It’s been a busy old day today, so I’m probably the last person to find out that Quartet Press are disbanding
Is that the quickest e-press death in history? I wouldn’t mind, but they had a much nicer welcome than most new e-presses get.
I wonder what happened? Anybody?
And what about Angela James?
Yep, nothing wrong with taking the wait and see approach at all.
UPDATE:
I just thought I’d add the link to the post I wrote re the initial fanfare that greeted Quartet Press when they arrived.
Mrs Giggles called it right wouldn’t you say?
Hey, I did say I wouldn’t be slow in shining a torch on them if they went tits up. I pride myself on my consistency, dontcha know. *g*
….
Second update–azteclady here. Found in the comments at Dear Author, a link to the Publishers’ Weekly piece on this.
AztecLady
September 9
8:50 pm
I don’t know squat about what happened, I doubt we’ll ever know what went down–and since it’s not any of our business anyway, I’m fine with that–but, as one who was happy with the prospect of having another good e-publisher around, I am right now very very sad about this… and very angry on Angela James’ behalf.
SarahT
September 9
8:53 pm
I have no clue what happened. Totally shocking. I feel bad for Angela James and any author who contracted with them.
I was baffled by all the advance fanfare over Quartet Press but I was in the ‘wait and see’ camp. Yes, lots of epubs went the way of the dodo, but people I’d consider in the know about digital publishing were lending the QP gang their support, which made me not dismiss them out of hand. I found the confusing answers (or non-answers) with regard to net & gross royalties odd, but not odd enough to question their legitimacy as a business.
And the irony in all of this is that the much-derided Ravenous Romance is still going strong!
Nadia Lee
September 9
8:55 pm
Me too, AztecLady. Samhain already filled the position, so I don’t even know if Angie can go back there.
It’s gotta be sucky though since I don’t know if they’ve informed Angie about their problems (or whatever) because Angie’s been trying to hire editors. Someone told me she sent the editor test thingie to QT this week. 
writer
September 9
9:09 pm
According to erec blog that honour belongs to Entrepid Press at 21 days. http://www.erecsite.com/blog.html
I don’t know why everyone is worrying about Angela James, she chose to leave her good job with an established press to go with a start up. She did that once before and it worked out ok, this time it appears to have blown up in her face. She’s a very experienced Editor I’m sure she’ll find work sooner rather than later. And I’m not sure why folks think that she should just go back to Samhain like nothing has happened, she may well have burnt bridges there.
katiebabs
September 9
9:15 pm
I was shocked and I do feel bad for Angela, but those are the chances one takes when they leave a job for a new one.
Karen Scott
September 9
9:28 pm
@SarahT I had the exact thought about Ravenous Romance. Oh the irony indeed.
I have to say, everybody’s being awfully polite about the whole thing, but we all know that had this been any other new e-press, there would have been loads of sniggering and condemnation, as well as a smattering of I-told-you-sos.
Angie will be fine I’m sure, she’s a good enough editor, although I do think there’s a lesson in there somewhere about friendship and business not always meshing well. And nobody will be able to persuade me that her decision to leave Samhain and take the job at Quartet wasn’t influenced by her friendship with some of the peeps there.
Fae Sutherland
September 9
10:30 pm
I’ve always been in the wait and see camp. I’m shocked this happened, though. They really seemed poised to make a strong beginning start for themselves. I considered very briefly submitting something but ultimately stuck to my guns and my motto of waiting at least a year to see, but wow…surprised isn’t quite the word for it. Wish we could find out what happened but that’s doubtful.
Kate R
September 9
11:18 pm
Sure, sure, it’s a business and it might have gone belly up anyway, but this sort of thing always feels like a loss.
I feel rotten for Kat Meyer and Kassia K who really worked hard for months. Their excitement was contagious at the conference.
I have a really nice Quartet tee-shirt I got from RWA and feel like I should dye it black.
JLFerg
September 9
11:49 pm
Here is the Publisher’s Weekly story on why Quartet Press closed, with comments from Kat Meyer.
Anonymous
September 9
11:51 pm
That’s so true. Haven’t we learned by now the dangers of touting a press as “the next big it thing”? A lot of people have egg on their faces, I think that’s why everyone’s being so nice.
As for Angie James, she’s a big girl. She made a big girl decision and took a big girl risk, and now she’s facing the big girl consequences.
sybil
September 9
11:51 pm
I am not shocked, although I do find the omg this is ‘shocking’ sort of odd. And everyone is being nice – right now – I think there will be much wank up coming. It seems to already be in the air. Or a few emails might kill it… but I doubt it. I guess only time will tell.
I would guess something happened to the money or the peeps running the show couldn’t play well together in the long (err… short?) run but they really should give a better reason for closing cuz egad the stuff filling in the blanks now is movie worthy.
Angie has built a great rep I would think she will be fine. Why people think she would go back to Samhain I don’t know but stranger things have happened. Last I heard the spots were filled…
http://goodbadandunread.com/2009/08/26/changes-at-samhain/ – maybe Crissy will fire or demote them to hire her back or create her a position. You know for old time sake, cuz they’re friends… it isn’t like a business or anything.
Sorry that was smartassy, bad me. Angie is a smart cookie one would think she has her ass covered with a contract that pays out if some asshatery happens like this.
Karen Scott
September 10
12:24 am
I think it’s interesting to note that Kat put the failure down to realising that the financial structure was flawed, that could be why it seemed so hard to get a succint answer from anyone re the structure of the payments to authors.
Personally, I think that as well as the financial stuff, they probably found it harder to play well together than they would have imagined. Four owners, four sets of ideas, four strong opinions, new venture. Some would say it was a recipe for disaster.
Wendy
September 10
12:57 am
My knee-jerk reaction (prior to reading PW story – and frankly, I’m not sure what I make of that) is that the money got pulled out from under them.
I will admit, I’m a little shocked. But I’m less cynical than Sybil. I wasn’t ready to strike up the brass band for them so early in the game – but I was most definitely in the “wait and see” camp, and I was very curious about what sorts of titles/authors they were going to be offering.
I don’t think we’ve seen the last of this story yet. Not by a long shot. I find myself agreeing with Sybil that there is probably more wank in our immediate future.
Chuckling
September 10
2:31 am
I read the PW article as follows:
“We ran the numbers, and discovered that we couldn’t make a bazillion bucks right out the gate without doing any actual work, so we just decided to pull the plug.”
People with that attitude are not meant to run businesses.
AztecLady
September 10
2:35 am
No kidding.
Edie
September 10
7:05 am
My first thought was someone has pulled the money rug away from beneath them.
