Editing an Old Friend - Cupid's Mistake

Almost done proofreading the scanned copy of Cupid's Mistake so that I can republish it as an e-book.

I haven't read it in years, and so I can edit with a good amount of detachment and objectivity. It feels, oddly, as if someone else wrote it, not me.  The good thing is that I believe it's a solid story. The bad thing is that part of me wonders whether I can write as well again after not writing a full-length novel for almost a decade.

I'd like to test the waters by entering some RWA contests, but I think because they won't let previously published authors enter unpublished work unless they've not been published for five years (my last novella--not a full-length novel--was published in 2010), I have to wait a total of 11 years before I can enter an unpublished work in one of those contests.

Yeah, I know, I should just write a new one and put it out there.  But times--and styles--change. I, personally, like my writing style, because the rhythm of it falls well on my inner ear. However, I am not so certain younger, more modern, ears are tuned to such sounds any more, if that makes any sense. As a result, I'd like to test the waters via a contest before I put a book out there.  But, I don't really want to wait more years to test the waters.

That said, it's nice revisiting the Hathaway family in Cupid's Mistake.  The Hathaways are a loving family--a bit eccentric, but all of them kind-hearted.  Even the matchmaking Lady Hathaway--ever ambitious for her children--is there with a hug and a shoulder to cry on should her children need it. There are a lot of dysfunctional families in novels, even in romance novels, and I've written more than a few of them. But the Hathaways are, I think, one of the few who are simply nice, caring people.  And that does make me happy.  It's like visiting old friends, and good-hearted friends at that.  :-)

Harlequin vs. RWA and a little history

I've seen more than a few comments around the blogosphere, lists, and Twitter about how Romance Writers of America should have been more compromising with Harlequin, that it's making their Harlequin authors some how "not published."  How RWA has always been against innovation, and of course the perennial accusation comes in about how RWA hates ebooks.  RWA just needs to come into the 21st century!

You don't get it.  You really do not get it about RWA.

Let's take a look at their mission statement, right on their web site, up front:

Romance Writers of America is dedicated to advancing the professional interests of career-focused romance writers through networking and advocacy.

Notice the words "advancing the interests of career-focused romance writers."  Notice the word "networking" and really, really, really take note of "advocacy."

Click here for more

Harlequin vs. RWA

Jackie Kessler nailed it:

http://www.jackiekessler.com/blog/2009/11/19/harlequin-horizons-versus-rwa/


I'm pretty danged proud to be a member of Romance Writers of America right now--they've dropped Harlequin (HQ) from their recognized publisher list because of HQ's Harlequin Horizons vanity publishing venture.  Science Fiction Writers of America and Mystery Writers of America have followed RWA's lead.

The news is all over the blogosphere and fiercely Tweeted right now, and it's not showing to Harlequin's benefit.  Even the New Yorker is giving its two cents, and yeah, not so hot for HQ.

FWIW, I don't have a problem with self-publishing, nor do I even have a problem with vanity publishing.  They all have their place.  But if an agent did what HQ is doing, he or she would be drummed out of AAR.   RWA is an author advocate organization.  They can't go against their bylaws and mission and look the other way when even Harlequin--the world's largest romance publisher if not the world's largest publisher--does something detrimental to authors' interests.

And I've gotta say, even if you were determined to pay someone to publish your books, you could do it far, far less expensively than with Harlequin Horizons.  Less than half price, or so I'm told.

From what I understand, Torstar, Harlequin's parent company is seeing losses in the millions; Harlequin is the only company under Torstar that's seeing a profit and a healthy one at that.  I have no beef with any company making good money; I'm a capitalist at heart.  But I wonder if Torstar is pressuring Harlequin to go the vanity publishing route to so as to make more money to bail out their other failing companies.  Seems to me it's a sure way to kill the goose that's laying the golden eggs.  If one of your companies is failing, you either do what you can to fix it, or you drop it.  You don't go compromising the name and quality of the successful company to shore up the failing one. 

Harlequin's still a good publisher with which to publish your books--advances, international distribution, etc., are okay.  But not as a vanity publisher--not with the Horizon imprint.  The money should flow to the author; the author shouldn't have to pay to be published.