Scam Of The Spindle

I just got home from AWP. It was a great and fun time, and I plan to do a more in-depth post later in the week, but first I needed to share something. Actually, before I do, I should mention my love for Narrative Magazine. You know just how close Narrative and I are, right (see here, and here, and here)? So being the smart-ass that I am, as I wandered around the book fair I tweeted:

As it turns out, they were not in attendance at the conference. Why? Who the hell knows. My theory is a) they've come to realize most people dislike them or b) they had no extra money for a table because fewer and fewer authors are submitting or c) they knew I was going to be there. Not sure about anybody else, but I'm leaning toward the third theory ... or the first ... or hell, all of them sound good.

So anyway, Narrative wasn't in attendance, which was just as well, because over the weekend I learned of another publishing faux pas, one that, I think, even outdoes Narrative's ridiculous bullshit. You see, I heard that the web journal Prick of the Spindle had opened submissions for a new print edition. So what do I do, the web-savvy writer that I am? I go online and check out the guidelines of course! And saw this:

Prick of the Spindle is a literary journal that is open to forms in both traditional and experimental modes, with a special bent toward fresh and innovative voices using language in unique ways. We read for issues year-round. If you are interested in being considered for publication in Prick of the Spindle, please take care to read the guidelines for submitting your previously unpublished work.

The online edition of Prick of the Spindle is published quarterly. Online content is also made available for the Kindle magazine incarnation of the journal. The print edition of Prick of the Spindle is published biannually.

There is no reading fee for the online edition, and submissions are accepted year-round (for reading fees for the print edition, please see the end of this page or the submission manager guidelines). We do send a courtesy e-mail notifying authors that we have received their submission; if you do not hear from us with a decision within three months of submitting, please feel free to send a query.

See what they did there? If not, read those three paragraphs again. Go ahead, I'll wait. Back already? Yes, you read that right. There are reading fees for the print edition. And those fees are ...

If you are submitting by mail, please indicate whether you wish to submit to the online or print edition of the journal. Keep in mind that it is free to submit to the online journal (a quarterly publication) but that if you wish to submit to the (biannual) print edition, you must include the appropriate fees. Fees for the print edition are as follows:

Poetry: $15, up to 5 poems Fiction: $15, one story Nonfiction: $10, one story Essays & Articles: $15, one essay or article Reviews: $10, one review Drama: $10 one dramatic work Art: $10, up to 5 pieces

Checks or money orders should be made payable to Prick of the Spindle.

So it's almost as bad as Narrative, right? Actually, I would say no. Because while Narrative charges $20 reading fees, they actually pay their contributors (most of which, I believe, are solicited, and who, I believe, do not pay any reading fees). But this new print edition of Prick of the Spindle? As far as I can tell based on the guidelines, there is no payment. Not even a mention of a contributor's copy or even a free PDF of the finished work.

Yesterday I e-mailed Cynthia Reeser, the journal's editor-in-chief and founder, asking if there would be any payment for accepted pieces for the print edition, but have not heard back yet. And quite honestly, even if it turns out they do pay something, I would say it is in every writer's best interest to stay far away from Prick of the Spindle. Which is sad, because I know a lot of talented people associated with this journal, and a stupid and greedy decision forever tarnishes the entire thing.

EDIT: Reeser says "We are not greedy." Check out how "Ignorance Breeds Contempt" here.

Fine Print

Do you always read the fine print? Most people don't. Usually it seems people are just so trusting they continue with whatever is happening, hoping for the best. But as writers it's important to always read the fine print, just as it's always important to read the guidelines. Because not every guideline is the same. As many of you have probably already seen, O Magazine is having a poetry contest guest-edited by Maria Shriver. Cool, right? Well, not really. Because here's some of the fine print (I've gone ahead and bolded the shady parts):

