HelenKay Dimon

Some miscellaneous thoughts.  You know, those things that hit me while flying back across the country and waiting for American Airlines to find us an open gate to de-plane at Washington National (I refuse to call it Washington Regan so please don’t write and correct me):

1. Editors and agents agreed that the market for new writers is better than ever.  Publishers are showing a willingness to take a chance and are looking for new authors to develop and grow.
2. In a point that may contradict #1 to some extent, the agents I heard speak all said they get some ridiculous number of queries each week – ranging from the hundreds to one claim of over 1,000.  They further said they give a positive response – ask to see work – in about 1% of the cases.
3. Kim Whalen, an agent with Trident, bucked the trend a little and said she did think authors of category romance needed agents.  She says she’s always able to squeeze more money out of Harlequin/Silhouette and that her company has a great relationship with H/S and have made some progress on the contracts.

My thoughts on the conference:  Before I sold, I went to RWA for inspiration, information and a kick in the pants.  See, by the early Spring each year, my determination sputtered.  Okay, it shut down completely.  Going to RWA in July would reignite the fire and get me working again.  I would go to the publishing spotlights to gather information and to hear authors and editors from the houses I was interested in speak.  Sure, I also played fangirl and collected free books, but those really weren’t my main reasons for being there.

This year was strange, a kind of in-between land where I’m not really published because my book hasn’t come out and I’m not really unpublished because I do have a book coming out.  I’m not a joiner or an extrovert so conference in general aren’t my thing.  This year I didn’t need the How To Write A Synopsis class.  I listened to editors and agents but felt a bit out of place everywhere I went.  My editor’s comment to me was:  you don’t need this stuff but next year you’ll be part of the literary signing.  True, but I wonder if I’ll feel more a part of the process next year.  I find it hard to imagine having a book sitting on the shelves provides that much security.

The result is that I’m not sure what my needs are for RWA right now.  The reality is the person who most helps with my writing is my cp and she isn’t a member, I didn’t find her through RWA and I doubt she’d ever join RWA.  I’ll remain a member because the organization fulfilled a need in the past.  I’m hoping it will in the future.  For others it would be a waste of time and money to attend or be a member.  For still others, the information and camaraderie is essential and worth the price of membership.  The question is where you fit in that scheme.  If I figure out my answer, I’ll let you know.

Editors and agents at the conference spend a lot of time telling writers not to chase trends.  Good advice.  Now, here are some trends people were talking about:  medievals are making a comeback, chick lit mysteries are in demand, folks are waiting for westerns to come back strong (K Duffy at Kensington and J Enderlin at St. Martin’s both want them), agent Evan Fogelman insists editors are asking about paranormal inspirationals (I’m assuming the paranormal parts are more angels than vampires) and hot stuff is still hot.

The publisher spotlight is a favorite of the conference.  Basically, this is an opportunity for the publishing house to tell you how great it is, how particular it can afford to be because of how great it is and wonderful its current author base is, which in some way relates to how great the house is.  The bottom line, and what you hear over and over until you want to jab yourself in the eye with the RWA pen you got at registration, is that they are all looking for fresh new voices, innovative ideas, authors they can build and nurture….blah,blah,blah.  Really, just once I want an editor to say:  we’re looking for crap. 

I enjoyed Kensington’s spotlight because it was less about "ain’t we great" and more about asking authors to give the house a shot.  I ventured to a few other spotlights.  All were interesting, some for what the editors said and others for what they didn’t say.  The ones I attended for some period of time before going in search of a latte were:

1. Bantam/Dell – These folks have a big NYT list.  Some of the authors we heard about have nothing to do with romance but we heard about them anyway.  Last I checked, Grisham’s paperbacks were not romance.  The basics are:  there are no set slots for romance and there isn’t a separate romance imprint or line.  The editor’s view was that this allowed for a lot of flexibility.  The editor also said the company was very supportive of new authors and pushed them to greatness. 
2. NAL – I had a heard time getting a handle on NAL’s overall program.  They are pushing trade erotic romance.  Luann McLane, a former Brava writer, and Toni Blake seem to be the leads. Unagented submissions are okay but will sit for a long time (more than 6 months). 
3. Berkley – The editors are looking at everything.  Berkley publishes at least 4 romances per month under its romance line, Sensation. The word count is 90,000-110,000.  Multiple submissions are okay (this means to other houses – it is not okay to send to multiple editors within the house).  Unagented submissions are okay.  Send a synopsis and 3 chapters.  Also, Kate Seaver is new to Berkley and trying to find authors.
4. St. Martin’s – The editors here are looking at everything too.  The house doesn’t have a set number of books or set romance imprint.  The word count is 90,000-100,000.  Multiple submissions are okay.  Send query only and the response time on that is about 1 month.  The preference is agented but that’s not a requirement.

More Jayne Ann Krentz….  For the second year in a row I attended the workshop Secrets of the Bestselling Sisterhood with JAK and Susan Elizabeth Phillips.  These ladies are engaging and fun.  They’re also saying what needs to be said, like:  stop listening to the rule nazis; get rid of people who deflate you; don’t let fear rule your career choices; don’t let critique groups steal your voice; perseverance is key, etc. 

One of the interesting stories JAK tells is about how she tried to sell for 6 years and couldn’t.  She kept submitting futuristics, which was a genre no one was interested in back in the early 80s.  She loved her futuristics and eventually scored a 3-book deal.  When those futuristics came out, her JAK contemporary numbers started to crash.  On the last one, the publisher even changed JAK’s name on the cover (and Jayne Castle was born).  JAK realized that what she loved about the futuristics was what she called the "core story" – the theme she wanted to write about.  For her, the core story of interest was the marriage of convenience.  She didn’t think that core story worked in contemporaries and decided she had to lift that core story and put it somewhere else.  For her, historicals were the answer and so Amanda Quick and JAK’s historical career began. 

The idea of a core story is intriguing but also seems to carry with it the possibility of having every story sound the same.  JAK listed some other core themes, like folks who like to write about emotionally wounded and fractured heroes.  That struck me as broader and possibly more viable for a long-term career.  Not sure how I feel about this idea but JAK certainly is passionate about it.

The other piece of advice these ladies (mostly JAK) gave was for folks struggling to find their voice.  She suggested taking what is to you a very compelling scene and giving it to a trusted reader friend or career partner.  The only job the reader has it to say what one emotion struck them.  JAK’s point is if the answer is nothing, then there is a voice problem.  If the answer is funny or something else, that might be the answer to the voice question and from there you can develop and nurture that voice.

First, some info about Kensington’s new erotica line.  If you want the free book info, skip ahead.   The erotica line still does not have a name.  It launches in January 2006.  The covers are amazing.  They’re looking for novellas and single titles.  The basic word counts are 25,000 for novellas and 90,000 for single title but they are open to anything.  They even said that if you have a 15,000 word manuscript, send it and they’ll see if they can make it work.  They are buying.  Let me repeat that, they are buying.  Some folks are talking about getting 6 book contracts.  People who tried to get in with Brava but the books were too hot are finding a home with the whatever-we-call-it line.  Don’t send to Kate Duffy because she said this isn’t her thing.  Hillary Sares and Audrey LaFehr are the folks to write to.  Don’t bother with synopsis and waiting for a response to a query – send in chapters.  Unsolicited and unagented – as with all of the Kensington romance lines – are welcome. 

As for the other Kensington lines, Kate insists westerns are making a comeback, regency is dead and erotic romance is hotter than ever.  Kate also said something a bit new – if you have a partial done, don’t wait to finish it to send it in.  She knows that’s not conventional wisdom but said she can tell if she’ll be interested based on a partial and doesn’t want folks wasting time on "bad" books if she can stop you.

