Marketing a Book Is Like Making a Bomb That You Hope Will Explode Joy and Confetti

...but that same bomb might instead explode anger and accusations and other messy words that start with "a"...like assumptions.

Bombs are delicate business. That is why I avoid them. Books on the other hand, I can't seem to stay away from. I've never been attracted to bad boys, but I guess writing books fills that void in my life.

Anyway, this is all a bunch of brain scatter while I try and work out the cover launch for Ellen Oh's debut PROPHECY. You see, I've followed Ellen's blog for years and I feel a little protective of her, though I've never met her. And I'm really really excited to read her book!

Let's check out her cover:

 

First things first: The cover doesn't feature a (white) girl in a pretty dress. HUZZAH! I'm not sure I'm in love with the tagline, but whatever. (omg a GIRL is going to save us all!? We're doomed...OR ARE WE = sarcasm).

The cover definitely has a High Fantasy feel to the design, which also explains the lack of girl in pretty dress (the girl in dress design telegraphs a more paranormal/ urban fantasy story). So, that's all to the good, and I do appreciate the smoky dragon. Who doesn't love dragons?

It's interesting to me that they seem to be downplaying the fact that the story is set in a fantastical ancient Korea. Has this become the way to market non European-centric books? We have to trick people into not realizing it until it's "too late?" 

Keep in mind that many people are responsible for writing and designing this stuff—not the author. The author only writes the book. The author may have some say in the cover, but usually not much. Yet the author often takes the brunt of the praise or outrage when readers decide they love or do not approve of a cover/copy.

Of course that's mostly because the author is the one with her face beside the book and her name on the cover. You'd have to dig pretty hard to find out which publishing people were responsible for the cover/copy, and the average person doesn't necessarily have  knowledge of how publishing works. So, the author is held responsible.

Knowing that, let's check out the plot summary:

The greatest warrior in all of the Seven Kingdoms . . . is a girl with yellow eyes.

Kira’s the only female in the king’s army, and the prince’s bodyguard. She’s a demon slayer and an outcast, hated by nearly everyone in her home city of Hansong. And, she’s their only hope. . . .

Murdered kings and discovered traitors point to a demon invasion, sending Kira on the run with the young prince. He may be the savior predicted in the Dragon King Prophecy, but the missing treasure of myth may be the true key. With only the guidance of the cryptic prophecy, Kira must battle demon soldiers, evil shaman, and the Demon Lord himself to find what was once lost and raise a prince into a king.

Intrigue and mystery, ancient lore and action-packed fantasy come together in this heart-stopping first book in a trilogy.

So. People are already drawing parallels between this book and Kristin Cashore's Graceling. It's interesting to me that because the plot summary says absolutely nothing about ancient Korea, the similarities between the two books seem even greater, when in fact, I'm guessing the mythology and culture in Oh's book is going to be totally different from Cashore's.

(Besides the fact that the graceling concept, which doesn't seem to feature in Oh's world at all, wasn't even unique to Cashore. For example the same idea was a huge part of Orson Scott Card's The Tales of Alvin Maker Series! Remember what Neil Gaiman said: “Genre fiction, as Terry Pratchett has pointed out, is a stew. You take stuff out of the pot, you put stuff back. The stew bubbles on.”)

But getting back to marketing, it's a delicate balance, isn't it?  As a marketing person you don't want to set people off who may not think they want to read about fantastical ancient Korea, and at the same time you want to attract an audience that you know will like a book about a female warrior. Enter: fans of Cashore's novel. So it makes sense that the marketing people would think to themselves, "Let's highlight the similarities between the two and attract Cashore's readers to this new and different series because they're sure to like it!!"

Alas, it's not that simple. Because now the marketing people have downplayed what makes Oh's book unique. And in the process, they've already started collecting some less than positive accusations on GoodReads. Check out some of the comments already popping up on PROPHECY'S GoodReads page:

"Who else thinks this is a copycat of Graceling? I'm pretty sure Prophecy can be rewritten like this (bolded = Graceling copied, underlined = substituted with Graceling aspects)..."

"Is it just me, or does this sound... slightly like Graceling by Kristin Cashore?"

"In the first part of the blurb, it sounded very much like Graceling by Kristin Cashore. But then again, there is no evil shaman in Graceling, right?" 

Remember: These people HAVE NOT READ the book. It doesn't come out until January 2013! They are just making assumptions based on the information given to them, which was selected by marketing people in an effort to sell the book. That's what the cover/copy is for. Sales. It's not to perfectly and accurately represent the book. It's just to get it out of the store and into readers' hands. 

I guess what I'm trying to say is...let's try not to judge a book by its cover and cover copy, hmm? And try not to blame the author if you don't like the cover/copy. The author only has control over the words INSIDE the book.

I'm not suggesting we all stop criticizing covers and discussing cover copy. It's not only important (for example, speaking out against whitewashing covers), it's also a hell of a lot of fun. But let's try not to cry wolf about a book that won't come out for half a year and let's all try hardest of all not to blame the author for the things on the outside of her book, because like I said, all she controls is the inside, and that's what we should hold her accountable for: The story.

End of story.

As my dad would say, "Capisce?" 

