Wednesday, June 21, 2017

Ban on Girls

My latest pet peeve is this persistent insulting trend of books that are about women that have "girls" or "girl" in the title. I am now boycotting all such books. I don't care HOW good they are. This stealth sexist bullshit by reducing adult women into the role of a powerless "girl" has to stop somewhere, and it's going to stop at my pocketbook. I walked through one of the last remaining Barnes and Nobles in my area and I counted--I AM NOT JOKING--eight books with the word "girl" in the title, And I wasn't even looking. I was just strolling along trying to find a Father's Day present for my husband. Did I see ONE book with the word "boy" in the title. I did not.

Monday, February 13, 2017

What Have I Been Doing?

First of all, I have been writing, yes I have. I stretched myself and wrote a short story. I know that sounds backwards, but while I admire like whoa those people who can write short stories, I'm like, nope. Not my word salad. But a friend approached me about contributing to this anthology and although I said no, somehow I said yes, and I pushed myself. It was an interesting exercise in stepping out of my comfort zone. It's not a mystery anthology, but something entirely different--when I go outside my wheelhouse, I don't fool around. The basic premise was, hey, you have two Greek gods, Debris and Detritus, go write. Anyway, I did it! The cover is amazing.

What else have I been doing? Knitting pussy hats. Because, I cannot state this more clearly, I am appalled, disgusted, and horrified at the threats being made on a daily basis to our democracy, and I am knitting my little fingers to the goddamn bone and passing these hats around to anyone who wants one. Because we are persisting. Even my 86-year-old mother is knitting pussy hats because she is so appalled. We won't be shouted down, and we won't be silenced. If you want a pussy hat, email me. Also, I've been playing around with the standard pattern that floated around the internets because it seems like this should be knitted in the round, and, indeed, it should. Below is my version.

Pussy Hat in the Round

1 skein of cheap pink yarn. I bought a gigantic skein of the cheapest yarn I could find at Michael's. Works great.

1 #8 16-inch circular needle

Cast on 81 stitches. To join, cast-off one stitch so that you now have 80 stitches. Place a stitch marker of some sort so you know where the beginning is. Work in a 2 knit, 2 purl rib for 4 inches. Switch to a knit stitch for 4 inches for a total of 8 inches. Cast off. Sew the top seam and you're done.

Thursday, September 29, 2016

What in the Hell Is Going On?

I try to keep this blog relatively free of politics even though I'm an extremely political person. The number of times a day I click to get the latest stats from Nate Silver's forecast models is nothing short of insanity; to me that is a sane response to what has become an insane situation.

The less said on Trump supporters the better. Let's accept that there are a number of Americans who are racist, sexist, jingoist trolls with a third-grade reading level. Sadly, this is the American way. That is what the voting booth is for. To deny these trolls their racist agenda. I wish I could be fair about this, but I can't. I understand their fears and frustrations. Manufacturing jobs are basically done in the U.S. It is Clinton's job to bring back some facsimile of production if she wants a second term. Indeed, if someone doesn't pour money into the rust belt and bring back well-paid union-wage manufacturing jobs, then the political spectrum will polarize even further. What is inexcusable is the racism. The sexism. The jingoism. THAT is not acceptable. Nope. And think about how you want people to buy American and your racist, sexist, jingoist ass shops in WalMart, where probably 80% of the merchandise was made abroad. But I digress.

So, that brings us to the Republicans. I have no respect for the Republican Party, and, amazingly, even less than I did during the Nixon and Reagan years, AND THAT'S SAYING SOMETHING. But they aren't or haven't been stupid. They have a different world view. They believe that if you are poor, you deserve your fate. You should wallow in your poverty, you lazy SOBs because you were too dumb and lazy (there's that word again) to pull yourself up by your bootstraps like I did. Uh, yeah, my father gave me $14 million to start a real estate company (hi, Donald) and my father's construction company benefitted massively from government contracts (hi, Paul). So? End of discussion. Oops, digressing again.

And aside from the Freedom Caucus and the occasional loony tune, the core of the old Republican Party is now largely silent. With the exception of Mitch O'Connell (dear god, what rock did that man crawl out from under?), most mainstream Repubs will be voting for Hillary. I bet Lindsey Graham is voting for her, and I want to go out for a drink with that man. He's hilarious and the first Republican I've ever wanted to out for a drink with. And, yes, I know he's a war hawk, but he's not INSANE, which I have my doubts about many of them. Ugh. Digressing. Sigh.

