Alison Kent

“Nothing says love like a teddy bear with a gun!” - Windy The Wise

Kazaa’s owners turn tables!

Does Stephen King chat regularly? Does John Grisham? Does Nicholas Sparks? Does Tom Clancy? Catherine Coulter? Danielle Steel? James Patterson? (Okay. You get the point!) My point being, why does this phenomenon only seem to apply to romance authors??

Don’t get me wrong. I LOVE emailing with readers who write to me, and chatting with them on my own VERY LONELY *grin* message board, as well as the Blaze Authors board and my gIRL-gEAR message board. These are the main places I hang out as they are my venues for staying in touch with MY readers. One place lets me talk about ME *grin* and the other allows me to discuss the line for which I write. Perfect balance.

But then I see comments such as this on other boards:

I have been spoiled by the authors who do come by here to chat and offer advice and responses — you guys are great! I guess I have come to expect this of authors who show up on line — and I don’t buy the busy excuse, because one of the busiest writers I can imagine, Nora Roberts, is on her list every day — she joins threads, has a question/answer thread where the answers ALL questions, and I can’t imagine anyone who would have more irons in the fire publication wise than her — so what it comes down to for me is a choice. But those of us on her list feel like we know her, we have a relationship with her, and that goes a LONG way in selling books. A lot more so than if she just dropped in to tell us about the new release from time to time.

Why do so many aspiring authors and regular readers put Nora up as an example when anyone with half a mind would realize that Nora is not the norm?? Nora is a goddess. Nora, in her position, can get away with writing anything she wishes to write, can make time for anything she wishes to have time for. There is only one Nora. There will never be but one Nora. So can we let Nora as an example go and return to the real world? The world where most of us live?

In this world, many of us work full-time jobs in addition to writing. Many of us work full-time jobs and have a second business we run in addition to writing. Many of us work full-time jobs, have a second business we run, and have a house FULL of family members requiring our attention in addition to writing. Many of us in this position also do our own housekeeping, shopping, cooking, run our own errands, do our own promotion as we can’t afford a publicist, do our own correspondence, as we can’t afford a secretary, do our own recordkeeping, as we can’t afford an assistant, ad nauseum.

Is it now required of me to have a personal and regular online relationship with readers in order to sell books? Again, I am not talking about answering email from fans which is a PLEASURE. Nor am I talking about chatting with readers who come to my boards wanting to ask questions about my books, etc. I’m talking about getting into deeply involved and ongoing conversations about the writing life or craft or other substantial discussions that can sap mental energy better used for writing.

Personally, I prefer to write.

Authors choose how they want to talk to readers, it doesn’t really have anything to do with being busy (I hate that excuse actually — we’re all busy). It’s about what you choose to make time for.

Yes. It is. (And how dare anyone assume to know how busy I am!) And I choose to make time for my family above all else. After that, I do what I have to to nurture my own creativity. I have learned, and have been encouraged repeatedly by my agent (who now owns her own agency after seven years spent in the firm that handles, gasp, Nora!) to hold dear my time, to concentrate on what is required by my creative process.

And that is to cherish my readers and my author friends, those who support me, are there for me, boost me up when I’m feeling down! All of you, I dearly appreciate more than you probably know!

A recent discussion at the All About Romance Reader To Reader message board titled Trade Size Rip-Off got me to thinking. I’ve temporarily changed my sidebar poll, as I’m interested in other opinions. This comment below sums up the gist of the thread:

I don’t think any reader believes the publishers should give the books away for free. But consider, that we have been conditioned to buy romances as mass market paperbacks. When a romance is released as a trade or hardback, the publisher has to convince me it is worth one to two times more than what I have been conditioned (by the publisher) to expect. Usually, the book is not any better. Therefore the question remains why should I pay more for that item?

And, yes. I realize WICKED GAMES is a series book and not a mass-market single title, which is what the conversation revolved around but, hey. I’m all into promo!

I don’t buy Romantic Times as a rule. Only when I have a book out to clip the review for my scrapbook. So, in buying the October edition, I see that I have apparently missed an ongoing conversation about whether or not RT should review erotica or erotic romance. This issue contained several Letters to the Editor in response. One of them I found rather interesting and rather strange considering the source.

