Jude Unchained

You may have heard me kvetching over the past month or two about my m/m contemporary Jude in Chains being stalled in cyberspace. Well, I finally retrieved it. And the story now has a home.

Last summer, I submitted Jude to two publishers, Quartet Press and ~~~~~~~. Remember Quartet Press? All the pre-opening hype? All the attention from major bloggers? And then -- blammy! -- QP just folded up its tent and disappeared into the sunset. That left Jude at the other place where I'd simultaneously submitted it.

So I waited. And waited. No word came my way. At the three-month point, I inquired about the status of my submission. Received no response. I inquired again and was told my initial inquiry had been lost. Then I got excuses for the delay. I continued to wait while keeping busy with other projects. Sent another, somewhat more impatient inquiry at the four-month point. Got more excuses and another delay.

To make this really long story short, I finally got the manuscript back.

Writers need to be intrepid and even ruthless when this kind of crap happens. What I should have done was submit the story to a different second and maybe even third publisher immediately after I found out QP was dead in the water. But I foolishly gave ~~~~~~~ every chance to review Jude before I sent it elsewhere.

Shame on me. All I ended up doing was fucking myself over.

Anyway, I wasted no time offering the novella to two other publishers. One of them sent me an acceptance and a contract in less than a day. That's right, less than a freakin' day! What makes the speed of response even more astonishing is that I don't have any books and therefore no assigned editor with this press; from their perspective, my manuscript came drifting in out of nowhere.

Granted, it was a unique confluence of circumstances that got my novella read so quickly. What got it accepted so quickly is another matter entirely and one I can't address, since I obviously wasn't privy to the decision-making process. All I know is that after having been jerked around for nearly five months by ~~~~~~~, there was no way I couldn't be impressed.

In case you're wondering how and where my marathon of frustration ended, Jude in Chains will be published by Dreamspinner in April. I'm very pleased, because I think it's a good fit. (I would've been happy with the other publisher, too, but an acceptance that comes in hours rather than weeks or months is pretty damned hard to beat!)

Here's what my long-neglected novella is about:

* * * * *

Hoping further to expose the fallacy of "reparative therapy" for non-heterosexuals, writer Misha Tzerko has enrolled in a week-long program at the Stronger Wings Camp and Conference Center. He's already lost his long-term boyfriend to the ex-gay movement, and for the sake of his own closure as well as his job at Options magazine, Misha hopes to get an inside look at the nondenominational ministry established by C. Everett Hammer III.

Contentedly gay, Misha has always been a player—except when he committed to his only real relationship. But when Robbie abandoned him for straight life complete with wife, Misha's promiscuity began to peak as his emotional landscape flattened.

That’s all about to change. Misha is shocked and dismayed to see another man from his past at Stronger Wings, a man with whom he’d had two brief but captivating encounters. Although Misha knows he can’t save every registrant in the Stronger Wings program, he becomes determined to save Jude Stone.

No matter what it takes.

Dicking with Publishers

Sometimes publishers are such a joy to work with, they make me thank my lucky stars (at least I would if I had lucky stars -- but I doubt it). Sometimes they make me wonder, WTF are you people thinking? And then there are those other times . . .

I've been waiting for the release of a print collection from you-know-who. Or you should know if you visit this blog with any regularity. First the book was supposed to come out in July. Then late September/early October. Two months ago, my editor was "working on the galleys" (which I, of course, will never get to lay eyes on, since I'm only the author). Now I must try to find out what the hell is going on. I'm actually not too concerned about what's going on, except in principle. Print editions usually result in returns, and returns are deducted from e-book royalties, and that sucks. But I am concerned whenever it appears one of my publishers isn't trustworthy and excels more at making excuses than getting things done.

Then there's this cluster-screw: I'm trying to get an old book back. Its contract will be up next year, and the publisher has disappointed me pretty much from the get-go. The book isn't making either of us any money. However, I didn't know whom to contact. This company has no on-site contact information, just a rather stagnant authors' loop on Yahoo to which I don't belong. So I had to google my original editor -- yes, google the woman! And thank goodness I found her.

