<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The RWA Says To Harlequin: &#8216;You&#8217;re Fired&#8217;!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://karenknowsbest.com/2009/11/19/the-rwa-says-to-harlequin-youre-fired/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://karenknowsbest.com/2009/11/19/the-rwa-says-to-harlequin-youre-fired/</link>
	<description>The book crazy blogger who has an opinion on everything, from Britney Spears to the global economy</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 01:21:59 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Christine Rimmer</title>
		<link>http://karenknowsbest.com/2009/11/19/the-rwa-says-to-harlequin-youre-fired/comment-page-1/#comment-48650</link>
		<dc:creator>Christine Rimmer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2009 14:35:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://karenknowsbest.com/?p=5097#comment-48650</guid>
		<description>Here&#039;s an absolutely excellent breakdown of why you will so be screwed if you publish with a vanity house like Author House or Ho.  

http://www.falconesse.com/2009/11/21/harlequin-horizons-and-the-terrible-horrible-no-good-very-bad-deal/

Numbers and all, people.  It&#039;s long, but read the whole thing and you&#039;ll see that if you want to self-publish, it&#039;s a whole other animal than going the vanity press route.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here&#8217;s an absolutely excellent breakdown of why you will so be screwed if you publish with a vanity house like Author House or Ho.  </p>
<p><a href="http://www.falconesse.com/2009/11/21/harlequin-horizons-and-the-terrible-horrible-no-good-very-bad-deal/" rel="nofollow">http://www.falconesse.com/2009/11/21/harlequin-horizons-and-the-terrible-horrible-no-good-very-bad-deal/</a></p>
<p>Numbers and all, people.  It&#8217;s long, but read the whole thing and you&#8217;ll see that if you want to self-publish, it&#8217;s a whole other animal than going the vanity press route.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ardath</title>
		<link>http://karenknowsbest.com/2009/11/19/the-rwa-says-to-harlequin-youre-fired/comment-page-1/#comment-48614</link>
		<dc:creator>Ardath</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 21:21:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://karenknowsbest.com/?p=5097#comment-48614</guid>
		<description>I&#039;d like to point out another reason why routing people to a vanity publisher like this is bad: it prevents them from finding their way to a legitimate publisher who&#039;ll actually take the manuscript.

Harlequin isn&#039;t the only romance novel publisher in the world; a lot of their rejections are submitted to, and picked up by, other publishers and do well.  Normally, that&#039;s part of the submission process.  You keep sending the manuscript out until it finds a home.

Harlequin is derailing this for writers by making it seem like, even though a manuscript has been refused by the main house imprint, it&#039;s been accepted by a subsidiary imprint &lt;em&gt;if the author is willing to pay &quot;a little&quot; out-of-pocket&lt;/em&gt;.  For a new author who has their heart set on a dream of Harlequin fame, or doesn&#039;t have the thick skin needed to forge ahead in spite of rejection letters, or just doesn&#039;t understand the process, this makes it look like they&#039;re actually achieving their dream.  They don&#039;t realize that their chances of their novel finding its way to any bestseller list -- or even finding its way into the hands of readers past their own circle of friends -- has just been largely negated.  And it&#039;s entirely possible that their novel &lt;em&gt;would&lt;/em&gt; have been published successfully if they&#039;d just kept going, and not stalled at Harlequin.

In effect, forwarding the &quot;rejects&quot; to an affiliated vanity press has the potential to &lt;em&gt;ruin&lt;/em&gt; a writer&#039;s career prospects.  Especially because they won&#039;t learn how to craft and revise their works to suit the demands of editors and the market, so their next novel won&#039;t be in any better position for acceptance.  This approach doesn&#039;t open doors to an author; it slams them shut and locks them.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;d like to point out another reason why routing people to a vanity publisher like this is bad: it prevents them from finding their way to a legitimate publisher who&#8217;ll actually take the manuscript.</p>
<p>Harlequin isn&#8217;t the only romance novel publisher in the world; a lot of their rejections are submitted to, and picked up by, other publishers and do well.  Normally, that&#8217;s part of the submission process.  You keep sending the manuscript out until it finds a home.</p>
<p>Harlequin is derailing this for writers by making it seem like, even though a manuscript has been refused by the main house imprint, it&#8217;s been accepted by a subsidiary imprint <em>if the author is willing to pay &#8220;a little&#8221; out-of-pocket</em>.  For a new author who has their heart set on a dream of Harlequin fame, or doesn&#8217;t have the thick skin needed to forge ahead in spite of rejection letters, or just doesn&#8217;t understand the process, this makes it look like they&#8217;re actually achieving their dream.  They don&#8217;t realize that their chances of their novel finding its way to any bestseller list &#8212; or even finding its way into the hands of readers past their own circle of friends &#8212; has just been largely negated.  And it&#8217;s entirely possible that their novel <em>would</em> have been published successfully if they&#8217;d just kept going, and not stalled at Harlequin.</p>
<p>In effect, forwarding the &#8220;rejects&#8221; to an affiliated vanity press has the potential to <em>ruin</em> a writer&#8217;s career prospects.  Especially because they won&#8217;t learn how to craft and revise their works to suit the demands of editors and the market, so their next novel won&#8217;t be in any better position for acceptance.  This approach doesn&#8217;t open doors to an author; it slams them shut and locks them.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nora Roberts</title>
		<link>http://karenknowsbest.com/2009/11/19/the-rwa-says-to-harlequin-youre-fired/comment-page-1/#comment-48588</link>
		<dc:creator>Nora Roberts</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 12:45:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://karenknowsbest.com/?p=5097#comment-48588</guid>
		<description>FYI, RWA no longer recognizes Thomas Nelson as an eligible publisher.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>FYI, RWA no longer recognizes Thomas Nelson as an eligible publisher.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Christine Rimmer</title>
		<link>http://karenknowsbest.com/2009/11/19/the-rwa-says-to-harlequin-youre-fired/comment-page-1/#comment-48547</link>
		<dc:creator>Christine Rimmer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 18:23:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://karenknowsbest.com/?p=5097#comment-48547</guid>
		<description>Well, I think RWA kicked butt on this and I&#039;m really impressed that they stepped right up.

