![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shalanna*sigh*
I suspect it's over. My gut tells me that this weekend, they called the winner of that contest and that person is celebrating. Wish I could be happy for that person, but I'm not. Y'all already know I'm a bad person, so I'm not going to pretend here.
I suppose I should be happy to have made the finals. Plus there's a kind of freedom in being totally screwed, as Matthew Broderick's character observes in "The Freshman."![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
wordweaverlynn adds to that, "I can reveal a lot of things other people would conceal, because I have nothing to lose. And when I recognize someone as one of my kind, I can make that instant connection." Yeah, exactly, and that's partly why I'm here on LJ . . . if there's someone I can help, even if only by showing them how much better off they are than the unworthy moi, then I should help, shouldn't I? And feel lucky to be able to boost someone's self-esteem.
What gets to me is that the contest people will choose the top three, or five, manuscripts and term them finalists, and then they'll pick ONE winner. Okay. But isn't this kind of a waste? Why is it that they just toss the "losers" into the trash? If a manuscript made it that far, wouldn't it be logical to think about offering a regular contract for one or more of those runners-up? Unless the manuscripts are *all* junky and you're just picking the lesser of the three evils, you probably have three that are just about equally commercially viable. It would not bother me to have on my book's cover that it was a finalist in their contest. I think that would appeal to buyers in the same way that "Golden Heart Finalist!" or "Hugo nominee!" must appeal to buyers. Else they would not bother to print "Hugo nominee" on the cover, would they?
I don't understand why they would rather sift through slush and stuff that they get mailed to them cold by agents in preference to something that's been read and ranked highly by their own judges. It would seem to me that it'd be worthwhile to offer a lesser deal, a normal deal, to one or more of the runners-up. You can't tell me that the winner won't get an editorial letter outlining what he or she needs to do to pump the book up and make it really ready for prime time. It probably would be the same amount of work to pump up the other two, because they must be approximately of the same quality. OTHERWISE, you would not have narrowed it down to three--you would have said, "There's nothing remotely publishable or fixable here except this one, which is by default our winner." If you had to deliberate over a top three, there must be merit in the other two, as well. Wouldn't you think? (Of course I'm using LOGIC here, which seems to be anathema in business.)
You'd have to do the same amount of "suggesting changes" for these other two books, most likely. But so? Would you not have to do the same for most books that you picked up from a query or from an agent? I should think so.
However, that's not the way that it has ever worked. My books have been finalists several times in the Malice Domestic contest and in the Warner Aspect contest, and so far as I know, they've never offered contracts or even revision letters to anyone who wasn't THE winner. I mean . . . when I worked at DSC and E-Systems, I used to take applicants out to lunch and interview them. I didn't just choose THE TOP resume. I chose three or four, and I interviewed all three applicants. Then I ranked them for the boss. The boss would then make offer(s) to the top two, and if they refused the offers, he'd make offer(s) to the next two until he had filled the position(s) we had open. There was never a particular stigma associated with being the guy who was the third choice. In fact, many times we were very, very happy with the performance of the person who got hired because someone else turned down our offer. There was no shame involved. It was much more sensible to keep resumes on hand for a couple of months, too, just in case we had another position come open. That was far easier than starting over every time. Of course, sometimes those people had found other jobs and were no longer interested. But you might be surprised at how many people wanted to work in our group (software engineering, and later software test and software quality metrics) and who'd still be available.
Perhaps I'm drawing an unfair parallel, but I don't think I am. I believe that many of these contests turn up people whose manuscripts are worthy of publication, but which will be thrown into the trash and the author told to start over, fugeddaboudit, go get a REAL job, get over yourself. And I think that ultimately means *profits that are missed out on* by that publishing house, as some authors tend to draw a readership that's loyal, and you never know in advance who's gonna be able to DO that until you give 'em a chance. Some of us have a readership NOW, when we're under the trash heap and breathing through an old PixyStix tube. Think of what we might do given an actual pair of shoes, let alone the wings of being published by a real New York house.
It just doesn't make sense. But then nothing does.
# # #
For a true writer, each book should be a new beginning where he tries again for something that is beyond attainment. He should always try for something that has never been done or that others have tried and failed. Then sometimes, with great luck, he will succeed.