Edit Thursday, June 21: I was just reading Ellen Oh's post where she interviewed her cover designers (read it here), and they pointed out that they used a font that would appeal to both boys and girls. Interesting point. I do agree that the cover is gender neutral. It doesn't scream, "This is a fantasy book for and about girls!!" And of course it shouldn't because it's a story about one girl and many other characters including a prince. Anyway, there are so many layers to a book cover! 

Publishing Industry Thinks Women Are Not Adults

Okay, Reader. I didn't want to to do this. I didn't want to talk about this. Why? Because I am possibly lazy. Also I'm trying to finish my novel (oh! Now that sounds like a much better excuse) and finally, because I was never very good at writing persuasive papers. I tend to make these logical leaps without realizing it. Also I'm impatient.

In short, I'm about to embark on just such a paper and if I make any leaps that you don't follow, I really hope you comment here and let me know.

So, let's talk about women writers and the Young Adult genre. This is an uncomfortable topic for me, a woman writer, who is currently rewriting a novel to be YA after advice from an agent and an editor-friend. Maybe that's why it fascinates and troubles me so much.

Women writers dominate young adult literature and with them, women protagonists.

On the same token, women readers dominate the market and young adult in general is a major force in book sales for the publishing industry.

Huh. Interesting. Let's connect the dots: women like to read books about and by women. Not exclusively, of course, because otherwise the entire publishing industry would have collapsed ages ago. Women are far and away more willing to read a book with a male protagonist, than men are about reading about a woman. Why? Well for one, because men have a had a choice for so long, while women have not. And also, on a stickier note, male is the default gender. As in using "he" as the automatic pronoun when no gender is specified.

But I wonder, what are these publishing men thinking when they see that women are making some serious bank with their books? They might not like it. They might try to find a way to minimize the accomplishment, even if only to make themselves feel a little bit better.

This brings me to Joel Steins incendiary piece Adults Should Read Adult Books. Here are a couple choice quotes from the article:

"The only thing more embarrassing than catching a guy on the plane looking at pornography on his computer is seeing a guy on the plane reading “The Hunger Games.” Or a Twilight book. Or Harry Potter. The only time I’m O.K. with an adult holding a children’s book is if he’s moving his mouth as he reads."

"I have no idea what “The Hunger Games” is like. Maybe there are complicated shades of good and evil in each character. Maybe there are Pynchonesque turns of phrase. Maybe it delves into issues of identity, self-justification and anomie that would make David Foster Wallace proud. I don’t know because it’s a book for kids. I’ll read “The Hunger Games” when I finish the previous 3,000 years of fiction written for adults."

"Let’s have the decency to let tween girls have their own little world of vampires and child wizards and games you play when hungry."

This article set off a firestorm of responses from YA authors and readers defending their genre. Here's one in the Huffington Post by Alison Flood, "Don't be fooled, Joel Stein: categorising books by age doesn't tell the full story." But the author only talks about genre, about why it's okay for adults to read about teens or children. So far I haven't seen anyone talking about what is really going on here.

Look at those pulled quotes again. Stein uses the male pronoun to describe the adult in question, the one who looks so idiotic reading The Hunger Games or Twilight or Harry Potter—all incredibly popular books by women and featuring female protagonists (okay, Hermione isn't the MAIN character, but still). Then he argues that he thinks we've got 3,000 years worth of quality fiction to get through first.

Huh, I wonder who was mostly getting their fiction published back then...Oh, that's right: men. And who were they writing about? Men. 

Finally, Stein condescendingly asks the reader to leave young adult books to the "tween girls."

You guys, this isn't about age, it's about GENDER. If you're an adult man, then you should read books written by and about men. If you read books about and by women, you're a child. Oh, excuse me, a tween. Let's leave the possibility of boobs in there at least.

Okay, I see I have to tone down my anger if I'm going to continue trying to express my point. Let me dredge up some examples to help. Why is it that The Brief, Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao is considered adult literature if it features a male teen protagonist who comes of age? Well for starters, it's written by and about a male character. The New York Times reviewed the book, lavishing praise on it, saying (bolded text is mine):

"But of course an awful lot of serious young-to-middle-aged novelists (All men: Jonathan Lethem, Dave Eggers, Michael Chabon) hang around there as well, lingering over the narratives that fed their childhood imaginations in order to infuse their ambitious, difficult stories with some of the allegorical pixie dust and epic grandiloquence the genres offer. In “The Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao,” Díaz, the author of a book of sexy, diamond-sharp stories called “Drown,” shows impressive high-low dexterity, flashing his geek credentials, his street wisdom and his literary learning with equal panache. A short epigraph from the Fantastic Four is balanced by a longer one from male Derek Walcott; allusions to “Dune,” “The Matrix” and (especially) “The Lord of the Rings” rub up against references to male Melville and male García Márquez. Oscar’s nickname is a Spanglish pronunciation of male Oscar Wilde, whom he is said to resemble when dressed up in his Doctor Who costume for Halloween."

And while we're at it, what about J.D. Salinger's Catcher in the Rye about a sixteen-year-old boy? William Golding's Lord of the Flies? Anthony Burgess' A Clockwork Orange about a "juvenile delinquent" or even Orson Scott Card's Ender's Game?? 

