Paying for It

One of the ARC's that arrived yesterday got me thinking and I have a question for you.

Sadly this isn't a poll since LAWSON & GWEN are evoooollllllllllll and haven't figured out how I can do the nifty thing I want that will allow people to vote through RSS feed. This makes me sad. I know... you cry for me too... uh sorry I digress

Honestly I have NO CLUE if this question really has anything to do with the ARC since I haven't really sat down to look at it and will talk more about the book in question after I do.

Is paying for sex erotic?  Is that a fantasy of many women?

My thought it is a control thing, which oddly I could get on board with that.  Or maybe too many veiwings of American Giggalo *g*.  Either way I am not saying anything about the book or the plot, just something that popped into my head.

Tags: Pondering, Sybil Overthinking Again, working for a living

Q’s 4 U (readers and authors)

We have a really nifty cool thing going on here that many of you might not know. Many of our reviewers are not bloggers. Yeah I know odd statement.

The Good, The Bad, The Unread was never meant to be anything more than a reader blog. Just me, myself and I, so you know, it was rock'n cool ;). Lawson I met at my first signing (Kleypas), Gwen found her way here as a cellie reject, Connie I knew from a bookstore, Finn worked with Lawson, Alicia & Sandy were on a yahoo group I chat on, lime was a contest winner I roped into the site and we will soon have another newbie who is an old friend of mine.

Read more

Tags: Blogs, questions for you, Readers for Life, Sybil Overthinking Again

Betcha Contest Info

this will make my ramble a lil bit shorter... the following was 1st apart of THIS POST. Enter contest by commenting on THIS POST or THIS POST

Read more

Tags: Betcha Wanna Contest Info, Sybil Overthinking Again

Betcha Think This Post is About You

a.k.a. My unpopular opinion/Tis about me not you

a.k.a. I will share anyway cuz I rawk like that, a.k.a. this is so in sybilish you might want to stop reading NOW for fear of brain damage/migraine, a.k.a. gwen isn't going to edit this into English (but will hopefully fix spelling & add links-HINT), a.k.a. I am prolly not even going to edit it (RUN), a.k.a. this shit is long and you aren't gonna read it but I can point to it from now on when asked /end warnings

Otherwise known as the answer to...

Why Sybil isn't in San Fran @ RWA's Conference
(in 3 parts)PART IYou may or may not know but I went to RWA Dallas Conference last year. Why did I go? Well there were 2 huge ass big reasons I wanted to go:

1. There were things I wanted to do for the blog that I thought the conference would help since I had decided to shift TGTBTU from a sole reader bitch board to more of a review blog.
2. It was in Texas.

Easy whore be thy name sybil. ::shrug::

Now many a person has asked me if I would be in San Fran this year and I made the decision a while ago not to go. You have NO idea how happy that makes me because I wouldn't be able to go @ this point in time (crappy shit here) and it would blow big ass chunks if I had signed up and paid. And I DO plan to go next year... so why didn't I go this year? You don't care you say? HA! I am gonna tells you anyway...

Last year was FAB. I had the best time and was able to do tons I wanted to for the blog. I was sharing a room with Jane of Dear Author, who I was lucky enough to have helping me with the blog at the time because we were both in something of the same place of changing a mind set of what we wanted to do with our blogs vs. what we first started with. (It is her post here that made me think "coolio I can post about this in public".)

I asked her, at the time last year, if she would mind more roommates, selfish reasons mind you cuz I had no clue how much much this was gonna cost me and a 4-way split rocks more than a 2-way. What? Sybsisnottehlawyerbabe. Who did I want to invite - again had a thought and selfish motive behind it (almost EVERYTHING I do does - yes, the blog has changed but it is still all about me me me to a point and my interest - I suck like that).

