Alison Kent

Grrr. Why do husbands insist on doing what you tell them not to do!!!! (Please remember this video is from 1995. I no longer have big hair or big glasses or a big car. Just a big ass. *g*) But, yes. I do still talk like Texas. *g*

PBW’s thoughts today echo a lot of what I’ve come to realize in my decision not to renew my RWA membership when it comes up again in January.

Focusing on your individuality, on the other hand, reinforces the writer’s creative foundations. It frees you from the restraints brought on by group expectations and their conformity strait-jacket. Yes, it’s lonely, and thats the price you pay, just as the group-joiners sacrifice their individuality in return for the benefits of the group.

This doesn’t mean RWA wasn’t a good thing for me years ago. The past few years, however, I’ve only stayed to more cheaply enter the RITA. But since many readers are better understanding the workings of the contest, more seem to be holding Wendy’s opinion:

Yeah, it’s an industry award - but authors have to “pay an entrance fee” and that’s the part I’m not wild about. I mean, I know RWA does need to make some money - but that fee (I thought I read $50 somewhere) is the sticking point I have. So if an author doesn’t want to (or can’t) pay that fee - that’s one less book entered for consideration. I wonder how many outstanding books aren’t entered because of that? That’s why the RITA has come to mean less to me as a reader over the years. It only represents the romance fiction that was entered into the contest. Not romance fiction as a whole.

Read the rest of this entry »

For fun, I’ve added a shoutbox to my sidebar beneath the bookcovers. Sheesh, I just typed “shotbox”. Hmm, that reminds me of The Who’s squeezebox song . . . anyhow, this way you don’t have to search for a post to reply to if you have something quick to say! We’ll see how it works!

No time today, but if anyone wants a insider’s look into SIN CITY, check out the hubby’s blog (though it’s his partner’s entry) detailing the background of the Frank Miller graphic novel.

And for even MORE sin, here are a couple of great entries spawned *hehe* by Shannon’s RTB entry yesterday that is STILL causing a puce-like stir! *ggg*

No Dick For Me, Thank You
Hashbrowns (but no bacon or sausage, please!)
Both Sides and Neither
Kate’s School of Simplistic Morality

And more (because I LOVE other people doing all the work - and I’ve really spouted off enough already!)

Damn, that’s one ugly baby
There’s an interesting discussion going on

Also, to put the rumor to bed YET again, I am NOT Emma Holly. Thank you for thinking so, however, as I love her work!

Over the weekend, when talking to a small group of my closest writing friends, I learned a few shocking truths. One of them, an aspiring author, has a published friend with whom she often critiques and shares reads. She said that late last year she was talking over her new idea with her published friend. No biggie, idle chit-chat. Yet two months later when talking to said published friend about her new idea, it seems the published friend’s new book featured characters in the same unique profession as those of the aspiring author. Hmm.

Another of my writing buddies, a published author, had earlier in the year heard from a long-time published friend about how an editor had recently pursued her to the ends of the earth and convinced her to submit to her line. Interestingly enough, another author with the ear of said editor happened to know the published friend had the pursuing story in reverse. She was the one who’d hunted down the editor and begged her to consider a story she’d written. Hmm.

The last one of my writing buddies, a published author, had been working to sell to a previous editor who’d moved to another house. One of her published friends was also interested in selling to the same editor and after the two talked, learned what tone of books the editor was looking for. Lo and behold, a month or so later, this published friend sent to my writing buddy a copy of the email she’d received “out of the blue” from the editor saying she’d love to see something asap. Only problem? This published friend had failed to remove her own email from the bottom of the editor’s reply. She had taken the information she’d gleaned and gone after the editor herself, yet didn’t own up to what she’d done and was caught in the act. Hmm.

First of all, these people are NOT friends! Secondly, WTF? I can’t imagine a published author needing to lift ideas from anyone else. I have so many I’ll never get them all written! Thirdly, is this what the industry has come down to? Such a competitiveness for the dwindling slots and the glory over the fresh and unique concepts that there are authors who can’t applaud another’s idea instead of trying to get there first - and thieve to do so. Yeah, so, you can’t imagine your way out of a bucket. Deal with it. Do NOT ruin the mental health and emotional fragility of other authors who you’ve pounded into the ground with your backstabbing ways!

The mind is boggled.

Oooh, oooh, oooh. Even more goodies to consider. Kathleen O’Reilly poses the following question in her comments at Romancing the Blog:

Do readers read steamy romances for the buzz? I guess what I’m wondering is if people are grativating toward steamier books because our society is just moving in racier directions, or because women are getting more agressive in exploring their own sexuality? I don’t think this is a conscience thing, or at least for me, it’s not. But has anybody else thought about this? It’s dangerous ground, I know, but I’d love to her other thoughts.

So, speak out! Let her hear! :)

Have to brag a bit and share the dh’s newest rant!

Still delaying today’s main post as I haven’t finished it yet! I heard from Holly that someone already snapped up my critique, so I’ve offered another! And since I have WAY too much to do today, I’ll simply point you to Shannon Stacey’s great discussion topic at Romancing the Blog, and post here the two comments I made in rebuttal *gg* to two previous comments.

Them: That’s precisely why so many Christians won’t judge erotic romances. Because we can’t even read the books without breaking what we believe to be God’s law.