These aren't considered young adult. Not really. You won't find them shelved next to Laini Taylor or Libba Bray in the young adult section. They are considered literary classics, with the exception of Ender's Game, which you'll find in the Science Fiction/ Fantasy section for adults. And they are all about teenage boys and written by men.

Name a novel written by a woman, about a teenage girl (non marrying age, so Austen is out) that is considered adult literature. Let's make it even harder: adult literary fiction. Good God, what if the book involves magic or magical realism as well or maybe a dystopian setting. Anyone? ANYONE?

I'm not talking about the quality of writing. I'm talking about the fact that if you are a woman and you want to write about a woman, in particular if you want to write about a girl, then you are going to be told that your work belongs in young adult. Unless that woman is looking for love, in which case it's probably chic lit or romance. Or unless she's a mother, in which case it's women's fiction.

What's that? You think it's a question of audience and who the author is writing for? Well I think that when the publishing industry is pushing women into young adult, then those women writers change their books to fit the audience they've been told is appropriate to them.

If you want to write about magic or teens while being taken seriously, you have to either be a man or at the very least write about men. 

Are there exceptions? Yes, of course. Erin Morgenstern's The Night Circus comes to mind, which had the privilege of being reviewed in the New York Times as well. Of course I can qualify that too. I mean, there are two protagonists: a male and female, who share the spotlight.

But my real complaint is that more often than not, women writers are being shunted into young adult, whether their work fits there or not. And if you're an adult and you like to read those books—about women—then you should be ashamed of yourself, because you are, according to Joel Stein, reading like a child or a mentally challenged person. Or, you know, a woman.

Let's stop wasting time trying to convince the men out there that there's nothing wrong with reading books about teens. They already know that. They'll happily read a book about teens when it's written by a man and packaged by the publishing industry as an adult book.

Instead let's talk about how the male literary world has decided it's okay if women get published. It's okay if they are successful and make lots of money, just so long as they remember that they are writing for CHILDREN, not adults. And if you want to read those books, then you too must be a child or a woman, and the male literary world will make fun of you and they will not take you seriously.

Edit: There's a great read by Roxane Gay in The Rumpus called "Beyond the Measure of Men," just out today on this general topic. I highly recommend you read it here. 

Wish List: Anne-Julie Aubry

Dear Publishing Industry:

Some smart YA and middle grade publisher needs to hire French artist Anne-Julie Aubry for their next cover art! I  just stumbled onto her work on Etsy. Reader, is it not utterly fabulous??

I'm sure people will initially think, "middle grade" because....well, because illustrations aren't really "in" for YA right now. What's "in" are digital art photographs of girls with parts of their bodies cropped out, lots of hair, and frilly dresses.

Please. It's not edgy. It's boring.

I'm campaigning for more illustrations on YA fantasy covers.

And I think this artist's work is gorgeous. I wish I had a big red magic phone I could call when I see something like this and just sort of make it happen.

Universe, please make this happen.

Love,
Jennifer

PS note: All images here are from Anne-Julie's Etsy store The Nebulous Kingdom and are available for purchase.

PPS Anne-Julie Aubry blogs here.

Blogs You Should Be Reading

The way women are depicted in geekdom art is insane. From comics to manga/ anime to video games to RPG art to urban fantasy book covers, you've got to wonder if these illustrators have ever seen real women before.

You know I've sounded off about this with my paperback boobs post and guide to urban fantasy covers post.


Want more?

How about fantasy author John C. Hines attempting to contort himself into urban fantasy cover art poses with painful, funny, and insightful results?* Yes, please. 

Or Escher Girls, a Tumblr account showcasing how ludicrous this art really is? Don't Mind if I do.

To balance it out, make sure you visit the Tumblr Women Fighters in Reasonable Armor, to reassure yourself that yes, women can be depicted with anatomy and clothing within the bounds of reality and some people out there are actually doing it. Hell to the yes.

And finally, for you gamers out there, Go Make Me a Sandwich provides, "A (mostly) humorous look at how not to sell games to women." Yes yes yes!

Now, read and get fired up and spread the word!

FUN FACT: during adolescence, there were three girls I wanted to be like:

1. Sailor Venus: kickass fighter with super skinny thighs

2. Buffy Summers/ Sarah Michelle Gellar: Sure she could kick your ass but SMG was and continues to be my height and about half my weight (here's my favorite photo of her from those days, which I aspired to)

3. Caitlin Fairchild: from the short-lived, X-men ripoff comic book series Gen 13. She was smart, responsible, the group leader, and her power was super strength (I really like super strength). Plus, she had red hair.

Also, she looked like this:

I thought I couldn't be beautiful unless I looked like them. A part of me still does. I struggle with my body image ever single day. By allowing this sort of art to continue, this is what we're telling young women.

If we don't stand up and say this isn't okay, who will?



*Much thanks to my friend and fellow writer Jazz Sexton for sharing the Hines post with me. You can check out her blog Write the World here. Go say hello!

There is No Joy in The Serious

The other day, I blogged about "literary" fiction's prejudices against genre fiction. To be honest, I've got a pretty big prejudice against "literary" fiction myself: That it's all DEPRESSING.

Which is why I avoid it unless a particular book has been recommended to me.

