NaNoReaMo 2007

First things first: Thanks to everyone who offered up opinions about the heat level issue. Time to talk to the publisher. :)

Those who've been by before may recall that I mentioned trying to put together National Novel Reading Month. Well, August 1st is tomorrow, and we're going ahead with the idea.

We're hosting the discussion community on Livejournal, so if you've got an account and want to, feel free to join in. I think I left it so you can also post anonymously if you like, so if you don't have an account ... feel free to join in. :)

A dilemma

There's more bloffle. There's always more bloffle, but I swear, this year it just seems like one spins into another before the last one is blown out. I'm sort of curious as to whether they will ever stop, in a train-wreck witness sort of way.

But I do occasionally still have serious things to ponder and discuss. Like:

I have a book to turn in for a publisher. It's the fourth of a quadrology. (Is that what those are called?) Fourth in a series, anyway. The other three books are by authors who write erotic romance. As in, that's what readers know them for.

I, those who swing by know, am not known for writing erotic romance. I don't, so much. Not under this name, anyway. So I have a dilemma.

The last time I did a series with erotic romance authors, I stuck by my guns and did not write a book that matched the tone. Certainly I upped the heat, I think, but I didn't go erotic. And the book didn't quite reach the reading audience for the series.

So now, here I stand at the deciding point again, pondering what to do. Should I continue to stick to the tone I've set with this name, and once more keep myself beneath the erotic romance line, and trust that the people who want to read it will find and enjoy the book (assuming it's picked up, of course). Or should I hop on the erotic romance trend, toss away caution and write something hotter, and hopefully tap into a new portion of the readers out there?

It really is a thorny (I was going to say sticky, but I'll spare you) question. What would you do in my shoes?

And the gift certificate goes to...

Mary Danielson, come on down! Or rather, email me and let me know where to send your prize.

As for the oh-so-scientific survey about what word we should use to replace buzz? *drumroll* Nooz is the popular winner!

So, whenever you're announcing books, sales, agents, etc on the net, let it henceforth be decreed that you are not creating buzz, but nooz!

I spent a fantastic weekend playing with the horses. Saturday, the Engineer and I went for our usual lesson. Which was not fabulous, but no one died. Yesterday, we went out to a lake with our trainer and her family. We took the horses, we took a boat, and we divided the day between an awesome trail ride and being dragged around behind the boat on inner tubes. Great fun was had by all.

And now it's back to the business of the workaday week, but that's all good. Sometimes you have to recover from fun in excess. :)

The glossary expands

So we have bloffle, which I've defined as a kerfluffle on blogs, particularly in Romancelandia, but really, it can apply to any group involved in an online scrap.

We have opinionating, which, yes, probably needs more definition.

Now the lovely and talented Kate Rothwell has called for a new word to replace the old "buzz". You know, the chatter and word of mouth hype for an author, book, event, whathaveyou.

I suggested N'type. Something like N'Sync, N'type would be pronounced Neh-type, to catch the concept of the net, typing, and hype, all in one word. It's cute, I think, but perhaps too odd or not quite catchy enough.

So I've come up with other options:

1. Nuzz: Let's just change the first letter. It's a buzz on the net! It's a nuzz! Easier to say and probably remember than N'type, but also close to a nuzzle. Do we want to be nuzzling authors and books?

2. Nooz: A play on news. Still using the letter n to incorporate the net. This is even cuter than nuzz, and as writers, can we stand deliberately mispelling a word?

3. Hotflash: This is currently my favorite. Television and the radio use breaking newsflashes, right? Romancelandia is a community comprised primarily (had to get that word in there) women, right? So we all know what a hotflash is, and it might be amusing to co-opt the word for ourselves. Got a new book coming out? Send out a hot newsflash: hotflash!

Since I'm having fun, other people should have fun too. I'm going to turn this into a contest.

Post your vote for your favorite between now and noon PST, Monday July 23rd, and I'll enter you into a drawing for a $25 (electronic) gift certificate from Barnes and Noble.

Your choices are:

a) N'type
b) Nuzz
c) Nooz
d) Hotflash

Or, you know, suggest a word of your own. And have fun!

Opinionating.

Oh look, a new word. By the time I get done, I'll have my very own personal glossary.

First things first, though. I want to say how much I enjoyed meeting the people I met. This year was so very much different than my first conference in Reno that I'm really sort of blown away. I didn't realize how many people I knew and how many connections I'd made until I started running out of time to talk to everyone I wanted to talk with.

If I missed you or walked by you (Hi Jacqueline!) I am so sorry. It wasn't my intent. After about Friday morning, I suffered tunnel vision and started missing my own roommates and was telling people to grab my hair to get my attention. I am making a list for next year and sticking to it.

On to the opinionating.

I am a chapter president. I did my duty at National, attended the AGM, and was impressed. Not by the decisions handed down by our current Board -- far from -- but by the eloquence with which my fellow members made their points and the spirit with which they argued. Seriously, ladies, there are some of you who blew my socks off, and I'm grateful for everything you said.

On the subject of publisher eligibility: I honestly don't think the Board and its legal advisor(s) seriously thought through the wording of what they intended to say. I'm not much in to conspiracy theory, so I don't believe that this was a move specifically geared at getting rid of e-publishers, particularly not when the RWA has essentially opened the door to any publisher that can meet their criteria. I think it was a move against publishers in general.

Because, let's face it, while most of the large houses may not have issues meeting the advance clause or the sales and distribution requirements, there are small print publishers that can not. There may be some "big boys" that can't. And I don't think that the RWA Board really thought through a sweeping change of eligibility requirements like this that cuts the legs out from under so many.

It's an unfortunate mistake. I've heard several e-publishers say that it's not going to change the way they publish their books, distribute them or do business, which is fantastic. I don't believe that it should. I would bet, however, that when RWA next puts out a call for sponsors for National or any other endeavor, that they're going to hear a significant silence on the part of the people they just eliminated.

One more thing: The dictionary defines primary as: 1. first or highest in rank or importance; chief; principal. Note how that does not mean 'sole' or 'exclusive'. If we're changing dictionary definitions of words not exclusively pertaining to the romance industry, I think it takes more than the decision of the board to do so. Just a hunch.

More opinionating on other issues another day.

Guess who's back?

That's right, I return! Conference was fantastic. I put faces to names, I met a lot of people, I'm sure I missed many more and if that includes you, I am *truly* sorry.

There's also more bloffle. Holy cow, is there bloffle.

I am too tired and brainless to comment on it now, but maybe in the morning I'll be coherent.

Until then, hello and goodnight!

Off to National with me. Apologies for the silence, again. Time got away from me.

I'll have some access so I'll be checking in, and looking forward to meeting people who are there.

Bye!