All links to Harlequin Horizons, aka Ho&#039; are now off the eharlequin site and they&#039;re changing the name Harlequin Horizons to...something else.  All they have to do after that is remove all mention of Ho from rejection letters, from anything Harlequin.  Have there be no connection.  I really think Harlequin will do exactly that and be re-recognized.  Soon.

Harlequin has worked hard for years to build the brand and its respectability.  Somebody really dropped the ball on this one at HQ and I&#039;m thinking they&#039;ll be mopping up the mess right fast.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, I think RWA kicked butt on this and I&#8217;m really impressed that they stepped right up.</p>
<p>All links to Harlequin Horizons, aka Ho&#8217; are now off the eharlequin site and they&#8217;re changing the name Harlequin Horizons to&#8230;something else.  All they have to do after that is remove all mention of Ho from rejection letters, from anything Harlequin.  Have there be no connection.  I really think Harlequin will do exactly that and be re-recognized.  Soon.</p>
<p>Harlequin has worked hard for years to build the brand and its respectability.  Somebody really dropped the ball on this one at HQ and I&#8217;m thinking they&#8217;ll be mopping up the mess right fast.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dick Fry</title>
		<link>http://karenknowsbest.com/2009/11/19/the-rwa-says-to-harlequin-youre-fired/comment-page-1/#comment-48507</link>
		<dc:creator>Dick Fry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 05:53:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://karenknowsbest.com/?p=5097#comment-48507</guid>
		<description>Apparently Harlequin knows that money well spent means a lot more to the self-respecting aspiring author than that fleeting, childish sense of self-respect. And remember, for every ten Chancery Stones who may jump at &lt;strike&gt;this literary whoredom &lt;/strike&gt;the opportunities that abound with &lt;strike&gt;stupidly paying out the ass&lt;/strike&gt; joining the advantages of HH, there still is &lt;strike&gt;a snowball&#039;s chance in hell&lt;/strike&gt; scientifically-calculated helluva good odds there&#039;s a Margaret Mitchell right behind her.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Apparently Harlequin knows that money well spent means a lot more to the self-respecting aspiring author than that fleeting, childish sense of self-respect. And remember, for every ten Chancery Stones who may jump at <strike>this literary whoredom </strike>the opportunities that abound with <strike>stupidly paying out the ass</strike> joining the advantages of HH, there still is <strike>a snowball&#8217;s chance in hell</strike> scientifically-calculated helluva good odds there&#8217;s a Margaret Mitchell right behind her.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Amanda</title>
		<link>http://karenknowsbest.com/2009/11/19/the-rwa-says-to-harlequin-youre-fired/comment-page-1/#comment-48503</link>
		<dc:creator>Amanda</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 01:03:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://karenknowsbest.com/?p=5097#comment-48503</guid>
		<description>Hey Shiloh

Yeah I get they would have to be well written stories, believe me, but it is still a viable solution. As a new author, I always say my stuff isn&#039;t that great, but I get wonderful feedback and just recently got picked up by a wonderful epub,(after almost being duped by another epub *coughs* XOXO *cough*)