It's funny, because I do love tragedies. I suppose you haven't ever seen the amazing Bollywood film Devdas, have you? I adore it—one scene in particular, which always makes me cry. Always. I also love Hamlet. I haven't quite figure it out, though I do find there's a difference between a grandiose, epic tragedy and a wear-you-down, life is hopeless depressing story.

The thing is, I'm very good at depressing myself without any outside help.

Why is it that Art has to be serious to be taken seriously?

People used to mock me for loving Sara Teasdale's poetry, despite my contention that she can be just as piercing and pensive as Sylvia Plath.

I was teased at the publishing house for selecting a holiday book (yes, every year we each got to choose a book that was then wrapped and opened in front of the entire company) about Maxfield Parrish (ever heard of "Parrish Blue?").

This is "Ecstay" my favorite Parrish painting and the first one I ever saw.

One editor told me I might as well like Thomas Kinkaid. Everyone laughed. At 23 and lowest on the company totem pole, I was mortified.

Similarly in college I struggled to enjoy dance class, which had been one of my primary loves up through high school. But there was no more Fosse, no more tap, and very little ballet. Dance was not to entertain and express a range of emotions. No, because it was college and so there was only Modern Dance and Modern was ONLY for the purpose of talking about Serious Topics.

Even the folks who made White Christmas knew that. ("Instead of dance it's choreography.")

Last night I attended yet another modern dance performance. I never learn, I guess. The entire time I kept thinking, "Where is the joy??" One piece after another featured stressful music, serious themes, and hardly any dancing at all. One piece that explored a little shred of hope (I'm not asking for sequins here, folks), would have stood out like a beacon of light.

Instead we were treated to one piece in particular, which involved a woman making upsetting noises, stomping her feet, and randomly spinning a top, all with her back to the audience.

I don't go to a performance to watch someone else's self indulgent display of emotion. Ditto for reading a book. I go to have emotions evoked in ME through the work. The artist shouldn't try to control what that emotion/ reaction is. Interestingly, that piece also required several paragraphs of explanation in the program, something about the world's sadness. Sad was not how I felt. Anger was more like it.

It seems to me that the only people who like this stuff, are the ones making it, be that certain literary fiction or modern dance or any other art form. It reminded me of a strange moment last summer at the Bread Loaf Writer's Conference wherein a couple literary magazines informed everyone that, "If you expect us to publish your work, you need to subscribe to our magazine." The implication being that otherwise the magazines would fold. You know, because no one wants to read that stuff, not even the people who are WRITING it!

As Curt said so eloquently, "That's not art, that's a bunch of people masturbating on each other."

I like to think of this crassness as my influence on him.

Please don't misunderstand, I'm not saying I want everything to be sunshine! rainbows! and jazz hands! But everything needs balance. Without an understanding of the hope a character might have for the potential joys they might experience, I can't then truly comprehend the meaning of their loss when/ if those hopes are not realized. I can't appreciate darkness without a candle, nor can I appreciate these long, lazy summer days without the dark, cold winter nights.

Besides, there's nothing wrong with a little joy. Mock me all you want. Shake your head all you want. Snub me all you want Mr. Snobby Narrow-minded Literary Agent, who doesn't have a clue what my writing abilities are. Dismiss my thesis or my dance composition piece or my holiday book selection.

For a serious person like me, exploring life's capacity for joy is far more difficult and meaningful than exploring its capacity for despair.

Editor's Note: I guess I think about this a lot. Here's a post from last year as a refresher.

Friday Links

Hello there. It's been a hectic week for me, which means I've been a bad blogger. The good news is that Husband read the first seventeen pages of my revised novel, which is now in first person with a narrator ten years younger than she was a month ago (WHAT?! I know, it's CRAZY up in here!) and he liked it!!!!!

Although, on second thought, Husband tends to like everything I write. I think it's because if he says it sucks mud puddles I might lose my will to eat and then no one will come up with what to make for dinner. (Note: I don't have to make the dinner, but I do have to delegate what we will have. Also, Husband refuses to flavor anything. Like, he won't even salt it. So. Weird.)

In short, here are a couple links I wanted to share with you:

1. New Albany Blog: Check out this blog supposedly by a fifteen year old who is living on a commune. I dare you to read more than three entries and still think it's about an actual teenage girl. Dudes, this is TOTALLY a pretend blog for a forthcoming YA series. Right? Right? Someone back me up on this one.

Also, I can't decide if I like it, because it's creative or if I am annoyed by it because it seems so pleased with itself. Thoughts?

2. Unicorn Vengeance If you ever enjoy reading my Tales From the Used Book Store posts, you MUST check out this amazingly bad Harlequin novel. You better believe I'm going to check and see if we've got any books by this gifted author next week at the store. Oh yes.

Time for some tea and some writing and lots of sleeping.

Fully Unfathomable

I just read the New York Mag article about James Frey and Full Fathom Five. It's written by Suzanne Mozes, a writer who met with Frey and considered signing with Full Fathom Five.

Now that I've read this article, I'm a hundred times more disgusted with this Magical Writing Machine idea than before. Honestly, I just feel sick.