While not following the whole thing that closely, I did think they were going to be an interesting company and was curious to see how they would go.
So bugger.
As to the polite thing, would it be because they hadn’t opened yet? Or that they hadn’t signed that many authors on? Realistically, I have no idea, though I am sure it will blow into one as time goes on.
writer
September 10
7:12 am
The polite thing is because they are bosom buddies with the major snarky bloggers.
sybil
September 10
7:19 am
http://jamaicalayne.blogspot.com/2009/09/on-manners-professionalism-and-karma.html
Well RR is mad and being snarky, does that count? I have so not been paying attention because I totally missed the “…and had even publicly announced it would publish the ringleader blogger’s debut novel”
When did QP announce that? Uh not that it matters now I guess…
SarahT
September 10
8:09 am
Anyone else find this quote from the Publishers Weekly article strange? How can they say the bookish community is being kind and understanding when the announcement had literally JUST been made at the time the article went up? Do they really expect no repercussions from their abrupt decision? Or was that statement made in the hope of stemming any negative comments being made about them?
Regarding Jamaica Layne’s post: which blogger’s book were Quartet Press planning to publish? Did I miss that announcement?
Mireya
September 10
10:47 am
I suspected it all came down to the money issues. They probably didn’t take a really close look at those numbers, or the newer numbers were not as pretty as they wanted them to be plus, mind you, they probably had to start paying bills … and I doubt the bills were cheap. The article only confirmed my suspicion. At the very least, they pulled the plug before it turned into a big mess. The main problem with this one is all the zis boom ba ra ra ra that was going around in the blogs. That now only serves to highlight the failure and the fact that even experienced people with a seemingly solid plan, sometimes do miscalculate.
Mireya
September 10
10:53 am
P.S. On a side note about RR, does anyone really care and did anyone really expect anything different from that side? And the major snarky blog was part of their big supporting machine.
And yeah, we’ll never know what really happened, but it all comes down to one thing: business, and in business, money does the talk.
Mireya
September 10
11:01 am
@Karen: you mention four owners … unless the four had been on the same page from day one … recipe for disaster as you well stated. I couldn’t agree more with you. I saw that happen in something I am involved with, suffice it to say of four owners, the two left standing happen to have the same mindset about pretty much everything and that’s why the whole thing didn’t go to the crapper … and there wasn’t even money in this equation as what I am talking about is not a business venture.
katiebabs
September 10
11:33 am
From the way I read the PW article, it looks like the owners didn’t set up contracts correctly with their distributors to get the product out. When I worked for a post production video company and the owner moved operations from NJ to NYC, the first thing he did was get in touch with the people who would move his product and other needs to run the day to day operations. He knew before he could make the move, he made sure he had the stock and the people on board to make it a go.
Ghetto Diva
September 10
12:20 pm
Honestly, I’m not surprised this happened, and its just another reason why authors shouldn’t submit to newbie presses.
I feel bad for Angela, but she’ll bounce back.
Chuckling
September 10
12:56 pm
Quartet was supposedly going to publish Jane Litte’s (who runs Dear Author)’s debut novel, which was supposedly going to be marketed in part by Smart Bitches. Which is why the two snarky blogs that love to trash everybody else were cheerleading Quartet to the high heavens. I think that sheds plenty of light on things.
They’ve got egg on their faces now. All of this goes to show that in publishing, it’s the money, sales, and business know-how that matters, not snarky bloggers with personal agendas.
sd
September 10
1:27 pm
Jesus.
Give me snark over bitter schadenfreude any day. And, yes, there is a difference.
B
September 10
1:29 pm
Speaking of personal agendas…
Karen Scott
September 10
1:40 pm
Chuckling, I think you’ve been misinformed somewhere along the line. I’m pretty sure Jane doesn’t have authorly ambitions. If you’re going to slag Dear Author off, then have the courage to sign your name, that way we don’t all just assume that you’re a bitter coward.
Chuckling
September 10
1:41 pm
Actually, it looks like Jane even tweeted about the book deal on her Twitter page. So unless she was just playing a joke (and she might well have been, knowing her) or something, it seems to be true.
sd
September 10
1:46 pm
the FREAKING WEREGERBIL book? Are you talking about that? Because um…. even to a casual observer (me) that was just her being a goofball.
Here’s the twitter that counts: @jane_l: There is rumor I am taking a pen name & pub’ing a book. This is categorically untrue.Not sure who’s spreading it but it’s false.
Nadia Lee
September 10
1:48 pm
Karen,
I’m pretty sure Chuckling’s Jamaica Layne. Her tone & word usage, etc. are very similar to JL’s post on QP’s demise and her snarky posts over at AW.
Karen Scott
September 10
1:58 pm
I just read Jamaica Layne’s post and I have to say, she is such a twat. And I mean a Grade A twat.
Listen, I’m not surprised by the glee coming off her in waves, cuz after all, it was her book that got decimated over at Dear Author.
Having said that, her post is full of misleading information. At one point, she even tries to imply that Angela James was involved in cyber-hazing her. I mean, come on, seriously? Urrrgh Dumb bitch.
AztecLady
September 10
2:04 pm
SD:
Oh Lord, yes!
Mora mentioned schadenfreude over at Dear Author, in relation to some commenters’ attitude towards Angela James, and it struck a chord with me.
The way many comments read to me, it’s like people felt personally offended that Ms James dared–the uppity woman!–leave Samhain for QP, and now are gleeful the rug got pulled out from under her.
That says more about the commenters than about Ms James, methinks.
Barbara Sheridan
September 10
2:09 pm
@Sybil @Mireya
Not everyone that pubbed anything with Ravenous is represented by Jamaica Layne and her views.
Jamaica Layne
September 10
2:27 pm
A twat, huh? Wow, Karen, that’s real class on your part. Nice. Don’t worry, I don’t mind. I’ve been called way worse.
For the record, Angela James did indeed participate in the online hazing against RR at Dear Author and elsewhere—at first. Until certain powers that be at Samhain told her to stop it. To her credit, she did. After which I met her (with Crissy Bashear) at a conference, where she was perfectly polite to me.
All I’m saying in regard to all of this mess is—the jig is up. The emperor has no clothes. Never did. Never will. And results in publishing are measured in dollars and cents, contracts and media tie-ins. Not blog hype. Never. Apparently, that’s hard for some people to hear.
Crawling back into my hole now. I have bigger and better things to do this week (and next, stay tuned).
sybil
September 10
2:29 pm
@Barbara Sheridan
Sorry cuz she is the biggest ‘face’ I put to RR and I think she is off her nut. But haven’t touch RR, which is neither here nor there.
