| There's an illusion sometimes
that getting published is about "who
you know" . . . This, I hear,
is the case for some people, but
I'm not one of them. I have no
dislike for people who end up here
that way, but I DO have a severe
dislike for the myth that that's "how
it works" because I think
it discourages potential writers,
so here's my story . . .
How I Got Here:
I knew absolutely no one. I
had never been to a SFF con,
SCBWI writing conferences, nothing.
In fact, I'd only ever been to
two book signings at that point.
After I started writing, I joined
three online crit groups. I met
a few people like me: not-yet-published
writers. I rec'd crits that suggested
strongly that my writing kinda
sucked--too many POVs, weird
language, not nearly original
enough, and gods almighty get
rid of those damn modifiers.
I also had some very helpful
feedback--most of it offline
though. I wrote and sold a few
short stories, had form rejections & personal
ones (mostly accusing me of writing
the starts of a novels), sold
a few poems, and developed lots
more of self-doubts from the
crits I was receiving. When I
realized that crit groups were
making me doubt myself more,
I stopped those.
I considered conferences, cons,
meeting people, but I never believed
in networking in my other job.
Old boys' networks, however we
phrase 'em, make me twitchy.
So I didn't go to any of those.
(NOTE: I am not suggesting there
are not good reasons to go to
these things, but going for the
purpose of networking was an
idea I considered & rejected.
There are panels & workshops & much
learning to be had at these places.)
Instead, I researched query letters,
agents, & I started lists.
I joined SCBWI & RWA so I
could read their journals. I
bought a few "market guides" & lurked
on writers forums. And I wrote
a novel.
While I was writing the novel,
I kept track of agents & wrote & re-wrote
the query letter. I wrote & rewrote
a synopsis as i wrote the novel.
I joined Verla Kay's Bueboard
(where I still hang out every
day). I queried a bunch of agents--in
small batches--and I charted
my rejections (I still have most
of them). I had a few requests.
No offers.
While I was waiting I wrote
another book--which I was calling
Finding the Summer Queen. Oddly,
i had a request for it before
I was finished. . . not via networking
but b/c I had a line in my query
letter saying "I am currently
working on . . . ." An agent
rejected the novel I was querying
on, but requested a full of Summer
Queen. So, I said thanks, but
I'm revising it still plus I
have exams to grade.
She asked me to send it when
it was ready.
A month or so later, I did.
At the same time, I sent out
queries to my latest top list
of agents. Only two of these
were print--one was to Rachel
Vater, a agent who hadn't replied
to my first query & had moved
agencies, but she had this awesome
letter to writers I'd read & .
. . well, she was passionate & seemed
different than the others. She
got a stamp. One other agent
got a stamp. . . But equeries
are faster, so I stuck to those
for the rest.
While I was waiting on agents
to reply on what would eventually
be Wicked Lovely, I started another
novel (Ink Exchange).
I had a bunch of requests for
Summer Queen/Wicked Lovely--within
hours a couple times. I had a
sweet rejection from an older
established agent that made me
giddy. (He's still on my Oh Wow
list.) The second agent with
a stamp sent me a crookedly cut
form rejection. The agent who
requested it before it was done
rejected it, too. Then there
were a couple offers--one was
from Rachel. I said yes.
Rachel was . . . well, insane.
She had all of these expectations
that the book was going to do
amazingly well. She wanted next
to no revisions. The other agent
I'd almost gone with told me
I had months of work before we
could sub. I worried that I'd
made a mistake. Oh Goddess, I
picked an optimist. Ugh. But
then, well, she called these
ten editors. Most of them said,
send it. Anne Hoppe got it Friday.
On Monday, I learned that she
left a message on Saturday saying
she wanted it. Then that day
I had a second offer. By the
middle of the week, I had 2 rejections
and a few houses saying they
wanted to offer/wanted in on
the auction. On Thursday, Anne
asked what it would cost to stop
talking to other houses. (NOTE:
I didn't know about this until
Friday. ) Friday morning, Rachel
called and told me to sit down.
Harper made a preempt for a 3
book deal . . . a major deal.
. . a co-acquisition with Harper
UK. . . and could we say yes.
Umm, I did. We re-titled, tweaked
a bit, & they invited me
to come to NYC to meet everyone.
I did. Then there was a pre-publication
tour. It got blurry around then.
But it's been better than I would
ever hoped. The very things crits
said sucked are the things my
editors love. It really is all
subjective. I get that now.
Since then, there's been a good
bit of my telling Rachel (& now
Anne & Nick, my UK editor)
I'm wrong. Wicked Lovely went
into its 9th printing in December
(9 printing with only 6 months
on the shelves!), debut on the
NY Times list & spent a number
of weeks there, a few other lists,
subrights in a batch of countries,
another tour, some promo stuff
in the UK, and. . stuff. . .
just stuff . . . and, none of
it by knowing anyone or doing
anything gimmicky. I wrote, researched,
queried, wrote, & got lucky.
