Weighing In on the NEW New York Times Bestseller Lists

It probably isn’t news to anyone reading this that the NYT Children’s Bestseller Lists are changing again, but in case it IS news, you can read the original announcement here, and then come back once you’re done.

Now that we’re all caught up: what does this mean?

Honestly, I don’t know if it means anything. That is, it doesn’t mean anything to ME, except that maybe one day my book will have a better chance of making it onto the list than it did under the old system, which means my future publishers and I have marginally better odds of being able to put New York Times Bestseller across the top of the cover. (We’re talking TINY margins of improvement. Like, really, not much. Like, out of the 5,700-and-some-odd books published and the many thousands of books continuing to be sold every week, only ten will make it onto that list, so SMALL SMALL ODDS.)

But I honestly don’t know if it means anything beyond that.

Some people are excited about the changes because having a list for (usually new) hardcover titles and a separate list for (usually backlisted) paperbacks means more discoverability for newer titles... But we’re talking about a list of ten titles. The range for discoverability is still pretty small. As discoverability tools go, the NYT Bestselling Children's Books List has always been, and always will be, an inadequate tool. Additionally, I don’t see very much time passing before publishing catches on to the fact that re-issuing backlisted titles  with strong sales as “special edition hardcovers” can get that same title listed on TWO NYT lists, which just puts us back where we are now with one or two names dominating both lists instead of just the one list.

And if we’re talking about the NYT list as merely a status report - as a reporting of facts, specifically the facts about which books are currently selling the most copies in any given week - then what this does is give us an idea of which new books are doing really well in their first few weeks after release. Which is nice to know, I guess, if you want to write to trends, which we all know is a bad idea.* It’s also nice to know which books have staying power. If publishers are marketing the bejeezus out of their new hardcover titles and someone’s paperbacks from five years ago are still outselling them, that says something about the quality of those old books, and maybe also about the public temperature in terms of the willingness of the general public to explore new and untested waters vs clinging to the familiar and comfortable. And there is something to be learned from that. (This is something we lose with the new switch - the ability to compare sales of new books with sales of older titles.)

The NYT List is also good for marketing purposes, in a “let’s examine this after the fact” kind of way. If there are more than ten awesome books coming out that week,** but only ten make it onto the list, it can be helpful to look at those ten and then look at what their authors and publishers and PR people did to market those books that the authors and publishers and PR people maybe didn’t do for the awesome books out there that DIDN’T make it onto the list. There are ALL KINDS of factors in what makes a book a blowout success, from cover design to advertising to book tours to blurbs to ALL THE OTHER THINGS. There is the factor of the author’s authorial history - did their debut win a big award? Did an earlier title come out this weekend as a film adaptation? Is this the third in an already best-selling series? 

This stuff makes a difference. It sucks a little that it makes a difference, because a) none of it has anything to do with the actual words inside the actual book, and b) apart from author-initiated marketing, pretty much all of it is outside the author’s control. But nevertheless, for better or worse, it makes a difference. Having a book on the NYT Bestseller List is an incredible achievement, and all the books on that list deserve to be there - but so do some books that never get there, and that’s just math. There are ten slots each week. There are a lot more than ten books coming out each week. You can’t control that.

And that’s the thing. There is only one thing that you, the author, can control. One. You can write an awesome book. You can write a book that is so awesome, people will press it into the hands of everyone they know. You can write a book that is so awesome, people will write fan fiction about it, because they can’t let go of those characters. You can write a book that is so awesome, people will wait in line overnight to be the first to read the next one.

So forget about the New York Times Bestseller List. Just write your book. Make it amazingly good. Pick the right words, and put them in the right order, and make it irresistible. If your book is irresistible, you won’t have to worry about the NYT Bestseller List, because people will buy your irresistible book.

And that’s what it’s about.

*NEWSFLASH: In case you’re new to the writing-for-publication scene and you haven’t come across this information yet, writing to trends is a very bad idea. By the time you recognize a trend, it’s too late for your book to ride that wave, because by the time you draft it and revise it and revise it and the publisher gets a cover designed and all the rest, the trend will be over. Just write the book that you need to write, and write it now.

**There are ALWAYS more than ten awesome books coming out in any given week. There isn't enough money in the world to buy all the awesome books every week. Unless you're Donald Trump, in which case you're too busy spending money on… Other things. Which is a shame, if you ask me, but nobody is asking me.

De-LAAAAAAYS

You may have noticed that March 17th came and went with no fanfare from me. Which would be normal for most days, except that March 17th was supposed to be the day that my book, BITE INTO BLOODSUCKERS, came out.

