If you haven't heard, this past week has turned up quite a bit of drama across the board within the RWA and e-publishing ranks. When I received my RWR and read the president's monthly article, I mentioned to my husband that this was turning into a running joke - I can't recall when she hasn't invoked the pitfalls of e-publishing, and I had to laugh when I saw (halfway through her article) that she had done it again.
Full disclosure before I continue: Once upon a time (about ten years ago), I'd exhausted all publishing venues for my romance novel, having submitted it to every known publisher and agency in romance-dom. I was trying to consider my options when, a year after I had submitted a requested proposal, I received my final rejection letter that said the associate editor liked it but couldn't get approval from the editor, and thank you and better luck elsewhere. At the same time, a friend for whom I had a deep amount of respect signed on as an editor at an e-publisher and told me that I should submit to another editor interested in my sub-genre. I did. After a few months, the publisher offered me a contract. I accepted without realizing how RWA would eventually respond and where that would leave me in the organization. I don't regret giving the publisher my novel (it wasn't going anywhere but the trash bin anyway), but I do regret that I'm now in a weird in-between place in RWA. To be honest, it feels like punishment.
Suffice to say, the exchanges online, from the Twitter #rwafail to the e-mail lists and blog posts, have caught my interest because they apply to my situation if only vaguely. This week, seeing agent and bestselling author Dierdre Knight tackle Diane Pershing's latest RWR offering has brought up points I hadn't considered. Likewise, Pershing's response today has given me more food for thought.
What do I think RWA should do? I don't know. RWA is a monolith, and any movement is difficult with a group this diverse and large. However, I do think a large number of members (including me) are being disenfranchised. Those of us who leaped before realizing that PAN's doors would slam on us, as would the Golden Heart, receive the benefits of PRO membership and little else on a national level. Those who are continually selling books and making a nice profit from e-publishing, whether solely or in addition to print publishing, have lately had trouble submitting e-books to the Rita. The few who've qualified by RWA's standards receive the benefits of PAN membership, but what about the remainder?
So what is a good solution? What is to be gained by leaving RWA? What's to be gained by staying and working on change from within? What can RWA do to serve all of its members, regardless of their business decisions? And more so - should anything change within e-publishing and that business model to make those houses more acceptable to RWA's demands, or is RWA basing its standards on a failing business model? I see a lot of emotional response to the subject on both sides, but I haven't seen many responses that logically tackle the issue and bring the underlying problem into focus. Specifically, I'd like to know why e-published authors feel threatened by RWA's decisions, and I'd like to know why RWA's board members feel threatened by e-publishing. On the e-pub side, is it all about the recognition? On the board side, is it all about the money?
I know I don't need to remind Five Scribes visitors, but just in case - please keep comments professional and (if critical) constructive. Let's have a discussion without heat and vitriol and really ask ourselves what the root issues are and how we can address them, whether within or without RWA.
19 comments:
Brava, KL. Well said, I think this is an intelligent post and I look forward to reading professional opinions and thoughts.
I'm not a professional (read - pre-pubbed author) but I feel RWA's missing the boat on digital publishing. If the PS3 vs. Blue-Ray Disc debacle proved anything, it's that people will turn to the technology that's cheap and serves their purpose. (in this case, PS3's which'll play video games & Blue Ray movies). Within the next 2-3 years at most, ereaders will come way down in price, just like cell phones did, and cross-pollenize themselves with supported download platforms. That means more e-pubbed authors getting a consistent readership and building up what used to be the "mid-list". This is a technological revolution and I think RWA's being short-sighted by not allowing their members to participate in a viable publishing model. Mind you, Mystery Writers and Thriller Writers have similar bias towards print books, so RWA isn't alone.
It's going to be the teen/college age reader who're going to front the e-pub wave, jmho. If they can get Twilight for $10 instead of $23, are they going to jump on the bandwagon? Absolutely! Just like cell phones, ereaders will soon be a "must have" on college campuses and high schools. If the ereader companies (Sony, Kindle) put enough bells and whistles on them to appeal to this demographic, why wouldn't young people gobble them up so they can download Moby Dick, etc. for school at a cost of $4.99?
In short, RWA should be leading the way in engaging in digital technology. Perhaps print publishers would take notice and find ways to increase their authors exposure by simultaneously releasing books via epubbing. That would help make up for smaller advances. By becoming protectionist, RWA's cutting off their published authors who're an incredible resource for the organization. Why pay to go to Nationals if you can't enter the RITA, go to the PAN Retreat, etc.? They're losing alot of money from epubbed authors right there.
If they're trying to promote industry standards and networking for their members, they're missing out on a huge chunk of future dividends in the market place.