"Oh," said she, "I haven't done much there for the past year, but I'll forward your message. When I get back onboard, although not even Jesus Christ knows when that will be, we have all these plans for blah-blah-blah, which will make things ever so much better, and blah-blah-blah." (Dig this. She RUNS the imprint through which my book was published . . . and she hasn't done squat with it in a freakin' year. Huh?) Mm-hm, yup. You've really bolstered my confidence. Just answer my questions, lady. I'm totally fed up with this outfit.

These people haven't sent me a royalty statement in two years. How professional, eh? (Doesn't matter if a statement only contains a big, fat zero, it nevertheless should be sent.) They haven't coughed up any royalties, either, because they have a policy of not paying out unless and until the amount exceeds X-number of dollars. Worse yet, the publisher thinks I'm not owed any royalties, because he obviously hasn't done his homework and looked up all the old statements. And, finally, he doesn't believe a letter granting reversion of rights is necessary.

This is no tiny e-pub, mind you. An e-pub, yes, but a large one that's been around for years and also, I believe, puts out print editions. Their lack of professionalism just makes my brain implode.

I really want to retrieve this novel and rework it. There's a good reason for that. But before I resubmit it, I first need to make a clean and legal break from the first publisher and get my damned money, no matter how small the amount.

Gawd. How do some of these operations get and stay in business?

EDITED TO ADD:

Oh for the fuck's sake, you wouldn't believe it . . .

Utopia-X, Book 4 and Other Updates

The fourth and final volume of my Utopia-X series for Loose Id, Finding Where Love Lives, is due to be released on (gulp) January 5.

To Be Where You Are, the sequel to InDescent (which makes it the next step in the Jackson Spey/Adin Swift romance), should have a release date . . . shortly. Maybe early next week. Maybe.

I still haven't gotten a yea or nay on Jude in Chains (the novella centering on "reparative therapy" for homosexuals), which has been sitting for quite a while in an editor's computer.

The softcover collection of my three otherworld fantasies for Ellora's Cave still hasn't been issued. I have no freaking idea what's going on, except that my editor said she was working on the galleys -- about a month ago. Or more. I haven't even seen a cover yet and doubt that I will. The book may just appear . . . or not.

If you're starting to get the impression that e-publishing has turned into a waiting game just as long and frustrating as print publishing's waiting game, you're right. I'll tell ya, this is going to be a very, very lean Christmas.

How's this for a promo gimmick?

So I'm taking a break, cruising the 'Net. And what do I come upon today? No, not my name in a happy place. I find a peculiar way for an author to pimp his or her latest book:

ENTICE BLOGGERS TO DO IT!

For a chance to win a signed Advance Review Copy, all you need do is spend time at some "social networking" site or your blog or any-damned-body's blog talking about why and how much you want this book. Posting the cover and an excerpt, or links to the cover and excerpt, will ingratiate you even further with the author (to whom, of course, you must report back with the url of your place of pimpage).

Seriously? Like, people are being asked to promote a book they haven't yet read, because it hasn't yet been released? On the chance they might win a copy? And might not even like it after telling everybody in the blogosphere exactly why and how much they planned on liking it?

I had to read this announcement a couple of times to make sure I was reading it right. Yup. Get on the stump, girls, and hawk this book . . . even though you didn't write it, didn't read it, probably won't win it, and have absofreakinglutely no reason to piss away your time in an effort to fatten this publisher's bank account!

WTF?

Do you think readers will actually take this bait? Would you? (If you answered yes to the second question, get back to me, 'cause I'm sure we can cut a deal. Heh.)

Hair Pulling and Head Knocking

Why can't I have a good day? An unadulterated GOOD day?

So Bastards and Pretty Boys is coming out on Monday. That's cool. It's my first first-person m/m contemporary, and I loved writing it. The story flowed, the characters formed and chose their voices, and romance seeped in and ultimately made for a HFN packed with optimism.

However, LSB has a peculiar way of spotlighting its "coming soon" books. They're all thrown together on the LSB forum, so a book coming out the next day is on the same footing with a book coming out six months down the pike. Imminent releases are not bumped to the head of the page, as one might reasonably expect, but must fight their way to the head of the page via comments. Since I haven't had any recent comments, my Monday release is slipping down the page, because visitors are commenting on coming-NOT-so-soon books. Go figure that shit out!