Why, you ask. Because I honestly believe that this has become the only way for the sane wing of the GOP to take down the Tea Party once and for all. To neuter it. This is amazingly Machiavellian and there is a part of me that thinks, nah, they can't be that smart, but it's the only avenue that makes sense. The Tea Party has actively worked to stymie their agenda for eight years. It's why John Boehner is teeing off every day on the links and why Paul Ryan takes tequila shots every morning before going to work. They are willing to hold their noses and deal with Hillary because she is, at least, sane. She will compromise. She will reach across the aisle. You know, like, govern.

At this point they need to completely undercut the Freedom Caucus so that the GOP can return the party to what is has stood for decades. The party of moneyed wealth (not impoverished former cotton mill workers) and dog whistle politics (not this in-your-face endorsement of white supremacist lingo). They are sitting back and crossing their fingers that she wins. Because it will be the ONLY way to retrieve their party from the angry white mob. And it will be the ONLY way to survive as a party. Right now it's not a party. It's a collection of angry people who by and large are uneducated and who don't see a way out of their relative poverty (because, hello, you're uneducated), and who are seriously thinking about joining their local chapter of the KKK if they haven't already. Their representative of this rage is a liar and a cheat running for president under the Republican mantle. They can't even deny it anymore. He denies saying something that he said on national television not one hour earlier--ONE HOUR--and brags about not paying any taxes. On national television. And in his world that's a measure of how great he is. For those of us who pay our taxes? This doesn't go over very well. Because we can't have our foundations pay our debts. Because we can't use a political campaign to pay our children inflated salaries. Because we pay our taxes to fund America. Yes, Donald, that's what taxes does. They fund America. Crap. Digressing again.

So, yes, the sane Republicans are voting for Clinton and when she wins, they will begin to rebuild their party. Sadly.

Wednesday, September 14, 2016

Book Review: The Girls by Emma Cline



In my opinion, this is the most overhyped book of the summer. Basically, Ms. Cline uses the backdrop of the Manson murders to frame a coming-of-age story. This is an interesting premise if not potentially fascinating, except you can't have a coming-of-age novel if your character never comes of age. That is only one of the problems with this book.

First of all, the character doesn't move emotionally. She starts out as a confused, clueless teenager who obsesses about the mosquito bites on her legs and ends with her being a forty-something confused, clueless middle-age woman obsessing on her varicose veins. On her legs. Horrible things happen and yet she doesn't move one emotional inch. This seems to be a theme these days in literary fiction. Nothing much happens, but a lot of flowery prose makes you think something has happened. I have read several books like this in the last year, where I feel like Dorothy petitioning the Great Oz, only to find him unmasked by a curious little terrier and then being told to ignore that man behind the curtain pulling the levers. It's a lot of smoke and no fire.

Anyway, I know I will get heat for this, but this book could only have been written by a millennial, and I'll tell you why. There is an obsessive sense of self. This is the generation that defines itself by the selfie, after all. I was thirteen or fourteen years old when the Manson killings occurred, so you'd think I should be able to relate to the protagonist of this book, and yet I'm stymied by her. The book doesn't read like a fourteen year old. It reads like a twenty-seven year old trying to write like a fourteen year old, but with a much older viewpoint that made me question, is this a fourteen-year-old girl? At several point the narrative slips and it begins to sound like as it were told by the older self in flashbacks, which actually works, but then we are yanked back into her "present" again.

There is an appalling lack of fact checking that several commenters have noted. Oi, the credit cards are just one example. If you're going to set a novel in an era that is acknowledged as a monumental cultural shifting of values, then at least get the details right. It's not like there aren't hundreds of thousands of people--like me--who were the age of this protagonist and can spot the errors without even trying. This is just pure sloppiness and takes us out of the story.

Okay, let's get on to the writing. Wow, this is difficult to parse, because there are brilliant sentences that are followed by sentences with descriptors that literally make no sense whatsoever. There are least three of these on every page, and the editor in me was dying to take out a red pen and slash through these modifiers. I opened a page at random, and there is an embarrassment of riches. "The copse of trees that had always vaguely attended by evil." What does this mean? Evil isn't vague. And evil doesn't attend anything. Another page: "Come here," she said, and I sat down on the itchy pile." What does this mean, itchy pile? Is the carpet itchy against her legs? These sentences sound pretty, but ultimately they are hollow because none of these descriptors make sense. Also there is a tick through out that should have been weeded out, and that is the sentence fragment. I use this every now and then, and I appreciate it as a device. But it can be overused and it IS overused in this novel. I'd say at least 20% of the narrative are sentence fragments. And in many cases for no reason (hee!). It's like she'd used up her subject/verb allotment for the day.

Essentially, I felt that the written language in this book needed a firm hand to cultivate this author's truly wonderful facility with language. But pages of lush language do not make a book. I would have liked to see a LOT less manipulation of adjectives and adverbs that are merely window dressing and a lot more attention paid to character development. No one took her by the hand and said, "But what does this mean and why is she doing this?"