Jane
September 10
2:33 pm
I am not writing a book but if you want to believe that my tweets about a were gerbil story are true, then go on with your bad self.
sybil
September 10
2:35 pm
“Crawling back into my hole now. I have bigger and better things to do this week (and next, stay tuned).”
Seriously? No matter what people think of QP closing, do you think dancing on this is going to help you or RR in anyway? If I didn’t already think you weren’t worth my time or money to read, this sort of behavior would put you firmly on the list.
Mireya
September 10
2:49 pm
@Sybil: point taken. They do have very good romance authors. Sadly, as it happens with everything, it takes very little to tarnish an image, or give the wrong impression. I don’t have a problem with the authors, but have to admit, I don’t particularly have a high opinion about certain things I’ve seen from people involved with this publisher. And isn’t Jamaica Layne part of the management there? If not, I apologize for the mistake.
Fae Sutherland
September 10
2:49 pm
*sighs and edits* *bites tongue till it bleeds*
Nadia Lee
September 10
2:54 pm
Saw your original comment before you edited. Fae, you wicked wicked woman.
Mireya
September 10
2:56 pm
Ack, my comment was for Barbara. Sorry about that. I better go back to lurking. That’s what I do best.
Karen Scott
September 10
4:08 pm
Jamaica, don’t talk to me about class luvvie, you dancing the jig over a potential competitor’s demise hardly makes you Mother fucking Teresa. And yes, you are a twat, one that I would prefer to stay off my blog, because you have nothing to say that I’m interested in hearing. In terms of being an author, you are the kind of batshit crazy loon that I delight in ripping the shit out of.
Now fuck off my blog, and pray that that karma you were talking about doesn’t come back and fuck you up the arse.
Silly cow.
che
September 10
4:54 pm
Not to mention JL’s tweet: I love it when the universe does something to reinforce my belief in karma. (Chuckles).
Yeah, the “Chuckles” was the dead giveaway. LOL.
Roslyn Holcomb
September 10
5:01 pm
If Jane was going to do anything I could see her starting an e-pub. Oops, did I just start another rumor. I fear for the sanity of anyone who actually believed the weregerbil tweets. Damn!
Ghetto Diva
September 10
5:44 pm
I simply forgot that Jamaica Layne was the one who wrote what had to be the biggest PIECE OF GARBAGE in history.
RR has to be ashamed for publishing that shit. I tell you, my daughter who’s 6 can pen a better novel than that.
What a crock of shit. I won’t be amazed if RR is the next publisher go under. Not that I wish that, but RR needs to release Jamaica Lame from contract, just to save themselves.
Inara
September 10
6:56 pm
@ Mireya,
Jamaica is published at RR, but not one of the management.
As an RR author (amongst other things), I’d like to say I feel badly for all involved with QP’s demise. I’ve seen so many bookstores close and heard about many publishing companies either going under or having to chop their staff in half, and it saddens to me to see this happen, regardless of the reasons. I hope all the authors who had books contracted with QP get other publishers for them.
Mireya
September 10
7:23 pm
@Inara: thanks so much for the clarification. That sure helps me see things under a somewhat different light.
kirsten saell
September 10
7:43 pm
Gerbil, huh? Puts a whole new twist on the “sex with a human while in animal form” thing, don’t it?
che
September 10
8:43 pm
If Jamaica and her ilk believe Jane has a book contract, on weregerbils, of all things, maybe they believe Mrs. Giggle’s Trixy Lion is an actual publisher, too. Why don’t y’all submit your books to her.
kate r
September 10
8:53 pm
STOP THE GODDAMN PRESSES! THE GERBIL RUMORS ARE TRUE!
Not only did Jane conceive, write, and sell that book today. She’s gotten her first review!! Already!
http://www.ireadromance.com/wordpress/?p=1754
Inara
September 10
8:55 pm
So…if I’m published with RR, does this make me ‘an ilk?’
Or do I have to believe in weregerbils first?
Just checking.
Inara
September 10
8:57 pm
@Kate r… Please issue a spew alert. I now have water ALL over my keyboard.
Inara
September 10
9:00 pm
But crap…now I believe in weregerbils. Which means I AM an ilk!
Cheesel… hee hee…
Melissa Blue
September 10
9:09 pm
Watch out. More shit has hit the fan: http://booksquare.com/how-i-spent-my-summer-vacation/
che
September 10
9:39 pm
Inara, no, though it’s hard not to, I’m not lumping all RR authors in the “ilk” crowd. IIRC, you were one of the saner RR authors commenting on the smut post at Romancing the Blog. No, I’m speaking of the likes of JL and Keta Diablo who have a tendency to cook up all kinds of conspiracy theories relating to e-pub and those two mean-girl bloggers, aka SBTB and DA.
See: previously aforementioned RTB smut post, a number of DA blog posts relating to RR, #romfail and Gartonians.
Don’t know about KD, but it must really chap JL’s ass that her book was so eviscerated by DA and she’s been on a grudge warpath against those two, but DA especially, ever since.
Mireya
September 10
9:41 pm
Dear fellow reviewer Kate r: Use friggin’ warnings when you post such heartfelt reviews!
*wipes monitor*
Angela James
September 10
11:16 pm
I waffled and waffled about addressing this, but decided I don’t want the misinformation being deliberately spread to continue.
This is categorically, unequivocally not true. There’s not even a grain of truth in it. I’m sure it’s no secret to anyone who’s familiar with Jane or I, that we’re friends. And Jane has never, not once, spoken to me about either her non-existent aspirations to write a book or me publishing it. Ever. I’m not sure how much more plainly I can put it, other than to say not only did I not speak to Jane about contracting her imaginary work for Quartet, I spoke to no author about contracting their work for Quartet, because all of my time and attention was focused on getting the editorial department running. No books were contracted by Quartet once they entered into discussions with me for the very simple reason being that I asked them not to, because one of the conditions of me working there was quality and editorial control.
Ms. Layne/Ms. Hughes, I’m going to cordially ask at this time that you cease speaking of things which are both untrue and never happened. Not only did I not participate in any “online hazing” of your publisher, but no such conversation ever took place between me and anyone at Samhain. The only part of your comment with any resemblance to reality is the part where I was perfectly polite to you at the conference we were at together. I’m only sorry you couldn’t see fit to respond in kind here on the internet in your comments regarding me and your feelings on my involvement with the closing of Quartet.
