an elite cabal runs publishing

Yep. Comprised of dead presidents in green.

Posted January 22, 2007 8:53 PM by Josh Jasper

More and more schools are offering courses in publishing. They’re popular, they don’t require expensive equipment, and nobody can tell whether the lecturers know what they’re talking about.

Posted January 22, 2007 8:59 PM by Dan Blum

Not that it changes anything, but back issues of the Del Sol Review do list Associate Editor positions.

As for the greater issue:

I don’t understand this person. If you’re going to fib about being a publishing expert, why put up a set of credentials that undercuts your claims?

I think that the targets of this scam (and, although I don't see a direct moneymaking setup here -- not even Adwords or Amazon links -- there's clearly something fishy going on, if only setting up a false front to funnel folks to places like Del Sol, maybe) aren't people who can actually see through these credentials. Given the outlandishness of some of the stuff online that does work (Nigerian moneymaking scams, etc), I could easily see this fooling plenty of casual readers.

Posted January 22, 2007 9:11 PM by Adam Lipkin

How many publishers and agents have asked you to be exclusive to THEM, yet have not returned your call in months!

...how many professional editors punctuate a question with an exclamation point?

Posted January 22, 2007 9:25 PM by Mary Dell

ooo, EVIL!

In addition to more atrocious punctuation, her blog features a big pimpin' shout-out to a "pitch conference." Follow the link and...

"the registration fee for the conference is $495 until April 9. After April 9, it is $595.00"

*sputter*

Posted January 22, 2007 9:41 PM by Mary Dell

oh. my. gawd.
Train. Wreck.

Posted January 22, 2007 9:42 PM by Greg London

We'll see how long she leaves up my comment on her "first novelists" thread:

All writers should begin their careers by learning Yog's Law:
http://www.sff.net/people/yog/

Posted January 22, 2007 9:46 PM by Mary Dell

The site for the pitch conference that she promotes has a small group of links - to the two writing conferences that are run by the same people who run the pitch conference, and to "Kaley Noonan's 'Pitch Bitch Blog'" (listed under a heading saying "A Relevant and Interesting Blog," snarf)

Race y'all to Google!

Posted January 22, 2007 9:55 PM by Mary Dell

Ding! I Win!

Kaley Noonan is associated with the Algonkian [sic] Writers Workshop, which handles the registration (FEES, that is) for the NY Pitch & Shop conference, which she pimps on her blog.

SCAM!

Posted January 22, 2007 10:01 PM by Mary Dell

Questions of honesty and knowledge aside, she's no Dorothy Parker.

And she wants to be - oh how she wants to be.

Posted January 22, 2007 10:08 PM by Steve Taylor

...maybe TPB is actually Lori Prokop (of Book Millionaire Reality TV Show) who is also psychically linked to Martha Ivery and ALSO a board member of Airleaf Publishing and Bookselling. Oh there's a story in this and it should be sold to Publish America!

But seriously, a quote from TPBs most recent post: "I seriously don’t know why I keep making adolescent sex a metaphor of the publishing industry (and we all know that “people who speak in metaphors can shampoo my crotch”)–whoop–there I go again."

You know, I'll admit that I've approached the publishing industry with a (little more than a) tad of irreverence at times --- but even on my snarkiest day I would never send any of my material to this editor regardless of who she might really be. I hope in the hungry self-absorbed world of the unpublished writer wannabe there is at least a modicum of something left that maybe/kinda/sort of looks like standards (just a little bit like standards please?)---and I hope those standards are never lowered down far enough to allow this kind of tripe to be taken seriously.

*edit* ePubs are now hardprinting their crap with the same wonky DAZ/Poser3d covers. Nevermind. No standards. Let tripe reign.*

an elite cabal runs publishing
Well, okay --- sure. But at least they like to drink and party at cons ;)

-=Jeff=-

Posted January 22, 2007 10:13 PM by JKRichard

"I will personally work with authors who have promising ms and even represent them in 2007 to additional agents not attending the conference."

Whoa. You'll personally work with me? And, if my manuscript is "promising," then you'll even query agents on my behalf for me? And, how much are you expecting me to pay you for this marvelous service?

Do I get a free set of steak knives with that?

Posted January 22, 2007 10:14 PM by j h woodyatt

"...how many professional editors punctuate a question with an exclamation point?"

To be fair:

(1) "Professional editor" =/= "proofreader." Lots of excellent book editors can't spot typos.

(2) Editors and, for that matter, proofreaders are as entitled as anyone else to make little mistakes in informal prose. I personally have very little patience for the "I'm shocked that YOU as an EDITOR would make this AWFUL ERROR" routine. Yeah, me as an editor also sometimes leaves the butter dish out. Disappointed? Deal.

It's certainly true, though, that if my online presence entailed promising implausible shortcuts to publishing success, people would probably be justified in amusing themselves by nitpicking my basic language skills.

Posted January 22, 2007 10:17 PM by Patrick Nielsen Hayden

I hear you, Patrick. Early in my career, I subbed my resume to Brittanica Corp. without noticing that it contained the word "poofreading." Yes. This despite being a decent writer, by academic standards anyway. So I get that poofreading is not necessarily relevant, but I don't think the exclamation point in that sentence is a typo. I think it's a gaacky stylistic choice. It's like she's cracking her gum.

Posted January 22, 2007 10:33 PM by Mary Dell

Any one of her mistakes is a mistake anyone could make. Taken all together, they're something else again.

(Someday, in the far future, a student who's set the translation of the preceding two sentences as an exercise in their Ancient Terrestrial English class is going to curse my name.)

Posted January 22, 2007 10:36 PM by Teresa Nielsen Hayden

Wow. I served three years as managing editor for an educational research journal, an actual paying job (even if it was grad student starvation wages). That's more experience than the Pitch Witch-with-a-B has. I could start my own "editor who knows it all" blog.