Then I get an email from another publisher. The contract I just sent in for a book is "invalid." Two copies made the trek across half the continent, and now they're fucking "invalid." Why are they invalid? Because the fucking watermark doesn't appear! Why doesn't it appear? I have no fucking idea! I filled out the contract and hit "print." The pages were perfectly legible. They were signed and dated. But my cheapshit made-in-China Dell printer didn't "acknowledge" the publisher's fucking watermark. Why? Gee, maybe I should ask one of the Indians or Pakistanis who work for Dell and then waste a day in utter confusion, because I can't understand a word they're saying!

Bottom line: I have no clue how to get the damned watermark to appear, and if it doesn't appear, my contract is SHIT in the publisher's eyes, and as long as it's shit, the book doesn't get fed into the production pipeline. WTF do I do?

Not even the most paranoid of my publishers--need I name names?--has had a "watermarked" contract. None. NONE. This bloody thing has caused me more grief than I can stand contemplating. Why? Because in addtion to my new release slipping off the page at the LSB forums, my next [unnamed] book is going to be held up due to some fucking gray smear on the contract pages!

So that's the story of my sucko Saturday. What will Sunday bring? *sigh*

How many books are too many?

Dear Author recently ran a poll (click on post title to view results and responses) that asked readers if the amount of published fiction should increase, decrease, or remain the same. The largest percentage of respondents voiced a desire to see fewer fiction titles published and a belief that too much of the stuff being put out was crap.

I'm resurrecting this topic because two of my publishers have recently made mention of a heavy influx of submissions over the summer, resulting in big additions to their stables. What does this mean?

Well, it probably means different things to readers, authors, and publishers.

For the companies: more writers = more releases = (ideally) more income. All publishers are scrambling for bigger pieces of the pie. This is a completely logical business goal. But, as stables grow, the multitude of new titles must somehow be accommodated. One way is to increase the number of weekly releases. Another is to increase the length of time between manuscript acceptance and publication. In any case, the business model is bound to change.

For readers: more published writers = more available books. Is this a good thing? I'm not sure. Many fiction readers complain their TBR piles are out of control. Many, like the respondents in the DA poll, have said they're dismayed by diminishing quality. Many admit their book-buying budgets are already stretched to the limit.

For authors: more fellow writers = more competition for release dates and royalties. Hard to get around that fact. As the pie slice expands for publishers and readers, it shrinks for the creators of the product. Only authors with huge, well-established followings are immune to this rather dismal outcome.

I've been through a "growth spurt" at EC, and it wasn't pretty. When that company doubled its number of weekly releases, my royalties immediately plummeted, and I wasn't alone. From what I've since seen and read, EC now issues titles just about every day of the week. They currently have ten "new releases" posted on their home page. If you count the other covers displayed there, some of which are print editions, 23 books greet you at the mouth of the Cave. Wow.

Anyway, I'd like to hear your input on this subject. How much reading material is too much? Or is there no such thing? Do you avid readers feel more is always better? Or do you think that when companies start popping out more and more titles, it's an indication they've lowered their standards for acceptance? Have you noticed a decline in quality that seems to correspond with a rise in the number of offerings? Or has quality remained consistent?

What's the optimum number of weekly releases per publisher? By that I mean, a number that satisfies your book hunger yet doesn't stress your budget or muddle your mind?

Authors, what's your take on publisher expansion? Has it ever affected you adversely, or aren't you fazed by it? Do you see it in a positive light, and if so, why?

I confess, I get the jits when one of my publishers introduces a plethora of new authors. My experience with this sort of development hasn't been good. Sad to say, becoming a better or more versatile writer isn't the solution -- not when readers are bombarded with a blinding number of choices.

My greatest fear as a craftsman is feeling forced into "assembly-line production" mode, which often seems like the only way to succeed at this gig. And, damn, I just don't want to go there.

Celebration Time!

WOOHOO! Nearly three years after its original publication in electronic format (it's also available in print), Acts of the Saints, my black sheep, is in the black! That means it's finally earned back its $100 advance (yeah, yeah, I know -- pathetic, isn't it?) and, in spite of not being an erotic romance, has crept into the red.