Laurie - thanks for taking the time to post a response. I see your excellent point that RWA is hurting itself by denying the expertise of all published members ranked among PAN.
Why would they do that? What is the greater good they believe they are accomplishing with their anti-e-publishing stance?
I guess I'm trying to dig for the core motivation (perceived or real) for the resistance. I'd also love to know the core motivation on the other side - is it personal (feeling like a second-class citizen) or is it financial (tired of spending $85/yr just to be shut out of several benefits of membership)? Or do some feel like there's an even simpler motivation?
KL & Laurie, I think RWA claims that they are thinking of compensation of the author, and that's why they have held these rigid rules against not only Digital but any small press that doesn't pay the designated required amount to its authors. We're quick to put this on RWA, but in truth, aren't there digital publishers who are making quite a deal of money off of they're e-published authors? Perhaps we should be asking some of our successful e-publishers if they might be willing to come up with more dollar amounts upfront, particularly for successful best sellers? Playing devil's advocate here.
We're quick to put this on RWA, but in truth, aren't there digital publishers who are making quite a deal of money off of they're e-published authors? Perhaps we should be asking some of our successful e-publishers if they might be willing to come up with more dollar amounts upfront, particularly for successful best sellers?
I'd love to see some response from the e-publishers. I saw Raelene Gorlinski of EC respond at the ESPAN page, but she's the only one so far. I'd like to know what their business model supports in terms of an advance, but from what I've seen from authors, it sounds like a chunk of that money goes to marketing the novels. I know sales are great, and I know overhead is less than for print publishers, but how much is actually left over to reinvest in the company...and in the authors?
I can buy that the business model doesn't support advances. After all, the print pubs assume risk via advances, and e-pubs assume risk via the edgy topics they're willing to invest in (and invest, they do - there are still editors, cover artists, marketing, etc. to pay for before the first sale is even made). And I certainly don't think a company should change its fundamental operations because of the demands of tradition. But what *could* they do to help their authors find middle ground with RWA? And would it even work - after all, RWA has spent the last few years redefining various aspects of the industry that have put epubs at a serious disadvantage - so can publishers even trust RWA to come to that middle ground, too?
why e-published authors feel threatened by RWA's decisions, and I'd like to know why RWA's board members feel threatened by e-publishing. On the e-pub side, is it all about the recognition? On the board side, is it all about the money?
We've discussed this the last two days at my own group blog and it's just dizzying! :D In the interest of full disclosure, I'm epublished AND NY print published--I sold my first book to NY three years ago. I also let my RWA membership lapse this year when my local chapter stopped meeting my needs.
Anyway....Ideally, RWA would realize that Epublishing isn't WRONG or BAD (and that's the impression they're giving IMO)..it's just different. And while they have a lower overhead, they DO have expenses.
Honestly, I'm not sure if ANYTHING can be gained by staying and fighting the good fight--that doesn't mean I don't support those who do. I wholeheartedly DO but until change comes, I'm NOT giving RWA my money.
Nothing has changed in 10 years and that in itself says A LOT about RWA.
Maybe RWA has reached the point that it CAN'T serve all it's members--that's where organizations like EPIC come in.
Considering the winter layoffs in print publishing, I'd say RWA is basing it's standards on a model that is dying a slow and agonizing death. NY will also eventually have to change.
As an epublished author, I don't feel threatened. I feel angry. I have some *very* talented CP's who are epublished but can't break into NY. As a print published author, I've written books I know will never fly in NY and I'm happy to epub them (For the record, my agent is happy for me to epub them also :D). Nothing wrong with that.
As my 15 YO son would say, I'm spitballin' here but maybe it's not epublshing that makes the board members feel threatened but what gets epublished--specifically erotica and erotica romance have been and continue to be the two genres that do very well. Maybe RWA feels by excluding epublishers, they can piss off enough erotica/erotic romance authors that they'll leave. *Shrugs* just speculating.
Obviously I'm not on the board LOL but I think money is the fine line in the sand that the board has found works for them. And I'm not an epublisher but why should a successful publisher who treats their authors fairly and pays them on time be excluded from RWA?
PS I agree w/everything Laurie said--we live in a digital world and it's not going away any time soon.
Amie - thanks for joining the conversation. Maybe you were spitballin', but could that be an issue? Perhaps extend that out, as well, and cover the very edgy topics (not apple-pie-americana, for sure) epubs are willing to take on even outside of erotica. They'll publish settings that NY publishers have shied away from (remember when a historical could *only* be colonial/old west America or Great Britain?), and they'll take on characters NY won't support.
