3/2/2010 9:53:00 AM
Hi, and I'm a new Anonymous.
Why critique query letters? Well, first of all, I suspect they wouldn't usually do it, they're doing it here to help people.
Agents and publishers get thousands of queries. It's a waste of everyone's time, including the authors', to send full manuscripts in as a first step.
It's really important that an author can make a case for their novel, that they can sum it up in a way that makes it exciting, that they can identify the selling points and what makes it special. Not because the big, bad world is obsessed with commercializing everything (although, by definition, if you want to be published, you want your book to be commercialized), but also because it helps the art - if you know what your book is and what it isn't, and give some thought about who might read it and why, it'll be a better book.
All three of the entrants so far have been a little generic, there's nothing that's made me, at least, go *wow!*. Or, to put it a little more cruelly, there's no point reading the manuscript.
Might the actual books be a lot more dynamic and brillant? Possibly. But a great writer, you'd think, would be able to get across that greatness in a query letter.
It can appear a little artificial - just like people sometimes complain that the ability to do well in a formal interview is not a good indicator of whether someone's good at a job. But Dystel are doing their best here to make the process more transparent, to explain what they're looking for.
I think it's a shame we have some trolls here. This is an incredibly useful service, since our careers rest on query letters. This series is providing insight into how agents think. The comment about flat writing helps me. When we're trying to pack in a ton of information while being "professional", sometimes we forget the importance of voice.
My2Cents said, on 3/2/2010 11:23:00 AM
It is extremely obvious that a couple of the "Anonymous" commenters are one of two things:
1. Don't know a thing about this business or how it works. 2. Aren't serious about their work or about getting it published. If they were serious, they'd know why these critiques are being done and that most of us seek out this kind of information. In addition, they'd be well-informed about this whole process by joining writing boards, writing organizations, critique groups and the like and then wouldn't have to go around commenting like trolls as mentioned previously.
Critiques make you better. Who doesn't want to be better at what they do.
Thanks Chasya and DGLM for your time and guidance in helping us be better.
Thanks for doing these - I think it's awesome when agents take the time to help aspiring writers. It's not like they get paid for doing these free critiques. I think the point of the query is to get your foot in the door. It doesn't matter how brilliant your book is if you can't sum it up in a succinct manner. Thanks DGLM!
I agree with the majority of the comments. Thank you, DGLM for rendering this service! I would, however, like to see an example of desireable query--or as close to a good example as you can find from that slush pile. So far the two samples you have critiqued seem very similar in their weaknesses. I would also like to see more variety. Thanks.
Query letters are a great opportunity to showcase your writing skills, and few people develop that skill well enough. I'm surprised to see criticism over this helpful service. I for one, will be using these to help being my query letter into tighter focus. My writing style for query letters is very similar to this one, I think my next query will be better off for it.
Wow - this isn't the first query critique I've read but it is the first one that gave me a great idea of where to flesh out my literary fiction query: where the agent would be a good sort of curious and where the agent would remain disengaged for lack of information. Thank you!
I've been reading and (I believe) profiting from these too -- and kicking myself for not getting my own query to you in time; it could use a good roasting.
Please do this again and don't be discouraged by the odd troll or two.
Anonymous said, on 3/3/2010 9:23:00 AM
This is great, don't get me wrong, but the lesson so far is that they don't really need to do it again. The query letters all have the same sort of faults, the same things missing, and in the cold light of day those are pretty easy to see.
It's useful to make this part of the process transparent, but it's also interesting to see that it's not just subjective, it's not just some evil gatekeeper or some arcane rules that outsiders haven't been initiated in - the standard just isn't there. The ideas are original or coherent or forcefully-expressed enough.
You knowhow I love a good bad title—the more hilariously bad, the better. In fact, occasionally I come up with some myself and mutter them aloud much to the dismay of my officemates. And I was positively inspired by our own DGLM bad title contest. But alas, not everyone is like me. It was when I stumbled upon this little primer from The Rumpus’s Eric Puchner that I realized some more helpful, more constructive individuals aim to steer authors away from unfortunate titling. Among the types to avoid: The Faux Poetic but Authentically Meaningless (“Hunt the Mist Slowly”) and The Lofty Abstraction (“The Lonely Shackles of Mortality”).
Authors, do you find the list helpful? And in the spirit of being constructive, what others would you add?
I like 'Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil', but looking at that list, I'd say it was squarely between Scratch 'n Sniff and Lofty Abstraction. But then I also like 'The Heart is a Lonely Hunter' and it's never made me want to giggle.