And then there is the ending. Why does this ending remind me of Gone Girl, which is another book that lacks a moral center. I suppose had Evie spoken up and exposed these murderous cretins for the evil bastards they were, then this would have actually had her grow up; however, belonging or being "seen" was more important than having a moral core. The fact that Evie did not speak of these atrocities at the hands of her "friends" might be more "literary," but as a reader we are left with a sour taste in our mouths. I didn't understand this stunted allegiance to Suzanne post-murder, or even less so the bizarre envy expressed by the protagonist as Suzanne enjoys her fame as one of the "girls," and a sense that Suzanne robbed Evie of being one of the "girls."

If this girl/woman can't speak for a murdered child, then why should we care about her? I don't feel sorry for her. I hated her by the end of the book. Her silence was beyond odious. It was craven, and no amount of fancy writing can absolve the book of this fact. If you don't care for the protagonist, then I think the writer has lost the reader. You don't have to like a protagonist, but you have to relate to their moral dilemma, and there is NO moral dilemma in this book. There is nothing learned. If the murder of four people doesn't move a protagonist in some direction to jolt her out of herself, then what would? This book reads like an emotional selfie. All image, no heart.

Saturday, June 11, 2016

Interview with David Alan Binder

Hey, I'm interviewed today by David Alan Binder. Check out his blog. I say somethings about writing, publishing, how the market has changed, and what I have learned over the course of twenty years doing this. Check it out!

Thursday, June 9, 2016


A good friend of mine wrote a brilliant post about the issue of piracy: Dear Broke Reader: Your Sense of Entitlement Is Killing Me. As writers, it threatens all of us, from the best-selling author to the no-name author like me. It affects ALL of us. Even before my books were published, there were pirated copies available on the Internet. I suppose they took arcs apart and scanned them, who knows, but it's across the board obviously. Complaining to Google could be a full-time job in itself.

I think that Sarah's blog is so well written that I can't add anything to her central point. But what I do want to point out is that not only are authors losing $$$, they are also losing clout. Your sales are not just about the dollars. It's also about generating clout in the marketplace. It's about getting that contract renewed for additional books. It's about getting speaking gigs to further your presence in the book buying market. It's about publishers being interested in you and wanting to further your career because it makes them money for them. In short, piracy is the gift that keeps on taking. Not only do you lose sales, but you also lose market share in an extremely competitive sphere.

I honestly do not think that the publishers are quite aware of how pervasive this practice is. Seriously? The Austen pastiche I published is available for free on some torrenting sites! It affects everyone who has ever put a finger to a keyboard.

I have no solution to this. I just know that I have been impacted by it and so has every writer I know. Once books became digital objects, then the writing cows were out of that frigging barn and scampering across the fields. You might as well close THAT barn door.

Saturday, March 12, 2016

More Hitting Head Against Brick Wall

So, if there are any writers in the crowd, this article will confirm what you already know: the title says it all. Income for U.S. authors now has fallen below the poverty line. News? HAHAHAHAHAHA! The usual culprits are trotted out, the number one villain of course being amazon, who has single-handedly destroyed the book market. I understand that indies are sort of making a comeback, but that's basically a drop in the bucket compared to all the stores that went under in response to amazon's predatory pricing.

Some juicy quotes include:

Analysing responses from 1,674 authors in its first survey since 2009, the US organisation found that the median income from writing for an American author in 2014 was $8,000, down 24% from $10,500 six years ago. The majority (56%) of writers, it said, earned less from all of their writing-related activities than the $11,670 judged in 2014 to have been the minimum income needed by a one-person household in the US.


Earnings for full-time authors dropped 30% between 2009 and 2014, from $25,000 to $17,500, while the median income of part-time writers fell 38% over the period, from $7,250 to $4,500. Thirty-nine percent of respondents to the survey said their sole income came from writing.

Another interesting tidbit is that even if you are forced to self-publish (like I was):

Thirty-three percent of author reported self-publishing at least one book. Educational authors with traditional publishers, meanwhile, had the highest writing-related income in 2014, at $17,750, followed by traditionally published trade authors, at $10,250; self-published respondents earned $4,500. The biggest decline in income over the period was for traditionally published trade authors, at 28%; earnings for self-published authors were down 25%.

with the depressing conclusion that:

The rise of indie authors and their fan bases may be taking sales away from traditional publishers,” said Rasenberger. “Self-publishing may be a good way forward for many authors, but by and large indie authors are not making much money yet.

There you have it. That sound you hear is my head hitting the brick.