Yeah.

My co-author Kari-Lynn Winters and I worked really hard on that book. Like, REALLY hard. I lost sleep more times than I care to admit. So did our editors, and the book designer, and everyone else. But unfortunately, things just didn't quite work out. There were layout things and cover things and all kinds of other things, and all the THINGS just took too long.

Sometimes, this happens.

Sometimes, despite everyone’s best efforts, things just don’t go to plan. It's nobody's fault. It's just the way things go.

It’s disappointing, but it’s okay.

I would rather have my name on a great book than a rushed book. I think this is important to remember, for creators everywhere. Producing stuff you're proud of is important.

SO, I’ve been told by my publisher that our new release date will be sometime in JUNE. Just in time to try out the fun activities in the book in the warm summer months! YAAAY! Mark your calendars!

And in the meantime, you can order BITE INTO BLOODSUCKERS on Amazon by clicking HERE.

Thanks for your support, and thanks for stopping by!

Monday Musings: On Changing the Status Quo

This is what I've been thinking about lately:




What do YOU think?

Query Critique Wednesday - Denise's Queries!

Good Morning! Today we have TWO picture book queries from Denise. Wow!

For those of you who are new, here's how this thing works. I post queries from the brave souls who email them to m, along with my feedback on what's working and what isn't and how to make them shiny and bright. Then, you guys throw in your own two cents in the comments! The only rules are that you have to be honest, AND you have to be nice. No slamming or flaming, guys.

Let's get this party started!

Denise's first query is:

DearMr/Mrs_________,

Geared toward the 4-8 year old market, PHEWIE HUGHIE is a humorous 486 word children's picture book.

Hughie loves his toots and the louder the better and Hughie thought everyone should love his toots. Well, Hughie has a hard time finding someone to appreciate his wonderful ability until two children come to an important dinner and Hughie is told to remember his manners.  Mayham happens after Hughie realizes he just can’t hold it in.  What’s a boy to do? 

I am a member of SCBWI Canada East, and the SCBWI picture book and middle grade groups. I look forward to hearing from you.  Thank you for taking the time to consider PHEWIE HUGHIE.  Please note, this is a multiple submission.

Sincerely,

There's a lot to like about this concept - fart-loving boys! - and the basic elements of the query are there, which is good, but I think the descriptive paragraph needs some clarification. Here it is with my feedback in red:

Dear Mr/Mrs________,

Geared toward the 4-8 year old market, PHEWIE HUGHIE LOVE THE TITLE! Is this a rhyming book? If it is, you should say so. is a humorous 486 word children's picture book.

This is kind of an abrupt start. If you're going to open with the housekeeping - which is totally fine, and which a lot of agents and editors prefer - I'd recommend prefacing it with a bit of personalised stuff: I saw you at x conference/read x interview/whatever and because you said y, I'm sending you my manuscript....

Hughie loves his toots and the louder the better and Hughie thought everyone should love his toots.  This is a run-on sentence. Since the last portion is implied, I think this query can do without it. Love the idea of a kid who loves his own farts! This is every little boy's dream. Well, Hughie has a hard time finding someone to appreciate his wonderful ability until two children come to an important dinner This  raises some questions - why important? Why important with KIDS present? - and feels a little awkward. Maybe try reframing the inciting incident to eliminate those gaps and focus on the really crucial element: Hughie now has an audience for his farts. and Hughie is told to remember his manners.  Mayham Typo: Mayhem. happens after Hughie realizes he just can’t hold it in.  What’s a boy to do? Instead of ending with a rhetorical question, which some people don't mind but a lot of people dislike, maybe hint at where this goes: do the kids love his farts? Hate them? Join in?

I'd also include some comparatives here: this book will appeal to fans of A book, B book, and C book. It's good to give the person you're querying an idea of where your book will fit into the marketplace, and it gives him or her more ammunition to use if your book goes to acquisition. Another good place for comparatives is at the end of the first paragraph.

I am a member of SCBWI Canada East Good to include this!, and the SCBWI picture book and middle grade groups I am not aware of these groups. Do you mean the critique groups? In which case you should mention that they are critique groups, and mention the Canada East part, since different regions have their own groups. Or skip the critique group part - many have said they don't need to know about it. I look forward to hearing from you.  Thank you for taking the time to consider PHEWIE HUGHIE.  Please note, this is a multiple submission. Great closing.

Sincerely,

All together, not a bad query. With some reworking in the middle there, I think Denise will be ready to go.