Stories, ideas, suggestions, essays, audio, video, photographs, related materials and any other materials of any kind submitted (hereinafter, the "Submissions") will not be returned or kept confidential. All such Submissions may be used:(i) on www.oprah.com (the "Website"); (ii) for broadcast or publication by Harpo, Inc. or any of its affiliated companies or entities, including, but not limited to, The Oprah Winfrey Show, Harpo Productions, Inc. and Oprah Radio (collectively "Harpo") or its related companies or entities, including without limitation, The Oprah Winfrey Show, "The Oprah Winfrey Network" and distributed in all markets and media worldwide in perpetuity. You consent to your name and location being published. 1. The Submissions may be shared with The Producers and/or developers of Oprah Radio and/or other Oprah Radio (or its related entities, including, without limitation, Oprah.com and OWN) related programming. 2. Neither Harpo nor any of its affiliated companies or entities are obligated to use or pay you for any Submission. 3. It is possible that similar Submissions may be submitted to Harpo by multiple sources and that a Submission may be similar to ideas generated or developed independently by Harpo employees. 4. All Submissions shall become the property of Harpo, may be edited for length, clarity and/or functionality, will not be subject to any obligation of confidentiality, may be shared with and used by the staff of Harpo and any of their affiliated companies or entities and shared with legal authorities if Harpo believes it warranted. Neither Harpo nor any party with whom Harpo shares the Submissions shall be liable for any use or disclosure of any information or Submission that you submit. 5. Harpo shall exclusively own all known or later existing rights to the Submissions worldwide with the unrestricted right to use the Submissions for any purpose in all media now known or hereafter discovered without compensation to the provider of such Submissions. 6. Harpo reserves the right to change due dates and specifics for Submissions in its sole and exclusive discretion. 7. By providing the Submissions, you represent and warrant that you are at least twenty-one (21) years old. 8. No Submission may contain material that is abusive, vulgar, threatening, harassing, libelous, defamatory, obscene, invades a person's privacy, violates any law, any intellectual property or other property or other rights, or is known to be false.

On the one hand, I don't think Oprah is seriously trying to screw writers over. Harpo, Inc is just so huge that it's important to protect the company. But protect the company from what, exactly? A half-baked haiku? Also, look at number 2: Neither Harpo nor any of its affiliated companies or entities are obligated to use or pay you for any Submission. Which means that if your poem is selected, they don't have to pay you anything. Why? Well, maybe because Oprah's new half-sister is already bleeding her dry, who knows. But she's friggin Oprah. You'd think she could throw you a few bucks, or at least a year's subscription to her magazine.

But it's not just Oprah you need to be careful about. Every year, NPR has their Three-Minute Fiction contest. Now, I love NPR. They were kind enough to have me on one of their programs and helped sell a lot of copies of the Hint Fiction anthology. But I would never submit anything to their Three-Minute Fiction contest, based on some of the fine print. Actually, there's a lot of fine print for this contest, so I'm just going to show the biggie:

7. GRANT OF RIGHTS.  By submitting a Story entry, the entrant grants to SPONSOR (i) the right to edit the Story for grammar and spelling; and (ii) a non-exclusive, assignable, perpetual, license to produce, publish, distribute, transmit, exhibit, exploit, and license the Story and any portions thereof in any format (collectively "distribute" or "distribution," as applicable) by any and all means, uses and media, whether audio, print, audiovisual or otherwise, now or hereafter known, throughout the universe in all languages. Entrant further agrees that NPR shall have the first right to distribute the Story unless NPR waives that right, in writing; provided that, NPR's first right to distribute shall automatically expire on December 31, 2011. Entrant retains the copyright and all other rights in the work.

So basically, if you submit your story, it becomes the property of NPR until the end of the year. Yet, somehow, Entrant retains the copyright and all other rights in the work. Uh-huh, sure. Plus what's the payment for such a huge contest? Well, that's number 6:

6. PRIZE. One (1) Contest Winner will be interviewed and have his/her Story read on-air during Weekend All Things Considered and will receive an autographed copy of Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie's collection of short stories, "The Thing Around Your Neck" (total approximate value- $30.00).  No substitution, cash redemption or transfer of right to receive prizes is permitted, except in the discretion of SPONSOR, which reserves the right to substitute a prize of equal or greater value. Prize consists only of items expressly specified in these Official Rules.