Perhaps this ties into fear? Fear of change, even? If established authors have found success in writing for New York publishers, does the emergence of successful epublishers possibly threaten their established success?
KL You could be correct regarding fear of change...it's not new or unusual. If anything successful epublished authors only threaten mid-list authors, not peeps like Linda Howard, Sandra Brown or Nora Roberts.
Going from memory here but the irony is, RWA was started so that authors would have support, etc in the face of the NY Old Guard publishing! And yet, NY is failing and so is RWA. Did that come out right? DOn't misunderstand me, I LOVE being NY published and have nothing against EITHER model. It's just food for thought :D
Oh dear...thanks for letting me ramble again.
Amie - If that's rambling, keep it coming. I joined RWA the first time in '95, so I wasn't aware of the origins of the group. I only knew I had to drive an hour and change each way to our local RWA meetings, and it was worth every minute in a crowded car. :)
I think what's happening is interesting in context of what's happening to the NY publishers - layoffs, lines closing, authors dumped. It's even scarier now to be a print pubbed author because, by all accounts, the business model is in serious trouble and might take a lot of damage in the current economy. The reticence of the RWA board has been going on since (as far as I could see from a peon standpoint) after the Chicago conference in...1999? The shove from Houston has been happening for 9 years now at least, so I'm curious whether we seem to be reaching an impasse now because heels are dug harder (over the additional threat of the economy on top of the threat of scary change) while the rest is tired of not having PAN advantages when e-sales are at stake.... But then, e-publishing isn't suffering.
I'm still lost. :D
You know, I WAS a PAN author and the only real advantage I found was the PASIC chapter of RWA. Lovely fabulous group of well informed writers who were more than willing to offer their advice/friendship/shoulders etc to their writer sisters and brothers--print or epublished!
RWA should take note. Even though I was mostly a lurker on the PASIC loop, I miss them.
Lynn Viehl posted a link to an article written after the 2000 RWA conference. This shows how little RWA has changed. :(
http://www.crescentblues.com/3_4issue/rwa.shtml
Thanks again, Amie. That was fascinating. I especially enjoyed reading the comments left by successful e-published authors (one of which was published by my publisher).
KL and interested bloggers. The debate between Deidra Knight and Diane Pershing continues. I'm going to go out on a limb here and talk quite frankly about the reason I never e-pubbed or digitally pubbed because I wanted to be able to enter the GH and RITA, also I wanted to make more more than an e-publisher would pay. I also am going to state that I have seen fabulous, why-isn't-this-book-out-there in bookstores e-publications just as I've seen bound books in bookstores, which leave me shaking my head and saying how the heck did this book ever get published?
Subjectivity is the name of this publishing gig. What saddens me on the blog on ESPAN is while there are so many professional comments, there are some that are hysterical, meant to inflame, attack and they serve nothing but a chance for an author to vent.
Please remember people have very short memories. I, for one, if you attack someone in a public forum right or wrong, I will scratch you off my to be read list, whether you are digitally published or traditionally published. That might not leave anyone quaking in his or her boots, but as I wrote on a Five Scribe Blog "Just be Professional, it's not that hard."
Donnell I have to say, for the most part, the conversations have been civil which is really nice.
We all have our reasons for choosing to print or e-pub or whatever. None of them is wrong; only different. And different is fine by me :D
Amie, and I totally respect those authors, you among them, who have come forward and handled them as such. I am a victims advocate, and admittedly, I come from this from a different perspective. I see the damage people can do to each other -- sorry, particularly women -- in degrading one another. While we are trying to elevate our genre in the eyes of the world, the writing world is watching. Words are the most powerful tools we own, and I salute those taking part in the discussion.
Hi KL. I appreciate you examing this latest discussion about RWA and epublishers. As an epubbed author with Samhain, I'm proud of my stories, my cover art, and my publisher. I'd like to say the same about RWA, but it's not possible. Truthfully, the only reason I paid my dues this year was to be able to participate in two online groups: Elements and RWAOL.
I'm not slamming RWA's board as I can see both sides of the controversy. I believe that the board is doing what they think is right. It's unfortunate that it penalizes so many of us epubbed authors. In fact, it's downright disheartening and I'd love to see things change.
What does it hurt to try something new? Accept the successful, tried and true epublishers on a trial basis? Support epubbed authors as well as major house pubbed authors? Why can't RWA lead the way in the writing organization community in embracing ebooks and epubbed authors instead of continuing to use the excuse that "other nonromance writing organizations have the same rules"?
Being a writer/author is full of roadblocks and disappointment. All of us need support and help on our journey to be successful in the publishing world. Many of us do not have local writing groups to look to for that kind of comradarie, and the RWA groups are some of the most supportive I've found anywhere.