Or then again, not. All I learned from that and from writing professionally is that I know -->this muchthis muchthis much

Posted January 22, 2007 10:38 PM by Writerious

Writerious, your text has perversely gone astray for reasons I doubt are your fault.

Posted January 22, 2007 10:40 PM by Teresa Nielsen Hayden

3:AM Magazine

Ducts Magazine

Posted January 22, 2007 10:41 PM by James D. Macdonald

All I can think of is naïve folk, with unsold and unsellable bad novels they've written in their spare time, who are going to be hurt by this. A modern-day Dante would have to include a circle in Hell for people like this 'pitch bitch'. A circle of burning pitch sounds about right.

Posted January 22, 2007 10:44 PM by Fragano Ledgister

A "personal" scam blog. Is that a perscablog? Mmm, that has sort of a ring to it... like an ottoman falling downstairs.

And Mary Dell @ 16: "poofreading." I'm going to be saying that to myself all night. "Poofreading." Hee hee. (That my slightly lisping 5YO son would pronounce the word "poof-weeding" makes it all the more entertaining.) Thanks for lightening what has been otherwise an unmitigatedly horrible day.

Posted January 23, 2007 12:26 AM by RedMolly

From Kaley Noonan's Credentials--Websites page:

What do you get when you cross a beautiful girl with a mime?

Ah, the eternal question...

Posted January 23, 2007 12:35 AM by RedMolly

I don't know, but she asks him afterward what he was trying to represent.

Posted January 23, 2007 12:58 AM by Teresa Nielsen Hayden

Poofreading... isn't that when while you're reading something, the mistakes all disappear but reappear (*poof!*) when you show it to someone else?

Posted January 23, 2007 1:31 AM by Tina

JkRichard, #13, I can do my own wonky DAZ/Poser 3D covers.

(Background info: Poser is a 3D graphics program currently owned by e-frontier. Started out, way back, as a computer version of those jointed wooden figures used by artists. DAZ 3D are a company based in Utah which produces some of the most widely used figures for Poser, and it's own free posing and rendering program, Studio.

Note the word "free". But you have to spend money to get figures which can actually be adjusted to have different faces and bodies.}

Not a cheap Poser book cover, honest.

Posted January 23, 2007 4:10 AM by Dave Bell

I like poofreading in the British sense even more.

I once saw an ad on a local site where a gentleman was offering his professional services as an "experienced coypueditor".

http://images.google.co.uk/images?hl=en&q=coypu&btnG=Search+Images

Posted January 23, 2007 5:13 AM by Eve

"Poofreading" is exactly how Feorag used to describe the job she did for Scotsgay magazine. (That, and "tripesetting".)

Posted January 23, 2007 7:33 AM by Charlie Stross

JKRichard@13: But seriously, a quote from TPBs most recent post: "I seriously don’t know why I keep making adolescent sex a metaphor of the publishing industry (and we all know that “people who speak in metaphors can shampoo my crotch”)–whoop–there I go again."

Sounds like one of those people who wants to believe the reason she's not getting the mainstream attention she so clearly deserves is because she's such a rebel.

Posted January 23, 2007 8:33 AM by Aconite

Hey Teresa,

You might want to up your meds a hair. I never said I was a commercial editor--not one place on the blog does it even imply that. I'm a fiction editor of online Algonkian workshops (stated clearly in the "About") as well as the Associate Editor of Del Sol Review (again, read "About"--stated clearly).

And you are angry that I started a blog stating my opinions on the publishing industry? Holy Crapoly--there's about half a million of blogs out there--happy hunting!

BTW--I've got nothing to hide. I'll keep posting--you people can flame all you want. Have a fab day, kittens!

Posted January 23, 2007 8:47 AM by The Pitch Bitch

Ugh.

Posted January 23, 2007 9:05 AM by ethan

"[A]ngry that [she] started a blog stating [her] opinions on the publishing industry" indeed.

You're entitled to your own opinions. You're not entitled to your own facts. And you don't appear to know the difference.

Posted January 23, 2007 9:05 AM by Xopher notes TPB's lack of reading comprehension skills

A self-proclaimed editing maven
Blamed Teresa for all of our ravin'.
But her wisdom and wit,
Are of male bovine shit,
And her vowels are hardly worth savin'.

Posted January 23, 2007 9:06 AM by Dave Bell

Xopher @ 32 You're entitled to your own opinions. You're not entitled to your own facts. And you don't appear to know the difference.

Brilliantly stated Xopher. I might have to steal that.
-=Jeff=-

Posted January 23, 2007 9:12 AM by JKRichard

"That is, he’s only been published in venues where material is accepted for publication, rather than bought (as is the vulgar custom in our own circles)."

I'm remembering the "artists" at art school (where I learned graphic design) pontificating about not being sullied by crass commercialism and payment.

Oh Lord, I would think (and still do), let me be so sullied. Let me appear to have wallowed in mud.

TPB, "you people can flame all you want." Oh darling, that wasn't a flame. Heck, I don't even see a lighter up there. You must be new to these interweebie tubular thingies. I see nothing but a critique and exposure.

Posted January 23, 2007 9:14 AM by Steve Buchheit

I dunno, Eve, we've got coypu (better known as nutria) all over my home state of Oregon. I daresay they could have used some heavy editing, particularly when they ate all the ducks in the city parks.

Posted January 23, 2007 9:16 AM by UrsulaV

Hey,

I went to Emerson.....and I resemble that! !!

Posted January 23, 2007 9:20 AM by Nathan

Xopher @ 32 You're entitled to your own opinions. You're not entitled to your own facts. And you don't appear to know the difference.