To the tune of $2.20. (Hey, at least I no longer owe Samhain!)

Big thanks are in order.

So, to Mrs. Giggles for her generous review . . .

And to Book Utopia Mom, for having the kindness, and guts, to resurrect this novel long after its publication date . . .

And to the elite group of readers who actually risked buying the book . . .

My boundless appreciation for taking a chance on something a little controversial, a lot heavy, and not loaded with smexxin'.

(I think I'll go out and buy me a couple of packs of gum to celebrate. Oh yeah, life is good!)

Click on the post title if you're wondering what all the fuss is about.

Publishers' Bestseller Lists

I'm talking about e-pubs, since they're the ones I'm most familiar with. (Yeah, okay, I dangled a preposition to avoid an awkward construction. Just so you know I know.)

Samhain has always posted its bestsellers at My Bookstore and More. It even ran a popularity contest last year in which readers were invited to vote for their favorite books. More and more e-pubs are coming forward with weekly or monthly sales rankings for their titles. Some make this information available only to authors; others, to the general public. Some still don't release the information at all.

I have decidedly mixed feelings about the sales-posting trend. On the one hand, I fully believe a forthright approach is to be applauded. Vigorously. Too many e-publishers have embraced secrecy, often for its own sake, and/or engaged in slinky and self-serving behind-the-scenes machinations. Authors and readers alike have a right to feel confident they're dealing with an upstanding business entity that has nothing to hide.

On the other hand . . .

I have serious reservations about this practice.

• Regarding public postings: Should readers be encouraged to buy books that are already selling well? This makes no sense to me. People being what they are (and I'll likely insult you here, so bite down), the herd mentality prevails. If book shoppers see that Eat My Shorts by Benny Bushwacker is Number One this week, they'll likely stop looking and buy Eat My Shorts instead of another book that could very well prove a more satisfying read. Shouldn't overlooked titles be brought to readers' attention instead of those that are doing well on their own?


• Regarding both public and inhouse postings: How does it affect a publisher's non-bestselling authors to see that their efforts aren't being "rewarded"? Will they succumb to a defeatist attitude? Or will they start playing copycat? Neither consequence is desirable. The former could cripple truly good writers who have much to offer, and the latter will result in a slew of derivative submissions as lowlist authors try to ride the high-flying coattails of their more successful peers.


• Finally, there are those doofuses who will go around proclaiming they're bestselling authors or such-and-such a title is a bestseller, even though these distinctions only exist at Peapod Publishing. (I confess, I just threw this one in because it annoys the snot out of me!)

A couple of my publishers share sales rankings with their authors and only with their authors. They're damned good publishers, too. I sure as hell don't fault them for doing what they're doing. Openness invariably garners my respect.

That said, I never look at the figures. I don't want to see them. I don't want to feel discouraged, or pressured into writing stuff for which I have no real affinity just because I think it will increase my sales. I don't want to become a mope and I sure as shit don't want to fall prey, however subconsciously, to the copycat syndrome.

I'm wondering how readers and other writers feel about this trend. Are you influenced by bestseller lists? If so, how?

Too many "unworthy" writers getting published?

Emerald Jaguar, aka emmyjag, offered up an interesting question recently about who's to blame for published books that are riddled with errors. Is it the author's responsibility to put out polished work? Or the editorial team's? The discussion (a good one, too, accessible through the post title) resurrected a question I've occasionally tossed around in my mind.

What's the publisher's role? What's the reader's role?

It seems to me, the final arbiter of quality is the publisher. That's where the buck stops. It's the company that sets the standards for its product; it's the acquisitions editor(s) who, in accordance with those standards, must decide whether or not to give new material a chance. I can't help but wonder how, if a submitted manuscript is dreadfully written (loaded with spelling, grammatical, and syntactical errors; lacking in plot consistency; burdened by wooden dialogue and leaden characters), the damned thing gets accepted in the first place!

And the damned things do get accepted. All the time. For electronic and print publication. I suspect we've all read the output of verbally challenged writers. I don't mean people who have an essential but occasionally flawed command of their craft, I mean those who don't seem to realize authorship is a craft.