KristieJ had (at the time) recently lost her husband, had her first vacation trip in a while cancel on her and I often heard say - one day I am going to write a book. RWA is for writers. Are they all published? NOPE. Do you HAVE to be a member to publish? Nope. But I think many a person can say RWA helped them greatly move from wanna-be-someday-writer to published STAR! So all those factors made me say a flippant comment to KristieJ one day about joining our 'lil RWA-Blogger-Train.

I was going, Jane of Dear Author was going, and the SmartBitches, so I knew/thought/assumed (in syb's IKNOWALLFASHION) that KristieJ wouldn't feel left out. I had seriously hoped she would go to some of the workshops and it might push her to write that someday book. Yes people, sybs is a buzy body. I suck like that too sorry.

Once she signed onto the lurvetrain, I also stuck my nose into biz and contacted a friend I knew KristieJ would die to meet. Why? Because I could, have no issue with being told "no" (HA! I made myself giggle - really I hate being told no - it irks me but if by friends I get over it ). I forget what Wendy said/posted/emailed/blogged that made me again say a flippant 'come to Dallas'. Her response, IIRC, "Were you serious?"

I emailed Jane "Am I serious?" and she shrugged [while no doubt thinking "goddamnit sybil stop putting so many people in the room". I am a pushy lil duck - sort of. As Gwen sez, one must learn to tell Sybil "NO" or she will have you doing WAY more shit than you can. This is true. OCD be thy name and a lesson Gwen learned the hard way *eg* yes and I ramble but I like to think of it as 'SIDENOTE'.] Long story short (too late) Jane was all sure, fine, whatever....

Why did I think Wendy should go? (Yes, once again there was reason behind my madness.) At the time THE WENDY was not at all apart of TGTBTU, her blog isn't (wasn't?) anything other than a reader blog. Of course, it is one of THE reader blogs, as in we all would not be here without Rosario, Wendy and McVane (a.k.a. THE Maili) (who I so hope touches base someday or at least fucking tells me what the fuck name she is posting under these days). And I, selfishly (yes, yes, yes I am - I admit it - I know I shouldn't - too lazy/seenoreason/amnotstoopid, a.k.a. why hide the obvious), wanted to meet THE WENDY (oddly I had no designs to put her to work at TGTBTU @ that time, came later ) but I was thinking she should go cuz of her job. It would be fab for us, the romance reader, even RWA sees that as they have a day just FOR the wendy's of the world.

And BAM! our room was born (at least in my mind who the hell knows what they were thinking).

PART II

Some point during the conference I started to think "FUCK we are presenting this wrong..." because so many reader bloggers started to make noise about coming next year (this year) and I said so to Jane... who I think/thought (might-still-I-haven't-asked) I was being my normal vain self and was saying "le gasp we won't be TEH SPECIAL anymore" and she was of the mindset that any and all readers should be welcome. We are paying so have just as much right to be there.

I didn't agree. (Jane and I OFTEN disagree, her coolness with that was always the thing I luv.) I think the highest of INTERNET MEDIA. I think if you are a blog that reports on the industry, does things to promote romance or aim too, you should be there if you can be.

My thought is the RWA Conference is not a fan event. The book signing, yes - the rest, not so much. I don't see how having 'star gawkers' wouldn't be distracting for authors. And most of all, holy hell, it is expensive, so it doesn't make sense in my head as a fan get together. And I don't get that type of 'fangrrlish behavior' that would make people travel just to meet THEIR FAVORITE AUTHORS EVAH. (I am not saying any reader blogger there is there for these reasons - haven't asked - don't know.)

Again... I AM NOT SAYING ANY READER AT THE CONFERENCE IS A BAD PERSON. I AM NOT SAYING THEY ARE DOING THE WRONG THING. I am not even saying they will cause a problem. I have seen MANY authors be all for them being there but in my normal selfish way IF there is fall out from having reader blogger there (with no author aspirations or a blog that is geared toward reporting on the Romance Industry), I didn't want to be guilty by association. See? All about me...