Brilliant line, but it's kind of wasted on this small delusion. The line has so much more potential - politicians, for instance. After all, there is a State of the Union speech tonight.

Posted January 23, 2007 9:23 AM by dichroic

Dave at 33, I wondered when we'd start poetry.

Is there such a thing as an insider in this case? Would anyone classify herself as an insider? Or is it something like 'adult' or 'professional' where no one thinks they're there, but they'll pretend because all the people around are clearly so? I wonder if I would count as inside for writing and publishing. I write, I know a lot of writers casually and more than so, I hear about PublishAmerica stings, I am not wholly unaware of how some aspects of the industry work.
I suppose the secret-cabal theory would match with the insider bit. But if there's a cabal, they're very unchoosy about who they let in.

Posted January 23, 2007 9:33 AM by Diatryma

"Up your meds"! That's good! I'll have to pass that on to my nephew.

Posted January 23, 2007 9:36 AM by Scraps

On Poofreading and editing. I have a straight male friend who works in the gay pornography business (long story). Some time ago he wrote about it on his site.

Bah, apparently the "carrot S" for "strike" to show a word with a strike through it doesn't work here. I'll just put the crossed out word in italics.

Thedoubles wrote:
As you know, I work in gay pornography. One of my many duties for this company is to proofread their sites for typographical errors and bad links. Well today I was editing a movie's description that had been submitted for revision, and made this correction:

"Eduardo is packing a table leg that is 9.5 inches long and six inches in diameter circumference."

I can't wait to tell my old math teacher.

Posted January 23, 2007 9:44 AM by Leah Miller

More and more schools are offering courses in publishing. They’re popular, they don’t require expensive equipment, and nobody can tell whether the lecturers know what they’re talking about.

I currently go to Pace for my MS in Publishing...and this is the first thing I checked out when I was even considering the degree. "Tell me about your professors' experience. Don't leave anything out."

I am trying to craft some joke about the "PitchBitch"'s painfully unfunny schtick and how it's related to her living in Maine, but I find I'm too recent of a refugee from the Pine Tree State and I'm still too bitter. Alas.

I'd also like to point out that Gawker often has funny, snarky gossip about publishing folks...thanks to them and Miss Snark, I have ruined quite a few keyboards.

Posted January 23, 2007 9:47 AM by Chryss

Pb, love, sorry, but it's all over the web now. You're not an editor on the inside. You're not even an actual, you know, pro, as in someone who makes most of their living at it. It's just smoke and mirrors, paint and prevarication, and everybody knows it now.

You have a customer born every minute, but a few might look you up, and now there's a better chance that some of them might see you here. I hope they have the mother-wit to realise that if you knew anything like what you claim to know, you'd be making a living editing, not peddling workshops by spam. We can hope. 'Bye, now.

Posted January 23, 2007 9:52 AM by Dave Luckett

Kaley -- May I call you Kaley? I feel like we already know each other! -- I do appreciate you clearing up the little matter of not being a commercial editor and all. People should read more closely, shouldn't they!

I am still a little confused, though. I thought you were offering to help me with a pitch, and the slush pile, and agents and all that confusing stuff. I thought that was commercial publishing. Since you're an Insider and all -- I went back and read it again, just to make sure! -- well, don't take this the wrong way, but what sort of Insider are you? I know you must really have experience with this stuff -- I mean, you don't say you do, but you wouldn't imply it if it weren't true, and then say Well I Never Actually Said That!

Would you?

Posted January 23, 2007 9:56 AM by Scraps

"I'm not an editor, but I've played one on TV."

Posted January 23, 2007 10:07 AM by Serge

You know, if someone wants to start up a blog and write about their experiences scraping at the windows of the publishing industry, hey, cool--could be a good read, and as the blogger learns things their readers could too.

There's an entire world of difference between "Hey, I'm a wannabe (or very junior) editor and novelist, doing my volunteer time, and shopping my ms around to agents, hoping for that big break, and, let me tell you, it ain't as easy as it sounds!" and "I Have No Industry Experience, and Paper Credentials, but I Will Share My Sekkrits, Because However Sad I Am At Not Being Published, You Lot Are Sadder, I Can Still Fool You into Believing I Know Stuff."

Even without the scammy workshops the latter is dishonest and self-aggrandizing. It's sad when people who don't know any better get sucked in by this sort of sham.

Posted January 23, 2007 10:09 AM by jennie

Longtime Making Light lurker here. How dispiriting to see Web del Sol linked to this sort of verbiform pollution.

Web del Sol was one of the first on-line venues for literary publishing; I worked for them as a volunteer years ago. Since then, on-line resources for writers in the literary market have leapfrogged past Web del Sol, which, like most portal sites, hasn't seemed to accomplish much to justify its independent existence. (The Algonkian Workshops were presumably such an attempt.)

Small correction: while the gulf between the micro-world of literary journal publishing and the much larger world of commercial publishing is huge, some of the journals listed by Michael Neff in his bio are in fact paying markets. (Whether they could be classed as commercial markets is another question, since most literary journals derive significant proportions of their income from grants, institutional subvention, etc., rather than from sales.)

Posted January 23, 2007 11:02 AM by Vince

There once was a self-proclaimed Bitch
Whose career was nine-tenths bait-and-switch.
Till some Persons of Letters
Thought she'd do well with feathers--
And a seminar, gratis, in Pitch.

Posted January 23, 2007 11:05 AM by Dan Layman-Kennedy

Dan... "Wizard of Oz", right?

Posted January 23, 2007 11:07 AM by Serge

#30: Oh no, there is no anger here, just mockery.

And you make a lovely pinata.

Posted January 23, 2007 11:08 AM by Fiendish Writer

I swear, Dogbert Consulting Company has manifested itself in the world.