Me: Since this is the case, I don’t understand how judges who morally object to reading pre-marital sex or sexual situations described in any sort of detail find anything to judge in the RITA contest at all. Even Traditional books will have sexual encounters - I’ve had them to read before in the contest - where the couple was already married and the sex was described. In fact, if Inspirationals are the only books where a reader is guaranteed not to run across a sexual encounter and Inspirational authors can’t judge in their own category, how exactly do they judge anything? Do they return books when they hit a sex scene? Do they skim it - and if so, is that fair to the author they’re judging since sex scenes should be intrinsic to character growth?

Them: But erotic romances are hard to judge. Technically, they are different from romances. For one, the sex is supposed to be an intrinsic part of the story.

Me: Uh, no. I’ve written for Brava and Blaze and Temptation and Meteor and Bouquet. It doesn’t matter if I’m writing hotter books or not so hot books. The sex is ALWAYS an intrinsic part of the story - as it should be in ALL books. Otherwise, what’s it doing there?

Agree? Disagree? Thoughts?

UPDATE: Okay, I’ve been thinking about this more and posting a lot of my thoughts to RTB, but I want to reiterate my stand here.

Read the rest of this entry »

I’ve donated a critique for the Jamie Denton fund. (HelenKay and Kelly Rivers will both testify to the fact that I will more than likely NOT get it done on time, LOL! But I will eventually get it done!) Additionally, I’ve donated a Website to be built and that will be auctioned I believe in May. And I’ve donated a set of gIRL-gEAR books and 3 sets of the SG-5 books. These make GREAT gifts!!!!! *ggg* (Since I just sent the emails to Holly and Susan tonight, the info won’t be up probably until tomorrow at the earliest!)

I also had to say I got the nicest email today from an author who judged The Bane Affair in the RITA’s and told me what a great book she thought it was. Those are the things that come out of the blue and make you realize that there are really sweet and thoughtful people out there. (I’m saying that now since I’ll being making a counterpoint tomorrow, LOLOL!)

Wendy had a very interesting observation on her blog last week.

I wonder why mainstream romances aren’t more inclusive? Why don’t they more accurately reflect the population? Why does every character in them need to be white?

What I posted to Wendy’s blog in answer is that I’m so used to a mix of cultures and races in my every day life, that I don’t think twice about including characters of color in my work. I haven’t done so in all my books, but I wrote Izzy & Baron in Wicked Games, Annabel Lee who appeared in four of my gIRL-gEAR books before starring in Indiscreet - the same book where I wrote Devon Lee, her brother. In Larger Than Life, I have a mixed race secondary relationship. And I’ll be writing another one when I finally tell Ezra Moore’s story. And, honestly, I don’t think twice about any of it because of the world around me.

Thing is, I’m not talking about the romance, but about the world the characters inhabit. Do neither the hero nor the heroine have friends of different ethnicities? Is the world they live in pure “vanilla”? When I worked, my boss was black. Our IT guy was PURE “Italiano”. *ggg* One of our engineers was from South Africa, another from Pakistan. One of our company’s executive secretaries was Chinese-American. One of the girls in the accounting department was Japanese-Irish. The president of one of our subsidiaries was Cuban. And I actually had to stop and think about the mix because when working? Never noticed it for a minute!!

So, what do you think? Whether you’re an author or a reader? Are romances not more inclusive because:

#1) Publishers discourage (or don’t encouarge) authors to explore cultural diversity? (Does anyone have first hand knowledge or experience one way or the other? I’ve never run into this myself. My editors haven’t said a word.)

#2) Romance authors are isolated and perhaps don’t think of the larger scope of the world? (Many may simply be writing smaller town stories where there is more of a “monoculture”? Or live in such environments and aren’t interested/compelled/curious in exploring beyond? They prefer to “write what they know”?)

#3) Readers aren’t comfortable reading mixed race relationships? Or characters steeped in cultures with which they’re not familiar? They prefer “white” romances or “black” romances? (To put it simply - not to degrade anyone!) They don’t relate to characters of color? (But that would assume readers are not of color, wouldn’t it? And that makes no sense!!!!)

#4) A mix of all of the above?

Update: Diana posted the following on Wendy’s blog:

I’ve seen tons of characters of all races in romances, so every time this topic comes up, I have to think really hard about what I’ve been reading. It strikes me that I read a lot of books with Latino, black, native American, Arabic etc characters… not enough Asian to suit me. Occasionally, I see comments about the “whiteness” of romances, or about how Hq/Sil “won’t buy ethnic characters,” but the very books on the shelves contradict it, month after month. Not only that, but there are publishers that specialize in romances where most of the characters are African American.

The BET and Dafina books are a given. We know those will have African American characters, but the ones I’ve picked up (and I have!) are usually ALL African American characters. Same point as above. The diversity isn’t there - but then these imprints are specific, as was Encanto at the time. But I certainly don’t see ethnic diversity month after month - unless it’s in one or two books. And one or two books out of how many published still means it’s not the norm. What the norm seems to be (from what I’ve looked into anyway) is large Latino families living in Latino neighborhoods. Or a circle of girlfriends that share the same ethnicity. So, the books are ABOUT those characters as a group as opposed to being about a group of diverse characters. FWIW.