Thursday, July 27, 2006

How To Ruin Your Writing Career (Step 2)

The first step toward destroying a perfectly good or even somewhat mediocre writing career was discussed in my post about the teenaged author who met her tremendous deadline and earned a whopping and undeserved advance by plagiarizing the work of another author and then excusing her crime by saying she had a photographic memory and ‘unintentionally’ copied whole paragraphs time and time again from someone else’s book. Kudos to her for providing a perfect example of how to royally screw up.

Here’s another one:

Step Two of How to Ruin Your Writing Career comes from a lesser known author [she has one book published so far] who wrote a scathing letter that was published in this month’s Romance Writer’s Report [the newsletter of Romance Writers of America.]

I won’t name the author here, because I feel mentioning her name will only give her publicity she doesn’t deserve, but for anyone who is interested, her name and the text of her ignorant and ill-informed missive can be found in the following places:

This post at Smart B*tches.

This post by HelenKay Dimon

This post by Kate Rothwell


Kudos to this author for providing yet another sterling example of a writer behaving badly. Not only has she spewed bigotry and hatred and impugned the very morality of other writers, she’s set up her own code of acceptance into RWA, listing the target demographic of the ENTIRE romance industry as: college-educated, married, middle-class, monogamous and moral.

Ain’t she just a peach? I have half a mind to post on her blog and ask her to define more specifically her definition of moral, since I’m college-educated, married, middle-class and monogamous – I just want to make sure I comply entirely with all her high and mighty standards before I go out and buy another romance novel, or write one for that matter, or pay my yearly dues to RWA.

Like tons of other authors today, I’m penning a response to RWR, not only taking this author to task for her vitriolic assault on the rest of us, but taking RWR to task for printing such garbage and fueling a fire within the organization that we thought had died down to a small ember.

So, once more congratulations to the author in question for letting her friends, fans and fellow authors know how narrow-minded, mean-spirited and completely ignorant she is. I’m sure this will help her sales tremendously. Good job!

7 comments:

Tempest Knight said...

I've been following this and I'm still baffled by it. The whole thing is so... stupid. I laughed when she said the target demographic was "married" women. What? We singles don't count?

Bernadette Gardner and Jennifer Colgan said...

Apparently no one counts except those who are carbon copies of her. I'm surprised she didn't add white, Republican and born-again. I also got a kick out of her comment that the rest of us are 'shrill' in voicing our opinions. That's just classic reactionary crap.

loonigrrl said...

That slippery slope argument is pretty sad and ineffective. It's the argument to use when you have nothing else to back up your claims . . . and it doesn't really make sense: what slippery slope? Anything could be a slippery slope!

Also the part where she claims that the believers in what comes naturally 'majority' is at risk of being censored rather than the other way around is totally absurd. What was she thinking? I just don't get it.

Ciar Cullen said...

Oh, wow, you said it much better than I did on my blog, but I'm glad you did! Honestly. Why didn't she add "white" and "God-fearing" while she was at it? Oh, damn, I see you just said that too in your comment LOL

She has a right to her opinion, of course, but RWA had a choice whether to print that. Editorials from members are quite often veiled statements by the org. itself. Me, I'm saving my hundred bucks and putting in either the vacation or RT fund.

Ciar Cullen said...

Oh, and PS, I mean to say that I'm a Republican, a Christian, white, married, and heterosexual, and STILL I find it offensive.

Annalee Blysse said...

Haven't been following... and what this makes me think of is that...

Not noticing just helped me decide to give up RWA until I go to the next conference. RWA online just doesn't work for me because I can't get online often enough. I haven't been to the forum for months for anything other than a fly by post. I work Saturday mornings so driving to the Sacramento chapter meetings is permanently out. Might as well save $100 this year and save it for an RT ad or something.

Amanda Brice said...

Oh, but she did add "Republican and born-again", only not as directly as that. She said "moral," which in the Religious Right crowd is code for "white, conservative, Republican, born-again."