And here's her second query:

Dear Mr/Mrs________,

Geared toward the 6-12 year old market, MALLIGA’S RAINBOW is a touching 927 word children's picture storybook.

Malliga and her Amma (mother) shared many memories, but the most memorable to Malliga was when they would play who could find the rainbow after a rain. After losing her Amma, Malliga has trouble facing the ache in her heart.  Her Appa (father) helps her and together they find a way to help Malliga one stitch at a time.

I am a member of SCBWI Canada East, and the SCBWI picture book and middle grade groups. I look forward to hearing from you. 

Thank you for taking the time to consider MALLIGA’S RAINBOW.  Please note, this is an exclusive submission.

Sincerely,

This, in my opinion, a pretty strong query already. I have some comments, but very few. Here's my feedback in red:

Dear Mr/Mrs________,

Geared toward the 6-12 year old market, MALLIGA’S RAINBOW You excel at titles. is a touching 927 word children's picture storybook. You've put yourself in the danger zone here. "Picture storybook" is a phrase usually equated with books like Beatrix Potter's TALES OF PETER RABBIT or A.A. Milne's WINNIE THE POOH, and while those books sell steadily, I have heard it said by editors and agents that that's more because people want to share their childhood memories with their kids than because the current market demands more stories like those. Books for young kids are now either picture books or chapter books. Your word count puts it into the picture book category - chapter books are typically 5,000-10,000 words - but your age range says chapter book or novel. I suspect that this is actually better aimed at the 4-6-ish market. (Don't be afraid to write books about death and loss for little kids; they need them as much as older kids do.)

Also: I have the same comment about the opening paragraph as in the last query.

Malliga and her Amma (mother) shared many memories, but the most memorable to Malliga Memorable is repetitive - maybe "Malliga's favorite"? was when they would play who could find the rainbow after a rain. After losing her Amma, Malliga has trouble facing the ache in her heart.  Her Appa (father) helps her and together they find a way to help Malliga one stitch at a time. I love this last part. This is a great paragraph! Super job. It's clear that Malliga has a cultural background, so I would say what that background is somehow, so it will be easier to imagine how to market this book.

I am a member of SCBWI Canada East, and the SCBWI picture book and middle grade groups. I look forward to hearing from you. Same comment as in the other query.

Thank you for taking the time to consider MALLIGA’S RAINBOW.  Please note, this is an exclusive submission. You don't really need to say that it's an exclusive submission; in fact, they usually assume that a submission is exclusive unless you say that it is simultaneous. However, you may wish to put a time limit on the exclusivity: "While this is an exclusive submission, I will send it to other agents/editors if I haven't heard from you in x months." I've read that something in the neighborhood of 3-6 months is typical.

Sincerely,

Despite the sea of red - sorry, Denise! - this is actually, in my opinion, a really good query. The most important section - the descriptive paragraph - is really solid. There were just a couple things that took a lot of explaining at the beginning and end!

Do you have your own comments? Ideas? Thoughts? Share them in the comments! Let's help Denise out!

And be sure to come back on FRIDAY for a giveaway!

K is for Kerfuffle Over Agency Pricing

I knew I'd manage to fit in a writerly news item somehow. :-)

So, basically, the Department of Justice is suing Apple and a bunch of book publishers over the Agency E-book Pricing Model, saying that they "engaged in a 'substantial' conspiracy as they set up the agency model for eBook pricing." Some of the publishers have agreed to settle out of court and Apple and the rest will be fighting it - more on that in this article from GalleyCat.


The particulars of this case are interesting because, as a writer, I was really excited about the agency model. I saw it as a way to prevent one major company - namely Amazon - from setting prices so low that they not only run bookstores out of business, but run publishers out of business by creating unrealistic and unsustainably low pricing expectations amongst the book-buying public. In a sense, this supposedly non-competitive behaviour on the part of publishers was actually helping to keep competition alive in the publishing and bookselling industries.  Steven Pearlstein writing for The Washington Post explained it much more eloquently than I can in this article.


Which means that in my opinion, this whole anti-competitive business with the Department of Justice is a load of cow poop. Writers need to be able to earn a living, and editors and art directors and everybody else need to be able to earn a living. If it costs X amount of money to make a book, then they should be allowed to charge a fair price based on X without being afraid that some huge megolith like Amazon is going to undercut them out of business. It's based on the extremely flawed premise that the only price that's good for the consumer is a lower price, which, if it leads to less diversity and lower quality, is obviously a load of you-know-what.