I hope the incoming RWA president will embrace epubs and the board will work with the Industry Change committee to bring authors together instead of pushing them into decisive camps.
Donnell - I wish I had known the GH would close to me when I jumped on board epublishing back in the day... LOL
Misty - Thanks for joining us and sharing your opinion, too. Like you, I do believe the Board believes what it's doing is right. I also believe the epublishers rooting for change are doing what they believe is right.
I'm really bummed to see how vitriolic the discussion has become, but I'm hopeful we'll start to see some unity once we find common ground and start building there (as opposed to separate camps, which is where we are right now).
I am e-published and some of the RWA arguments are valid. There are e-publishing houses who do not allow audits without an author incurring expense, who do not pay the EPIC (never mind the RWA) recommended rates and who do absolutely nothing for their authors save act as a cash register.
Even so, there are other e-publishers who promote their authors, have audit clauses built in to their contracts and who pay on-time exactly what EPIC recommends.
Taking this into consideration, my inclination would be to have RWA represent all Romance Authors, no matter what venue they choose to publish.
The awards should be determined by the material submitted, not by the status in the organization of the person who made the submission.
To support this conclusion, I recall, to my own embarrassment, an incident that occurred in an English Class many years ago.
We had just finished a semester on poetry appreciation,which included modules on composition, style and type. Our last assignment was to produce a poem. Much like the judges in your audience who didn't recognize the opening pages of the works of prestigious authors, our class knew who could write and who, of course, could not.
As one of the exalted, fortunate beings, well known to the class as a writer, I, along with a few others expected to take home the prize and the kudos. The poetry was read by a student from drama and the poems were judged by the class and a few other teachers.
We went through the usual amount of really bad verse, then came to a poem that was so deep with meaning, so beautifully written in iambic pentameter, that several classmates looked at the usual suspects, including myself and silently mouthed -- that has to be yours.
The moral of that story is that is was not mine. Nor did it belong to any of the other writing stars who shared that class with me all those years ago. It was written by a large teenager, with read hair and freckles who wore leathers to school and whom was dismissed as a "hood."
He made the female half of the class cry that day and the males were hiding their sniffles under coughs and sneezes.
Our esteemed president should learn from that story. Exclusion of talent on the basis of prior reputation only discourages talent and sends them elsewhere. If the RWA wants to continue to represent all romance writers, and especially the best of all romance writers, they should consider that sometimes roses grow in a field overtaken by dandelions, and are stronger for the experience.
Sincerely,
AC Katt
I am e-published and some of the RWA arguments are valid. There are e-publishing houses who do not allow audits without an author incurring expense, who do not pay the EPIC (never mind the RWA) recommended rates and who do absolutely nothing for their authors save act as a cash register.
Even so, there are other e-publishers who promote their authors, have an audit clause built in to their contracts, and who pay on-time -- exactly what EPIC recommends.
Taking this into consideration, my inclination would be to have RWA represent all Romance Authors, no matter in which venue they choose to publish. That is, as was pointed out in a previous post, a business decision. Not all authors can live on love until New York comes knocking.
That said, the awards should be determined by the merit of the material submitted, not by the status in the organization of the person who made the submission.
To support this conclusion, I recall, to my own embarrassment, an incident that occurred in an English Class many years ago.
We had just finished a semester on poetry appreciation, which included modules on composition, style and type. Our last assignment was to produce a poem. Much like the judges in your audience who didn't recognize the opening pages of the works of prestigious authors, our class knew who could write and who, of course, could not.
As one of the exalted, fortunate beings, well known to the class as a writer, I, along with a few others expected to take home the prize and the kudos. The poetry was read by a student from drama and the poems were judged by the class and a few other teachers.
We went through the usual amount of really bad verse, then came to a poem that was so deep with meaning, so beautifully written in iambic pentameter, that several classmates looked at the usual suspects, including myself and silently mouthed -- that has to be yours.
The moral of that story is that it was not mine. Nor did it belong to any of the other writing stars who shared that class with me all those years ago. It was written by a huge teenager, with red hair and freckles who wore black leathers to school and who was dismissed as a "hoodlum."
He made the female half of the class cry that day and the males were hiding their sniffles under coughs and sneezes.
Our esteemed president should learn from that story. Exclusion of talent based on prior reputation only discourages talent and sends them elsewhere. If the RWA wants to continue to represent all romance writers, and especially the best romance writers, the organization should consider that there are times when roses grow in a field overtaken by dandelions, and are stronger for the experience.
Sincerely,
AC Katt
Post a Comment