Shiloh Walker
September 11
12:29 am
Angela and Crissy are polite to just about everybody-it’s also known as professionalism. It’s why Samhain is so highly regarded by quite a few people, both those involved in epublishing and those who aren’t.
I’m curious to know where the supposed hazing by Angela James took place.
There’s definitely been heated discussion, but to my knowledge, I haven’t seen Angela ever be less than polite. Of course, if I’m wrong, please feel free to post the link and direct us to where this incident occurred.
I’m sorry, Jamaica, but any grief RR has taken, it’s been because of their own actions and attitudes, and commentary by authors such as you.
It has nothing to do with Angela and it has nothing to do with samhain. It has nothing to do with any other epublishers period-it’s because of the phrases like ‘feminist smut’ and the snotty, rude, comments that several of RR’s authors like to fling about.
I don’t know if it’s an attempt to be snarky and cool, over defensiveness, a lack of professionalism or what, but it doesn’t look like it’s won a lot of brownie points.
The heat RR has taken lies at their own feet, nobody else’s.
Debra
September 11
1:23 am
Jamaica,
Since I could not post this comment on your blog for some reason and you so kindly responded here….
If I am not mistaken, RR was brought out in the open due to the poorly written and poorly edited books. One of them being yours. Oh and because they made outrageous claims that still have not come to fruit. You didnt like the crit and chose to speak out about it. Unwisely IMO.
Quartet Press was lauded for the simple fact that they were professional, polite, and had people behind them who actually knew the business and didnt make outrageous claims about their publishing future. They realized they couldnt do it so they closed before they opened. I am sure there is more to it than that, nitty gritty details that will come out later.
As far as karma goes let me put this out there Jamaica…when you act like an ass in public…you look like an ass in public, and for a writer, your backside is not what you want your readers (like me) to see.
Debra D.
Melissa
September 11
2:15 am
Does this always have to come back to Ravenous Romance versus Dear Author and the ongoing (and TIRED) feud between the two sides? Every damn time it boils down to this and everyone comes out looking like fools. Is it too much to ask that both sides stop beating one another over the heads long enough to recognize the common goal? For all the crowing about being professional I see very little professionalism being exhibited by either side.
DP is never going to be taken seriously if all of its advocates insist on acting like children. Everyone wants DP to success but you’d never know it with the amount of drama that ensues at least once a month.
Anon
September 11
2:18 am
Maybe she should cover her ass with the codpiece she was so fond of in … um… I guess it could be loosely termed… her book
AnonYEditor
September 11
3:30 am
The interesting thing is that RR has given those authors editing positions too. Guess RR doesn’t care about the damage done to their reputation and their other authors by association. The sad thing is, their twat-like behavior (Thanks Karen!) also hurts those same other authors, like Inara, and their other publishers too.
Inara
September 11
4:04 am
AnonyEditor, if people are going to let what another author has said affect how they feel about me (or anyone else) based on the fact we share a publishing company, without having actually read my writing, I can only compare it to how I felt when other countries assumed all Americans were idiots because our president couldn’t pronounce ‘nuclear.’ It makes me sad, tired, and kinda cranky.
That’s NUCLEAR, France! We can SO pronounce it!
Anonymous
September 11
6:29 am
You’re right, Inara, it isn’t fair. But, as my father would say, a fair is a place with rides.
Did I enjoy having “Fuck America” screamed at me by strangers when I was in Russia a few years ago? Nope, but I can see why they might have been a bit upset.
Unfortunately, it isn’t just one author acting like an ass that’s given RR a bad rep. The editing has been poor, some of the publishing choices have been poor (note: I have not read your work, I am not saying yours is bad), and the owners have made absolute tits of themselves on more than one occasion.
Anion
September 11
6:38 am
ugh, never mind. Not worth it.
Ghetto Diva
September 11
12:17 pm
You know what pisses me the most off? Is the lies people tell, to call attention to themselves.
Jamaica/Hughes, why lie about shit that you know is going to come back and bite you in the ass?
Is it too much for people to discuss something without making themselves look like asses? I repeat I’ve never been on the Angela band wagon, but I tell you that she has more class in her pinky, then your entire bodies.
Both of you are acting like chicken heads.
Lauren Dane
September 11
4:35 pm
Yannow, it’s pretty vulgar to see Jamaica all over the universe as a mouthpiece for another publisher to laugh about people losing jobs. She likes to talk about karma a lot, I do hope she gets the opportunity to know just what karma is.
Shrug. It’s difficult to believe how off the chain her publisher is when they remain silent as their one of their editors pops off all over the internet about how awesome it is when other pubs go out of business.
I will say I’ll remember this and I’ll remember the total silence from RR when one of their editors gets out there and lies and stirs shit. It’s called blowback and I’m not speaking in euphemisms here. There are consequences to what you say, I hope RR and Jamaica are prepared to own this.
Inara
September 11
9:14 pm
Anon, thank you for making the distinction. I don’t eat at certain restaurants because they farm their cattle in the Amazon (I like trees and jaguars) and I’m not arguing that people who feel strongly anti-RR for whatever reasons should shop there. What I do object to is the oft-touted perception that individual authors are acting as a mouthpiece (to use Lauren’s expression) for RR, when they are, in fact, speaking for themselves. The other issues (editing et al) are separate. Now I know why television stations carry disclaimers before shows: the views expressed in this show do not necessarily reflect the views of this station, blah blah blah.’
One more clarification: editing an anthology or two for a publishing company as an independent contractor isn’t the same thing as being on the permanent editing staff.
Okay, enough on RR. Once again I’d like to express my personal regret for the demise of QP and my hopes for the best possible outcome for all involved. Apologies for going off track with the original subject of this thread.
Lauren Dane
September 11
11:13 pm
Inara, I think though, the situation here is that Jamaica has held herself out as an official of RR over and over again. Has spoken for the company on multiple occasions and now she speaks as an editor (which she’s held herself out as many times in public) all over the internet to tear down other people and publishers.
Had there been any word AT ALL from RR “officials” up to this point that Layne/Hughes was NOT a spokesperson, it would be different. Unfortunately, the perception is there for a reason. She’s been a spokesperson up to now and she continues to be without any check.
I didn’t care one way or another about RR until this point. Some people I respect like their books and not all the authors and employees act like asshats. However, RR, as a company, can’t have it both ways. All this time with that perception makes it reality. If she’s not a spokesperson, let’s hear it from RR itself.
Lastly, it’s splitting hairs to say she’s only edited “an anthology or two” and that doesn’t make her an editor. She is by definition an editor, she has done much public marketing for the publisher, she has sent out calls to authors soliciting them to write for RR. She’s quacking here and people have no choice but to call her a duck. No?