How simple the writing of literature would be if it were only necessary to write in another way what has been well written. It is because we have had such great writers in the past that a writer is driven far out past where he can go, out to where no one can help him.
--Ernest Hemingway
I suspect it's over. My gut tells me that this weekend, they called the winner of that contest and that person is celebrating. Wish I could be happy for that person, but I'm not. Y'all already know I'm a bad person, so I'm not going to pretend here.
I suppose I should be happy to have made the finals. Plus there's a kind of freedom in being totally screwed, as Matthew Broderick's character observes in "The Freshman."
wordweaverlynn adds to that, "I can reveal a lot of things other people would conceal, because I have nothing to lose. And when I recognize someone as one of my kind, I can make that instant connection." Yeah, exactly, and that's partly why I'm here on LJ . . . if there's someone I can help, even if only by showing them how much better off they are than the unworthy moi, then I should help, shouldn't I? And feel lucky to be able to boost someone's self-esteem.What gets to me is that the contest people will choose the top three, or five, manuscripts and term them finalists, and then they'll pick ONE winner. Okay. But isn't this kind of a waste? Why is it that they just toss the "losers" into the trash? If a manuscript made it that far, wouldn't it be logical to think about offering a regular contract for one or more of those runners-up? Unless the manuscripts are *all* junky and you're just picking the lesser of the three evils, you probably have three that are just about equally commercially viable. It would not bother me to have on my book's cover that it was a finalist in their contest. I think that would appeal to buyers in the same way that "Golden Heart Finalist!" or "Hugo nominee!" must appeal to buyers. Else they would not bother to print "Hugo nominee" on the cover, would they?
I don't understand why they would rather sift through slush and stuff that they get mailed to them cold by agents in preference to something that's been read and ranked highly by their own judges. It would seem to me that it'd be worthwhile to offer a lesser deal, a normal deal, to one or more of the runners-up. You can't tell me that the winner won't get an editorial letter outlining what he or she needs to do to pump the book up and make it really ready for prime time. It probably would be the same amount of work to pump up the other two, because they must be approximately of the same quality. OTHERWISE, you would not have narrowed it down to three--you would have said, "There's nothing remotely publishable or fixable here except this one, which is by default our winner." If you had to deliberate over a top three, there must be merit in the other two, as well. Wouldn't you think? (Of course I'm using LOGIC here, which seems to be anathema in business.)
You'd have to do the same amount of "suggesting changes" for these other two books, most likely. But so? Would you not have to do the same for most books that you picked up from a query or from an agent? I should think so.
However, that's not the way that it has ever worked. My books have been finalists several times in the Malice Domestic contest and in the Warner Aspect contest, and so far as I know, they've never offered contracts or even revision letters to anyone who wasn't THE winner. I mean . . . when I worked at DSC and E-Systems, I used to take applicants out to lunch and interview them. I didn't just choose THE TOP resume. I chose three or four, and I interviewed all three applicants. Then I ranked them for the boss. The boss would then make offer(s) to the top two, and if they refused the offers, he'd make offer(s) to the next two until he had filled the position(s) we had open. There was never a particular stigma associated with being the guy who was the third choice. In fact, many times we were very, very happy with the performance of the person who got hired because someone else turned down our offer. There was no shame involved. It was much more sensible to keep resumes on hand for a couple of months, too, just in case we had another position come open. That was far easier than starting over every time. Of course, sometimes those people had found other jobs and were no longer interested. But you might be surprised at how many people wanted to work in our group (software engineering, and later software test and software quality metrics) and who'd still be available.
Perhaps I'm drawing an unfair parallel, but I don't think I am. I believe that many of these contests turn up people whose manuscripts are worthy of publication, but which will be thrown into the trash and the author told to start over, fugeddaboudit, go get a REAL job, get over yourself. And I think that ultimately means *profits that are missed out on* by that publishing house, as some authors tend to draw a readership that's loyal, and you never know in advance who's gonna be able to DO that until you give 'em a chance. Some of us have a readership NOW, when we're under the trash heap and breathing through an old PixyStix tube. Think of what we might do given an actual pair of shoes, let alone the wings of being published by a real New York house.
It just doesn't make sense. But then nothing does.