Afterwards, I wanted to know
people--not to open doors, but
b/c it's a weird weird world
I stumbled into & I thought
stumbling at the same times as
others would be more fun. I met
some people since then. I'd be
lost without my critique partner
Jeaniene (Frost). I still don't
have a crit group. I still have
had form rejections from magazines.
(And I still think my agent--and
now editors--are far too optimistic
and more than a little insane.)
And I know that I was lucky
but that it happens so don't
let stories of people needing
to know people scare you off
. . . It doesn't have to happen
that way Smile
| I've
had a number
of blurb
requests
(those
little
quotes
on book
covers)
of late,
so my agent
asked me
to clarify
my rules.
Since I
did so
for her,
I thought
I'd do
so here
too b/c
sometimes
requests
seem to
jump the
process & come
directly
to me.
Process
the first--My
inbox
for the
public
address
is scary.
It takes
weeks
to get
thru
it all--and
that's
when
I'm not
mid-story
b/c mid-story
time
means
I don't
even
read
email.
Your
best
bet is
going
thru
my agent.
She & the
editors
(and
my mother,
actually)
have
a private
address
that
goes
directly
to the
file
I read
daily.
It mean
seem
like
it'd
be slower,
but it's
faster
to go
thru
them
. .
. and
by "them," I
mean
my editor
or agent
not my
mother
:) My
mother's
involvement
in my
job is
1) if
I get
2 author
copies,
she gets
one,
2) I
fuss
at her
over
stuff
I can't
angst
over
in public,
and 3)
silly
woman
is still
a helluva
support
system.
No matter
how panicky
I get
, wringing
my hands, & saying "it
all sucks!" she
tells
me it'll
be okay.
Anyhow
. . .
* I
don't
blurb
MG (middle
grade)
or horror.
*
I prefer
urban
fantasy
(adult
or YA),
contemp
non-fantasy
YA, & paranormal
romance.
I especially
love
vampires,
werewolves,
bi or
gay MCs,
feminist,
social
issues
. . .
but I
also
like
light
fluffy
stuff
too.
Just
not Disney
type "fairies" :)
*
Reading
doesn't
mean
I'll
blurb.
I don't
throw
my name
out there
without
thought
*
My liking
you doesn't
mean
I'll
blurb
your
book--or
that
I won't.
The 2
are utterly
unrelated.
*
If your
readers
aren't
an appropriate
audience
for my
text
(i.e.
middle
grade
fiction),
I cannot
blurb
your
text
b/c it
would
be unethical.
I don't
want
middle
grade
readers
reading
Ink Exchange
(or WL).
My kids
look
at the
authors
who are
listed
on covers & check
them
out.
I cannot
do something
that
will
encourage
MG readers
to read
my book. |
| Prologue
Ponderousness
. . .
I like
prologues.
All three
of my
novels
so far
have
a prologue & epilogue.
In WL,
the prologue
takes
place
at a
different
point
in time.
The rest
of the
chapters
are in
close
linear
time.
It highlights
an event
that
is plot-central,
but doesn't
require
a full
chapter
to depict.
It's
the "moment" that
sets
into
motion
the rest
of the
story.
One could
argue
that
the Epi
is less
essential
in re:
storyline,
I suppose,
but I
am a
dénouement
fan.
The Epi
lets
me assure
that
my threads
are tied
off.
(I do
the same
thing
in INK.)
Arguably,
events/moments
set other
things
into
play.
Seeing
a particular
moment
through
a specific
character's
pov highlights
a "moment" with
consequences
that
are the
plot
of the
book
to follow.
Of course,
imho,
it's
who's "telling" the
moment
that
makes
it the
prologue.
To Keenan,
the events
in that
prologue
weren't
a moment
but one
in a
seemingly
infinite
series
of failed
attempts.
To Donia
(& eventually
to Ash),
that
same
tableau
is The
Moment.
Prologues & epilogues
are,
by necessity,
short
sequences.
This
gives
the events
more
oomph & signposts
that
the events
in these
sections
of text
will
have
Consequences
That
Matter
(prologue)
or are
the end
result
of what
has happened
(epilogue).
So I
guess
I put
them
there
for 3
reasons--
1) the
events
are out
of the
time
sequence
in the
overall
text,
2) the "moment" thing
I was
just
rambling
about, & 3)
they
allow
for emphasis
by structure
(kinda
like
using
a simple
sentences
in conjunction
with
a number
of compound & compound
complex
sentences).
Are
they
necessary?
I dunno.
I put
them
there
for a
reason
though,
so I
find
them
necessary.
Whether
or not
readers
will
agree
is a
question
I can't
answer
though. |
| filling
in blanks
that were
left in
WIcked
Lovely
and Ink
Exchange
has been
entertaining
me. The
last Summer
King is
named and
mentioned
a bit.
A plot
concern
in Ink
Exchange
is followed
up. Neither
is new
data to
me, but
it wasn't
the right
time to
offer either
of these
answers
in the
first two
books.