I know what it is to write for a publisher when people who work there do things in public that make it a lot harder to get books sold. I feel for you (and I mean that, I do) and wish you the best.
Inara
September 11
11:40 pm
Lauren, thank you for your thoughtful reply. I don’t entirely agree with everything you said, but I DO feel you bring up good points and I respect your point of view. I also appreciate your good wishes.
Shiloh Walker
September 12
2:56 am
Inara, I remember your comments from the blog at RTB-there, as well as here, you were well-spoken, polite and never once did you jump on somebody for having an opinion that differs from yours.
And I will admit-my memory is often frazzled, so the fact that I do remember your attitude, for me, says quite a bit.
If you write for someplace other than RR, I’d be interested in giving one of your books a try, but I’ll be honest-I’m not in the least bit interested in trying anything by RR.
Although I don’t like Jamaica’s attitude, that isn’t enough to put *me* off. There are authors at EC, Samhain and Berkley who have attitudes leave me thinking…what in the hell…now those authors, I won’t read their books. You couldn’t pay me to buy one of their books.
But the publishers themselves, I have no issues with.
My problem with RR is that one of their head people (if I recall correctly) seems to view erotic romance as feminist smut. Lori Perkins was the one with the article @ RTB that had a lot of discussion, if I recall.
I’m sorry. I don’t write smut. I don’t read smut. If that’s ‘her’ view of erotic romance, and she’s presenting that view at one of the ‘in charge’ people at RR?
Sorry. She lost me before I even looked at the website.
I can only speak for myself, but IMO, she doesn’t understand romance well enough to acquire anything I’d be interested in reading, not if she thinks erotic romance and feminist smut are synonymous.
Shiloh Walker
September 12
2:59 am
And although, as I said, my main issue with RR is the confusion (or that failure to care that quite a few readers don’t want to hear their romance called smut), Lauren’s got one hell of a point.
Inara
September 12
3:24 am
Hi, Shiloh,
I took the ‘feminist smut’ title as tongue in cheek, but I do understand that a lot of people did not. All I can say is there are books on RR that are romance. Spicy, yes…but with the HEA that could be asked of a romance. Some are definitely more erotica, but none of them are what I’d consider porn. For one thing, I don’t hear ‘wockachika’ saxophone playing while reading it.
The biggest lesson I’ve learned during all of this is how important it is to really know the language of your readership… and to realize that what may be tongue in cheek to one person may offensive to someone else.
I appreciate your comments and the fact that you’re also always very level-headed and polite when presenting your opinions. I especially appreciate your differentiation (spell check assures me this is a word even though it looks REALLY weird about now) between author comments and your opinion regarding publishers. I’m also honored I made it into your frazzled memory.
I sympathize – between a full time job, writing, 13 cats (don’t tell!) and my boyfriend, I feel very frazzled a great deal of the time. I do write under my own name at a different house – mysteries.
Will anyone be at the West Hollywood Book Fair in Oct.? Inquiring minds…
Janet W
September 12
3:27 am
This is cherry picking extraordinaire, because what I know about DG/Quartet could be put on the head of a pin. That being said, I always read HUGE comment threads (hey, we all slow down at an accident, eh?) and I could never understand KK’s posts when she posted on KKB. And I would totally read them twice or three times. So I thought this a nonny mouse grab from the Mrs. Giggles thread was sort of funny/validating (like I wasn’t the only Mrs. Du*Mass out there!). And as for start-ups, I remember my dh’s beginning few months about 11 years ago, when he went out on his own. Walking the tightrope doesn’t come close to describing it. Two partners, him and his partner. No employees. They spent their own $$ for months/years … getting great employees to come on board was so difficult. One employee’s MOTHER told her she couldn’t join until my dh’s co had been in the black for 12 mos plus. LOL. So my experience is that principals tend to dig deep and for a long time into their own personal capital.
OK, here’s the quote from Mrs. Giggles: [ ] I count as my key ‘not buying or subbing there’ moment, when over at KKB Mary Winter asked point blank how they were going to pay authors and Kassia offered up several garrulous, but completely evasive, answers. In my estimation, all of the people I’ve ‘seen’ from QP on the net could double-speak a group of high level lobbyists into mental retardation, LOL. The inability to answer a simple, simple question with an equally simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’ was unacceptable to me.
Shiloh Walker
September 12
3:27 am
Bingo.
If they don’t understand the language and how it’s going to strike many people as offensive, then how could they possibly understand what I’m looking for in a book?
Time and money are too short and when a publisher refers to their books as ‘smut’ all it does is just make it very easy for me to knock them off my list of books to look at.
Inara
September 12
3:34 am
I get that…but it’s not a hot button for me (‘smut’ as a word), and I also wonder if people hadn’t already been so het up over previous remarks made re: RR if it would have had such a negative affect. Effect? Apologies, I’m really really tired. And no matter how many times I look at Strunk and White, those two buggers always mess me up.
Nuclear!
Sandra Cormier
September 12
5:21 am
*Waves at Inara*
Jewelry! Not Jewlery! Who am I to complain, we Canucks say oot and aboot, don’t we?
I just wanted to chime in and say I’m sorry that a promising e-pub had to fold before they launched. In this economic climate, such things will happen. I remember being treated kindly by the staff at Samhain. They lost a great editor and she’s sure to bounce back from this setback.
On the RR front, I hope I didn’t ruffle any feathers in the last few months while reacting to various comments. After all, I’m only human. I belong to 3 different houses and all of them have great authors, editors and publishers. I’m proud to be a part of each one.
Bree
September 12
12:32 pm
Honestly, they also felt simultaneously condescending and uneducated, and in that QP did share something with RR…
Anyone with the slightest familiarity with epubs probably understood Mary Winter’s questions, and the fact that KK came into KKB and sat us all down to edjumacate us on what words meant without acknowledging that epublishing might have its own common vernacular made me realize that for all their touted years of publishing experience, they didn’t give any evidence of knowing much about epublishing.
I considered QP a viable submission option worth my consideration on the day they hired Angie James, and my reservations returned when they kept traipsing about the internet saying things that made them look dumb about epublishing. Obviously the benefits of having someone with Angie’s knowledge wasn’t going to mean much if they weren’t going to use it.
Summer
September 12
2:36 pm
I’m a writer who’s not ashamed of my books and who doesn’t mind the word smut in the least. I think my use of it dates back to the night I got tipsy (not drunk, no sir) and announced to some friends that I wrote smut and I loved writing and reading it, dammit.