For a true writer, each book should be a new beginning where he tries again for something that is beyond attainment. He should always try for something that has never been done or that others have tried and failed. Then sometimes, with great luck, he will succeed.
How simple the writing of literature would be if it were only necessary to write in another way what has been well written. It is because we have had such great writers in the past that a writer is driven far out past where he can go, out to where no one can help him.
--Ernest Hemingway
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-10-21 11:53 pm (UTC)Yes. One of the reasons why I've never invested in a contest. Not that I have any argument with anyone who does. Why not shoot for the ring whatever way inspires one?
Shalanna Quotes Hemingway: World Ends
Date: 2007-10-22 02:46 am (UTC)I did not send my submission (RBT) to the Amazon contest, because with what I know about the law, Requirement #4 is ironclad. Convince me I'm wrong and I'll reconsider. Playing with someone else's fate might be a pleasant change of pace for you.
COLOR RADIO proceeds. Finally got the guy married and off to Bakersfield; I think, despite its excessive length, it's coming to come in, as so many of my books have, at 24 chapters.
Want me to hold onto your hand for a few more minutes? No problem.
Re: Shalanna Quotes Hemingway: World Ends
Date: 2007-10-22 02:48 am (UTC)Fly, magic fingers!
Re: Shalanna Quotes Hemingway: World Ends
Date: 2007-10-22 03:11 am (UTC)Who would want to screw with a contest if you had a contract with any of the big publishing houses, anyway? So that doesn't even make sense. They'll never have the time to check up on everything and test the rules by saying, "Hmm, was that one ever available anywhere but on Amazon?" I don't know how they'll have time to check the other stuff they need to check, in fact. They must be drowning in text by now.
You're making modifications, so this is not even the same book. You could use the Plagia Rising bit as one of Blake's books!
There's something about 20 chapters. I get 20 or 22 a lot of the time.
I've quoted Hemingway before! He isn't the minimalist that people claim he is. Those people never actually READ _The Sun Also Rises_ or _For Whom the Bell Tolls_. He did do a lot of SVO declaratives: "She walked in. He looked at her. She sat down, not looking at him. He nodded." But it isn't the minimalist feast that people have made it out to be. For that, look at Raymond Carver and Raymond Chandler and those guys, but now we learn that editor Gordon Lish made Carver and some of the other early minimalists into minimalists with his harsh editing! Tess Gallagher is fixin' to publish the original versions of a lot of her husband's stories so they can be compared. "Minimalism" as a movement was apparently Lish's evil plan. Aha!
Some of Hemingway bugs me. What always bugged me was why he'd commit suicide. Now that I know he was given electroshock "therapy," I know why. He said that his memories were gone, and thus his well as a writer was dry and his material was gone. No wonder! My relatives who had this forgot lots of things and still have the brain damage to prove it--they misinterpret logical things and they jump to conclusions in a way that shows something's amiss, when they never did that before. But all that happened around 1968-1970 when they were young fillies and the docs were old hands, so maybe the doctors who did that to them are now in the first circle of Hell, going "ouch-ouch-OUCH." (We can only . . . conjecture. I'm not allowed to hate and say "hope.")
Re: Shalanna Quotes Hemingway: World Ends
Date: 2007-10-22 02:31 pm (UTC)So we'll see.
The last years of Hemingway's life were awful for him, and not just due to the electroshock business. As to that, it would have been _so_ much kinder to strap him into an electric chair and get it all over with at once. He made a famous statement explaining why he was so unhappy -- I quoted it in BETTER THAN TOMORROW -- and along with the diminution of his mental powers, he mentioned impotence. When he shot himself, he was as close as you can get to having nothing to live for.
Not that Fitzgerald's way (drinking onesself to death) was any smarter.
Gee, kiddo. All _we_ want is a publishing contract. Sheesh!
no subject
Date: 2007-10-22 04:07 am (UTC)I'm like, I could've sent that elsewhere in the amount of time I wasted on them.
no subject
Date: 2007-10-22 06:18 pm (UTC)I know someone who was offered a book contract by one of the judges after not winning a contest. It's not just about the book being good enough, but the editor has to love it enough to pitch it and convince the folks with the money to buy it.