Another general thought, if you’re out there writing chick lit because you think there’s a big need, stop.  According agent Evan Fogelman (and just about everyone else) the market is saturated and the stories have to be pretty special to get attention right now.  Write it because you love it not because it sells.  There was a suggestion that chick lit mysteries were still in demand but the "aren’t my shoes pretty" type without something deeper aren’t going anywhere.

Now, the books…  One of the interesting aspects of the RWA conference is the unbelievable number of free books thrown at the attendees on a daily basis.  Some are books you didn’t buy and probably wouldn’t the next time you walk by them in the B&N racks but when they’re handed out free you take 15 copies.  The books are on the chairs at the luncheons, handed out at publisher signings and left, well, everywhere.  As a result of the frenzy, I have some extra books – those I have multiple copies of or do not plan to foist off on my unsuspecting cp Wendy, my mom and my romance reading friends.  Like Sylvia (I actually stole this idea from her – btw, if you haven’t met Sylvia, you’re missing out because she is charming as well as talented, as is Sasha), I will give away some of the books to keep my TBR pile at a controlled chaos level. 

If you’re interested in any of the below sets of books, write me an email or post a comment telling me which set (you only get one shot and you can’t pick and choose individual books in different sets) you’re interested in.  If you email absolutely no attachments (I will delete those unopened) and the subject line should say Book Giveaway.  Again, just make sure to let me know which set you’re interested in.  If more than one person wants a particular set, I’ll randomly select names on Wednesday August 3rd then post the winners.  I’ll ship the books out but take no responsibility whatsoever if they are lost in transit, damaged, if you hate them, etc. The books are free folks, so no complaints or whining or I absolutely will say nasty things about you in a blog entry.

The sets (all are paperbacks):

1.  The Julia Set -  Includes: When He Was Wicked by Julia Quinn and Highlander in Disguise by Julia London

2.  Sexy/Paranormal Set-  Includes:  the anthology Secrets 10, Angela Knight’s The Forever Kiss and The Challenge by Susan Kearney.

3.  Chick Lit Set:  Includes: Confessions of a Serial Dater by Michelle Cunnah and Exes and Ohs by Beth Kendrick

The first day of the conference is always a short one.  After a morning of chatting, mingling and workshop attending, the scheduled activities end until morning.  Notice I did not mention the lunch.  It sucked as all conferences lunches do.  The speaker, Debbie Macomber, was inspirational.  Her story of skating on the edge of poverty for 5 years as she pursued a writing career is very interesting.  Having 60 million books in print ain’t too shabby either.

With respect to Macomber, the most enlightening comments came in workshops on the issue of rejection.  See, having now sold I now live in fear of never selling again.  Yeah, heaven forbid I not have something to obsess and worry about every freaking minute of every freaking day. 

Jayne Ann  Krentz, a personal fav and NYT bestselling author, gave a lecture called Reinventing Yourself.  She talked about the 3 times in her career where she’s had to either adapt to the market or change the marketing style of her book due to a change in her writing.  During the speech, she mentioned that she had a book rejected recently.  Yeah, Krentz got rejected in 2005.  With her track record, this didn’t seem possible but she said it.  After an initial panic – you know, something along the lines of if publishers aren’t buying a bestseller why the hell will they buy me – I realized this was a good lesson.  No one is immune.  The concern will always hover around the edges.  The goal is to not let that panic overwhelm the writing.

Lucy Monroe – who is absolutely charming – also talked about rejection.  She has 11 releases this year.  She talked about how Kate Duffy at Brava wasn’t excited about some of the work and let it go.  Berkley picked it up.  Monroe’s point was that she admired Kate’s honesty and decision because the rejection let Monroe place her other books with an editor who was excited about those works.  This proves that Monroe is a better and stronger woman than I am, but also shows that there are other options out there if Kate wakes up some morning and decides buying my work was a mistake.  Another good lesson.  One I’m hoping not to have to deal with, but still good.