I like 'The Heart is a Lonely Hunter' too. And the list was more about what not to do than what to do, and there are so many "do nots" it's likely that a lot of good titles break the rules. It's more about what's right for the story, no?
STEIN ON WRITING has a great chapter on titles and the effect they can have on enticing readers and sales.
I agree with Liesl that the list was more what not to do, and of course, every title coming to mind right now breaks one of those rules. The list of what to do was so extensive that I'm not sure what's left. Trying to think of what's on my bookshelf, the only examples I can come up with that don't break those rules are the ones with simple, two-to-four word titles, usually beginning with "the": THE HISTORIAN, THE SPARROW, THE TIME-TRAVELLER'S WIFE, etc. These all describe or are a metaphor for the main character. THE CURIOUS INCIDENT OF THE DOG IN THE NIGHT-TIME might be one that successfully gets around that list while remaining catchy. Then there's always the simple one-word titles (ACACIA). But even THE SOUND AND THE FURY violates the lofty abstraction and the allusion to more famous literature rules.
Titles are easy and hard. For me, shorter is better. If you can make a title short and have it still capture the readers attention-then that is great! It also makes it easier for people to remember. I am currently reading Andrew Petersons," On the Edge of the Dark Sea of Darkness." Cute title, but its a middle grade novel and it captures the heart of the book so well! The title was what made me want to read it!
The Millions has a good article that delves into the myth of the rags-to-riches career novelist. It’s a well-known, albeit depressing, reality in the publishing industry that most authors don’t have the luxury of writing full-time and supporting themselves through their work. But authors--don’t worry, you’re not alone! As the article points out, and as we can’t stress enough, as much as we’re obsessed with the J.K. Rowling-esque stories of writers who came from nothing and succeeded to become the most famous (and wealthy) authors of our day, this is the exception--not the rule. And, as it turns out, keeping your day job can benefit most of us. Among the perks? Well, being in the everyday world and gleaning from your everyday experiences. And, er, eating. Yes, that’s important! Because as much as we all have that curmudgeonly chain-smoking, black coffee drinking stereotype of an author in our minds, it’s important for even the most obsessive writer to keep up their strength.
9 Comments on Don't quit your day job, last added: 2/18/2010
I quit smoking this year and I drink my coffee with milk and sugar. I also own no tweed! None. And I haven't had a drink since New Year's Eve! Some days I have to remind myself I'm still a writer.
The Guardian is pushing a new trend: delivering bad news via haiku on Twitter. It was only a matter of time before this limited syllable form of poetry and word limited form of social media converged, no? The haikus may be bleak, but the comments are delightful! Most posted in proper syllabic form, of course.
1 Comments on Twitter haiku, last added: 2/10/2010
It’s been speculated by some in the publishing industry that enhanced e-books are most certainly the wave of the publishing future. Some will argue that with standard e-books not even completely off the ground, this is misguided, while others will say that such a product would be a completely new medium and not a book at all.
Whichever camp you happen to be in, some interesting developments were just announced on the multimedia front. PW reports that Vook, the video book company, has developed new software called MotherVook that will allow publishers to create their own media-enhanced e-books.
Is this one small step for publishing-kind? Though the details haven’t all been worked out, I’m interested to see how this takes off in our ever-changing landscape. I’m one of those who believe that media-enhanced books are more likely to happen then not. So now, particularly on the eve of the Apple tablet unveiling, will publishers take advantage of this software to create hyperlinked, video and music enhanced editions of what, until recently, has always been an ink and paper medium? And if this MotherVook software does take off in the market, will enhanced e-books make books better? It’s gotten me thinking, do I want a book that comes tricked-out with extras?
3 Comments on E-books: New and improved?, last added: 1/26/2010
The whole notion of a "vook" doesn't do anything for me. I love me some ebooks, and I have been happily devouring them on my iPhone and am even likely to get a nook sometime soon.
But I don't need extra bells and whistles with the story. I want the story and okay, yeah, some nice cover art to go with it. I'm happy with the electronic version of the product I'd otherwise be buying in the bookstore. Adding in extra bells and whistles and music and such just distracts from the writing, for me!
This is something I've been thinking about recently. Like you I'm inclined to think it will happen. It seems to me a logical progression, and an obvious potential selling point for e-content.