So maybe they have active imaginations capable of churning out plot devices like there's no tomorrow -- say, dragon-shifter ghosts that haunt the British Isles, looking for reincarnations of their former soulmates . . . or whatever. Maybe they have a real flair for dreaming up kinky sex scenes. Both of those capabilities are just dandy, but they don't amount to trail of rat turds if the writer doesn't have a sound command of both the language and the fundamental elements of fiction.

To quote comedian Ron White, "You can't fix stupid." Were I an editor who had some corned beef hash of a story thrust at me, I sure as hell wouldn't know how to turn it into New York Strip. And the author sure as hell wouldn't know, either, because s/he thinks that hash is New York Strip.

Ergo, it's publishers who must bear the brunt of responsibility for what kind of product they put before the reading public.

But . . . but (and here's something else to consider) what's the role of consumers? If the reading public gobbles down the hash without complaint, publishers have no incentive to improve their menus.

Whaddaya think?

Is more ever enough?

Remember when Harlequin introduced the "Temptation" line and Silhouette introduced "Desire" and "Intimate Moments"? Probably not. But believe me, compared with their predecessors, those titles contained some racy stuff. They signaled the banging open of the bedroom door. Unfortunately, Roget's Thesaurus banged open along with the door, so although readers were getting eyeful after eyeful of rapturous horizontalism, they were also being fed some really laughable euphemisms to describe the action. (Netherlips? Isn't that what the eastern and western edges of the Netherlands are called? Are they grasslands? Or swamp lands?)

Anyway, this silly sexspeak went on for a good many years. Then the bodacious Tina Engler came along and essentially decided it was time to call a spade a spade. Thanks to Ellora's rockin' Cave, readers no longer had to ask themselves, His "member" of what? The Elks' Club? And why does this member broadcast "seed"? Is he a conservationist? A landscaper? And what kind of seed? Ah, grass seed, I'll bet. In the Netherlips. All the delicate obfuscation came to an end with EC's "erotic" romances. A cock became a cock, plain and simple (and usually large and turgid), and it shot copious amounts of cum into every hot, dripping, swollen, gaping, achingly impatient pussy it could.

The dam had burst, so to speak. Once the Netherlips became as drenched at they could get, a kind of frenzied adventuring began. Erotic romance wouldn't content itself with settling in the land of explicit, one-on-one m/f sex. Nuh-uh. This was a Brave New World, by gum, and it had all sorts of raunchy regions to explore. Joyful masturbation. Happy-toys. Positions that defied gravity and rewrote the Kama Sutra. Menages of ever-increasing numbers. Hardcore BDSM. Fetishism. Sex with shifters, vampires, demons, aliens. Fantasy rape that veered this close (+) to actual rape. Double penetration. Multiple dicks. Twincest. Octucest (well, you know that's bound to turn up sooner or later!)

This exuberant progression has led me to a question, which is the point of my post. Are sex scenes and sexual relationships, whether opposite-sex or same-sex, now considered too "vanilla" if they don't contain one or more of the above elements? (I'm really getting sick of the term vanilla, like I'm sick of Oh. My. God. and Wow. Just. Wow. But I digress.) Have readers begun to expect and even demand ongoing one-upmanship? Can relationships still be perceived as thrilling and satisfying if they are made up of (GASP!) two people who just like to fuck? Or (DOUBLE GASP!) make love?

I'm just wonderin'.

All of a sudden, Mormons are HOT.

Who'd a thunk it? The Osmonds wanted to be perceived as hot but failed. Quite miserably. Nevertheless, they set the stage. Then Mit (Mitt? Mitttttt?) Romney came along and tried to be -- in an appropriately understated way, of course -- Mr. Hottie of the American political scene. (What the hell does Mit stand for, anyway? Or is it German, as in "With" Romney? Sind Sie mit Romney oder gegen Romney? ) Anyway, he didn't quite make the cut, although he definitely caught our interest.

But in the world of books? WHOA. Jump back, Jack!