Posted January 23, 2007 11:19 AM by Greg London

#50 Fiendish Writer, I too don't understand why she thinks we're flaming her (her comment #30), except that it's easier to dismiss the criticism that way and play the martyr. Although that doesn't fit into her "tough as her spiked heels" persona she's trying to project.

Hint to TPB, your slip is showing, darling. Might want to see to that.

If we were going to flame her, we'd just start by transposing the words in her screen name. Only "Bitch The Pitch" doesn't work. In the world of flames, that's just a freebie.

Posted January 23, 2007 11:57 AM by Steve Buchheit

I don't think Adams invented Dogbert Consulting Company any more than Eco invented the scam publisher in Foucault's Pendulum. They're both fictionalized caricatures of real-life scams.

Posted January 23, 2007 12:00 PM by Chris

Oh yeah, the slush exists—just like dive bars and VFW wedding receptions exist.

As someone whose (entirely satisfactory)wedding reception was held at an American Legion hall, I am very glad we didn't invite Miss Noonan.

Posted January 23, 2007 12:00 PM by Bill Higgins-- Beam Jockey

#54 Bill Higgins--Yeah, and what does she have against dive bars? I love dive bars!

Posted January 23, 2007 12:03 PM by ethan

Um...thanks, but I didn't make up that thing about not being entitled to your own facts. I was just quoting it. I think I got it here, maybe from Patrick?

Or were you teasing me for saying it just as if I were just thinking it up? I didn't attribute it. Wikipedia attributes it to Daniel Patrick Moynihan, which seems likely.

Btw it seems it's quoted without attribution all over the web.

Posted January 23, 2007 12:08 PM by Xopher

Yeah, and what does she have against dive bars? I love dive bars!

Those are those icecream things, right?

Oh wait.

Posted January 23, 2007 12:10 PM by Xopher

Posted January 23, 2007 12:11 PM by

Ethan @ 55: if it ain't a dive, it ain't a bar.

I'd also bet your average VFW wedding reception is a lot fuller of warmth and genuine celebration than the monstrous Bridezilla-style affairs that crop up in overpriced venues every weekend.

(My event photographer-husband's favorite TV show is "Bridezillas." Nothing says "future marital bliss" like a coked-out PR-type screaming over the late arrival of her $15,000-a-gig troupe of former Cirque de Soleil acrobats.)

Posted January 23, 2007 1:01 PM by RedMolly

Pitch Bitch (30), is that the best invective you can manage? I'd have hoped for better from someone who has "Bitch" in the title of her weblog.

Posted January 23, 2007 1:22 PM by Teresa Nielsen Hayden

RE: The Todd James Pierce Connection

There I was, merrily following the links, when I got to the Algonkian Workshop's interview with TJP and found this gem:

Versatile enough to publish short stories while simultaneously setting his sights on novels

I can't wait to apply this new concept of versatility to my own life. I strive for the day when I can be versatile enough to pat my head while simultaneously endeavoring to rub my tummy.

Posted January 23, 2007 1:26 PM by Kellie Hazell

Listen kittens, there are ways to bypass the slush pile.

Hiya, Kaley!

Tell me -- how's that working out for you? Bypassed the slush pile yourself yet?

Posted January 23, 2007 1:27 PM by James D. Macdonald

Oh, Teresa, I don't know..."Have a fab day, kittens" has me quaking in my stylish, yet affordable, boots.

Posted January 23, 2007 1:31 PM by ethan

Starving artists don't produce deathless prose.
They don't paint timeless landscapes beloved of arts students for generations to come.
They push up daisies... which doesn't have much to do with "art."

Or does "Pitch Bitch" mean that anyone who calls him/her/itself an artiste is entitled to a middle-class salary just for being an artiste, even one who produces three or four short poems a year?

P.S. For even more fun, run down the actual publication credentials of the writing and publishing faculty at Emerson. Hint: There are several vanity presses in there... and not just for poetry, where that's more "normal" (even if still a rip-off).

Posted January 23, 2007 1:41 PM by C.E. Petit

I'll make some money "publishing" bad art,
capitalise on all that vanity and pride,
take simple folks and their cash for a ride,
and make believe I really give a fart
for all they say, pretend I have a heart
that's not as dead and wizened as my hide.
If I can do this and simultaneous deride
the carping critics I'll have done my part
to make the world a danker, nastier place
where vultures like myself can find weak prey
and curse the ones who try to make us go.
I'm a real expert, for if you seek to trace
my achievements all disappears into the grey
of winter, my job, indeed's, to snow.

Posted January 23, 2007 2:25 PM by Fragano Ledgister

More evidence that "snark" in the hands of the inexperienced can be a dangerous thing.

Posted January 23, 2007 2:54 PM by Joy

Well, hell's bells. If she's an editor, so am I.

I have not finished a college degree, I make $12.75 an hour, but I can cut, size, and restitch academic articles better than a lot of people who have PhDs.

I can also tell pretty closely who will and won't fare well in peer review. And, even more impressive, I've had articles published, and I live in Maine and eke out a miserable living too. In publishing, no less.

Maybe I'm in the wrong racket.

Posted January 23, 2007 3:39 PM by murgatroyd

Please stop snarking at the poor defenseless target, everyone; all this sarcastic chuckling is giving me a severe pain in my Unique Artistic Vision.

Posted January 23, 2007 3:42 PM by Steff Z

Hmm.

Nyrond's Addendum to Yog's Law;

"but seldom very fast."

Posted January 23, 2007 4:04 PM by Zander

#59: If it ain't a dive, it ain't a bar.

Thus the need for the term "cocktail lounge."

Incidentally, our wedding reception was at the American Legion hall, too, and we were quite satisfied with it.