Dear Author and Smart Bitches (in my 'lil no one agrees with me opinion) SHOULD BE THERE. In my mind they are JUST as much members of the press as any fucking one else. And THAT is why I am still so not amused RWA said they weren't (for all I know that has changed by now, couldn't say). But this is the first year (I think) fans have gone in such numbers, so I don't think RWA has/had a way to qualify who would be 'internet press'. And maybe they got stars in their eyes and saw coin. Not sure... I plan to follow up with them after the conference. Again that is NOT a dig at RWA, as I think the organization, while flawed, RAWKS SOCKS. They do a fucking fab thing for romance writers.

So what do I mean?

A perfect example is katiebabs (co-blogger with the fab KristieJ), when she first said she was going, I thought she was going as a reader fan. When the ever smart LLB saw the window to have her report for All About Romance, and I think Katiebabs works for All About Romance in a publisher contact way once she stopped reviewing for them. Again I think - could be wrong - too lazy to check... So iIMHO (just me) Katiebabs now SHOULD be there as she was 'internet press'.

Does that make sense as to what I was thinking? If not... situation normal *g*.

But the RWA Conference in my 'lil mind is for writers (published or would-bes) NOT a fan event. Jane's thought was I over think shit (I do), readers belong everywhere, their money spends just as well, you are no better than anyone else sybil (which wasn't my point) and other thoughts I forget now.

So when we got back, Jane was allllllllllllll over planning for the next one. Jane is THE awesome and so organized it is sick. I? Not so much. And you may have noticed I tend to take on too much, over think (see above), distract EASY and can't make a decision to save my fucking life. So when she started making plans in AUG 2007 for this year... ::dies:: I was like "you are on crack."

None of this is secret ;). But my unease grew with more and more reader bloggers deciding to go. And, le sigh, I felt guilt because I am like that and thought we might have presented it in a star gawker way. Jane did a lot of twittering and reporting. I did mostly behind the scenes stuff, setting up guest days, contests, making contacts and pimping out the Romantic Advances (le sigh, again, another post which makes me ashamed). That means you, our reader here @ TGTBTU [HA! as if anyone is still reading this ramble] didn't see why I was there so maybe I looked like a star gawker?

I went back and forth... there were things I wanted to do for the blog and I thought again "I should go..." "omg! san fran fucking coolio..." "omg! san fran too expensive for me to invest in a hobby blog..." and then RWA made their decision that unless an Internet outlet was tied to a MAJOR print or TV media they couldn't apply for a press pass.

I have made no secret I HATE that decision (working on coming out of my shell and saying what I think - how I doing?) not because it means "no press pass for sybils" but because the volume of traffic in that thinking doesn't compute. Tell me I can't go because my numbers are not good enough. Tell me you don't think TGTBTU does anything for the Romance Industry. Even tell me you I don't belong, so if I want to go I have to pony up cash. DO NOT tell me I don't 'count' because I am just internet media.

I have, and still will, argue that Smart Bitches and Dear Author reach more readers than what stoopidlyy counts as 'true press'. Again, I know... most, if not all, don't agree with me. ::shrug::

So that sealed the deal for me. In my mind, RWA told me Internet doesn't count. Might not have been their point but that is what I heard. I hate being told "no" without an intelligent reason and saying "gosh a year isn't enough time to figure out how to understand (or attempt to figure out) how to measure traffic" smacks of greed, laziness and I thought a clear message of "readers not wanted".

And most of all I am a bad, bad, bad, suckyass fan. I admit that... I am NOT a good fangrrl. I can love an author to pieces and still not like a book they write. Ask me my opinion - regardless if I think you want it, agree with it or if it will piss you off - ask, I tell. Hell, don't ask and I tell. Blogger be thy name.

PART III (a.k.a. syb gets to her point - sort of)

So what do I think now, for those of you seriously bored and still here *g*.