I have some qualms about the burgeoning erotica genre. It’s not because I don’t think erotica should be written. It’s not because it’s degrading or perpetuates gender stereotypes though frequently it does. It’s because of the quality of the offerings currently glutting the market.

Okay. This I cannot deny. And let’s not even TALK about the frightening claymation sex cover art.

Just like anything that becomes faddish, I get the impression publishers are releasing some less than stellar works to fill the enthusiastic maws of their readers.

Again. Agreed.

For example, I have noticed that books in the Harlequin Blaze line receive lower than average ratings in RT than some in other category lines. At other review sites, this is also the case. This isn’t to say good books don’t exist in that line, but that they exist less often.

Okay. This is where this letter writer, who is also an editor for Science Fiction Romance takes a flying leap off the deep end. You would think in such a position, one would never be so quick to take the opinion of one reviewer, let me say that again, ONE REVIEWER, in formulating such a judgmental statement.

Is RT suddenly the definitive answer as to what is good and what is not??

Huh, I don’t THINK so, Dave!

Give me a break!

I don’t buy Romantic Times as a rule. Only when I have a book out to clip the review for my scrapbook. So, in buying the October edition, I see that I have apparently missed an ongoing conversation about whether or not RT should review erotica or erotic romance. This issue contained several Letters to the Editor in response. One of them I found rather interesting and rather strange considering the source.

I have some qualms about the burgeoning erotica genre. It’s not because I don’t think erotica should be written. It’s not because it’s degrading or perpetuates gender stereotypes though frequently it does. It’s because of the quality of the offerings currently glutting the market.

Okay. This I cannot deny. And let’s not even TALK about the frightening claymation sex cover art.

Just like anything that becomes faddish, I get the impression publishers are releasing some less than stellar works to fill the enthusiastic maws of their readers.

Again. Agreed.

For example, I have noticed that books in the Harlequin Blaze line receive lower than average ratings in RT than some in other category lines. At other review sites, this is also the case. This isn’t to say good books don’t exist in that line, but that they exist less often.

Okay. This is where this letter writer, who is also an editor for Science Fiction Romance takes a flying leap off the deep end. You would think in such a position, one would never be so quick to take the opinion of one reviewer, let me say that again, ONE REVIEWER, in formulating such a judgmental statement.

Is RT suddenly the definitive answer as to what is good and what is not??

Huh, I don’t THINK so, Dave!

How can anyone say that good books exist less often in the Harlequin Blaze line than in any other unless they themselves have read each and every one?

Give me a break!

Have at it, boys!

Wife to husband: So, when a guy has his eye on a lustful blond babe, does that just mean he thinks she’s hot to look at, or that he wants to do her?

Husband to wife: It’s like a wonderful horse. Of course the ride is the goal, but showing her off is what scores the points with the guys.

First of all, are you tired of having people sneer at your choice of reading material? Then say, “No More!”

Yes, I’m back from vacation. I’m done with my Mother’s Day novella. I’ve finished my eHarlequin serial. It is BRAVA TIME! I’m so excited. And so nervous. And wish I had more vacation to take so I could immerse myself with these characters.

SPOILER WARNING:
If you haven’t read STRIPTEASE and don’t want to know anything about the secondary romance, read no further.

That said, I have had many questions about Aiden Zuniga and Renata Faulkner and whether or not they are going to have a story. Quick answer, no. Longer answer, their story is included in STRIPTEASE. And they are briefly mentioned again in INDISCREET.

Just for fun, I’ll send a copy of my upcoming Blaze, WICKED GAMES, to the first reader who emails me and identifies who I used as model for Aiden in this photo montage from the gIRL-gEAR site.

Also:

Acocdrnig to an elgnsih unviesitry sutdy the oredr of letetrs in a wrod dosen’t mttaer, the olny thnig thta’s iopmrantt is that the frsit and lsat ltteer of eevry word is in the crcreot ptoision. The rset can be jmbueld and one is stlil able to raed the txet wiohtut dclftfuiiy.