First, Stephenie Meyer, bored hausfrau and reluctant author extraordinaire, decides to kill some time by trying her hand at writing. Why not, eh? She doesn't have to work thanks to hubby's considerable earning capacity, and since she really doesn't give a rat's ass about the craft of fiction, she can just go ahead and dabble around to entertain herself. But something entirely unexpected happens. Whoosh! -- down comes the angel Moroni with more golden plates, but on this set are inscribed holy words called the "Twilight" series. Young girl gettin' jiggy with a hungry vampire, both quivering with unspent passion. Meyer looks at the first book and says, "Jiminy, will I have to claim this came out of me?" And the angel answers, "First of all, my name isn't Jiminy. And you betcha, babe. The book sucks too bad for me to claim it, but you'll be well compensated for your embarrassment."

It isn't only in the realm of hetero romance where Mormon sizzle has been sending out steam signals. James Buchanan's most recent release, Hard Fall from MLR Press, features a gay Mormon hero (and, from everything I've read, is an infinitely better book than Meyer's dreck). Then that incomparable greenhouse of eroticism, Ravenous Romance, followed suit by publishing a most provocatively titled short story, "The Missionary and the Artist," which also features a gay Saint.

Makes me want to move to Utah, I'll tell ya.

I wonder which religion or denomination will generate the next eruption of verbal smexxin'. Got any ideas?

The Great Erotica Riddle

M/M/M/F, M/F, M/M, M/M/F, M/M/M, M/F/M/M, Menage, Voyuerism

I swear, I did not make up that content notation you see above. That's copied and pasted from a book review.

Wouldn't you say the "menage" and "voyeurism" at the end are, uh . . . superfluous?

The book nobody wants is now...WANTED.

Yeehah! Third time's a charm. InDescent apparently doesn't violate the editorial standards of Liquid Silver's "Molten Silver" GLBT line, so there it shall be published. Jackson Spey and Adin Swift will once again appear on the world's stage. (Well, at least the little ebook-world stage, which is plenty good enough for me!)

This brings up some interesting aspects of the writing biz. I believe I've mentioned them before, but they bear repeating. A relationship or even story arc can't always be carried to completion at a single company. There are a number of possible reasons for this.

Sometimes companies fold. Sometimes they're horribly mismanaged and/or their owners turn out to be turdwads; as a result, writers fall out of love with them and choose to go elsewhere. Sometimes, it's simply a case of "wrong fit."

Although Jackson and Adin had their first significant encounter at Ellora's Cave, they couldn't have subsequent encounters there. The HEA or HFN ending to any EC book cannot be compromised. So, I couldn't bring these two men together without dragging Adin's girlfriend into the mix -- something I staunchly refused to do. (Loony as it sounds, the characters resisted it, too.) It was at Changeling Press, in the novella Obsessed, that Jackson and Adin got together. Securely ... if you know what I mean. ;-)

BUT Changeling couldn't take InDescent. At nearly 70k words, the novel far exceeds their length limit. And because of its unconventional plot construction, it wasn't appropriate for Loose Id, either. (Understand that I have great respect for both companies and fully appreciate their rationale. EC's, too, for that matter. Their editors make decisions, as they should, in accordance with their companies' guidelines.)

So, I toddled along with my oddball book in tow. A speed bump here, a roadblock there. It's part of the business. Not every book is appropriate for every publisher, and no writer should blame a company for adhering to its business model. Writers can, however, throw blame at snotty, self-important editors who autonomously make decisions based on personal whim rather than professional standards. Those are the true villains in any given submission drama. Thank goodness they're few and far between.

Update: The Book Nobody Wants

Do NOT follow this cliched advice: "Write what you love." Well, go ahead and follow it if you must, but don't expect to get published.

Poor, uncategorizable InDescent is still making the rounds and bouncing off pigeonholes into which it just can't fit. This hybrid urban fantasy/journey of self-discovery/m-m erotic romance has no niche!

Objection #1 - The villain isn't villainous enough. (Uh...that's because he isn't a villain. A wannabe villain--yes. A little bit of a prod, an antagonist, a foil--maybe. Primarily, though, this superficial, self-centered doofus serves, through contrast, to highlight the essential albeit flawed nobility of the protagonist and his lover. If the book has a villain, it lurks within the hero's internal landscape. In other words, he's his own worst enemy...and must come to realize that.)