Posted January 23, 2007 4:08 PM by Lawrence Evans

#30: Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzt! I'm sorry, you have failed the reading comprehension part of the contest, and so win neither respect nor Googlejuice. You do, however, get a copy of our home game, and some packages of Rice-a-Roni, the San Francisco Treat.

Posted January 23, 2007 4:17 PM by Aconite

From original post:

Look at this post (Its subtitle, A No-Excuses Truth to Understanding The Publishing Industry, is almost enough on its own.)

That link doesn't work anymore. Is that cockroaches I hear scurrying?

Posted January 23, 2007 4:38 PM by Greg London

jennie @46
Your point, in slightly allusive verse:

The road beside the river tends to flood
When autumn storms bring rainfall to the hills.
Your wagons and your horses, mired in mud
Are trapped until the water rises, and it kills.
The mountain passes close with winter snows,
The desert's parched in summer's white-hot days.
The road that looks the safest often goes
To nothing but a hovel, thick with strays.
A canny guide is worth her weight in gold
When maps are not enough, and no one knows
When caution suits and when you must be bold,
And when to give up on the route you chose.
You wouldn't trust a guide who'd never been
Along the road, and learned from what she's seen.

(OK, now I really have to do some work.)

Posted January 23, 2007 5:13 PM by abi

I don't think these guys are villains. Kaley Noonan may not know squat about trade publishing, and Michael Neff may have built an entire writing and workshopping career around non-paying literary fanzines, but no way are they in the same class as American Book Publishing, Linda Dockery, Barbara Bauer, Robert Fletcher, or PublishAmerica.

Posted January 23, 2007 5:23 PM by Teresa Nielsen Hayden

And yes, Greg London (72), that post has disappeared. You can still get the flavor of it from the first of the two spams I quoted.

Posted January 23, 2007 5:47 PM by Teresa Nielsen Hayden

PublishAmerica is so tempting a target that if I had a bit more time I think Betty Swallocks would be frantically working to get her DETECTIVE NWAR masterpiece ready to submit to them.

Posted January 23, 2007 5:47 PM by Charlie Stross

For $595, they could make me what they are?

Hmm. I fail to see the selling point.

Posted January 23, 2007 5:49 PM by elise

elise @77:
You don't want to develop a narrative voice straight out of Heathers? Are you sure? Kitten?

Teresa @74:
I don't know if they're villains. But a blog that claims to have the Inside Dirt on the Publishing Industry, and serves only to divert authors' energy strikes me as, to a lesser degree, the equivalent of the witch doctors who "treat" patients until the cancer is incurable or the cataracts have made them blind.

It wastes time, wastes hearts, wastes courage and wastes joy. It's possible that this one does this in good faith, which would be a mitigation.

Posted January 23, 2007 6:03 PM by abi

What I'm waiting for is the response.

Kaley Noonan now does have a reputation, as a shameless charlatan. From here on when anyone looks up her name; an agent, a publishing house, a reviewer, what they'll find is her history of misrepresentation.

That's gotta hurt. That's gonna hurt more.

I wonder if the folks involved in this debacle will somehow try and come clean and redeem what they can of their professional reputations? Or will they lay low hoping it all just goes`away (but Google doesn't forget.)

Posted January 23, 2007 6:23 PM by Michael

To dismiss and demean such esteemed and high-quality literary journals as Conjuctions, The Literary Review, Black Warrior, and many others as simply "non-paying literary fanzines" nt nly shws th dpth f yr gnrnc, Trs, bt scry cptlst prsn. r y Rpblcn f sm srt? Wrtng s nly t b jdgd by hw wll t pys? Thn y'r wr tht D VNC CD mst b bttr thn ny SF vr pblshd by TR bcs t sld nfntly mr cpy? nd ny bt f mrnc, clch swll pblshd ths dys n n SF rg mst b bttr thn ny pm vr pblshd tht md lss mny r n mny?

Gt ff yr BS hgh hrs. Mthnks hr lttl cmmrcl dgs brkng t p stn by bggr dg.

JF

Posted January 23, 2007 6:31 PM by Julie Field

Teresa has a scary capitalist persona, and might even secretly be a Republican... Say it ain't so.

Posted January 23, 2007 6:35 PM by Serge

Of course, as we all well know, Democrats hate making money. Thus, if one likes making money, one can't be anything but a Republican. (I remember how shocked my Republican father-in-law was upon discovering that the hubbies of his daughters all like the accumulation of pecuniary resources.)

Posted January 23, 2007 6:44 PM by Serge

She certainly lacks Miss Snark's wit, charm, and nice manners, which is reason enough for such bitterness of 'tude.

Those in the industry who might have helped K.N.'s career are now all too aware of her name in a negative sense.

Ms. Noonan has shot herself in the foot enough for one planetary rotation. Time to limp home and consider wiser options than writing more blog rants that beg for mockage.

Posted January 23, 2007 6:49 PM by P.N. Elrod

Julie Field #80: If there's a dog here, her name is Julie, and she is barking up the wrong tree.

Posted January 23, 2007 7:02 PM by Fragano Ledgister

Hey! (Or perhaps "Arf!".)

Posted January 23, 2007 7:18 PM by Julie L.

"The authors have deleted this blog. The content is no longer available."

Posted January 23, 2007 7:23 PM by bentley

Oh dear. Pinata all gone.

Posted January 23, 2007 7:44 PM by Fiendish Writer

You want to hear someone dismiss and demean such high-toned literary fanzines as Conjuctions, The Literary Review, and Black Warrior? Sure. They specialize in boring stories about dull people whose trivial problems have obvious solutions.

And the writing isn't all that good, either. Sure, I know about Sturgeon's Law. But in literary prose it's closer to 99% than 90.