So here you don't get any money, but you at least get something. That's just mildly more promising than Oprah's contest, right?

In the end, it's up to you to always read the fine print. This is your work; protect it.

*  *  *

In other news, I'm supposed to leave for AWP tomorrow. As D.C. isn't that far away, I plan to drive. Only now it's freezing rain. And the weather's supposed to get worse. So keep your fingers crossed for me, thanks.

An Epidemic

You know how they say friends don't let friends drive drunk? Well I have a new one: friends don't let friends use crappy books covers. Sure, one can argue that some book covers are an acquired taste, and this is true. There are many covers out there that don't float my boat but I can still appreciate what the artist or graphic designer was going for. But then there are covers that literally make my jaw drop open in awe at the insane terribleness. And I think: Am I the only one who sees just how godawful this is?

But I know I'm not. Others see it too but, oftentimes, they're too kind to say anything. And what, exactly, is the point of that? Are they afraid they'll hurt feelings? Have we really gotten to the point where we all just grin and bear it and not say a word? It's like when you critique a friend's story; do you want to be completely honest and say what's wrong with the story in hopes that your friend will learn and grow stronger as a writer, or do you want to be nice? In the end, "being nice" doesn't benefit your friend at all. It just perpetuates the problem. And that, my friends, is what is happening with these terrible covers. Nobody says anything, and so they continue and get worse and worse. The bar has been lowered so far that crap has become the standard. And what is anybody doing about it? Absolutely nothing.

Don't get me wrong, there are a lot of presses out there who produce great books with really striking covers. ChiZine Publications is a press that consistently creates great looking covers.

Well, some will say, ChiZine has quickly established themselves as a top small press publisher. Of course they're going to have great covers.

That, I will answer, is not always the case. There are some "top small press publishers" who continue to produce really crappy covers. And why? Well because they use the same artists who have become well-known and who become overworked and do a half-fast job. Or at least that's what I think, giving them the benefit of the doubt. These presses commission artists to do the artwork and then take that artwork no matter what it looks like.

But even newer small press publishers can come up with great covers. I really love what Aaron Polson did with the cover for the second volume of 52 Stitches. It's simple yet creepy all at once. It's perfect.

Why am I bringing this up? Because the Q & A with Grand Mal Press last week got me thinking. One of the things the publisher mentioned was eventually having "original covers designed by professional artists." And that reminded me of something that happened not too long ago, something I swore I would never share on this blog. But, well, I like to think one of the things readers of this blog appreciate about me is my honesty and straight-forwardness. And with that in mind, I'll let you in on a little secret.

(I have to admit I'm embarrassed by the next image, so read the rest after the jump.)

Back in September I knew I wanted to publish In Solemn Shades of Endless Night as an e-book. I wanted to try something different this time around, so I decided not to bother my friend Wyatt who had done my two previous covers and contacted a professional artist who had once done an illustration of one of my stories. I told this artist what I was looking for, this artist quoted me a price, and while it was a pretty penny, I figured it would be worth it. So I sent the story and waited a couple weeks until I eventually received the cover (I've blanked out the artist's signature).

I was, as you can probably guess, speechless. I immediately sent it to a friend of mine for her opinion, and she said, "Well, it's not that bad."

Uh-huh, sure.

I e-mailed the artist saying thanks but this isn't the direction I'm headed. But I had commissioned the artist and even said I would be happy to pay the fee. The artist replied asking what direction did I have in mind. I knew based on this cover that nothing was going to work, so again I said thanks but this isn't the direction I'm headed. The artist sent the invoice which I promptly paid, what I have come to think of as a lesson learned (and I figure since I paid for the damned thing, I might as well share it).

Sure, the cover captures certain aspects of the story, but it just ... wasn't at all what I was going.

But October was quickly approaching and I still needed a cover for my e-book. So what I did I do? I started browsing around deviantART.com and came across this wallpaper:

I contacted the artist asking permission to use part of it as an e-book cover, and she replied saying sure, just as long as I credited her and sent her a copy of the e-book. And I said certainly, sounds great, and came up with this:

All said and done, it took about a day to find the original image, ask for permission, and create the cover. And it was free.