1. I still don't think the RWA Conference (as I saw it last year) is worth the coin for readers to go.
2. I have NO clue if they [the readers] will prove to be a distraction to the point of the conference for writers, and if they do, I think that is bad, bad, bad, bad for them to be there. Cuz I am greedy and I want the conference to be for writers so they can write me nifty books to read.
3. I LOVE the idea of a reader blogger event with authors cuz I think that idea rocks socks. Someone should make that happen.
4. I plan to try and attend one of the 'reader' events in 2009. Haven't decided which one... either RAW or Lori Foster's thing... unless something else comes up and that could be a possible too *g*
5. I think if RWA wants the conference to welcome readers they should do things to include them and make it interesting for us on that level. Gwen had a nifty thought on this I think but I forget it [Gwen: it was to do what ComiCon did - have a concurrent "Alternative Media Expo" in the same hall or a meeting room where bloggers, etc., could get face time with whomever attends the conference]. Cuz tis too much money to spend to just hang at the bar and/or meet up with other bloggers. Of course, that is just my general opinion, if you have that money to blow and/or that is your want AND RWA/authors wants us there, rock on with your badself.

TGTBTU will have a few odds and ends on the conference (which, correct me if I am wrong, but that is a different word than convention - and if this was the RWA Convention I would have completely different thoughts on this). Sandy is a wanna be author, who will one day write THAT book. And I hope to hell she reports on some of the workshops she goes too. I think that is interesting from a reader stand point, but as a reader, wouldn't want to attend unless I planned to blog about it. I think (as I have said) RWA is for her. And, like KristieJ, I HOPE it pushes her to start and finish that book that is in her. Do I know if either will be good? Nope - but I think if you wanna you should try. Wendy is going to a dinner for me and I will be reporting on all things Harlequinish that go down. Her other blogs on the conference will be at her blog (I think).

Everything else - I would point you to Dear Author, Smart Bitches and All About Romance. And most likely if you are a reader - you know that *g*.

So as an author or reader, tell me why you disagree with me, tell me what changes (if any) you would like to see at the RWA Conference, tell me what your dream convention is and what you would like have planned as events, tell me you agree with me (cuz hey I would love at least one person *g*), tell me you think the RWA Conference is useless for writers or readers, tell me whatever you wanna...

CONTEST INFO MOVED HERE - will close contest at end of this week Sunday August 10, 2008.

Tags: 27th Annual RWA Conference in Dallas, Contest, missing maili, RWA, Sybil Overthinking Again, Why I R Not @ RWA Conference 2008

There is NO Crying in Reviewing

This is a post that I very oddly started forever ago when an author annoyed me by basically saying you shouldn't review books you know you won't like. That is such a head meet desk comment to me. How do you know you will like it or not and do you seriously write off a genre cuz you are hard to please? Does your opinion suddenly NOT count?

I bore easlily and got sidetracked. Oh and the author in question I still adore and am VERY much looking forward to reading her next book which I strongly think is going to fucking rock socks. So why did I dust this off and finish it up? I know it is wild, you can not agree and still the world will spin on axis.

I am gonna tell you a secret. I didn't like Sleeping with Ward Clever. NO REALLY. I know... you and you and you and you loved it yes? Awesome! Me not so much. And I had a bitch of a time trying to find someone to review it. The first person I finally just forced it on (thinking she would love it) begged to not have to finish it. I am evol but not THAT evol. The second reader who took it on was Laura D - this is her story. ::shrug:: Sometimes I get it wrong. Sometimes books I think people will love they don't or books I think they will hate they adore.

YES I CAN BE WRONG. Not often mind you... but you know

oddly enough I STILL don't like the book and find the author annoying... BUT I do love Dorchester and think the editor rocks socks so do not take this as a omg do not read Dorchester. I could careless if you read the author,  I think you should try it and for fuck sakes REVIEW it. NO MATTER WHAT cuz 3 bad reviews? period? Smells like apathy to me

so with out farther ado...