As regards the question of making books better, I think it's really a question of how it's used. I'm sure in some instances it will lead to a thoroughly immersive multi-media experience. Yet in others it will distract from the story and appear gimmicky. There is parallel here I think with the recent debate on the use of 3D in films.
I actually would be happy to see extra content, as I'm very attached to hard copy, and I'm likely to need something extra to persuade me to go for a e-version rather than a print version of my favourite author. Even then I would probably prefer the hardback.
"[D]o I want a book that comes tricked-out with extras?"
We already have those; they are called movies. I do not think that anyone would disagree that the best movies with the strongest storylines and characterization are all based on books. So will we authors now have to write screenplays along with the MS in order to even be looked at?
Agents have insisted on their blogs that the best way for an unpublished author to build a platform is by beginning a blog. Yet, no one seems to discuss what to do with a blog of say three hundred plus followers after you've accomplished this. Can you mention or link to it in a query letter to agents? Is it foolish or wise? Why?
A:
Thanks for your question. First let me clarify that there are many misconceptions out there about how to build a platform and authors are often instructed to blindly get cracking on a blog, as well as Facebook, MySpace and Twitter accounts. Keep in mind that not all online platforms will suit all writers. If you’re not frequently updating your content and dedicated to the task of blogging and networking, you’re not going to garner the following you need to attract attention from publishing folk. You wouldn’t necessarily want to link to your blog unless you have a substantial number of followers. This number would be in the thousands, though it’s hard to be too specific here, as what is considered significant depends on the book you’re writing, the topic, etc…
I had a manuscript on submission and got double-digit requests for fulls. All were rejections. I had material out to a dozen or so agents when I realized, after a year plus of rejections, that the novel wasn't publishable. I withdrew my manuscript from submission from all the agents and told them I was doing a massive overhaul. All agreed to look at the new work when I was finished. Fast forward two years: I saved about 25% of the old MS, added some subplots, tweaked some characters, and heavily revised the plot. I'll be ready to query soon. I would first like to approach the agents from whom I withdrew the original MS. I still have all the emails, but is it too late to approach them and say, "hey, remember me? I'm back! You wanna take a peek?”
Answer:
It would be one thing to resubmit the manuscript with the attitude that these agents have been waiting with bated breath for two years to read your material, but that’s clearly not what you’re doing. There’s no harm in dropping them a line to ask if they’d like to see it in it’s different/improved state. Remind them of who you are and the circumstances that led you to withdraw your material. If they’re still interested in having a look they’ll let you know.
In honor of the holidays, I’ll be taking a little break from the questions corner to bring you this hilarious post from Thom Geier at EW’s Shelf Life blog. What does Christmas have to do with a book called The Stray Shopping Carts of Eastern North America, you ask? Absolutely nothing.
Enjoy, and happy holidays!
0 Comments on For your entertainment as of 1/1/1900
Chasya used this week’s Questions Corner to respond to a good question; namely, the mistakes that authors make while pitching. My afternoon was a busy one, and somehow I missed my moment to chime in, but I’m adding my two cents now. I’d argue that pitching—the ability to use your three or seven minute “speed date” to sell an agent on an idea— is less important than the material you send or hand over. In other words, it’s possible to flub a pitch session entirely, but if you’ve managed to communicate the core idea, and that idea strikes me as an interesting/viable one, then I’m almost always willing to look at a sample. For me, and likely for most agents, it’s what is on the page that counts. So, if you stuttered or shook or needed to start over, don’t sweat it. Polish your pitch so that you feel comfortable delivering it, but know that the real assessment comes not at a tiny table in the midst of a busy conference, but when I read your work.
That said, my best advice to writers, whether they are preparing for a conference or mailing out queries is to try and think like an agent/editor. Do come up with some contemporary writers whose work is thematically or stylistically related to your own. That your work is unique is a given, but for agents and thereafter publishers to “position” your book, they’ll need to target a particular audience; does your work appeal to readers of Sue Miller and Jane Hamilton, readers of Jonathan Lethem and Dave Eggers, etc. I’m always surprised by the number of pitchers who seem flummoxed by this question. Note: It’s probably best to exclude all canonical writers from the discussion. Not because it may raise an eyebrow or two (being presumptuous is fine if you can back it up) but because it is not especially helpful as a marketing description. Leave comparisons to Joyce or James or Fitzgerald to the dazzled critics.