Objection #2 - The "love interest" doesn't appear until halfway through the story. (Not entirely true. He isn't part of the on-scene action, although his presence is felt nearly from the start. When he does show up in person, things really start getting intense.)

Ah, well. I never bothered actually responding to these objections. There's no battling publishers' models or genre norms, and there's no point in trying. I learned that a long time ago. All one can do is swallow and move on.

So just bear in mind when you write what you love that it may not fit current fiction formulas. Be prepared to put on your patience-pants.

"This is bad!" I heaved.

EDITED TO ADD: I have another post, from June 14 of this year and also tagged "language," about dialogue itself--in this case, sex-scene dialogue, which people actually wrote. Really, truly, actually wrote.

My previous blog was, in part, about winning a book when you don't get to choose the book you want to win. Oh, my. I was recently the recipient of a historical romance, issued this year by a major print publisher. Not only was it riddled with anachronisms (e.g., yuk, as an exclamation of disgust; two cents' worth; the last straw), it had the most stupendous, dizzying array of dialogue tags I've ever, EVER seen between two covers, paper or electronic.

What I found most annoying was how seldom characters "asked." Almost invariably, they "queried."

Where have all the good editors gone? Into e-publishing?

As you peruse the list below, keep in mind that each of these words was used as an indicator of a character speaking (like the way I used one of them in my post title). I kid you not. Comma, end quote, tag -- in that order. Many were followed by some rip-roaring adverbs, too, which put extra kinks in my occipital cortex and temporal lobe.

I have to confess I've employed many of these tags myself. Most authors have. "She asked" and "he answered" and "she said" don't go far in the descriptive department. Said-said-said can also wear on a reader's nerves. But . . . but . . .

Well, just check out the list. I doubt it's complete; I surely missed some because, frankly, I did have better things to do. By the way, I didn't bother jotting down the more common and acceptable tags, like "whispered," "murmured," and "replied."

Fellow e-authors: hold your heads high! Keep in mind this attractive trade paperback came from a big, snazzy New York house. Now go get a supersized beverage and settle in.

acquiesced
admonished
advised
affirmed
agreed
announced
apologized
applauded
averred
barked
beckoned
bellowed
beseeched
bit out
blazed
boomed
breathed
cajoled
called
ceded
chastised
chided
chimed in
choked out
chortled
chuckled
commented
concurred
confirmed
continued
corrected
countered
cut in
declared
demanded
denied
derided
elaborated
encouraged
enjoined
exclaimed
explained
exploded
expostulated (Wow!)
faltered
fired back
gasped
greeted
growled
grumbled
heaved
hesitated
hissed
imparted
implored
inquired
insisted
interjected
interrupted
invited
maintained
mewled
mimicked
mused
needled
nodded
offered
ordered
panted
persisted
petitioned
placated
praised
pressed
pressed again
probed
proceeded
prodded
promised
protested
pronounced
purred
pursued
queried
questioned
reasoned
refuted
reiterated
rejoined
remarked
reproved
responded
returned
roared
scoffed
shrugged
sighed
smiled
snarled
sneered
snorted
sobbed
spat
sputtered
stammered
stated
swore
supplied
taunted
tried to agree
vowed
warned
whimpered
yawned

Owners and editors . . . as writers?

I've pondered this subject on and off and still haven't lit on an attitude I'm comfortable with. (Yeah, okay, so I dangled a preposition.) I've been an editor at two different houses: first, the august Llewellyn Publications, known for serious nonfiction works on every aspect of occult studies, e.g., astrology, witchcraft, high magick, divination, the afterlife, psychic powers, etc.; second, a micropublisher that specializes in regional, local, and family histories. Whenever I wrote anything during my tenure at either company, it had to do with my my job.

Since I started publishing my own fiction several years ago, I've noticed that many e-pub owners and editors are also writers. I can't speak about larger print houses, because I have no experience with them, but a lot of peeps in e-publishing seem to like working both sides of the desk.

Is this good or bad? Is it neither good nor bad? Can it be both?