At least Dan Brown convinced thousands of non-lit'ry people to donate their money and their time for his words. The folks who write for Conjunctions, et al.? They're hard-pressed to get the other MFAs to read their stuff. What really burns Kaley's bush is that Dan Brown made it out of the slush pile and she didn't.

You want the secret to avoiding the slush pile? Send your material to p/a/y/s/-/i/n/-/c/o/p/i/e/s/ free literary e-zines. They'll take anything. As long as it's unreadable.

Posted January 23, 2007 7:55 PM by James D. Macdonald

Julie L #85: Not you!! Sorry.

Posted January 23, 2007 7:58 PM by Fragano Ledgister

Julie L #85: Not you!! Sorry.

Posted January 23, 2007 8:06 PM by Fragano Ledgister

Julie Field@80: To dismiss and demean such esteemed and high-quality literary journals as Conjuctions, The Literary Review, Black Warrior, and many others as simply "non-paying literary fanzines" not only shows the depth of your ignorance, Teresa, but a scary capitalist persona.

Wow, these folks really have problems with reading comprehension. Would you like to point out where Teresa "dismisses and dismeans" those journals, Julia? Was it where she noted that they don't pay? This may come as a surprise to you, but being published in markets that don't pay don't make you an expert on the industry.

That says nothing about the quality of the market or the works in it. Several SF markets that pay pennies consistently publish work that wins awards and critical acclaim. But if you're claiming to be an expert on the industry, that means you deal with the commercial side of it, and that means getting paid.

As for the supposed depth of her ignorance--child, someday you may know enough about the woman you're talking about to be embarrassed by that remark.

Get off your BS high horse. Methinks I hear little commercial dogs barking at a pee stain by a bigger dog.

Bit of a logic problem here. Who're the little dogs? I thought you all were supposed to be the little ferocious outsiders, barking at the monolithic publishing industry. Now you're the big dogs? And yet...you have no publishing success, no insider experience...how does that work, again?

Posted January 23, 2007 8:08 PM by Aconite

From Conjunctions (from December '06, so it's recent):
"Flood" by David Shields.

This is written by someone who's never in his life slept in a wet sleeping bag, or tried to walk in the woods on a starless, moonless night. Where's the light coming from, David, for your first-person narrator to see the things he sees?

"The underside of the porch drips rain like a child peeing." Let's assume there's enough light for you to see that. Do childen drip when they pee? What are you trying to say?

"She likes the smell of bathrooms, mirrors, warm toilet seats." Does your perfect Carla really spend a lot of time smelling warm toilet seats? Or was that just clumsily phrased?

What happens in this story? Plot summary: The narrator isn't smart enough to come in out of the rain, but Carla, apparently, is.

At least I didn't have to pay anything to read this. At least it was short.

Would someone -- anyone -- care to defend this waste of pixels?

Posted January 23, 2007 8:29 PM by James D. Macdonald

#80: I don't think the term "fanzine" is pejorative, certainly not in this context. It's also completely fair to point out that expertise in non-paying markets doesn't necessarily imply expertise in commercial publishing.

Oh well. At least Kaley Noonan has apparently reconsidered her venture.

Posted January 23, 2007 8:47 PM by JC

T Th Drns f Tr,

Y wld ll prfr ln btt ntnn jmmd p yr nss t rl ltrtr. Hv y sn tht lkwrm pp tht Trs Hydn clls fctn? mn, th stff sh wrt? 'll bt sh's bn rjctd frm rl ltrry mgs nd tht's why sh's n th ttck hr.

Cllng gd ltrry jrnls "fnzns" s bth nccrt nd nsltng. t ws mnt t b.

Posted January 23, 2007 9:35 PM by Mlly

I haven't seen a comment thread get this nasty in a while (though I don't read all comment threads). How did a situation where a self-proclaimed Insider turned out not to be turn into snarling?

Sometimes the world just doesn't listen when I want everyone to be friends. Alas for reality.

Posted January 23, 2007 9:43 PM by Diatryma

Kittens? WTF is that about?

Posted January 23, 2007 9:50 PM by j h woodyatt

When that I was and a little bitty Bitch,
(With hey, ho, the Merry Drones of Tor)
A foolish blog did scratch my itch,
(For the drones they drone on ever more)

But when I came to make my Pitch,
(With hey, ho, the Merry Drones of Tor)
'Gainst knaves and thieves they pulled the switch.
(For the drones they drone on ever more)

But when alas I came to write
By swaggering could I never thrive,
And then my "friends" did raise their heads
With sockpuppets still I earn my bread

Not long ago my blog began
(With hey, ho, the Merry Drones of Tor)
But that's all done, Teresa's won
And abi'll write a sonnet every day

Posted January 23, 2007 9:56 PM by TexAnne

You would all prefer alien butt antenna jammed up your noses to real literature.

Yes, so what's your point?

Posted January 23, 2007 9:57 PM by Serge

Fanzines. Insulting? Perhaps. Accurate? Definitely.

Have you seen that lukewarm pap that Teresa Hayden calls fiction? I mean, the stuff she wrote?

No, and neither have you. Teresa doesn't write fiction. That Bitter Rejected Author fantasy of yours is just a square on the Bingo Card.

I do write fiction. Back when I started trying to publish commercially I listed "little and literary" credits in my first couple of cover letters. The Lit'ry Magazines didn't reject me. I dropped them when I figured out exactly how meaningless they were.

(And those were in the days of paper Lit'ry magazines. At least they paid in copies. What do the on-line 'zines pay in? Electrons?)

I also read literature. Real literature. I love it. It isn't in the literary e-zines. The literary e-zines are a refuge for the poseurs, the artistes, and the wannabees.