Which, incidentally, is what we'll all eventually be buying if book prices continue to fall and publishers continue to go out of business because they can't afford to pay for editors anymore. No more editors = not such great books. Well, you know what they say: you get what you pay for.


What do you think? Feel free to disagree. Let's discuss it in the comments.

E is for Editor

When I was a kid, I thought an editor was someone who went through a manuscript and checked for misplaced semicolons and random typos. A lot of people still think that.

A lot of other people think an editor is a gatekeeper: someone with the power to make you an author, or not. Someone who decides.

A lot of people think an editor is a taste-maker.

A lot of people think an editor is extraneous - who needs to hire an editor or sign with a publisher in this age of spell-check and instant e-publishing?

But I would argue that editor is essential. Because an editor does more than find good manuscripts and correct typos. An editor is more than a gatekeeper, more than a taste-maker. An editor is more than any of your writing friends could ever be.

Because a good editor can read your manuscript, get to its heart, and ask you the questions that will force you to dig deeper into the soul of your manuscript and lay bare the essence of your story. Good editors can see the big picture and know what to say to make you see the places where the canvas is showing through because you didn't use enough paint.

Good editors are like gold.

What is your most memorable editorial experience?


And for more A-Z posts, go here.

D is for "Dear Editor"...

...which is something you should NEVER use to open a query.

Equally, you should never use "Dear Agent." These openings make the recipient of your query feel like they've been the recipient of a mass-email, and nobody likes that feeling. (I appreciate the irony of an editor telling us to query widely, and then saying that they don't want to feel like they're just one of a bunch of people receiving your query, but still. It's just not nice to be MADE to feel that way, even if it's a little bit true.)

You should also not open with anything like "Dear Agent Awesome," or "Dear One Who Holds My Dreams in Her Hands," or "O Worthy One," or anything like that. Some people think it makes you look witty, but it doesn't. It makes you look like a fruitcake, and we all know what happens to fruitcake: it ends up in sitting in a tupperware for 12 months until it finally sprouts a mould spore and you have an excuse to throw it in the trash. You don't want that to be your manuscript mouldering in some editor's trash.

Also, the fact is that most of the people who get your query are going to have to pass on it, for perfectly good reasons, which is fine - you only need one person to say "yes" - and saying "no" to someone is HARD. It sucks more than my mother's Dyson. Nobody likes turning people down. So don't make it harder for them by actually stating in your opening how high your hopes are that they will like your work.

Keep it professional. Use his or her last name. And that's it for queries for today!

For more #AtoZchallenge posts, check out the list here.

Publishing Is Not About Books

Rachelle Gardner recently wrote this interesting post about the publishing industry and the music industry, and how much they (don't) have in common. It got me thinking, and what it got me thinking was this:

We've got it all wrong.


We've been talking about the future of publishing with the advent of the e-reader, and what will happen to publishing, and how self-pubbed e-books will change publishing, and and and. But here's the thing:

Publishing is not about books.


Publishing is about storytelling.


It's not about the words on the page (or the e-ink on the screen). Publishers create audiobooks, which in my mind are analogous to CDs. And more and more people are opting to listen to the audiobook instead of reading the words on the page - and hey, since you can do that AND clean your house at the same time, you can hardly argue.

And let's not forget about film rights: more and more books are optioned for film these days. Going to the movies is, for many, many, many people, an alternative to reading a book. For one thing, it's a hell of a lot quicker. And I think that in our time-pressured society, in which people are trying to cram more and more into our already-packed schedules (full-time job, family, pet, home repairs, and writing on the side, anyone?), the number of people investing in audiobooks and opting to skip the book in favor of the movie is only going to go up.

Books? I love them. I am a true bibliophile. I want a 3,600-sq-ft library like Jay Walker's. But mark my words: they're going to go the way of sheet music and movie scripts.

Publishing? It will survive. But not as we know it.

What do you think? Do you agree? Disagree? 

The Two Faces of Publishing

Many of you have heard about the travesty that was the TODAY SHOW's snub of this year's Newbery and Caldecott award winners last Tuesday. Those of you who haven't can get the scoop in this Publisher's Weekly article. I won't get into the details here, but what it boils down to is that the TODAY SHOW chose to forego their traditional interview with the winners of the two most prestigious awards in children's literature, and aired an interview with Jersey Shore's Snooki instead. Interestingly, Snooki was there to promote her new book.

Let's just pause for a moment to let that sink in.

Are you ready to continue? Okay.