It's weird
sometimes
dealing
with reader
responses
on tour
or in email
(or seeing
them in
the ether
or in reviews)
commenting
on things
that are
left unanswered
in a text.
I ended
up discussing
this at
length
with an
author
I chat
with in
real-time
some days.
There's
a variety
of ways
to deal
with this,
but I tend
to go with
a limited
POV in
which I
don't see
dropping
data into
the scene
if it isn't
a realistic
thing for
the pov
character
to ponder
at that
moment.
Is Keenan
going
to stop
and think
of his
father
by his
given
name?
Nope.
Is Beira?
Nope.
So that
detail
is omitted
for the
time.
As a
reader
I get
frustrated
when
a text
bogs
down
in backstory & obvious
world
extension.
It feels
artificial,
like
the writer
is all
about
telling
the reader
the world.
I'd rather
a slower
unwrapping;
it feels
closer
to real
to me.
Now
there
are lots
of ways
to read
the "show
don't
tell" phrase
that
is tossed
about
so much.
One has
to tell
some
things,
imo.
This
is simply
the way
life
works,
and to
me, that
means
it's
how text
must
work
as well.
Text
is to
be replication
of aspects
of life,
so in
life
there
are times
we'd
tell
things.
There
are times
we think
things
that
are "telling" .
. . Ergo
these
are fine
in text
sometimes
as well.
I walk
a line
btw implementing
what
pleases
me as
a reader & approaching
text
like
life
caught
in a
frame.
Giant
paragraphs
of world
building
bore
me though,
so I
tend
to omit
them
(even
though
I have
one editor
who sometimes
wants
more
of them).
Paragraphs
of setting
visuals
make
more
sense
to me
though,
as when
I look
at the
world
these
are the
details
that
filtre
into
my mind.
I think
I tend
to give
the setting
fixation
to the
characters
whether
I mean
to or
not .
. . but
finite
depictions
of characters'
appearance
feel
artificial
to me--partly
because
they
are inevitably
subjective
and partly
because
my mind
refuses
to process
that
way.
When
I meet
people,
I tend
to focus
in on
a few
key details.
These
are the
details
that
anchor
in my
mind
as cues
so I
can identify
this
person
later.
My recall
is often
spotty
so I
need
a few
anchors
to label
the image
in my
head
with
that
person.
Sometimes
these
are visual,
but sometimes
they
aren't.
This
feels "real" to
me, so
I think
it's
my inclination
in text.
. . plus,
again,
that
whole
subjective
thing.
What
I assess & note
as "attractive" might
not be
what
you do,
so if
I affix
precise
images
to a
character
I'm trying
to convey
as attractive
and those
aren't
the details
that
match
the term "attractive" for
you my
purpose
is thwarted
by adding
those
precise
modifiers.
Of course
. . .
if one
looks
at the
terms
we often
utilize
for descriptors
the limitations
become
pretty
obvious
too.
Eyes,
hair,
height.
Let's
see.
*yawn*
I'm 5'2" ,
blue
eyes,
long
hair.
Clothes?
Hmm,
black
skirt & white-ish
top.
If say
we're
meeting
at a
bar & that's
what
you use
to find
me, we
might
miss
our appointment.
Aside
from
the height
there's
nothing
useful
in that
description.
Add "snarled" to
the hair,
that
might
help.
Better
still,
add "likely
to be
sitting
with
back
to the
wall" or "probably
wearing
boots
of some
sort." It's
not the
eyes/hair/height
that
give
a real
cue;
it's
the details
with
connotations
that
help.
Take
a group
of people
wearing
similar
clothes--publishing
folks
at BEA,
frex.
There's
a lot
of people
with
shoulder
length
hair
(tidily
contained)
wearing
black
clothes & sensible
pumps.
I located
my black-clothes-clad
agent
by her
walk.
(I'll
pick
on her
b/c her
picture's
online.)
Hers
is a
very
long
stride
(she
towers
over
me),
alternating
between
purposeful
and pause-oh-wow-look-at-this,
and ends
in impractical
shoes.
Or maybe
that's
just,
yanno,
b/c of
my perspective,
my point
of view
;) I'm
short,
amused
by her
bouts
of look-at-this,
and like
shoes.
So those
are the
details
that
I file
away
under
the label "Rachel
Vater." I
can't
honestly
tell
you what
colour
her eyes
are,
if she
wears
glasses,
or how
she wears
her hair.
I know
her hair
is dark.
I can
say with
pretty
good
certainty
that
she HAS
two eyes.
She usually
carries
a mid-sized
bag.
So I
guess
which
details
go in
the paragraphs
are decided
somewhere
btw subjectivity & what
we naturally
notice.
I notice
buildings
more
than
eyes
:) |
| Characaters
as "real" people
. . .
We can't
assure
happiness
for anyone.
We can't "fix" the
broken
pieces
or un-do
stress
for others
in our
lives.
We can
worry,
listen,
suggest,
but in
the end
| |