So, we’re off for a few days of fun in California pre-RWA conference.  I’ll pick up with some conference thoughts – to the extent I have to anything worth saying and to the extent the internet service at the Reno Hilton works. 

Until then, how’s this for innovation:  put writers together in an anthology, tell them they can write anything they want and drop the bylines so the authors can have complete anonymity.  I gotta say that I love the idea.  And, so did someone at Random House.  In The Secret Society Of Demolition Writers, 12 famous folks (think Sebastian Junger, Michael Connelly, Aimee Bender and others) got together and wrote without any restrictions on content.  The result is an interesting writing experiment and an unusual mix of topics.  The game now is to pick up a copy and see if you can match each story to its author.

A romance publisher should give this idea a try.  Think how much fun that could be.

If you’re not an avid reader of Entertainment Weekly  – which is hard to imagine – you may not know that Stephen King has a regular column.  He doesn’t appear every week but drops in often enough to remind us all just how scary he is.  Well, actually, his words usually aren’t too terrifying, except when he talks about rap music, but the photo that accompanies his column is creepy.  As you would expect. 

In the interest of disclosure, I will admit that every damn week I first flip to the last page of the magazine to see what King has to say and, yeah, I get the teeniest bit disappointed if he takes a week off.  But, good news, he wrote something this week (or whenever this edition went to print). His newest article is titled My Manifesto.  I don’t know exactly what he was going for with that banner, but his basic point is that he loves pop culture and loves to write about it. 

He yammered on about music, movies and Michael Jackson.  He even touched on the the literary critic who had a fit when King received an award from the National Book Foundation for Distinguished Contribution to American Letters – a moment in time that clearly fills King with glee.  He also said this about some recent books: 

I thought The Historian was a bore, but I think it’s wonderful that a book by an unknown first novelist could displace the seemingly immortal Dan Brown on the best-seller lists.  I like it that the new Harry Potter novel is being delivered to bookstores in 16-wheelers, and that gazillions of kids stayed up until midnight to buy that sucker.  I like the idea that gazillions of adults are going to read it, too.

Now, the rest of you might be thinking all that but King said it.  That’s why we still love him.

Ever wonder how many times a year someone is declared this year’s "bright light in fiction" or some other stupid thing.  As an avid reader of reviews – it’s almost risen to the level of being an obsession – I stumbled across this one in the August issue of Vogue.  Not my usual book recommendation magazine, sure, but this sentence made me wonder what was happening out there in fiction land:

"Kunkel has created what is easily the most endearingly original voice in fiction so far this year…"

The praise is for the lead character in Indecision by Benjamin Kunkel.  I hadn’t heard of the book.  It’s possible not many people have since it’s not one of those book covers plastered in every magazine.  In case you care, this is Kunkel’s first book and it’s about a guy who can’t commit to anything and ends up in Ecuador.  Something like that.

So, I tried to figure out if I’ve come across any new and exciting voices in romance fiction so far this year.  I enjoyed several books.  There also were some I didn’t like so much.  As far as finding an amazing author or book, nothing jumps out at me.  See, if I find a new-to-me author I tend to read the person’s entire backlist and hunt down his or her website to see what’s coming next.  Didn’t have any of those moments this year so far.  I did pick up the newest from chick lit author Lauren Baratz-Logsted and liked her voice.  Wouldn’t give her a "best of’" award but did find her voice refreshing.  Maybe some years that’s the best we can do. 

I wonder if we’ve gone too far.  If authors are too accessible to the public.  If, as readers, we know so much about the person writing that we can’t always separate that from what’s being written. 

If you have a favorite author you can now track that person to the ends of the Earth.  Really, with Google Earth you can actually see the author’s front lawn via satellite.  Between blogs and websites and author newsletters and publisher sites and booksignings…well, let’s just say what your favorite (or least favorite) author is thinking, doing and in some cases what meds she’s taking are no longer great mysteries. 

