On Other Blogs

How Not To Get a Blurb

by

A self-published author sent me a generic email asking me to read his book and blurb it. I’ve taken out his name, and the title of the book, as a courtesy:

I am  about to launch the XYZ novels, which are
legal/crime thrillers. I would love to get a blurb from you for the first novel
in this series, XYZ.  I have attached the first few chapters for
your review and will be happy to send the full book upon request.  I
thoroughly believe that you will find this book compelling and will be proud to
have your name associated with it, otherwise I wouldn’t intrude upon your
valuable time.

As compelling as his personal endorsement of his own book is, that’s not a good enough reason for me to read his novel.  In fact, this solicitation is a classic example of how to not to get an author to read your book. For instructions on how to do it right, check out author Gregg Hurwitz’s checklist of dos-and-don’ts for blurb pitching.

Must Reading for Aspiring Authors

by

My brother Tod takes a hard look look at Writer’s Digest and its list of the 101 Best Websites for Writers. 

Any magazine which purports to be "for" writers,  yet accepts
advertising from scam agents and sleazy publishers and regularly
provides some of the worst advice imaginable for aspiring writers is
doing no one any favors.  Needless to say, their 101 websites
mirror their excellent quality control standards.

Tod checked out a few of the sites. His peek at the Long Ridge Writers Group is especially revealing…and hilarious.

Imagine if a Harlequin Romance Novel Could Vibrate, Too…

by

Susie Bright went to a Romance Writers convention and came back with this observation:

When a woman buys a traditional Romance, it’s like a hardcore porn fan
buying a XXX video. She wants her money shot. She does not want
distractions. She wants familiarity, to connect with "the childhood
masturbatory feeling," as my friend and offbeat Romanticist Pam Rosenthal
so perfectly described to me. I say this with utmost sympathy, but fans
would probably feel exposed by that description. Still, I believe
romances are stroke books— they are not so much read as used.

I wonder what she’d say about mysteries after going to a Bouchercon or Malice Domestic convention?

Obi-Wan Love Sandwich

by

Are your erotic fantasies filled with visions of  "an Obi
Wan/Amidala/Qui-Gon intergalactic love sandwich?" If so, then Fleshbot has found the STAR WARS slash for you at the Obi-Wan Torture Oasis.

"There is something so wonderfully demoralizing about sodomy;  takes all the fight out of a man, to be conquered from within." (from Zen & nancy’s "Little Earthquakes")

It’s more than a kink, it’s a biological imperative. We Ladies of Slash must hurt young Obi-Wan Kenobi.
Hurt him bad. Hence this site, and you know the rest. We’re not too inclined these days to wonder just *why* we enjoy Obi-Wan (or Mulder or Bashir or Blair or a host of other icons) displayed in such a visceral state. At least, we wonder no more so than men who question why they enjoy lesbian porn flicks. Just relax and enjoy the rollercoaster.

 

Royalty Reality

by

For all of you dreaming of becoming the next John Grisham or Alice Sebold with your first novel, here’s a jolt of reality:  UK author Amanda Mann posts the details of her latest royalty statement and it’s sobering. And the performance of her first two books is far more typical than you might think.  (Thanks to Lynn Viehl for the heads-up)

The ABC Schedule

by

TVTracker reports that ABC has announced their fall schedule. BLIND JUSTICE and EYES are among the notable, though not surprising, cancellations. Hitmaker JJ Abrams two pilots, THE CATCH and PROS AND CONS failed to make the sked, despite the success of LOST and ALIAS. But the influence of LOST is certainly reflected on the new schedule. Like NBC’s new roster, there’s quite a few new "speculative" fiction shows on tap, including a reimagining of THE NIGHT STALKER (from X FILE’s alum Frank Spotnitz) and INVASION, a Shaun Cassidy-produced series about aliens who secretly arrive in the Everglades in the midst of a terrible storm and a Park Ranger’s efforts to unlock the mystery.  Other new series include COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF, about the first female President, from writer-director Rod Lurie.