Consider this excerpt from Mozes:
"I later spoke to Conrad Rippy, a veteran publishing attorney, who explained that the contract given to me wasn’t a book-packaging contract; it was 'a collaboration agreement without there being any collaboration.' He said he had never seen a contract like this in his sixteen years of negotiation. 'It’s an agreement that says, ‘You’re going to write for me. I’m going to own it. I may or may not give you credit. If there is more than one book in the series, you are on the hook to write those too, for the exact same terms, but I don’t have to use you. In exchange for this, I’m going to pay you 40 percent of some amount you can’t verify—there’s no audit provision—and after the deduction of a whole bunch of expenses.'”

Despite claims that he's merely trying to revolutionize literature, James Frey sounds like a big bag of sleaze with a side of scum. I was aware of the controversy surrounding A Million Little Pieces, but had no interest in reading it or learning the specifics about what was or wasn't true. So today I decided I should find out. I read the original The Smoking Gun article from 2006, which revealed the many extensive fabrications in Frey's book as well as strongly suggesting that Frey is, well, an enormous jerk.

That article combined with the one by Mozes makes me think you have to be insane to be willing to enter into a "contract" with this guy. Writers, you're better than this. And you deserve better than this.

More importantly, READERS deserve better than this. They deserve real stories from the heart. Maybe you're sitting there and thinking, "Yeah, tell that to Stephenie Meyer." But you know what? I think she did write from the heart. You can criticize her literary skills all you want, but she poured her heart into that story, and that's what makes it come alive.

Remember that.

The Magical Writing Machine

My friend Rebecca, who writes for New York Magazine, sent me this article about James Frey (yes, the guy who wrote A Million Little Pieces and got slammed by Oprah).

If you want to keep reading this post, I suggest you read the article first because I'm not in the mood to summarize today. According to my NaNoWriMo stats, at the rate I'm going, I won't finish my novel until....JANUARY. This makes me giggle a little. But it also occasionally fills me with dread (though as Husband pointed out, that's still a pretty short time to write a first draft, which is true but entirely beside the point.).

In short: there shall be no summarizing! Only long, apparently meaningless digressions.

Getting back to the point at hand, it seems that Frey has created a bit of a Magical Writing Machine. I imagine him in Victorian dress, peddling his monstrous creation on the dirty streets of London.Courtesy of Wellcome Images via The Quack Doctor (worth a click to check out this blog of "Historical Remedies for All Your Ills")

I imagine Frey would say something like this, "Step write up! See what my machine can do! Just add one high profile 'writer' (ME) with plenty of marketable ideas, toss in a few actually talented writers with no platform who are desperate to make it big and are tired of burning old manuscripts to heat their one room apartments, season with some marketing bigwigs who prioritize crucial story elements like needing a brand similar to Harry Potter's lightning bolt....and then just press this button. Walaa you have a bestselling book with a movie deal directed by Michael I-Blow-Shit-Up Bay."

And then he'd play with his suspicious Victorian mustache and wiggle his eyebrows and go count his money.

I'm just not sure about this. I guess it's not entirely shocking that factories like this could develop. It's up to the public to decide whether or not they have value. But it definitely leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

And so much for intellectual property. Those writers who sign with him (especially the ones who write under a pen name like Pittacus Lore) can easily be brushed aside, replaced, and silenced. It's just weird, almost as if the authors are banking on either making it big or, barring that, causing huge controversy by doing a tell-all on Frey, which will in turn get them a new book deal. It's all so flashy trashy.

Side note: I won a "signed" copy of I Am Number Four at BEA this year, which was not actually signed by the author--although in this case, the "author" is tenuous. Would Frey sign? Hughes, the supposed author? Let's be honest here though, some poor editorial or marketing assistant was probably the one signing these books. I was disgusted by the idea of winning a book signed with a pen name. Come. On. Pretty obnoxious, in my opinion.

Anyone else have opinions on this? Are you ready to step up and buy that magical elixir that cures everything and is made of sewage runoff?

Perhaps most disturbing of all: Will you even know the difference??

The Future of Stories?

Have you guys seen this video yet? It's from IDEO. I stole it from my friend Dr. Jolly via facebook. At first, I was just going to share it because it's pretty and also it discusses the future of books, albeit nothing that I found totally shocking. It mostly seemed like the natural progression of things.

But then. Then came Alice.

Alice is for fiction.

And it's some crazy Wonderland shit! At least, I thought so. Check it out and let me know what you think. Interactive stories!? I'm excited and freaked out by this concept. How does this affect storytelling? Is it bad or good?

Is this even worth debating? Because it IS happening, whether some of us like it or not.

The Future of the Book. from IDEO on Vimeo.

Blog Discovery and Book Review

Children of the 80s, rejoice! Whitney is a blogger who reads a bunch of YA fiction, especially R.L.Stine, V.C. Andrews, and other literary greats. Then she writes hilarious recaps on her blog!

Awesome Blog of Awesomeness: Unleashing My Inner Geek

How did I find this gem, you may ask? I was trying to remember a creepy horror book I read at my friend's lake house when I was in middle school. I grabbed the book one day and just couldn't stop reading. Not because it was good so much as creepy. I googled this exact phrase, because it's all I could remember about the book: "YA horror+girl with tri colored hair_ islander"

Lo and behold, Whitney recapped this book! It's called The Fog by Caroline B. Cooney.Now not only is my obsessive need to remember that book satisfied, but I found a new, fun blog to read and share with you.