I think I claimed the word, like many women are taking the word bitch and wearing it as a badge.
Also I think the word itself is more fun than “erotica” (which is a pretty word, now that I’m saying it aloud to the dog. Exotic–more silk sheet.)
But say it. Smut. A single syllable that’s more earthy and less arty. Embrace the smut, the erotica, whatever. It’s fun. Being ashamed and upset by word people use to describe my stuff makes me feel defensive and I’m done with that.
If they want to have a gross connotation for the word, that’s their issue, not mine. I choose to think of it as joy and fun.
writer
September 12
3:10 pm
Summer I don’t think anyone is talking about erotica being called smut. They have a problem with romance or erotic romance being called smut. This is one of the problems with Ravenous Romance – they put the romance in their name to make a fast buck out of the romance crowd but they are primarily an erotica publisher.
Bree
September 12
3:22 pm
Well, good for you? Errr…if what you write is erotica, I mean. If you write romance and go around telling people it’s smut, you can say you’re reclaiming the word all you want, but all you’re really doing is perpetuating the genre confusion.
Granted, I didn’t need to be drunk to tell my friends and my grandmother and my dog that I wrote erotica…WHEN I WROTE IT. (Which I have.) But most of the stuff I write isn’t erotica, and I am really tired of people coming around to pat me on the head like a repressed little puppy who just can’t admit that she writes the naughty words without dashing for her smelling salts. The word smut doesn’t give me vapors, it gives me a branding headache, because this is a business, not a tea party.
Summer
September 12
3:27 pm
oops, writer, and I know better, too. I don’t write erotica. I write exclusively erotic romance.
In truth I do clarify what I write if someone asks about my erotica (or smut) but only because I don’t want them to be disappointed by not pure hawt sex in my books.
I don’t mind anyone calling my books smut or erotica or porn as long as customers don’t buy them expecting something I don’t deliver. For clarification’s sake, I’ll correct someone.
I was mostly caught up in the argument that there are forbidden harsh words and my argument is that words like smut (or fuck or bitch or porn) are what we make them for ourselves.
I used to have the “fuck it if they can’t take a joke” attitude, but that took too much negative energy and anyway, like I said what other people feel isn’t my problem. I love Shiloh Walker and respect that she feels that way. I just thought I’d present another way of looking at it.
And also. There IS a respect factor here. If I’m talking to a group of readers, I might avoid saying smut, just like if I’m talking to a group of grandmothers, I won’t say fuck. I’m just saying personally, I don’t mind hearing or using the words. They make me smile, not choke.
Summer
September 12
3:36 pm
geez bree, I don’t walk around in a drunken stupor. Just one night of drinking with fellow writers made me realize how much I’d been acting ashamed of what I write and trying hard to differentiate myself from those OTHER writers, the erotica or porn people. Not because I wanted to make sure people knew what I wrote, but because I thought they were kinda …. eww.
It’s kind of like people who write books with romance in them but want to BE SURE that everyone knows they don’t write romances. And get offended if they’re called romance writers. So you get mistaken for writing a genre you don’t write. That doesn’t mean the genre itself is terrible. Or the people who write it are hacks. It means you have a chance to explain to someone the difference between what you write and what they do.
If they’re patting you on the head, that doesn’t mean you should bite their hand or even be insulted.
kirsten saell
September 12
5:17 pm
Ha! I’ve never had a problem with the word “smut”, either–so long as it’s used affectionately rather than in a derogatory way. Some words I’ve used when telling people what I write: erotic books, erotic romance, smut, dirty books, steamy/trashy romance, brown paper bag stuff, 80-proof fiction(40% sex by volume), “what Tolkien might have written if he wrote for Penthouse Forum”.
What words I use definitely depend on who I’m talking to (and whether they ask me silly questions like “You mean like a Harlequin?” Uh, no) and my mood at the time. I usually reserve the more loaded terms for when I’m talking to men, because when dealing with a different species you gotta speak in a language they understand, lol.
I also make a point of telling people that sex is hella fun to write. From the initial looks I sometimes get, you’d think they figure I spend nights sitting in a locked, dark room with a stack of vibrators and an overflowing ashtray, and it’s nice to be able to give them a different impression of what it’s like to write sexy books. Work, and difficult work at that, but not seedy or creepy or weird, just a lot of fun.
I do this because I know the impression people sometimes get when you’re defensive about words like “smut” or “dirty books” is that you’re somehow ashamed of what you write, or ashamed of the fact that what you write might be seen as smut by many people (and it is, frankly–even when it’s no more explicit than the average 80s romance novel). Not saying that authors who hate the word “smut” are ashamed, just that people can get the impression they are.
I refuse to waste my time defending what I write to anyone. Just like I refuse to waste my time looking for euphemisms for lady-parts when “c*nt” (another word that needs reclaiming, IMO) works fine, just because some people find that word offensive.
And frankly, I want people in my family and my town to know what they’re getting into if they read one of my books. At this point, the general readership is not necessarily accustomed to erotic romance, and I don’t want them to go in expecting Amanda Quick with a few more sex scenes and a couple “fuck”s and “pussy”s thrown in. The folks around here who’ve read it all seem pleasantly surprised by the level of writing and the depth of story they find. They are never unpleasantly surprised by the fact that OMG almost half the book was sex!
Those are my thoughts on “smut”. I know other people disagree. They can do what they do. I do what I do.
Shiloh Walker
September 12
9:55 pm
Summer, that’s just fine, if that’s how you want to do it.
However, I see smut as a far different cry from good romance or good erotic romance.
I view the term ‘smut’ as a term used to describe something trashy and meaningless. And frankly, that’s how a lot of people who don’t read romance see it.
Since quite a few of us romance lovers would like the world in general realize there is value in romance, I don’t think having romance publishers (or erotic romance publishers) use the phrase is doing the genre any favors.
Now is this because I care that the world in general doesn’t approve of romance?
Personally speaking? No. I don’t care.
But as a writer who would certainly benefit from people having a more open mind? Yes. I do care.
Considering how many readers still feel the need to hide their romances so they don’t ribbed about reading smut, it’s not helping the cause in that aspect, either.
I don’t see romance or erotic romance as trashy.
One definition of smut is:
So using it to define romance just adds weight to those outside romance seeing it as inferior. Again, personally? I don’t care-I don’t need to defend what I want to read.
But many of us, readers and writers alike, would benefit if people realized how much value romance has. So yes, the phrase does irritate me.