So what's the lesson here? Even "professional artists" create crappy covers. The cover the "professional artist" did is on par with a number of other covers floating around the small press. It's that way, I believe, because the bar has been set so low. And it's up to us -- all of us -- to finally put our foot down and say nooooooooooooooo.

Next Week ...

... I'll be knee deep in AWP. In fact, one week from today is the Hint Fiction panel. If you're going to be at the conference, do yourself a favor and make sure to attend. In case you haven't seen it yet, here are the details:

Februrary 4 3:00-4:15 pm Virginia B Room, Marriott Wardman Park, Lobby Level

Hint Fiction: Stories that Prove Less is More. (Robert Swartwood, Randall Brown, Michael Martone, Daniel Olivas, Roxane Gay) The editor of the recent Norton anthology and its contributors examine stories of extreme brevity. They will discuss whether these stories are considered actual stories, and whether they hold substance, focusing on these questions: Do works of this length help or hinder writers? Can these tiny stories have just as much impact as stories of traditional length? The panelists will share their own hint fiction and discuss its role in the ongoing evolution of literature.

And in case that doesn't convince you, I even created an event for the panel on Facebook. So yeah, now you know just how serious this is. People don't just create events on Facebook willy-nilly, you know?

Tonight I printed out the AWP conference schedule. A ream of paper and a replacement of toner later, I realized the list of panels was way too much to go through tonight. So instead I skimmed through the Thursday schedule to see if anything looked interesting. The problem with a conference this big is that sometimes there are just way too many panels you aren't interested in for a certain time slot, while sometimes there are a lot of panels you're interested in for a certain time slot.

My list of potential panels and thoughts on those panels after the jump.

9:00 am - 10:15 am

R109. Short Story to Novel. (Alan Heathcock, Heidi Durrow, Alexi Zentner, Téa Obreht, Marie Mockett, Eugenia Kim) Debut novelists often publish excerpts of their finished works as short stories before tackling a full manuscript. Yet the way from short story to published novel is not always smooth. Four debut novelists, who did publish parts of their books as short stories, will discuss the journey from short story to novel, with an eye toward helping other emerging writers.

R110. Hired!: Landing the Elusive Tenure-Track Job. (Caitlin Horrocks, Jennifer Kwon Dobbs, Darrin Doyle, Nick Kowalczyk, Forrest Anderson, Kelcey Parker) Six recent tenure-track hires in fiction, poetry, and nonfiction discuss their diverse experiences and offer advice and guidance on the search for a teaching position. They’ll discuss every stage of the job search, from researching positions to writing cover letters, to the interview and the campus visit, providing insight into what you can control, what you can’t, and what you should do to prepare. Ample time will be provided for questions.

R112. CLMP Panel—So You’ve Made an eBook… Now What? (Ira Silverberg, Gloria Jacobs, Julie Schaper, Andy Hunter) A marketing-focused symposium for publishers about how small presses and literary magazines can make the most out of paperless publishing.

Andy Hunter, by the way, is one of the co-founders of Electric Literature, and I'm huge fan of the journal and their business model. But the thing is, I think you have to be a member of CLMP to attend that panel, so maybe that panel is out. Anyway, moving on ...

10:30 am - 11:45 am

R132. Things That Go Bump When You Write: Monsters, Myths, and the Supernatural in Literary Fiction. (B.J. Hollars, Bryan Furuness, Hannah Tinti, Laura van den Berg, Scott Francis) What do Bigfoot, the Loch Ness Monster, and ghosts all have in common? For one, over the past year, they’ve all managed to stomp, swim, and haunt their way onto the literary scene. Join writers as they discuss their experiences implementing supernatural elements into their fiction. Panelists will offer tips on how to add credibility to the incredible and humanity to the inhuman. They will also explore the evolving definitions of gothic and grotesque in the 21st century.

