I'm in a dark place regarding the book in progress. This happens to all authors so I'm trying not to get too panicked about the situation. I'm in the midst of a major rewrite on the intro - I'll spare you what version I'm on, soon to be double-digits - and nothing, absolutely NOTHING, feels right anymore.

Part of selling a manuscript, or so I'm told, is being able to pitch it in one sentence, and three sentences. So I started investigating movie taglines, thinking that might give me some idea of what the 'pros' come up with in regards to some movies I am very well acquainted with.

almost famous - Experience it. Enjoy it. Just don't fall for it.
rockstar - the story of a wannabe who got to be
this is spinal tap - Does for rock and roll what "The Sound of Music" did for hills
high fidelity - A comedy about fear of commitment, hating your job, falling in love and other pop favorites.
bull durham - It's all about sex and sport. What else is there?
empire records - open til midnite.
detroit rock city - Kiss The Rules Goodbye.
chasing amy - It's not who you love. It's how.
bridget jones - It's Monday morning, Bridget has woken up with a headache, a hangover and her boss. [alright, so I'm not well acquainted with this, but it's a damned good tagline; better than the movie itself]
Madonna: truth or dare - like you've never seen her before [duh]
Metallica: some kind of monster - The film that redefines group therapy.
say anything - To know Lloyd Dobler is to love him. Diane Court is about to know Lloyd Dobler.
six feet under - Every Day Above Ground Is A Good One.
sex and the city - Are you ready for more? [Is that not the most boring thing ever?? My gawd, I never would've watched the show if I heard that beforehand!]

Demented but Funny

Thank you Barry for this fucked up little gem....

So Close, And Yet....

I've been spending far too much time lately on an online writing community where you mostly do "blind" reviews. The great majority of the pieces I encounter require a lot of work, if not shredding, deleting or burning and just starting over. But every now and again I run across something with potential.

Like today.

Today I hit the opening scene to an action-adventure novel. Sort of a Da Vinci Code (in a good way) meets Indiana Jones. The copy needed some tightening and I had one question about a certain chain of events, but overall the chapter opened well, built tension and climaxed appropriately.

I submitted my review, which revealed the author and allowed me to see his profile page. I clicked over to see if he had additional chapters posted because I wondered if he was able to follow-up on his promising opening. (as many agents and editors know, manuscripts can and do implode after great first chapters) Instead I found he hadn't logged-in since July 20, and that his book had "published" by iuniverse.

Yes, a POD vanity-press. That means HE PAID THEM to bind his manuscript and make it available for purchase. And believe me that ain't cheap - we're talking five figures to make that happen.

The saddest part, to me, is that based on what I saw, if he had taken the time to find a decent copy editor, he could've found a legitimate publisher and actually launched a writing career for himself. Instead, he won't get distribution into conventional bookstores, no one will review his book, he won't get the media attention that traditional publishing garners, he'll be regarded as not legitimate, AND he squandered an opportunity to be a better writer. (not to mention the hunk 'o money he spent, which he'll probably never earn back)

I might actually consider hunting him down and telling him all this, but it'd be moot. He's already made his choice. Besides, he wasted my time doing a review he'll never see because he's so only using the website as free advertising! Why should I bother to help him now?

Beauty in The Eye of the Beholder and All That...

This is a giant Barbie head. It's original intention was to teach little girls the proper way to style hair and put on makeup and well - it's a lovely piece of Mattel merchandising that gender programs the hell out of little girls.

(Unless, of course, she became Goth Barbie, Crow Barbie, Punk Barbie, LeatherFace Barbie, or other such creations that, these days, would guarantee a young girl the fast track into therapy and psychotropic drugs.)

I pulled this version from the Lizard Princess blog, where the "raw organic super charged mommy power" blogger keeps it as her profile photo. She says "my first love is Jesus Christ - my salvation and my friend". She's a vegetarian, sports a breast cancer badge on her page, and best of all, a red, white and blue Dead Head icon.

While I don't think Lizard Princess (can we say Jim "the lizard king" Morrison homage, anyone?) actually created this lovely work of feminist/anti-crass commercialism art, I sure as hell like her for using it. So much that I thought I'd share it with you. Enjoy.