There is No Crying in ReviewingI have to admit every time I read, Loyalty in Reading, I think of the line: There's no crying in baseball. Who knows why...That so should be a button - There's No Crying in ReviewingThe fact is or maybe the word FACT is too strong... In my opinion very few reviewers, readers, bloggers or even the ever dreaded romanceland blogging reader reviewers - open a book WANTING to hate it.

When was the last time you sat down with a book and thought gleefully "I am so going to enjoy the next three or four hours hating these characters". Or "this author sucks rocks, I think I will kill an evening reading her tripe, so I can then kill another hour or two writing up a review".

Every book I open, I do so wanting to love it. I want it to be THAT book that I stop and tell strangers about in bookstores. I also open the book prepared to honestly give my opinion of the book, no matter if it is for a review, a contest, a test read or just an author asking for a quick opinion.

Is that odd? I just assume all readers do that otherwise why bother reading?

At the same time I am not one to blow sunshine up anyone's arse. There are other blogs that stick to a only happy happy, joy joy view of books. This isn't one of them. There are other blogs you can pay to be told what you want to hear. This isn't one of them.

And that is ok, it is a big playground and we can all find a sandbox we like. But I do wonder how many authors read a review thinking, well there was no way she was going to like my book anyway or well she just doesn't like me. And why they think such a thing, do authors often read books wanting to hate the competition so they expect the same of everyone else?

There are a few reason I read a book but they all must first fall under the first rule of reading for sybil.

I wanted to read the book. I know that sounds like very simple logic but it is true: could be it is apart of a series I love, maybe the summary interested me, it could be the first book in a new subgenre, maybe the excerpt caught my eye, the author is a favorite of mine and I have been interested in books simply because the editor has worked on many a favorite.

The next reason I read a book is something I decide before I open it and that goes back to the blog.

1.  Is this a book I am considering for a guest day? If it is and I find myself hating the book beyond reason or even just bored there is a good chance I won't finish the book. Guest author days are only set up for books I would recommend and I am happy to read books that are recommended for guest days they have to fall under the first rule of reading for sybil.

2.  Is this a book for review? If it is, I finish it. Period. There was a short period of time where I looked at publishers as a 'we really need to get x amount done this month' or this is a book we really should cover and if someone else couldn't do it, my first thought was I would. Instead I decided on guest reviewers. I suppose there is the fear of if everyone wanted to read the books they will get nothing but good reviews, as I haven't found that to be an issue I stopped worrying about it.

3.  Is the ever popular impulse buy. This could end up reviewed. It could end up a guest day or a guest post. It could also end up not finished. The main point is I open the book WANTING to love it. And a series I am following I want to love that much more. I think it is an issue of expectation more than it is an issue of loyalty, maybe even reader attachment. And I don't know if authors can really bitch about reader attachment. Isn't that the reason our cup runneth over with series books and there are few single titles to be found?

A writer can create any world they want but it if isn't a marketable one, they will be writing for a small group of people. At the same time, no one wants a series created 'for the market', which is such a catch 22. The author has to balance creativity, originality and voice with what readers will accept, purchase and lust after. Guess what THAT means... writing is hard work. For serious. Go Team You!

Personally I never would have read Sookie Stackhouse if I had known of the authors love of flexing her godlyness over her world by killing off characters. If I had known going in I would have been happy to skip the series, would have saved time and money. And woot for me. But there are at least two or three other reviewers JUST on this blog who lurve the series. Still to this day, YAY for them. And for me that I don't have to read it anymore. We are both right. And I so don't think Harrison gives a fuck about my opinion. They are her characters to do with what she will. She will rock on with her badself and you guys love it. ::shrug::

review = opinion = you don't have to agree with me and I don't have to agree with you...

k?

K!

Or you know feel free to disagree with me oddly enough we do allow that here.  Because I say so and well I make the rules so woot!