Do I have dreams of greatness, sure doesn&#039;t everyone, but I think I have become a little wiser and yeah I feel bad for those who will fall for this.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey Shiloh</p>
<p>Yeah I get they would have to be well written stories, believe me, but it is still a viable solution. As a new author, I always say my stuff isn&#8217;t that great, but I get wonderful feedback and just recently got picked up by a wonderful epub,(after almost being duped by another epub *coughs* XOXO *cough*)</p>
<p>Do I have dreams of greatness, sure doesn&#8217;t everyone, but I think I have become a little wiser and yeah I feel bad for those who will fall for this.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lee Goldberg</title>
		<link>http://karenknowsbest.com/2009/11/19/the-rwa-says-to-harlequin-youre-fired/comment-page-1/#comment-48502</link>
		<dc:creator>Lee Goldberg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 00:47:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://karenknowsbest.com/?p=5097#comment-48502</guid>
		<description>Thomas Nelson and Westbow are not on the Mystery Writers of America&#039;s Approved Publishers list...nor would they meet our criteria for eligibility if they were to apply today.

Lee</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thomas Nelson and Westbow are not on the Mystery Writers of America&#8217;s Approved Publishers list&#8230;nor would they meet our criteria for eligibility if they were to apply today.</p>
<p>Lee</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Shiloh Walker</title>
		<link>http://karenknowsbest.com/2009/11/19/the-rwa-says-to-harlequin-youre-fired/comment-page-1/#comment-48500</link>
		<dc:creator>Shiloh Walker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 22:30:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://karenknowsbest.com/?p=5097#comment-48500</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;Why not instead of vanity publishing, set it up so the ones they don’t get to can go there and still get the same opportunity?&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Because epresses don&#039;t guarantee every book will be published.  The epresses would only take well-written, good stories.

I imagine there are a lot of good books in the slush pile.

But there are also a lot of crap books.  This way, there is money to be made off those crap books, if anybody wants to front the money.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Why not instead of vanity publishing, set it up so the ones they don’t get to can go there and still get the same opportunity?</p></blockquote>
<p>Because epresses don&#8217;t guarantee every book will be published.  The epresses would only take well-written, good stories.</p>
<p>I imagine there are a lot of good books in the slush pile.</p>
<p>But there are also a lot of crap books.  This way, there is money to be made off those crap books, if anybody wants to front the money.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Amanda</title>
		<link>http://karenknowsbest.com/2009/11/19/the-rwa-says-to-harlequin-youre-fired/comment-page-1/#comment-48498</link>
		<dc:creator>Amanda</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 22:03:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://karenknowsbest.com/?p=5097#comment-48498</guid>
		<description>I just thought of this and I would think it would have been a better viable solution to the whole we have too many Mss and slush piles. Didn&#039;t HQN come out with an ebook press off-set?

Why not instead of vanity publishing, set it up so the ones they don&#039;t get to can go there and still get the same opportunity?

I think some where along the lines someone dropped the ball. And yes my heart goes out to the HQN authors especially the ones who only have one publication contract.

What I still don&#039;t get may never get is, why is MWA giving them the chance to &quot;fix&quot; the situation? Obviously they think what they are doing is right, so why not just go ahead and do what you feel is right and pull your endorcements?

It&#039;s all kinds of crazy, but in a way its putting the publication word on its toes and paying attention. Bet HQN never thought it would go this far.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I just thought of this and I would think it would have been a better viable solution to the whole we have too many Mss and slush piles. Didn&#8217;t HQN come out with an ebook press off-set?</p>
<p>Why not instead of vanity publishing, set it up so the ones they don&#8217;t get to can go there and still get the same opportunity?</p>
<p>I think some where along the lines someone dropped the ball. And yes my heart goes out to the HQN authors especially the ones who only have one publication contract.</p>
<p>What I still don&#8217;t get may never get is, why is MWA giving them the chance to &#8220;fix&#8221; the situation? Obviously they think what they are doing is right, so why not just go ahead and do what you feel is right and pull your endorcements?</p>
<p>It&#8217;s all kinds of crazy, but in a way its putting the publication word on its toes and paying attention. Bet HQN never thought it would go this far.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jill Sorenson</title>
		<link>http://karenknowsbest.com/2009/11/19/the-rwa-says-to-harlequin-youre-fired/comment-page-1/#comment-48496</link>
		<dc:creator>Jill Sorenson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 19:56:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://karenknowsbest.com/?p=5097#comment-48496</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m sad for Harlequin authors, myself included.  The RITAs are important to me.  The big book signing at RWA Nationals is a one-of-a-kind opportunity.  I participated for the first time with my debut novel in 2008 and...it felt like a big deal.  

I support RWA on this issue, but my heart goes out to the HQN authors who do care.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m sad for Harlequin authors, myself included.  The RITAs are important to me.  The big book signing at RWA Nationals is a one-of-a-kind opportunity.  I participated for the first time with my debut novel in 2008 and&#8230;it felt like a big deal.  </p>
<p>I support RWA on this issue, but my heart goes out to the HQN authors who do care.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