In addition to the new fall series,  Zap2it reports that ABC has picked up several series for midseason: Additional Series
Orders: CRUMBS, THE EVIDENCE, IN JUSTICE, LESS THAN PERFECT, THE MIRACLE
WORKERS, SONS & DAUGHTERS.

Both "The Evidence" and "In Justice" reflect ABC’s aspirations to land a
strictly procedural hit, the network’s equivalent of a "CSI" or "Law &
Order." In "The Evidence," an eclectic cast — featuring Orlando Jones, Martin
Landau and Nicky Katt — solves crimes by putting together an assortment of
evidence that the audience has already seen. "In Justice" follows a lawyer (Kyle
MacLachlan) and an investigator (Jason O’Mara) struggling to get innocent people
out of prison.

On the comedy side, Fred Savage ("The Wonder Years") is back in "Crumbs,"
about two estranged brothers forced to reunite to take care of their deranged
mother and run the family business. Things remain in the family on "Sons &
Daughters," a semi-improvised look at grown-up siblings, executive produced by
Lorne Michaels ("Saturday Night Live").

Following in the footsteps of this season’s alternative programming successes
like "Supernanny" and "Wife Swap" and the emergence of "Extreme Makeover: Home
Edition," ABC will also have "Miracle Workers," a reality show about doctors who
perform revolutionary procedures on regular people, ready for midseason.

The new schedule is on the jump.

Read more

LitBlog Coop Controversy

by

Publisher’s Marketplace reports that the Litblog Co-op (which includes our friends Sarah Weinman and Mark Sarvas) is generating controversy with their first "Read This" pick, Kate Atkinson’s novel CASE HISTORIES.

In initial"comments" posted by blog readers, at least a few express disappointment with what one co-op member acknowledges was the "biggest" of the five nominated books. Atkinson’s book, published here last fast fall, registered widely within
the mainstream reviewing circles to which the lit-bloggers want to offer an alternative. Our own Book Review Index has logged 18 full-length reviews from top newspapers–almost all quite enthusiastic.

As one poster remarks: "You say yourselves that the LBC’s purpose is to draw attention to ‘the best of contemporary fiction, authors and presses that are struggling to be noticed in a flooded marketplace.’
So how does this novel qualify? It seems like a middlebrow cop out." Another reader concurs with the sentiment: "Nothing against Kate Atkinson, but a Whitbread Award Book of the Year winner whose latest novel is being published by Little, Brown hardly seems to be a choice in keeping with the spirit of the LBC’s self-imposed mission."

My brother Tod Goldberg says it’s definitely the "in" book right now.

I’ve heard lots of good things about this book and may have already told more
important literary types at cocktail parties and readings that I’ve already read
it and simply adored it and was seriously considering sending the author a fan
letter, but the fact is I haven’t, though I intend to.

People on Tod’s blog are hotly debating the choice as well. The gist of the argument is, since the book is already generating a lot of attention, did it really need help from the Litblog Coop? Should the LitBlog Coop have gone further afield and picked a book that’s struggled for  attention? Author Lynn Viehl, for one, thinks so:

Now, I’m a little slow, and kinda confused, so maybe one of you nice
people will explain this to me. We’re supposed to be getting the skinny
on struggling writers, books and presses from the LBC, correct? Um, how is Kate Atkinson struggling, exactly?  Did she like blow all her Whitbread prize money?

Based on the backblog debates on the various blogs, it seems the LitBlog may have stumbled out of the gate with this choice, but the judges are defending their pick. Mark Sarvas says:

Remember, we never said "unknown" fiction … Worthy is the goal, and besides if
we’d have picked some obscure, experimental novel, we’d be pilloried for being
pedantic and elitist.  We only means you can’t please everyone and we’re not
even trying.  We’re confident that those who check out Case Histories
will be glad they did, and the ones who knew it already have future choices to
look to (including the other four summer nominations).

What do you think? Did The LitBlog undermine their own highly-publicized intentions with their first "Read This!" honoree?