Tags: authors seem to nevah learn, no crying in reviewing, Stupid Author Tricks, Sybil Overthinking Again

Is It Just Me Or…

Two things I seem to be seeing more and more of lately...

or it could be something I am just noticing but...
Read more

Tags: Sybil Overthinking Again

All Your Blogs Are Belong to Us

Jane has an interesting post up regarding 'Street Teams', which is a topic expanded on from a blog post Karin Tabke posted at Writer Unboxed. Really this was posted a week or so ago and I am sure has more comments and such. But I am lazy so I either post this now or say fuck it.

I know, I know... you are shocked I would shut up and NOT post something but teh lazy often over rides the mouth (keyboard?) whatever...

As a reader, a blogger and blog owner I happen to think the idea of 'street teams'... Read more

Tags: Big Pimp'n, Reviews, Street Teams, Sybil Overthinking Again

RWA needs to help end the Writers Strike…

WOOT! My comment wouldn't save right so being, you know, like the blog owner and, oh yeah, lazy, I just made a new post. Go team me! Aren't you glad I am posting again? I know... I missed you guys too.

The heart of my issue is INTERNET MEDIA does matter. RWA really needs to contact the writers on Strike and let them know there is no promotion, money or worth in the internet because they are costing a ton of people a shitload of money saying the 'net matters.

Yes, there are special badge for press and a room for press that you can't get into without the badge.

But that is neither here nor there. What I am trying to say, and I guess doing it badly, isn't that bloggers should be treated differently, or get freebies, but that if a blog is there to report on the conference - not as a fangirl/boy, not as a wannabe writer - then they should not be discounted for a press pass JUST because they are internet media.

There are ways to gauge print publications: subscriptions, syndication, etc. There are ways to do the same thing for websites. So saying there is no way to turn down 'teh kitten blog luvs romance' with two readers and accept Dear Author or All About Romance, doesn't make sense to me. I understand it could be a lack of knowledge on RWA's part in the ways of 'how' to qualify websites and web traffic.

But it has been a year... so the answer being keep press passes only for 'print' press and throw out internet media... to me reeks of agenda. It is stated in such a way that keeps Barbara Vey and Michelle, both who state repeatedly they only focus on the positive. Michelle even has posts about women can only be supportive of other women if we only tell them the nice stuff. And PW and Lifetime.com both get a large amount of traffic - that does NOT automatically mean Vey's blog does or Michelle's page does. That doesn't mean their visitors = what the main page of PW or Lifetime.com is...

Vey gets a shitload of comments from authors who gravitate to happy shiney things.  Michelle can get a nice amount of comments - she also repeatedly posts in her comments to engage with the author-heavy commenter's. Are the press passes meant to promote the romance genre to romance authors? Because, uh, you guys are already there and sort of on board.

The point "I" would think is to promote it to readers.  Readers who will be buying the books. Readers who may love Nora Roberts but never heard of Chrsitine Merrill. So being here, in this thread and after the OMFG is that REALLY NORA ROBERTS (which happens alot, it is rather funnah) many of those people will click on Merrill's name (which should link to her site and girlfriend if it doesn't make sure in the future you do that!).  Word spreads and new fans are made.

That is what DA and TGTBTU do for romance. I have always made it point to mix genre's to help crossovers, and to present more than one side of an issue. And I admit I do it for readers not the authors. BUT if I CAN help - in whatever little way - to promote [again authors I enjoy reading because my blog, me me me] than I WANT to. Because you guys work really hard, for little pay and a serious lack of respect.

So RWA is telling me they have no respect for me. They want to keep out the meangrrls. And I am sorry but I would bet AAR, DA, SBTB have done a hell of a lot more to promote the Print Romance genre than Lifetime.com.

And if you wanted to get really technical, they state national affiliation. So where you may only find Dear Author or TGTBTU on Reuters and IBS, which means over 70+ newspapers (be it their websites) from New York to CA, 2 to 4 times a week... and where the only place that reprints just about every TGTBTU post is San Antonio Express News (only a 'local' print affiliation, even if it is the 7th largest city in the US, before San Diego and Dallas)... USA Today syndicates TGTBTU about once a week - maybe - but you will find Dear Author there just about every day.