R139. Trends in Contemporary Flash Fiction: What Are Editors Looking For? (Tom Hazuka, Todd James Pierce, Leah Rogin-Roper, Robert Shapard, Ryan G. Van Cleave) Flash fiction may be elusive to define (stories of 500 words? 750? 1,000?), but there is no denying its widespread appeal to both writers and readers. What do editors want in the flash fiction stories they publish? Five editors of both recent and classic short short story anthologies (Flash Fiction, Flash Fiction Forward, You Have Time for This, etc.), who are also widely published writers, discuss trends in contemporary flash fiction and what they look for in stories for their anthologies.

R140. Strangers on a Train: What Poets Can Learn from Hitchcock. (Michelle Mitchell-Foust, Ralph Angel, Stephanie Brown, David St. John, Suzanne Lummis) Over the course of eleven days, Alfred Hitchcock used 80 camera angles and nine actors to create 1 minute and 48 seconds of film—his shower scene for Psycho. This attention to detail is also the poet’s work. Hitchcock reveals a psychological density in his films that many contemporary poems aspire to. The panelists examine his narrative structures, scenes, interview material, and Hitchcock-inspired poems, in a discussion of what Hitchcock’s vision provides to today’s poets.

As someone who likes to dabble in the supernatural from time to time, that first panel is definitely at the top of my list. But then again, I'm really interested to hear what Robert Shapard and company have to say about flash fiction. And then, of course, you have a panel that's inspired by Hitchcock, so what's not to love?

Noon - 1:15 pm

R152. Narrative Structure: The Episodic and the Epiphanic. (Jack Harrell, Erin McGraw, Josh Allen, Nicole Mazzarella) In Best American Short Stories 2000, E.L. Doctorow noted a shift more disposed to the episodic than the epiphanic, moving the modern story toward the earlier form of the tale. Does this trend in fiction continue? Should it? Since anti-story musings of the 60s, the epiphany has been cast as a naïve insistence on meaning. Will globalism and cultural ecumenism further the shift to the episodic, bringing about the climax and the denouement of the literary epiphany itself?

R160. The Future of the Book Review: How to Break In. (Salvatore Pane, Roxane Gay, Irina Reyn, Emily Testa, Paul Morris) The rise of the book blogger has forever altered the traditional book review. But what is the state of the book review moving forward in a digital culture, and how do interested parties actually go about becoming reviewers? Panelists including the editor of PANK, the book review editors of BOMB and Hot Metal Bridge, and published writers currently working in the field will answer these questions and more.

R161. Scripting Curriculum: Integrating Playwriting and Screenwriting into the MFA in Writing Program. (Kathleen Driskell, Steven Cramer, Tod Goldberg, Charlie Schulman, Charlene Donaghy) MFA programs—particularly those that are low-residency—have begun teaching playwriting and screenwriting next to the more commonly taught genres of fiction, poetry, and creative nonfiction. Directors and faculty members from Lesley, Spalding, and UC Riverside will discuss the challenges of teaching writing that has been traditionally housed in film schools or theater departments, and the enrichment gained from adding scriptwriting to their programs.

R162A. Playwriting and Screenwriting: Their Business in the Academy. (Bonnie Culver, Ken Vose, Ross Klavan, Jean Klein, Juanita Rockwell) This presentation discusses the difficulties and successes of including playwriting and screenwriting in writing programs. Both genres demand a different approach in writing and business acumen than poetry, fiction, and nonfiction. What are those challenges? How has one program decided to embrace the potential conflicts and make a place for these “less academic” writers. Wilkes faculty discuss how screenwriting and playwriting techniques are integral parts of the program curriculum, from poetry to nonfiction.

R164. The PSA Presents: A Reading and Interview with Stephen Dunn. (Robert N. Casper, Stephen Dunn) Pulitzer Prize-winner Stephen Dunn will read his poetry, followed by an interview with Poetry Society of America Programs Director Robert N. Casper.

A lot of good panels around noontime. Which might conflict with lunch, so that's a problem. And while those panels all look really interesting, how often does one get a chance to hear Stephen Dunn read his work?