There has been outrage from the people in publishing, as well as disgust, which I share. Their move has been called a ratings grab, which in one respect makes good marketing sense, but when you look at it and realize that they have every other day in the year to do high-ratings shows with celebrity authors it becomes clear just what a flimsy excuse that is. And as for Megan Kopf's explanation that "the show was booked for the entire week," well. We've all known for a while when these awards were going to be announced. It's not like they crept up on us. It's called "planning ahead."

But let's get back to why Snooki was there in the first place, and who put her there. She has (purportedly) written a book. Published by a publishing house. (Gallery, an imprint of Simon and Schuster, in case anyone is interested.) And, since she's a celebrity author, she most likely has a publicist assigned to her by that publishing house, who probably called the folks at NBC (which broadcasts the TODAY SHOW) and got Snooki her spot on the show. This person could have requested a different date, or even insisted on a different date; maybe he or she did, maybe not. My guess is not, because I can't see NBC arguing a point like that with the publicist of someone as huge as Snooki. But either way, the publishing industry needs to carry its share of the blame here.

You all know that I have read books by celebrities that I have liked, and I have read books by celebrities that I have thought were drivel. (The books, not the celebrities.) And we all know the mantra: books by celebrity authors make the publication of all those other books (you know, the 80% that don't earn out) possible. Snooki's book is probably, at some point in my future, going to indirectly put bread on my table. And we say that we should accept it, because how else can publishing survive? If this is what people want to read, then we have to give it to them, and then we hope that while they're there they pick up some of the higher-quality stuff too. But if we're going to accept this, then we have to understand what comes with it: not only the loss of a publishing slot to a celebrity book, but a loss in publicity share.

The world of marketing and publicity is already extremely skewed towards celebrity authors. Even if the folks at NBC were right in their prediction that a story about award-winning authors and illustrators wouldn't garner much interest, they were wrong to pull the plug on the interview on the assumption that it would harm their show in the long term. This is an interview that should have happened. It is a sad fact that high-quality books, especially children's books, need this kind of publicity.

But it's a slippery slope, guys.

If you're upset by the omission of the Newbery and Caldecott Medal winners in the TODAY SHOW's programming, you can write to NBC and tell them. (Scroll to the bottom of that link.) You can also go to the campaign page on Facebook, and "Like" it.  And, of course, you can blog about it, and tell other people who care about quality in literature to do the same.


And of course, feel free to discuss this further in the comments.

Key Porter Books: Shocking, Yes, but Surprising?

Those of you in Canada will surely have heard by now about the immediate "suspension of activity" (which, since they laid off their last editor, sounds a lot like "closure" to me) by Key Porter Books, one of the largest Canadian publishers. Nothing slated for publication after January will be published. Learning about this was a real shock to the system for me; if the big fish can't make it, how will the little guys manage to survive?

Additionally, I was saddened to hear that none of their authors had any idea. In fact, from what I can gather from the news articles about the suspension, most of their authors didn't even learn about it from Key Porter. They heard about it on the news. Which is just sad, and also, in my opinion, unprofessional. (And ironically appropo, given my blog post last Thursday.) It's not at all what I would expect from such a large company, and I hope that the people at Key Porter have a good reason for their lack of communication with their authors.

But then when I looked into it more, and started searching for news about the company and their plans for the immediate future, I came across this CBC article from last September announcing that they were closing their Toronto office and laying off almost two-thirds of their staff, and only one thought occurred to me: the writing was on the wall for these guys, and has been for at least a few months now. Maybe it's the cynic in me - okay, it is definitely the cynic in me - but as soon as I see a company being bought out, downsized, restructured, merged, or what-have-you, I always assume that they'll be gone within 5 years or less. I never hope to be right about these kinds of predictions, and sometimes I'm not - but these are all signs, to me, that a company is drowning.

So, apart from hoping that Key Porter finds a way to come back from the brink (which I do), what does this mean for writers? When we see a publishing house bought out by another one and merged as one of their imprints, (hello - and goodbye - Tricycle Press), or when we learn that a publisher is downsizing, how should we interpret that news? Should we be wary? Should we cross them off our submission list? Is it better to be optimistic, or to think about strict business potential when it comes to where we send our work and who we sign contracts with?

I honestly don't have answers to these questions, guys, so I'm opening the floor to comments and ideas. What do you think when you see that change is afoot for a publishing house? Do you rethink your submissions to them, or is it business as usual?

James Frey Wants to do WHAT?