In other news, I just finished Seanan McGuire's Rosemary and Rue.It's Urban Fantasy and about faeries AND it's actually for adults (yay!), so I had to read it. Let me give you a brief review using LISTS!

What I Liked:

1. It's Urban Fantasy for adults. I do enjoy YA urban fantasy buuut sometimes I want to read something meatier. This was about Toby, a changeling (in this world, meaning half fae half human) private detective with baggage. While there is some romance in it, it's not about her romance with any one guy (a guy who somehow represents the metaphorical path the rest of her life will take if she decides to go steady with him. ZOMG).

2. The Main character is flawed but in a likable way. She's also a woman but I feel like that's incidental--for the most part, which is nice.

3. The fae world McGuire creates is really interesting. I was occasionally annoyed that every single fae Toby encounters in some unique mix of this or that but that's just me.

Now, What I Didn't Like:

1. The book suffers a bit from what I like to call Felicity Syndrome.
That being, seemingly every male character introduced, falls in love with the main character. However, I would call this book the girl's version of Harry Dresden--in other words, a fantasy/detective story. And in a typical male protagonist noir/detective story, the detective is surrounded by women who want to sleep with him. In this book, the female protagonist is surrounded by men who want to love her (also have sex with her, obviously).

So then I thought, well maybe that's what most women want. Sex with someone who also wants to protect them, and brush their hair off their face when they sleep. Is that so wrong? So we'll consider this a tentative con of the book.

2. She needs rescuing. Like, a lot. And there's often fainting involved and being carried by one of the aforementioned burly men who love her. Yes, she is a tough character. But if you force the tough girl into scenarios where she is constantly relying on a guy and fainting in his arms, then it feels like fake feminism. (Kind of like a certain *clumsy* wannabe teen vamp who just wants to be Independent but really is a danger to herself without a man to rescue her, *cough*Bella*cough*)

Bottomline: Will I Read The Next Book? Yes, yes I will.

To wrap up the news for tonight, I want to share that during a brief, violent storm, the sky turned a sickly shade of greenish yellow. Yes, it was awesome. Yes, I took photos. No, they did not do the eerie sky justice.

Mockingjay Never Grows Wings (Brace Yourself for a Long Post)

All right people. I've rolled up my sleeves. I've got snacks at hand and tissues (for mucus or possibly blood). And this cold has let up enough that my brain seems to be operating at relatively normal levels. I think I'm finally ready to blog about Mockingjay.

Please note: (read the following line in this voice))

OH YES. THERE WILL BE SPOILERS. Actually, there's going to be some blood too.

Mockingjay, book three in Suzanne Collins' Hunger Games trilogy, was a huge disappointment. I'm genuinely stunned by all the glowing reviews, gathered with links here by the Huffington Post for your perusal.

I was particularly shocked by the effusive review from Publisher's Weekly whom I trust so blindly (especially with its red stars. How could you, PW??)

Now I'm not going to drag you through every single reason why I was disappointed in this book. Why? Because a reviewer on Amazon named Suzanne G. has said it all (or most of it, anyway) and said it in a much calmer, rational voice than I could probably manage. So please please pretty please, read her review right now and then come back.

Review you must go read right now.

...waiting...waiting....

Done? Okay, great.

To quote Suzanne G., "I think the vital counterpart to accurately portraying the horror and corruption of war is the possibility of redemption, of pursuing redemption."

I completely agree. If I wanted to read in grim, brutal detail about the horrors of war and PTSD with no sense of redemption whatsoever, I would just read a nonfiction book about war. I would NOT read a Young Adult fiction book. See, that's the beauty of fiction. You can show the reader sadness and horror but also lift them above the fray to reveal something MORE. As in, the redemptive powers of helping others, the resilience of humanity, the power of love to survive attacks that scar the body forever, or the beauty that can be found in simply moving forward.

At the end of Mockingjay, I felt none of this. Nope. I just felt sick to my stomach. Depressed. Numb.

It's tempting to drag Collins into the town square and hold her responsible for our collective grievances against this book. But as a writer, I know how easy it can be to be blinded. Collins has a lot of (explosive) balls in the air and there were so many places that almost worked. I can't help but think she had the best of intentions. And yet, the book fell short. So I want to talk about the publishing industry and where some of the blame should fall with the failure of this book.

Where was her editor? Seriously, where was she? My very first thought when I finished Mockingjay was, "Well, that book needed another round of revisions for emotional growth and character development." (Yes, that really was my first thought.)

Look, we all know how these big series work, right? They're cash cows for publishers. The first book is a huge hit and the readership clamors for more, working themselves up into a lathered frenzy of anticipation. The next book comes out and we ALL buy it in hardcover, no questions asked. Twilight, Harry Potter, The Hunger Games. They've made big bucks for publishing houses and bookstores during a time when many industry professionals are peeing themselves with fear over the impending publishing Armageddon.