My God, I Can't Make This Sh*t Up

The Headline: Warner's Robinov Bitchslaps Film Women; Gloria Allred Calls For Warner's Boycott

The gist: Warner Bros president of production Jeff Robinov has made a new decree that "We are no longer doing movies with women in the lead". This Neanderthal thinking comes after both Jodie Foster's The Brave One and Nicole Kidman's The Invasion (as if three different directors didn't have something to do with the awfulness of the gross receipts) under-performed at the box office recently.

A bit of fall-out, and oh yes, a little more...

And naturally, the follow-up by the original reporter.

The end result? The original report was Friday, and after much hand-wringing, off-the-record-ing, and no-commenting, Nikki follows up with:

Sources inside Warner's tell me that, 1) Robinov doesn't believe there's an actress who can carry a movie worldwide since Julia Roberts, 2) Robinov has now gone so far as admitting to his studio colleagues that the decree I reported was made when he was "in the room", 2) Robinov is acknowledging that the studio is reassessing the strategy of making action pictures starring women, 3) Robinov was inundated with calls on Monday and Tuesday from media and Hollywood types asking him about my posting, 4) Robinov has three pics currently in production and six in pre-production and not one stars a women as the main lead of the film, 5) he's nixed Wonder Woman as a stand-alone film, downgrading her to just one of four superhero characters in the proposed Justice League, and, 6) Robinov will only make Wonder Woman as a spin-off of Justice League, about four superheroes including Wonder Woman. But his proviso is that JL would have to do really, really boffo to justify having a female star-driven pic. Again, I stand by my story.

My thoughts? I honestly expected Robinov to do a Mea Culpa and utter some lame excuse that it was an "emotional utterance". However, can you imagine backlash if he had said, "No more blacks in lead roles!" Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton with trip over each other to throw their faces on CNN and MSNBC. But women? Eh, who cares.

How many movies are made every year and how many fail to earn a profit? How many of those movies are written by men? Directed by men? Starring men? But yet I don't hear Robinov or anyone else declaring a ban on men.

Because it would be ridiculous thing to say. Gosh, good thing we didn't change the lead role in the Alien trilogy from a man as it was written to that no-money-making Sigourney Weaver...

Misogyny lives. Until then, boycott Warner Brothers. Thank you.

Those Book Publishing Contests...

For the whole press release:

An imprint of Simon & Schuster announced "hollywood car wash" as the grand prize winner of Project Publish, so she'll be offered a publishing contract with Touchstone books.

From the press release:

"The book was originally released in March through iUniverse/ASJA, and has consistently been at the top of their bestseller list, as well as reaching #45 on Amazon.com."

And:

"Contestants for the contest included referrals from well-known literary agencies and bestsellers at print-on-demand sites Lulu and iUniverse. Other contestants were drawn from hundreds of proposals directly submitted via the Media Predict site."

There was a total of 50 contestants.

Now, excuse me from being suspicious and cynical, but "referrals from well-known literary agencies"? Something tells me the only referrals any agents were doling out to this contest were manuscripts they haven't been able to place elsewhere.

And considering "hollywood car wash" was already achieving some level of success WITHOUT the big NY Publishing machine, isn't it sort of a no-brainer that they'd choose it as their winner?

Let's see, should we give a publishing contract to an unproven commodity or to someone who already has marketing hype and a built-in audience? Hmmmm, let me think about that for awhile....

Daily Stresses of Being an Editor

As an aspiring author, I spend a lot of time reading blogs and articles devoted to the publishing biz. What I run into repeatedly is a great list of mistakes that folks looking for an agent or editor make; yes, each of these blog posts and articles usually talk about the same mistakes with very little variation. And everytime, I think "Nah, folks CANT be that stupid; they can't SERIOUSLY do stuff like that!"

Then I recieve an email like this one from - oh, let's be nice and call him "Bob":

Subject: An article that might interest your readers...
From: *ahem* Bob@freemail.com *ahem
To: Bands@scoremusicmagazine.com

I am the author of this article you have my permission to use it free of charge as long as you keep the post script intact. If you have any questions reply to this email with your questions. Thanks

best
crzy

Attached to this missive is a Word Document containing aforementioned article.

Problems, Issues & Errors, not necessarily in order or importance, more likely in chronological order or in the order in which my mind concocts them:

1. The Subject Line - As generic and spammy as it is, "Bob" is lucky I didn't delete this without a second thought. If you're going to submit to any publication or editor, read their submission policy. Many require a specific subject line be used for that very reason.