Okay! So, I know I'm supposed to be on hiatus, BUT I saw this post on Robert Paul Weston's blog and just had to jump in here.

The gist is that James Frey wants Creative Writing students to send him one-line pitches and full manuscripts for high-concept paranormal books, which he will buy exclusive rights to for the low-low-price of...

$250!

Yeah, I know. It gets better!

Then he'll rewrite it, and market it under a pseudonym, and keep 60% while giving you 40%.

Ummmm...

Right. Does this say "turd" to anyone else, or is it just me?

Here's my take. If James Frey wants my ideas so he can write his own stories, fine. He can have them for $250 each, because the ideas are the easy part. But for me to do all the work, and then let him rewrite it and sell it under a pseudonym, and not get any credit whatsoever for my work? Thanks, but - no, actually, not even thanks. Just "no".

Look. This type of assembly-line-style writing is not for me. But even if it is what you want to do, don't do it this way. Go to a publishing house that does this type of thing and at least pays you decent money and puts your name on the cover of your work. Go get hired by James Patterson, who will at least list you as co-author on the cover.

But please, for the love of print, don't sell your work for peanuts to some guy with an inflated ego and a big name so he can rewrite it and pretend it's his. Surely the publishing industry isn't that far gone.

(More on this over at KT Literary's blog, in New York Magazine, and in The Globe and Mail. Enjoy. Or, throw things at your computer. Whatever takes your fancy.)

FREE WRITERS' CONFERENCE!

That's such an overused ploy, isn't it? Dangling a carrot like that just to get your attention? So mean and shallow of me.

But it's TRUE!

WriteOnCon is a free, online childrens' writers' conference from August 10-12, 2010. It's scheduled to take place outside normal working hours, so it's even do-able for the nine-to-fivers among us, and it boasts an agent and editor line-up that has me breaking out in cold sweats of excitement and fear. Most boards are closed until the conference opens, but there is a critique board that is absolutely humming for those of us who want to polish up our work a bit ahead of time.

Did I mention that it's free?

So go register, already!

Oops, They Did it Again

A big wag of the finger goes to Bloomsbury this week for their second book cover screw-up in six months. After a huge controversy over the cover of Justine Larbalestier's Liar, which came out in September of last year but whose jacket design depicting a blond caucasian teenager representing the bi-racial narrator was released two months prior, you'd think the folks at Bloomsbury would have learned their lesson. But no, not yet. It took another similar blunder, this time depicting debut author Jaclyn Dolamore's Thai heroine in Magic Under Glass as a caucasian in traditional Victorian dress. Bloomsbury has re-jacketed both books, but this will not help them shake the reputation they are forming as a house that doesn't pay proper attention to its manuscripts.

As an author, it is extremely frustrating to work so hard for so long only to have your words ignored by the art department. The authors of both these books intentionally wrote stories about people from certain backgrounds, and their editors intentionally chose these manuscripts in large part because of this choice, and these manuscripts were misrepresented in both cases by the depiction of the main character on the cover. And we're not just talking skin color - we're talking clothing, setting, attitude, the whole deal. Issues of race aside, there is a problem when the art department is so misinformed (or uninformed) about a manuscript that they can miss the mark so completely not once, but twice in six months.

And as a consumer, it is equally frustrating to see a book, like the look of its cover, and then open it to find that the manuscript and the cover bear no relationship to one another. Or to turn it around, I might overlook a book based on its jacket design, only to realise later that I missed out on a good thing because the actual story bore no relation to the jacket itself. Either way, Bloomsbury, you're misleading people, and it is wrong.

Has Bloomsbury learned its lesson yet? I certainly hope so, but only time will tell. In the meantime, I guess we'll have to take the old adage "you can't judge a book by its cover" literally.

Thanks for stopping by.

Useful YouTube

I'm a little addicted to YouTube. My whole family is, actually; nothing tames a restless toddler at dinnertime like videos of skateboarding bulldogs and baby orangutans waddling around in Pampers. (Think I'm joking? Try it! It works, I'm telling you.) So, I am very pleased to share with you two very useful links to two very useful YouTube videos about publishing, editing, and this whole crazy business.

There's an interesting clip from a panel discussion on researching the competition here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjL0lwmf_8I&NR=1.

And there's a short interview with Alison Janssen, editor at Bleak House Books, here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wyXqwWRVmg&feature=related. Check her slush pile!

There seems to be a lot more useful info there in other videos, so stay tuned for updates as I navigate the vast (vast!) selection at one of my favorite websites.

Happy writing, and thanks for stopping by,
Ishta