People can ‘reclaim’ words all they want but that doesn’t mean others are going to view it the same way.
veinglory
September 12
11:15 pm
What is more important is how the money-paying readers that support this industry feel about these words.
Shiloh Walker
September 12
11:22 pm
Good point. Excellent point.
Maryanne
September 12
11:27 pm
I am a reader and I often refer to all romance/erotica/what-have-you as girl smut. I have done so for years. My family and friends refer to it as such too.
It is meant with love and affection.
From a reader stand point, this seems like a bunch of people taking terminology way too seriously and making a mountain out of a mole hill.
Shiloh Walker
September 12
11:43 pm
Since I was the one who started the discussion about the feminist smut issues, you can lay that at my feet.
However, the main reason I brought it up was to point out to Inara that the actions of a few authors at RR aren’t necessarily going to be what dissuades some readers from checking them out-it’s how the publisher handles things-on the ‘smut’ debate and on a number of other issues.
Maryanne
September 12
11:52 pm
As a reader, the whole post about feminist smut made me laugh.
What happened in response to the article/blog post seemed to me (as a reader) to be a bunch of people looking to start a fight.
I don’t care about the publisher (unless they are abusing authors).
I buy an author’s work. What an author does–like continuously beat a dead horse about the term smut or continuously post comments that are in poor taste (karma/professionalism–is more likely to scare me off as a consumer.
Melissa
September 13
12:00 am
Woah! Shiloh, do you realize that romance publishers & editors are actively courting people who write “smut”? Not just RR but Samhain, Ellora’s Cave, Loose Id, Tor, Harlequin, and the list goes on and on. Every week I get notifications that one of these pubs are looking for highly erotic romance and they’re doing it on the erotica circuit – they’re asking for the same authors that Playgirl, Hustler and other men’s magazines are asking for; they’re asking for authors to go the distance, be kinkier, racier, and by the way can you have a love story involved?
Say what you want about Ravenous Romance in terms of business practices and author behavior but don’t fool yourself into thinking that Ravenous is the only one peddling smut. You may not like the word but as you can see from this thread there are a lot of us writers and readers who have no problem with it and we don’t write for RR.
Don’t like smut? Don’t write for folks who ask for it and publish it.
Summer
September 13
12:10 am
Absolutely.
You were talking image and I was wandering into more personal territory. All about me me me (Although you did talk about your personal response too, so I didn’t go entirely far afield.)
I can’t control anyone else’s response to a word–but I can do something about me. I was having trouble with the word a while back and I think my problem was I was overly defensive about my genre/writing because I was slightly embarrassed. Not everyone’s issue. Just mine. Now I’m not. Life is nicer.
A reader wrote me a letter about my first historical and called it a bodice ripper book. She even put up a nice review at Amazon about the book using the phrase.
I wrote back a very polite, very enthusiastic letter and put in something about how some writers don’t like that to hear that their book was considered a bodice ripper. I was very neutral, but she read between the lines and knew I was slightly cheesed. She wrote back and said, “WTF do you care what I call it as long as I read it?”
That was when I realized I really don’t care. Sure, I roll my eyes at the articles that have that phrase in them, but I have no interest in converting people into never using it again or trying to get other writers to take my genre seriously etc. I don’t usually care and I’m only taking part here because I have a serious problem with a plot and hate my current book.
If I want to convert readers or writers into respecting my genre, I’ll do something about this goddamn plot problem, make the book the best I can, better than I’ve written before.
If I resent RR, it’s not because of the noise and words they use in their PR, it’s because of any books they publish that are not properly written or edited. (nice covers though, and a wonderfully easy site to buy from)
Of the 3 RRs I’ve read, one was actually pretty good. (Would have been better with editing…) But the other two horrible things were not worthy of the word smut. Bad books = more outrageous than any image issue.
Batgirl
September 13
4:08 pm
Seriously? Methinks you are full of shit. Playgirl and Hustler? LMFAO Somehow I can’t see Samhain and Harlequin doing that.
AztecLady
September 13
4:48 pm
Melissa, I don’t think anyone thinks that Ravenous Romance is “the only one peddling smut”–I know I’ve never thought that.
What I think is that I’ll never get a chance to know whether any of the stories published by RR is a romance, because I, quite simply, won’t go check out a publisher who claims to publish smut.
I read romance–sweet or erotic, suspense, historical, what have you–not smut. I buy romance, not smut. Frankly, if I want smut, I can find fairly decent examples for free out there, no need to fork over good money to a company that allows people like Ms Layne and Ms Diablo to speak for them. (And yes, the fact that TPTB at RR have not spoken up to say, “hey, these two don’t represent the company!” means that they are allowing them to do so.)
Mireya
September 13
6:06 pm
Well, seems like the company that sells smut is going to be on HSN tomorrow. I am sure I am not the only one who got that spam in her inbox.
Melissa
September 13
9:28 pm
Guess again, Batgirl. Harlequin, Samhain, the whole lot of them have had their names on the same roll call for those publishers you’re turning your nose up at. In July I received a long list of calls in one email with romance publishers (including Harlequin) mixed in with those who publish pure erotica.
http://www.erotica-readers.com/ERA/G/Call_For_Submissions.htm
Recognize any of the pubs on there? Right there alongside of Hustler Fantasies, Penthouse Variations, and Big Tools?
You can be as snobby as you want about it but that doesn’t make it any less true. Even Angela James, former HBIC at Samhain, has contributed some great articles to the ERWA site (which, if you look around, you’ll see proudly owns the word “smut”)
http://www.erotica-readers.com/ERA/Archive09/Archive_2009.htm
Azteclady, I assume then that you would *never ever* buy anything from the publishers on the link I posted up there. You can keep shrieking about RR all you want for being smut peddlers but the proof is right there, my dear. Whether you like it or not, these publishers clearly have no objection to being featured alongside of Larry Flynt’s flagship.
Seressia
September 13
9:51 pm
Oh see I thought you meant a Harlequin editor put out an call for smut. Every writer site out there can copy from a publisher’s official website (heck that exact same wording is on the RWA market update)
I think you could argue that there’s a difference between an official call for submission and someone aggregating publishing opportunities for steamier works.
Not that I care all that much, just wanted to point that out.
Melissa
September 13
10:39 pm
lol Seressia if you want to think that publishers have nothing to do with their calls appearing on the more nefarious sites & mailing lists and don’t have their own contacts in the erotic market you can go right ahead. It never ceases to amaze me when people assume that romance editors, publishers and writers steer clear of their dirty little cousins in erotica. If you had any idea how many authors wrote real smut under pen names no doubt you would be disgusted. Some of them don’t even write under different names. One author I know wrote an incredibly “smutty” book years ago and when her pub went tits-up it ended up at EC under the romance banner and did very well.