2. The From - Notice that the email address contains the name of the author. (I changed the name to protect the ignorant, but in reality, the originating email address contained a full first and last name). Now notice the signature in the body of the email. That's right - a screen name. Better yet, an uncapitalized, misspelled, IM or text version of a screen name. I cannot begin to stress how unprofessional this is.

3. The To - Our bands@ email address is for - shock! - bands and publicists to use to request reviews of their material. A cursory review of Score! Music would've told him how to contact the Content Editor. Always Read The Submission Policy.

4. The Salutation - it doesn't exist. This means "Bob" didn't bother to find out WHO the Content Editor Was. He found a random email address somewhere in the vastness of the 'net and threw some correspondence together.

5. The Email Itself - Lack of Punctuation does not lead me to believe that "Bob"'s article will be a ratings' booster. Nor does the fact that it says nothing about him, his writing credentials, or why the hell I should bother opening the Word Document at all. All query letters (and yes, that's the proper term for what "Bob" sent me here) should contain an introduction to the writer, the article in question and why the writer thinks the article would be a good fit for the magazine.

6. We Don't Accept Unsolicited Material. "Bob" would know this if he had READ THE SUBMISSION POLICY.

7. The article sucks. Good and truly sucks canal water, as my SO might say. Grammer, punctuation, capitalization and spelling errors abound; the attempts at snark and humor fall flat' and quite frankly, the content is not informative, but insulting and patronizing to the "wannabe musicians" he's addressing.

8. "Bob" did not submit this article because he thought Score! Music Magazine was a cool space on the 'net and he had something worthwhile to contribute to its readers. No, based on the "postscript" (as he calls it; I think the more appropriate term is Advertisement), Bob has plucked something more fitting to his own personal blog than an actual publication for public consumption and spammed God-knows-how-many music related websites to promote HIS website and HIS "program" for "artists" to achieve "economic freedom". We're all in the business of marketing something, even if it's just ourselves, but the trick (if there is one) is that to GET something of value, one has to GIVE something of value. This is something that "Bob" obviously doesn't understand.

So, editors and agents alike, I apologize for overestimating the intelligence and competence of aspiring writers. I am now humbly reminded that yes, people are that stupid. But the bigger question is - why do the rest of us who actually follow directions have such a hard time getting your attention?

Real Values or Just Pandering?

While I applaud the message in this film, I have to ask myself - Dove's parent company is Unilever, and they own, amongst other things, SlimFast and Axe.

Kinda makes you wonder, doesn't it?

You Need to Hit the Store When....

You're using toilet paper because you ran out of Kleenex, and now you're down to a 1/4 roll of T.P. that you're forced to carry around with you in case either end requires it.

Banned Book Week

The ALA Office for Intellectual Freedom (OIF) received a total of 546 challenges last year. A challenge is defined as a formal, written complaint, filed with a library or school, requesting that materials be removed because of content or appropriateness.

The "10 Most Challenged Books of 2006" reflect a range of themes, and consist of the following titles:

"And Tango Makes Three" by Justin Richardson and Peter Parnell, for homosexuality, anti-family, and unsuited to age group;

"Gossip Girls" series by Cecily Von Ziegesar for homosexuality, sexual content, drugs, unsuited to age group, and offensive language;

"Alice" series by Phyllis Reynolds Naylor for sexual content and offensive language;

"The Earth, My Butt, and Other Big Round Things" by Carolyn Mackler for sexual content, anti-family, offensive language, and unsuited to age group;

"The Bluest Eye" by Toni Morrison for sexual content, offensive language, and unsuited to age group;

"Scary Stories" series by Alvin Schwartz for occult/Satanism, unsuited to age group, violence, and insensitivity;

"Athletic Shorts" by Chris Crutcher for homosexuality and offensive language;

"The Perks of Being a Wallflower" by Stephen Chbosky for homosexuality, sexually explicit, offensive language, and unsuited to age group;

"Beloved" by Toni Morrison for offensive language, sexual content, and unsuited to age group;

"The Chocolate War" by Robert Cormier for sexual content, offensive language, and violence.

Source: The Office of Intellectual Freedom