1:30 pm - 2:45 pm

R172. Writing: What To Teach, How To Teach It, and Why. (Meg McGuire, Marie Ponsot, Rosemary Deen, Jackson Taylor, Catherine Yeager, Ruth Nathan) In the almost 30 years since its publication Beat Not The Poor Desk by Rosemary Deen and Marie Ponsot has never been out of print and its pedagogical principles have influenced the creative writing classrooms of hundreds of teachers. In its opening line the book asserts, “Writing is one of the great human pleasures and is done in the energy of that pleasure. There is great professional pleasure in teaching it.” Deen and Ponsot lead us to recognize that the use of writing is thinking and that while each piece of writing is unique—all writers use the same five elements in composing. Here we revisit and celebrate this classic text with its authors, Rosemary Deen and Marie Ponsot, and with teachers who’ve practiced its pedagogy: Catherine Yeager and Jackson Taylor. Moderated by Meg McGuire.

R173. Beyond Psychobabble: Finding Effective Language for Workshop Critiques. (Susan Hubbard, John Hales, Liza Wieland, Anna Leahy, Darlin’ Neal) What constitutes effective feedback in a creative writing workshop? Why do students often speak like psychological counselors? Four teachers/writers of fiction, nonfiction, and poetry discuss strategies for shaping discussions that are provocative, not overly emotive or unduly self-reflexive. Borrowing criteria and terminology from other art forms, and avoiding psychobabble, can be useful first steps in fostering students’ fluency in making critical statements in and out of the classroom.

R182. Agents & Editors: Best Practices for Securing Your Publishing Partners. (Mary Gannon, Julie Barer, Robert Lasner, Corrina Barsan, Greg Michalson) Agents and editors will give an overview of the literary market and their places within it, as well as providing a behind-the-scenes perspective on how they acquire clients or books and offering specific guidance to authors on the best practices for each step involved in partnering with publishing professionals.

I mention the last panel there not so much for myself but for anyone else who thinks they want/need an agent. You can read as many agent blogs as you'd like, but seeing them in action, actually talking about publishing, will give you a better sense of their personalities and what they have to offer.

3:00 pm - 4:15 pm

R189. The Art and Authenticity of Social Media: Using Online Tools to Grow a Community. (Jane Friedman, Tanya Egan Gibson, Guy Gonzalez, Bethanne Patrick, Christina Katz) Social media is easy to disparage as meaningless socializing, undignified shilling, or time better spent writing. Yet sharing information online and having conversations with readers is critical to spreading the word about what you (or your organization) does. Online community building can help develop a long-term readership, plus open up new opportunities. This panel discusses meaningful online social interaction, and how the panelists have seen it advance their careers or their organizations.

Nothing else in this time slot really popped out at me. Maybe on a second read-through something will. Or maybe this would be a good time for a quick nap.

4:30 pm - 5:45 pm

R212. Delinquents, Desperados and Drama Queens: Managing Unusual Personalities and Unexpected Situations in the Creative Nonfiction Classroom. (Amy Friedman, Hope Edelman, Michele Morano, Deborah A. Lott, Amy Wallen) Writing workshops can be delicate—things of beauty when students work as a community and challenging if someone demands too much, dismisses others, provokes, or acts out. Subject matter also can challenge ethically and psychologically—abuse, mental illness, sexuality. How can instructors manage these situations and serve all students? Panelists discuss ways to address and diffuse potentially explosive dynamics while maintaining focus on the work.

R213. Understanding Comics as Creative Writing. (John Woods, Matt Madden, Gary Sullivan, Luca DiPierro, Joseph Young) While the critical study of comics has been fully embraced by English Literature departments, creative writing programs have been slower to create a place for the practice of comics in their own curricula. Similarly, independent literary presses rarely publish comics, leaving that work to comics-specific houses. This panel features teachers and practitioners of the medium who will discuss ways to open up the creative writing field to the practice of comics (and other image-text literature).

R214. Ploughshares 40th-Anniversary Celebration. (Ladette Randolph, Eleanor Wilner, Kathryn Harrison, Colm Toibin, Elizabeth Strout, Terrance Hayes) This roundtable features six recent guest editors of Ploughshares magazine and celebrates 40 years of the journal’s founding commitment to showcasing diverse literary voices with each issue. Former guest editors read and discuss how they made choices for their issues.