Maybe it’s too much information.  Maybe we’d be better off in promotional terms and readers would be more interested in what comes next if everything wasn’t right out there to see. 

An example of the theory of "less is more" is John Twelve Hawks author of The Traveler.  I’ve written about Hawks before here not because I’m excited about his book – frankly, I’ve read 8 reviews of this book in 8 different magazines and still don’t know what it is about.  I don’t know much about Hawks either but what I’ve read grabs my interest:

1. He got a seven figure deal for his first book.
2. Spielberg is making the movie.
3. His editor is the same editor of The Da Vinci Code.
4. His agent and editor have no idea what he looks like or who he really is.
5. John Twelve Hawk is not his real name – he changed it legally for the sake of anonymity.
6. When he speaks with his agent, he uses a voice scrambler so even his agent doesn’t know what he sounds like.

Overkill?  Strange?  Lunacy?  Probably all three.  But the guy has the mystery thing down and maybe, just maybe, knowing less instead of more benefits him, his career and his readers.  It’s also possible that sense of mystery helped get that seven figure deal.   

There’s realism and then there’s the concept of too much information.  A few years back I heard about a memoir where author Kathryn Harrison described her love affair with her father.  Yeah, I couldn’t say ewww fast enough either.  I quickly forgot about the book – happily – until I read reviews of the author’s newest release over the weekend.  I don’t know Ms. Harrison but on Sunday I had the urge to take her to lunch and tell her it would all be okay.  Somehow.  The Washington Post Book World and the New York Times took shots at her book Envy.  The Post’s being the worst:

Writers and critics who complain of the shrinking audience for literary fiction argue – validly – that huge advances and advertising budgets for blockbusters reduce the resources left to promote serious novels.  But the chances of good literary fiction finding an audience are also damaged when books such as Kathryn Harrison’s Envy  are published and passed off as worthy.  Ten pages of Envy are enough to make you yearn for the juiciest trash novel you can find; 50 will have you dreaming of box-top recipes, road maps, computer instructions – anything with a purpose.

Yeah, reviewer Charles Taylor said "trash novel" and we know what kind of stuff he would put in that category.  Whatever.  He also compared the book to a bad Lifetime movie and said things like "…there is enough to rob Envy of any claim to successful fiction, not least Harrison’s writing-seminar symbolism."  Did I mention he hated this book?

The review is nasty.  No question.  Almost makes me happy The Post rarely bothers to review romance.  For the record, I would be greatly relieved if no one ever referred to my work as a bad Lifetime movie. 

There’s either been a slight change in publishing or I’ve become more aware, but everywhere I look there are novellas and short story collections.  Sure, the literary world, general fiction and romance all have mounds of single titles.  You can find a 300 or 400 or 500 page novel in just about any genre without much effort.  But when paging through magazines (yes, by that I mean EW, People, Elle and all the other fine review magazines) there are numerous short story collections, usually of the literary variety.  In fact, over the weekend I saw a collection by Stephen King’s son – I’m sure the kid has a name but I can’t remember what it is.  The good news is that he doesn’t look like his dad. 

In romance there seems to be an anthology released every single day.  So I tried to figure out why the new trend and still have no clue.

1. Myth:  Novellas are easier to write.  I say false.  Trying to fit believable conflict and character development into 100 pages is tough.  Things like story arcs and sexual tension are compressed and if the heroine and hero hadn’t met before page 1, getting from "who are you" to a satisfying ending can be a challenge.
2. Myth: People love novellas.  For me this is true but many folks don’t care for the shorter format.  Frequently on message boards and Amazon reviews a reader will complain about a collection of novellas.  Usually the argument goes something like this:  I didn’t know this was an anthology and was very disappointed with the 3 shorter stories.  Now, you’d think seeing 3 author names on the cover would give away the deep mystery that the book is actually an anthology but I guess not.
3. Myth:  Well at least they’re cheaper.  Uh-huh, have you heard about trade paperbacks?

Mystery unsolved.