That is national, no? So if the fear is lawsuit and those bloggers (again, a possible thing but I am cynical) not even responding to the question seems a touch... wrong.

Of course I have no idea if Jane even questioned it. I know I asked about it because, even though I am not going, it reeks of agenda and I hate being told 'no.' But once Jane's Dear Author Post went up communication with RWA, an org I have always been on very good terms with, has stopped. Now I haven't really pushed. There is that li'l thing called a phone...

Yes, it makes me pissy. Yes, authors volunteer at RWA, although really Nora you are a special kind of animal. There are a few of you, as in bestselling authors who do give of your time. TONS! That, to me, is what makes you NFR (that's Nora F'g Roberts to the uninitiated), not how awesome your books are, not how much you sell, but the fact you give back to a genre that MANY authors, who don't even reach your level of success, turn around and abandon. And not in a way as they change genres as much as to say repeatedly how much they hate the "shallowness" of romance.

And really out of the three plus hours we were setting up, there were quite a few volunteers.  Not enough, but many (hell I called Kristie J and she came down to help) but honestly Nora... there wasn't one 'name' there. Just about everyone I spoke to was a hopefully, one day, to be published author. And I think I remember one Harlequin author in the medical line.

BUT, again neither here nor there... my point, which was lost, was while I had fun and got to go to some nifty things, the reason I went to RWA last year was not to become a writer or to meet my favorite authors evah (I suck as a fan and don't do well with the awe thing). I went because of things I wanted to do with the TGTBTU, things which promote the industry, the authors, the books and the publishers, and I wanted to see what other people - authors, readers, bloggers - thought of those things.

So if I were to go again - for those reasons - and there were press passes, I would expect to be considered. If I didn't meet the guidelines, ok I don't get one. BUT to say no, I am not even allowed to ask because I am internet media and don't matter, isn't true.

**I think I sound seriously pissed off and annoyed and really I am not. It is much more a passionate belief that internet media deserves some respect. And the fact I am not a professional writer so I don't express myself as well as I should. ok fine and I am lazy and not gonna edit this shit.

::heart you gwen::  [You better - g]

Tags: RWA, Sybil Overthinking Again

No Such Thing As A Free Ride part I

Wendy, a.k.a. THE Super Librarian, as an interesting post up regarding RWA, Press Passes and Fans: Group Mentality. As normal she has many a good point, go check it out if you haven't seen it.

I like RWA. I don't see them as the window to becoming Nora Roberts and I don't think you have to be apart of it to write the next best selling novel. It has its pros and cons, and each writer needs to look at it and decide if it is worth their money to join, go to the chapter meetings, and attend nationals. It is a big cost (I think), not to some of course - and yay them - but to many people, it is.

To me the cost of joining RWA, what is does for the writer or brings to the genre, isn't the point or my issue with the new policy. Nowhere does RWA state "No bloggers allowed" or even "no fans", they are saying "pony up." I fall into the camp of "fans" who don't need to go, unless they fall into the "I want to be a writer when I grow up" camp. Many a fan does grow up, so sure it makes sense they should pay to play, but going just to go, hang at the bar and go to the author signings (where you pay for the books and all the money goes to charity), seems like a cool thing to do if you are a fan and live in the area.

Other than that, events are mostly invite only and the rest you pay to play, "crashing" events even if you say "Nora Roberts said it was ok," is not something I would do or suggest. It was a concern of mine last year when we went that the view some readers took away was, "OMG that is so cool, I wanna go play too!" And when I voiced that, along with the thought presenting it in a "fans should go way" would put RWA in a position to not 'give' alloted press passes to bloggers, I believe I was told "Why shouldn't fans go?"