This situation does have distinct pros and cons. There've been some notorious instances in e-publishing of owners allegedly writing under multiple pseudonyms and giving themselves preferential treatment. Teddypig, a reader and reviewer, recently posted on this topic at his blog. Other companies have been accused of the same shenanigans. I suspect it's damned tempting to further one's own writing career in this manner ("Hey, I'm the owner of this sandbox!"), but it certainly isn't ethical.

On the other hand, many owner-writers like Tina Engler (aka Jaid Black) at Ellora's Cave, Margaret Riley (aka Shelby Morgen) at Changeling Press, and Treva Harte at Loose Id have done little or no spotlight-grabbing beyond what's necessary for promotion -- and I mean the promotion of any title. In their stadiums, or sandboxes, the playing field is level. Margaret Riley has said that her experiences as an author have helped her be a more responsible, and responsive, e-pub owner, and I don't doubt her one bit. She's a marvelous lady.

The issue of editors who are also published or aspiring authors is a bit thornier. On the plus side, a writer understands other writers . . . or should. We all have similar aspirations, fears, concerns. There is, I believe, such a thing as a creative mindset. So far, so good. We're cut from the same cloth. We're simpatico.

BUT.

What happens if a writer-editor starts imposing, however inadvertently, her authorial voice and/or viewpoint on the work of her "editees"? It's always a possibility.

Then there's the matter of prioritizing. I know how rabid I am about writing. When I'm on a roll, I often won't bother answering the phone; I resent cleaning and cooking; I don't venture outdoors or even watch television. Coffee, potty, and letting the dogs in and out are about all that can drag me away from the computer. This isn't a good place to be for editors, however. To excel at what they've been hired to do, they can't put their own projects first. Emails need promptly to be answered; paperwork, shuffled; manuscripts, evaluated or edited; batches of material transferred to scores of different people. Any delays or mistakes resulting from an editor devoting too much time to her latest and greatest brainchild are . . . well . . . inexcusable.

I've often considered getting back into editing. I have the credentials, and I sure as hell need the money. For the reasons mentioned above, I've invariably scrapped the idea. The impulse to fashion my own stories is too strong. I'd be guilt-ridden as hell if I started neglecting my obligations on either side of the desk . . . but one side, at least, would certainly suffer.

There's fantasy. And then there's fantasy. And . . .

Long ago and far away, a man named Carl Linnaeus created a a system of taxonomy for classifying all living creatures. Remember it from your biology courses? The "kingdom, phylum, class, genus, species" -- and then some -- breakdown? Well, modern popular fiction has a taxonomy of its own. For example, there's no such thing as plain old fantasy anymore. I'm afraid I don't have the time to be as meticulous about categorization as Linnaeus was, but here are some distinctions I've noticed.

• Earthbound fantasy, historical. It takes place in the past, usually the distant (Arthurian or medieval) past, on our own planet.


• Otherworld fantasy, historical. It takes place in an alternate or parallel world, very much like earth, in a place and/or time period that has a feel similar to those on earth.


• Earthbound fantasy, contemporary, usually urban


• Otherworld fantasy, contemporary, usually urban


• Earthbound fantasy, futuristic, urban and/or interstellar


• Otherworld fantasy, futuristic, urban and/or interstellar


• Fantasies with and without epic battles


• Fantasies with and without female "heroes"


• Fantasies with and without dragons, faeries, elves, etc.


• Steampunk

Okay, I'm already tired. So which do you like best? I'm torn.

As I wrote my Galdeshian fantasies for Ellora's Cave -- Wing and Tongue, Cauldron of Keridwen, and Prince of Glacier Glas, I became immersed in the world. Even my authorial voice shifted, as if it had an automatic transmission, to reflect that world. These stories fall into the second category above, and they all have dragons. I adore writing about this "other-place" and its unusual society and inhabitants.

But when I wrote Hoochie Coochie Man, in the contemporary-urban category, I loved it, too. And I love InDescent, a work-in-progress, passionately.

But wait, there's more! Now I'm creating a futuristic urban fantasy series for Loose Id. The first volume, Looking for Some Touch, will be released in early November. And it features men with men, yet another sub-category of fantasy that's only recently begun to shine. Am I crazy about this series? Well, take a guess.

So, I repeat: Which type of fantasy do you prefer? Can you come up with other classifications?