R221. Fiction’s Future. (Tom Williams, Lance Olsen, M. Evelina Galang, Roy Kesey, Debra DiBlasi, Steve Tomasula) This panel invites five aesthetically diverse authors brave or foolish enough to respond to think aloud about fiction’s future. What might in fiction look like, read like, and why? What forms are we apt to see in the next five or fifteen years? What changes in publishing, distribution, media, and the sociohistorical landscape might impact what we mean when we say “fiction,” “journal,” “book,” “conventional,” and “innovative?” Should writers even concern themselves with such questions?

R224. A Screening and Discussion for The Times Were Never So Bad: The Life of Andre Dubus. (Edward Delaney) A screening of The Times Were Never So Bad: The Life of Andre Dubus with the filmmaker Edward Delaney, and others who participated In the fim. The documentary features interviews with Andre Dubus III, Tobias Wolff, Richard Russo, Christopher Tilghman and others, and has been an official selection the Rhode Island International Film Festival, the New England Film & Video Festival, among others, and has toured the country at many colleges and universities. The screening will be followed by a discussion and Q&A with the filmmaker and others who participated in the film. The film is 86 minutes long.

R228. Writing the Young Adult Novel. (Tami Lewis Brown, Zu Vincent, Carrie Jones, Stephanie Greene, Helen Hemphill, Sarah Aronson) The young adult novel has exploded in recent years, and many adult writers are crossing over. What does it take to write for this burgeoning field? Six novelists publishing literary, historical, mainstream, and fantasy fiction for the young, discuss the similarities and differences in adult and young adult fiction that can help writers transition to this fresh—and often edgy—new genre.

A lot of interesting panels listed in this time slot. Not 100%, but I think I might be leaning toward the Young Adult panel. We'll see.

And that's basically Thursday's potential panel schedule. Like I said, I'll have to do another read-through to see if anything else sticks out. And if it does, then how does one choose which panels to attend? Because even though one panel might sound really interesting, it could turn out to be a dud. You just never really know.

So for those of you who are attending AWP, which panels (besides the Hint Fiction panel, of course) are you looking forward to?

E-Book Royalties: Agents vs. Publishers

Agents and publishers have very different ideas about what royalties for eBooks should be. Agents think that 50% is a fair royalty, while publishers think that 25% is a fair royalty. This finding is according to research from Mike Shatzkin, CEO of the Idea Logical Company and Constance Sayre, principal at Market Partners International. The two presented their survey at the Digital Book World conference yesterday afternoon. Despite the discrepancy, a third of agents claim to have negotiated deals for 50% royalty rates. According to Sayre, a few years ago Random House was offering a 50% royalty rate which may have influenced these numbers.

According to their survey, half of agents think the overall impact of eBooks is favorable for authors on backlist titles and 25% think eBooks are favorable for new books. Publishers aren’t so sure and have yet to answer the question.

Interestingly, 2/3 of agents think that a non-compete clause would not prevent them from doing an eBook outside of a contract. Publishers disagree. “But they are not interested in turning this into a fight, they’d rather negotiate than sue,” said Shatzkin.

The study also found that 90% of agents have author clients who have expressed interest in self-publishing, but publishers aren’t scared. “Publishers don’t think authors want to do the work themselves and they think they have the edge because they have the advance,” said Shatzkin. “Print is still heartiest sales and self-publishing is not good for print.”

I find it interesting that "publishers aren't scared" about authors self-publishing. Maybe that's just big talk and they're actually terrified. An advance is always nice, yes, but the larger the advance, the less chance the author will ever see royalties. In fact, most publishers are making their advances pretty modest these days. So 50% royalties on e-books? I do like the sound of that. 25%? No so much. Because 25% on a high-priced e-book isn't going to make you hardly anything; even 50% on a high-priced e-book isn't going to make you a lot if the sales aren't there. It's looking like authors and publishers may be headed toward an ultimate showdown. The question is, who is who in this clip:

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2t2GgN_RC7M