Don't try to sling words here, Molly. You're in the presence of people who actually can.

Posted January 23, 2007 10:02 PM by James D. Macdonald

Calling good literary journals "fanzines" is both inaccurate and insulting. It was meant to be.

molly, if you spent much time here, you'd know that "fanzine" isn't a pejorative term at all. we are, you see, fans.

it is a comment however, on how "inside the publishing industry" a person whose work has only appeared in fanzines could be. fanzines can be repositories of great art, but they are, by definition, on the fringes....

nevermind. i'll stop feeding the troll now.

Posted January 23, 2007 10:06 PM by miriam beetle

Julie Field@#80, Molly@#94: You do realize that you're making fools of yourselves in public, don't you?

Posted January 23, 2007 10:21 PM by Debra Doyle

How did a situation where a self-proclaimed Insider turned out not to be turn into snarling?

The MFAs, sensitive souls that they are, perceive that they're getting laughed at.

Posted January 23, 2007 10:24 PM by James D. Macdonald

#92 James D. Macdonald, "Would someone -- anyone -- care to defend this waste of pixels?"

Oh, Jeeze. I'm going to get another scar from banging my head against the wall to get the stupid out that story/poem/whatever it was tried to get in. All I can say is that, way, too, many, damn, commas. I don't think it's a comma splice issue, I think it's death by a thousand commas. At least there's whale puke in there (really, there is). I doubt the author knows that's what the word means, only that it relates to "Pair-foom-airy."

So, have I crossed into the insulting side of this argument? Silly me.

Posted January 23, 2007 10:39 PM by Steve Buchheit

Mr Macdonald, you have no idea how satisfying it is to me to have someone of your stature say what I have been having underground thoughts about for years.

At one stage, I had to attend a sort of literary salon where I was asked, perfectly po-faced, whether I found the act of commercial publication perhaps a little, well, um...

I answered cheerfully that it didn't require half so much pimping myself out as getting the Masters (Creative Writing) which was the reason I had to attend the sort-of literary salon. The conversation went south after that, alas.

At the government-funded "writers' house" where they paid me to present a "workshop" (which wasn't a workshop, but that's another story) I got asked whether it wasn't galling to have to put work in front of people who simply didn't understand, you know, its real artistic merits. I said something like, "Yes, indeed, not only don't they pay you, but you're out the postage as well."

Funny looks you get at government-funded "writers' houses".

The same place is talking about getting an actual anthology of their work out, but very few stories have been submitted, because the proposal is to get a grant and employ a, you know, professional editor with actual selection powers. Two of the leading lights remarked that they didn't feel quite right about being submitted to scrutiny in this way. A committee of members would be better.

Heigh-ho. Well, back to pimping myself out for commercial scrutiny.

Posted January 23, 2007 10:48 PM by Dave Luckett

Re: me@91: ARGH! "doesn't make you." Time for new glasses. Or to switch to the "Larger type" option, up-page, so I can see what the hell I'm typing.

So, we have a devotion of Snarklings. What's the collective noun for drones of Tor?* And do I get to be a drone? As I recall, drones get to make new queens by choosing who to feed royal jelly to. That would be kewl. Can I, can I, huh, oh great Tor-people? Pleeeeeease?

*"Hive" is obvious, but it sounds itchy.

Posted January 23, 2007 10:54 PM by Aconite

I meant more #92, which is public bashing of stories from people who aren't involved in this. It seemed unnecessarily nasty, which may have been part of what you were trying to do-- show that Teresa was not particularly insulting by demonstrating what insulting really looks like-- but I like my conflicts simpler, with at least one side behaving well. Making Light comments show up on Google occasionally (the top hit for my name leads here) and the authors aren't really involved.

Like I said, I prefer simple conflicts. "That's not a knife. *This* is a knife!" might have motivated the post, but it comes out looking worse. It's easier to show that we are not the enemy if we don't rip bystanders to shreds.

Posted January 23, 2007 10:54 PM by Diatryma

Professor Doyle - I hear the 'woosh' sound when I read their posts.

If you'll excuse me, I'll go back to the other threads that include:
abi and Fragano's poetry
discussions of all things linguistic
handcrafts and fiber materials
commentary on literature in translation and language shift
amusing pet stories
debates of current events and politics
a remarkably small amount of SFF colloquy

Posted January 23, 2007 10:57 PM by Tania

#94 I don't mean this to be insulting or an attack. I'm hoping that you'll please play nice.

Now--stating the obvious here, but 'literary' is a genre like any other, albeit one that focuses on a theme, generally 'exploration of the self', rather than more easily-waved-about features of setting or style.

Like all genres, literary fiction has its freebee, publish-on-acceptance zines. Some of these will be reasonably good, some not so good.

The reality is, however, that on average any writer who feels that his/her work is of a standard to warrant payment will send it off to the bigger and more lucrative markets first. Writers, after all, like to eat too.

The result is that (again, generally speaking) paying markets will showcase a better quality of fiction than non-paying markets, simply because they have the first pick of the subs.

So, to be blunt, if you want 'quality' literary magazines you'd be better off investing time and effort in reading 'The New Yorker', 'The London Review of Books' or 'Meanjin'. All are paying markets, well respected, and at least reasonably well know.

I suppose, in a round-about way I'm saying that no-one here is attacking literary magazines or the genre in general. What has been pointed out (rightly) is that freebee online zines are nothing more or less than freebee online zines--and it's not sensible to claim vast publishing experience on the basis working for such a magazine.

Posted January 23, 2007 10:59 PM by Chris

A pattern is beginning to emerge here. I've long noted that people with MBAs are damn touchy about their work. They tend to think that their opinions are more valuable simply by virtue of their having that degree. Sometimes they actually think their facts are automatically better. This isn't SO bad when the topic is their area of expertise...but I've had MBAs try to tell me about linguistics.