There are even more that come out weeks before the call even goes up on the publisher’s website and sometimes it doesn’t even appear on their website but comes exclusively down the pipe with a request that the information not be posted elsewhere. “Smut” didn’t go knocking on romance’s door – romance came knocking on smut’s door. I can’t imagine why they chose not to share with with their readers. Heard it was something about a giant stick and needing colorectal surgery …
Btw, love how you skipped over the part of my post where I linked James’s willing contribution to the site as a columnist. Wouldn’t want to burst any bubbles, now, would we? Why don’t you ask her about the time she was forced at gunpoint to become a contributer? I’m sure she sits around gnashing her teeth about how she was wronged and heaven-forbid anybody find out about that and accused her of being a smut-peddler.
Just like the pubs have no idea where their calls are going.
Not.
Angela James
September 13
10:44 pm
Nothing nefarious in my contributions there. They approached me about doing a series of articles for their visitors on digital publishing. Since I’m pretty passionate about evangelizing the word of digital publishing (that was tongue-in-cheek, btw) I was happy to. I hadn’t heard of the website before that, I’m still not very familiar with it, so I can’t speak to what they do or say about romance or erotic romance. I don’t think my articles there can be construed as support of their opinions, whatever they may be, any more than my presence at RWA presenting a workshop or at NINC doing the same can be construed as supporting all of their beliefs or policies. The articles and workshops are the only opinions I’ll own as mine, I don’t think that’s unreasonable.
Melissa
September 13
11:25 pm
Glad to hear you have no second thoughts, Angela, and I’m sorry if by bringing up your name I caused any distress. I did enjoy your articles and had hoped you would contribute more, seeing as e-publishing seems to be the way erotica is going since print publishers are accepting less and less submissions.
The point I’m trying to make is that everyone’s definition of smut differs. I doubt that Harlequin, EC, Samhain, etc. would put themselves into the same slot as Hustler and other explicitly pornographic publisher, but when you get right down to it the two are diverging. Just as Playboy/Playgirl wouldn’t want to be painted with the same brush as Hustler, I can see why romance publishers would want to avoid being painted with the same brush as erotica.
However, there’s no getting away from it and there’s no denying that much of the content you find in erotica is the same content that you’d find in erotic romance and no single publisher can legitimately make the claim that they’re not dipping their toe into the same pool. I’ve gotten into heated debates with authors who tell me that what they write is romance and not erotica – and since the theme of the day seems to be to cite RR, the most lengthy discussion I had was with an RR author who loathed the smut/erotica label – and it’s too easy to cite publications from publishers who bill themselves as erotic romance yet manage to “out-smut” with their content. RR is not alone in publishing explicit material – they’re just the most referenced because they are so hated.
I’m one of the authors who comes from the “smut” side of the fence. After successfully publishing “smut” it was suggested to me that I start looking at romance publishers and when I did I found little difference between the two. With very few adjustments and by tacking on a HEA I was able to submit a manuscript to one of the bigger-named romance e-publishers and get published on the first try. From where I sit the grass is the same shade of green on both sides.
Angela James
September 13
11:32 pm
No distress, but I felt that your point was that my articles appearing there meant that I was endorsing whatever the site may say. If that were true, no author, editor or publisher would ever be able to guest blog or have articles anywhere (magazines, websites, newspapers, etc), because we’d be considered…liable? Not sure if that’s the word I’m looking for, but we’ll use it for argument’s sake. We’d be considered liable for any opinion or statement ever expressed on said blog or in said publication. Giving a series of articles about digital publishing doesn’t mean anyone should or can extrapolate from that my feelings on the word smut, or on any other subject.
Angela James
September 13
11:38 pm
On a different note, I don’t think anyone is going to argue with you about the fact that everyone’s definition of “smut” differs, but I don’t believe that’s the issue at hand. The issue seems to be more about what we call it, or label it. And at any point in our life, labels matter. What I see the authors and readers here arguing is not even so much about content, but respecting the product by respecting what you label it. Sure, you can write some very hardcore erotic romance, but it’s not something to be ashamed of. I think (and I’m not trying to speak for anyone, just stating what I’ve gotten from the conversation) is that by using a label that many consider negative, it gives the appearance of not having respect for what you’ve written, or published, as the case may be.
Melissa
September 14
12:02 am
Thanks for your response, Angela.
I have to admit that when I think of the word “smut” I immediately go to my great-aunt and her mountains of Harlequin romances back in the early 80s. She’d read one a day and as she did so she would grumble about the amount of “smut” in them, yet she would keep reading. The word gives me the giggles and when I see it inspiring such heated debate I can’t help but chuckle.
Shiloh Walker
September 14
12:16 am
Melissa, I think I made it pretty clear that I don’t consider romance “smut”. Nor do I consider erotic romance “smut”. I view the term “smut” as something that has little or no value, and that is certainly not how I view romance or erotic romance.
please note, I very clearly said:
If I choose to get irritated over the term “smut”, it isn’t because I view “smut” as the same as erotic romance.
It isn’t. For me, the term “smut” is interchangeable with “trash.” And for me, the term “smut” is NOT interchangeable with “erotic romance HIM” or “romance”.
I’ll write for whom I choose, thank you.
If EC, Samhain, Berkley and Ballnatine suddenly start putting out a call for “smut” versus “romance” or “erotic romance”, I may well reconsider who I write for. But they ask for romance or erotic romance, and that’s what I deliver.
If you view “smut” the same as “erotic romance”, that’s perfectly fine-I’m not say you have to see it the same way I do. But likewise, you also can’t tell me that I’m not entitled to view the issue exactly as I choose to.
Anon76
September 14
6:39 pm
Okay, Melissa, I do have to call you on your post about AJ supporting your visions of “smut or not smut”. That because she posted articles on that one site she is then in your camp, but a hypocrite because she won’t say so.
This is copied from the second weblink you provided, and it states:
Links in the left sidebar lead to an eclectic mix of articles offering advice, insightful commentary, interviews, and information about erotica in the news and in society. Links in the right sidebar lead to a variety of book and movie reviews.
AJ is in the left sidebar and the posts are all about digital technology. And many of the articles on the left sidebar have nothing to do with erotica, per se. They are indeed an “eclectic mix” of articles dealing with a number of topics in the publishing world.
Now, I’m not an AJ cheerleader, but I certainly give her the right to squawk on this account. I call “bullshit”.