The reason, IMHO, is because it isn't for 'fans' and nationals isn't a 'convention' but a 'conference'. So saying that, why do I care "internet media is being excluded", especially when I hadn't planned to attend? It seems from the comments in this post the thought is 'hey chick I pay, you should pay'.

To which I say, no, not in all cases.

There are many different reasons for going to nationals. If you are a writer, going for your job, it makes sense to have fees. If you are a publisher, going for your company, it makes sense to have fees - like the authors you are getting something for your craft, your company, your job out of attending. As well as it makes sense that if you give back in the form of your time, you get a discount or comp (depending on WHAT you are doing). If you are a fan, going to stargaze, you should pay.

I am sure some of you are thinking this just comes down to me thinking everything is about me. Oddly it isn't.  Don't get me wrong. I am not saying I don't think everything is about me, but that would be a different issue. WHAT? Like you don't have issues.  Shut up.

My point goes with Stephanie Feagan, a member of the RWA Board who responded with her personal opinion at DearAuthor.com regarding the quoted email sent to internet media who received press passes last year:

...What is it, specifically, that RWA gets in return for handing out press pass comps? Hopefully some national media coverage that will get the word out about romance and the authors - hopefully in a positive light.

If there are 13 comp press passes and the point is 'national media coverage ', how is the answer to exclude ALL internet media? Tina, an editor at Blogburst, recently posted, "Bloggers and Journalists form an uneasy alliance":

A new survey of US journalists found that nearly 70% check a blog list on a regular basis and the majority of journalists surveyed said blogs were having a significant impact on news reporting in all areas tested except news quality.

The quality part is another post for another day, but did anyone see the report on Cassie Edwards? It is possible you caught it at CNN, New York Times, Newsweek, or that little used source The Associated Press. In case you missed it, the story (or witch hunt as authors who I can only guess don't like 'national media coverage') was discovered by a BLOG. You probably haven't heard of it, being just a blog and all, but The Smart Bitches Who Love Trashy Books would be the chicks who got the word out that lead to "national media coverage". Oh and they were at Nationals last year. Were they one of the 13? I have no clue and haven't asked. But if that is the purpose of having those passes, excluding ALL internet media might be a BAD IDEA.

Go Google "RWA National Conference", go ahead, I will wait. Here have a link. Isn't it nice to see all that "national media coverage"? Makes total sense to not have internet media there to muck up the place. Oh I know, we should have spelled out RWA... let's try that... Are you tired from all the national news coverage reading yet?

Hmmmm let's try another way... searching Publisher's Weekly, the top return is regarding a conference from 2003: Sweet Savage Bookselling: Opening Day at the Romance Writers Conference. Most recent coverage would be Barbara Vey, who will be in San Fran. Nice blog, all positive, author heavy (as positive, nice blogs are) and a very, very nice person running it but how can it be argued The Smart Bitches Who Love Trashy Books is a bad way for nonromance readers to get a view into romanceland because they won't get 'we are more than snark and naughty words' but it is fine to present the view of women MUST give 'only praise to be supportive,' are only here for teh sex, "oh look at that cover hunk" and "do my thighs look fat" is a good way to present romance to the nonreader?

That is just a small part of my point though but I hate long ass posts so shall continue this in part II. No really there is a part II, I know.  Try to contain your excitement.

Tags: Nationals, Ponderings, RWA, Sybil Overthinking Again

Novel Idea?

Did anyone else notice this doesn't have paranormal romance on the spine? Doesn't have paranormal on it either.

It says NOVEL.

What's up with that? I thought no matter what JR Ward was all about a HEA. I wonder if that has changed. I hope not cuz it is bad enough to go Hardcover in the middle of a series but to change genres? Well that would blow.

Don't forget to read Gwen's Lover Unbound review here.  NOTE!!  There are spoilers in the review and spoilers in the comments.  (It's an interesting discussion, though.)

Tags: 2007, Black Dagger Brotherhood series, Pondering, Sybil, Sybil Overthinking Again

Next Page »