There's always a push for the next book to come out sooner, while the fan excitement is at fever pitch. Why worry about the quality of the story when the publisher knows for sure that we'll all buy it anyway? Now that Mockingjay is out, who are fans like me waving their fist at? The author Suzanne Collins. No one is coming to the doors of Scholastic with torches and pitchforks. And what does Scholastic care about Suzanne Collins? Her trilogy is over. That cash cow has been milked. On to the next author. The next trilogy. The next big thing, which we will all go out and buy in droves, no questions asked.

You will notice that stylistically Mockingjay is very similiar to the previous books in the series, in my opinion, to a fault. Every single accursed chapter ends with a ludiscrous "twist." Now, Collins' used her amazing ability to write a good cliff hanger to breathtaking affect in the first two books. But in Mockingjay it was overused. The story no longer takes place in the Hunger Games/ Quarter Quell arena and life doesn't always involve a twist. It would have been more effective to end a few chapters on an emotional cliff with no twist and then punch the reader in the face with an unexpected twist when the plot genuinely called for it.

As is, I began to anticipate when something would go wrong and often, how it would go wrong (Oh great, Peeta's all crazy in the head.) I can't help the fact that I can physically see the chapter coming to an end. Now, either an editor failed to reign in Collins' obsessive need for end of chapter twists or (more likely) Collins' was strongly encouraged by her editors to invent twists with which to end each chapter because that's something the reviewers have praised about this series.

There's also the unforgivable matter of not explaining why Katniss voted yes to a final Hunger Games involving the children of Capitol leaders, as Suzanne G. mentions in her review. Smart readers can make the assumption that Katniss voted this way on purpose to make President Coin trust her thereby leaving the President open to Katniss' deadly attack. But this was in no way explained. Immediately after Katniss kills President Coin, she is dragged into a room where she promptly contemplates suicide for the billionth time in the book (yet another lost opportunity for character growth and some sense of gratitude for life and the resiliency of the human spirit. No?) That was a perfect time for Katniss to take the reader through her thought process, thereby reassuring us that she would never, NEVER actually support another Hunger Games, no matter who participated. I'm truly shocked that no one caught this mistake. And as a writer who tends to leave out important explanations by accident, I'm going to blame the editor for this one.

Really what I'm getting at here, is that these cash cow series are often congratulated for keeping the industry going. They also reassure people that readers do care about books in spite of blockbuster movies and video games. And I think instead of milking them for short term gain, publishers owe it to us, the readers, the industry, and themselves, to make these books as great as possible and stop worrying about making sure the book hits its release date.

Because if that's all the editors care about, then the publishing Armageddon really is on the horizon.

[Editor's Note 1:55 PM, same day:] The voices in my head were arguing with me (as they do) and so I felt the need to explain a bit more about this post. I don't want anyone to think I'm putting all the blame squarely on the editor. I just think as readers, writers, and consumers of stories, we need to demand that the story is what matters, not the deadline.

Basically, it takes a village to write a book. The author writes the best book she can. But she should feel comfortable telling the editor that the story is taking longer than the predetermined schedule. And the editor should then take the book and make it even better than the author ever could on her own. But she should also feel comfortable walking into a meeting with the President and the marketing people and say, "Look, Author and I have been working as hard as we can, but this story isn't ready yet. We need to push back the release date." And the higher ups should be supportive of this. They shouldn't punish the editor or the author.

So as readers, how can we help? We can demand better books. And we can be patient when a book doesn't come out on schedule. Because in the end, it's the story that matters. The story is what will be left behind. And it deserves to be the best story it can possibly be. No matter what the cost.

The Right Title For Your Bestseller

Today I'm going to help YOU craft the perfect title. The right title CAN and WILL ensure that your book hits the bestseller list. All you have to do is understand the formula and make it work for you!

Award yourself points along the way (points earned will depend on how closely you can follow the workshop guidelines) and at the end, find out if YOUR BOOK is destined to be a BESTSELLER.

Ready? Let's get started!

STEP #1 Use a career or identifying characteristic as the title, preferably something archaic, obscure, and possibly made up:


The + Profession/ Characteristic + ist/ic/er

My Title: The Sarcasmist

Other Examples: The Somnambulist (Jonathon Barnes), The Hypnotist (M.J.Rose), The Alchemist (Paolo Coelho), The Imperfectionists (Tom Rachman), The Piano Teacher (Janice Y.K. Lee), The Book Thief (Markus Zusak)

Points: 3 Bonus +1 if you chose "ist" (so much more current than last year's professions) and +2 if the profession/ characteristic is pertinent to the story but in a way that is metaphorical and not immediately evident simply by reading the back of the book.

STEP #2 Let's take this enigma up a notch! Instead of making the title--I mean, story--about the sarcasmist, make it about the sarcasmist's female companion:


The + Profession/ Characteristic + ist/ic/er +'s + daughter/ wife/ mistress

My Title: The Sarcasmist's Mistress

Other Examples: The Alchemist's Daughter (Katharine McMahon), The Heretic's Daughter (Kathleen Kent), The Time Traveler's Wife (Audrey Niffenegger), The Memory Keeper's Daughter (Kim Edwards)

Points: +2 Penalty -5 if you used "Mother." Mothers are not sexy, and the female must bring a satisfying promise of sexuality in the novel.