Nonfiction writers should address one of book publishing’s existential questions: namely, is this material really a book or is it better suited to a magazine/blog piece? Obviously, this is a subjective judgment, and sometimes it’s a question answered in hindsight, when a book fails to sell. It is, however, among the most frequently cited reasons that editors pass on interesting, well-written and even timely material. For most writers, it’s worth the effort to view your work through this lens: what does a book offer than an article length treatment can or does not? Is this a subject that people will pay to read about? Why?
Sometimes it’s tough to look at our own work so dispassionately—after all, this is a project you care mightily about. But doing so can help you reframe, fine-tune, or broaden your approach into something more viable. Something people might not only want to read, but pay to do so.
As someone who's been struggling with her pitch -- and who flubbed it a couple times -- I really appreciate this post! My next conference is the SCBWI Winter Conference in NYC, and I'm determined to be prepared -- especially since I'll have a query-able novel by that time!
Well, I have to say that I agree wholeheartedly with the above (at least re: fiction - I've never written nonfiction, so caan't comment on that).
Yes, know your marke, know where the publishers can fit you in their product line up.
Publishing is a business after all... Beautiful writing a literary merits are fine and dandy, but the book has to sell. Publishers don't pay staff, cover overhead and make a profit off warm fuzzy praise and group hugs.
I pitched my book (in query letters) but saying it was a beach book and would appeal to women 20-40 who liked Janet Evanovich's writing.
I got a contract within 4 months of looking (and about 6 months later another contract offer came in too).
My book came out about a month ago, and in a review in The Globe & Mail (Toronto) the columnists actually said "Blood and Groom has the fast and funny style that will appeal to fans of Janet Evanovich."
So: know your market, know your writing and the rest will fall into place sooner or later!
Another excellent question from one of our readers:
What are the biggest mistakes writers make when pitching their work at a writers' conference?
Answer:
I asked around to several other agents here to find out what sorts of things make writers stand out to them during pitch sessions--and not in a good way. These were some of their replies:
I think the biggest issue I have is when people over-rehearse. It sounds so phony and it's not engaging. I want people to talk naturally about their work, and while they should be able to do so easily, I don't want it to sound like they're reading from cue cards (or even worse, ACTUALLY reading from note cards).
-Michael
I don't know that I'd classify it as a big mistake, but I don't like it when pitches go on too long, they need to be concise, and it's hard to be objective when the pitcher gets really emotional, so I'd say keep it professional.
-Stacey
I’d say the biggest mistake is pitching a book that isn’t done: not complete, not revised, not read by a critique group or trusted friends and then revised again. It’s a waste of everyone’s time. An author that has a pitch session lined up before figuring out that they should have been further along in the process is better off taking the time to ask more general questions than pitching a book the agent can’t consider that the author might never complete—or that might be a very different book by the time they do finish.
-Lauren
I’d say being completely and utterly terrified. Or too reliant on a script. People trip themselves up and forget that all they really have to do is talk about their book. It’s better to be enthusiastic and calm than it is to be super-precise. Oh, and don’t bring props.
-Jim
We need more of your questions! Please send inquiries to [email protected].
7 Comments on Chasya's Questions Corner: On Pitch Sessions, last added: 12/9/2009
What's funny about the props thing is that someone must have actually done that to prompt Jim's comment. I'm keeping my eyes open at my next conference for props.
The comments here are as funny as the advice is useful.
I can't see myself over-rehearsing, but the other three (going on too long, being utterly terrified) make me think it's a good thing I've never attended a pitch session.
When I did a pitch festival for screenplays a few years ago. I over-rehearsed, and then I kept on rehearsing. I did it in funny voices (I highly recommend pitching a heist plot as Queen Elizabeth II as a way of getting a whole new take on how it sounds. Although only pitch it this way to your cat, not to an agent or editor. They may not understand.) I kept going until it was so natural, that I could change it at will.
And by the time I got to the pitch festival, I was actually able to just _talk_ about the story, and I was able to adjust my pitch quickly as I saw which bits were boring the audience and which were engaging them. If you are going to rehearse, do it until you can freely speed it up, skip or expand on things without a script.
Welcome aboard!
Welcome, Stephanie! I hope you love agenting as much as you've obviously loved interning at DGLM!
Welcome! I love your enthusiasm and look forward to your blogposts. I've posted an announcement of the changes at DGLM at the AgentQuery forums.
Congrats Steph! I keep trying and deleting former intern related jokes, so I'll leave you with a long distance high five!
Congrats on the promotion, Stephanie! So, considering your interest in the young adult genre, what is your favorite young adult novel? And has there been a book (or books) that inspired you to join the agenting world?