STEP #3 Spell it out. Tell your reader that your book is about secrets! And lives! And secret lives that will no longer be secret when she READS YOUR BOOK!

Note: Don't worry about making your title too long. The longer and more meandering it is, the more literary value it will have!


The + Life/History/Correspondence/Confession/Society + of the + Profession/ Characteristic + ist/ic/er +'s + daughter/ wife/ mistress


My Title: The Rambling Secret Diary of the Sarcasmist's Mistress

Other Examples: The Secret Life of Bees (Sue Monk Kidd), The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks (Rebecca Skloot), The Story of Edgar Sawtelle (David Wroblewski), The Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao (Junot Diaz), The Short Second Life of Bree Tanner (Stephenie Meyer

Points: +3 Bonus +2 if you included the word "secret" or "mysterious" or "enigmatic". +1 for each additional adjective you can cram in to describe the life/society/etc.

If you've earned 10 or more points, congratulations! Your title is ready to go out in the world and sell you some books!

A Beginnger's Guide to Paranormal Covers

This week I decided to do a paranormal romance book display in the window of Otter Creek Used Books. Since it's a relatively new sub genre, paranormal romance has been shelved in Fantasy and Romance, so for the window display I had to comb through the store looking for anything that would fit the bill.

Sound impossible? It was actually a lot easier than I thought. It seems that there's some unspoken agreement between publishers to design paranormal covers in a very limited color wheel involving black, white, blue, and purple.

So for the novice, here's a tongue-in-cheek, somewhat accurate, easy way to pick them out on the shelves:

1. Vampire Paranormal: It should hardly come as a surprise to learn that most vampire books involve a lot of black (because vamps are, like, dark-hearted and can only come out when it's dark outside) and red (blood! They drink it!).

2. Werewolf Paranormal: I've noticed that a lot of werewolf covers are blue. Maybe it's because of the emphasis on the night sky, full moon, and whatnot. Of course if there's a wolf in the foreground and a beefy guy's bedroom eyes overlaid over a full moon in the background, that's also a dead giveaway.Please note the continued use of red as an accent color (blood! Werewolves want it, too!).

3. Faerie Paranormal: As if to emphasize the more feminine, sparkly, glittery aspect of faeries, these covers tend to be purple. And pretty.

4. Young Adult Paranormal: Paranormal targeted at young adults often features a closeup of a beautiful, pale teen girl, or a part of her anatomy. I think it's safe to say that Twilight kicked off this trend with its closeup of a girl's hands (see above). The emphasis on female anatomy and extremely white skin frankly weirds me out. Just saying.

All The Rest: Yes, there's also paranormal books involving witches and angels. When in doubt, look for a bad ass woman on the cover dressed in tight black leather/ corset/knee-high boots, her hip jutting out and her hair flowing.

Gripes: Genre Fiction

All right, apparently I'm feeling grumpy today and it's time to get it off my chest and out of my system. Also instead of writing this morning I've spent at least an hour reading book review blogs and getting alternately angry that I currently do not have a published book that one might review and frightened that someday when I do have a published book to review it will be scorned and belittled by people all over the internet.

I suppose I should be so lucky.

But that's not even what I'm going to gripe about! I'm going to complain about something near but not dear to my heart and that is the term "genre fiction."

I don't understand this at all. I grew up coveting my sci fi and fantasy-loving dad's books so of course I have gorged myself on those books (my tastes lean way over on the fantasy side, fyi) for most of my life. Then there's the anglophile in me who can't get enough pre 1800's Brit Lit...and basically any Brit Lit between then and Austen's time, more or less, though please keep in mind that I'm friendly with letters and not numbers, people.

Anyway, what really gets under my skin is when people I previously considered friends who also majored in English and who write, draw themselves up and announce, "I don't read genre fiction." Then they look at me in a sort of sad, condescending way as though I'll never quite reach their echelon of Literature--in writing or reading.

Even my beloved Publisher's Weekly, which is the only magazine I read on a zealous, weekly basis separates their reviews by Fiction (silently understood to be literary fiction, perhaps), Nonfiction, and then Genre Fiction (broken out by Mystery,Sci Fi/Fantasy, and...lowest of the low it seems, Mass Market). Umm, correct me if I'm wrong here, but isn't a fantasy novel technically fiction? The implication here is that genre fiction is a lesser form of fiction that must be quarantined for the safety of such literary darlings (with appropriately bloated titles) as "The Story of Edgar Sawtelle" and "The Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao." (And yes, I do appreciate the irony that Diaz's book is in fact about a person who reads genre fiction!)

I of course have my own fiction prejudices. To me, contemporary or literary fiction tends to be depressing, often about failed relationships, the inability for people to connect, etc. In my opinion that's the drudgery of life--I live it every day. I don't need to read about it, too. But that's where I make my own assumptions about what a genre (I consider literary fiction to be a sort of unspoken genre) entails. I'm sure, for example, plenty of crime novels are ultimately about loneliness.

Sometimes notice a "genre fiction" book placed in the "fiction" section of PW's reviews. So there seems to be an unspoken acknowledgement that genre fiction is of lower quality, perhaps fulfilling certain expectations of plot and character.

The problem occurs when people judge the quality of the writing by the genre. You just can't judge a book by where it's shelved in the bookstore.