Now it appears that MFAs may, in some cases, have the same effect. So the M[B | F]A degree is a marker of assholism?

Further study is needed.

Posted January 23, 2007 11:00 PM by Xopher

So, we have a devotion of Snarklings. What's the collective noun for drones of Tor?*

Perhaps swarm?

Posted January 23, 2007 11:08 PM by roach

I... Uh...

Oh, hell.

Mabel, git my shotgun. We've been overrun by varmints.

Posted January 23, 2007 11:12 PM by Greg London

As I recall, drones get to make new queens by choosing who to feed royal jelly to.

Actually I think the Workers control the means of production.

Posted January 23, 2007 11:24 PM by Xopher

Posted January 23, 2007 11:27 PM by

Xopher@112: Oh, hell, that's right. The drones are the males. (Time to review apiculture, or get some sleep.) Well, that's not nearly as much fun. Dang.

Still, we could get "Tor Drone" T-shirts. "Two pens enter, one pen leaves"?

Definitely sleep.

Posted January 23, 2007 11:30 PM by Aconite

Re: 113: Okay, so you folks like to pick on ezine people? MFA's are a detriment I suppose?

Wow. These people really do not get reading comprehension at all.

When's the last time TOR book was made into a film?

When was one of yours?

Side note: If you're trying to pretend you're not the same person, or in the same group, you might want to watch out for miswriting the same proper name in the same way in different posts with different names attached. Just sayin'.

Or when has one of your select group written a nonfiction book about something real, and not related to "How to Get Published."

Well, you could use Google to find out, but since that was just a shot and not an actual inquiry, I'm sure you won't bother. But I'm confused--now "How to Get Published" is bad and lame? Because when you were doing it, you made it sound so hip and cool.

Posted January 23, 2007 11:39 PM by Aconite

Posted January 23, 2007 11:41 PM by

Call me paranoid, but I think "Benedict Arnold" up at #113 is actually Mrk Yrk. View All By (thank the tech gods it's working again) show that "Benedict" has two posts, one of which is at #113. Both of which try to link to "Aga inst a Rap id Stre am" by guess fricken who.

Posted January 23, 2007 11:43 PM by Greg London sees possible Mark York spam

Well, let's examine what the brilliant writer, Chris Johnstone has to say!

Here we go from post #108:

Chris Johnstone says: "The result is that (again, generally speaking) paying markets will showcase a better quality of fiction than non-paying markets, simply because they have the first pick of the subs."

Assuming, of course, that in your scenario all America's good fiction writers are following the Chris Johnstone formula and ONLY sending their work to paying mags. Also, it assumes no self-respecting fiction writer would want to be published in a mag that doesn't pay enough. Yes?

"So, to be blunt... "

Yes, be blunt Chris Johstone.

"if you want 'quality' literary magazines you'd be better off investing time and effort in reading 'The New Yorker', 'The London Review of Books' or 'Meanjin'. All are paying markets, well respected, and at least reasonably well know."

Mnjn? Wht bt Ztrp? Nw thr's gd pyng mrkt, ys? S thrfr, ccrdng t th brllnt pstr, th bst fctn MST b n Ztrp bcs t pys mr. ndd, th mr th rg pys, th bttr th fctn bcms, rght? t's tht smpl! Dmn!

Lt's lk t sm f Chrs Jhnstns rcnt plcs t snd hs "wrk" ...:

Th Hntng f Mrs Hggns - Fntsy nd Scnc Fctn, S
Th Pstmn's Nw Cstmrs - Wrd Tls, S
Rd f Lng Brdn - Shmmr, rlnd
Chtng th Ms - ntrglctc Mdcn Shw, S

Dn't th ttls snd hrrbly rgnl? Nw, lt's ssm th fctn f Chrs Jhnstn gts pblshd n n f ths ptrd rckt rgs tht rk f crtn chrctrs nd prdctbl plts, thn t gs wtht syng tht HS fctn MST b bttr thn nythng tht hs vr pprd n, lt's sy, Qrtrly Wst r Prr Schnr. Why? Bcs ntrgltc Mdcn Shw pys bttr!

It's all so logical.

Thank you Chris Johnstone. Y wldn't knw gd fctn f t kckd y n th blls.

Posted January 23, 2007 11:54 PM by Julie

While Jim's perfectly capable of defending himself, "Who the hell are you besides a hermit in Colebrook NH?" is probably not a good question to ask.

He's an EMT. He saves lives.

He has a wife and a bunch of kids, which is not exactly typical of hermits.

He's an instructor at Viable Paradise, teaching other people how to write.

He's a veteran of the U.S. Navy.

Who are you to belittle him?

Posted January 23, 2007 11:57 PM by Lawrence Evans

Hey, Julie: Just so you know what kind of pissing match you're about to get into, you might want to read the message threads here:
Todd James Pierce Part I
Todd James Pierce Part II

Also, consider that you just ripped into one of the few people here who was treating you like a person capable of rational discussion. Good move.

Posted January 24, 2007 12:02 AM by Aconite

Posted January 24, 2007 12:02 AM by

Good call, Greg.

Posted January 24, 2007 12:05 AM by Aconite notes that Greg London called it first

Posted January 24, 2007 12:06 AM by

mrk,

a novel with fictional scenarios? horrors!

Posted January 24, 2007 12:07 AM by miriam beetle

I'd like to apologize to Julie and her crowd for mistaking Mrk.Yrk for one of them. Y'all are obnoxious and not too well researched, but you're not on Mrk.Yrk's level. All I can say in my defense is that sometimes he starts out sounding almost coherent.

Posted January 24, 2007 12:12 AM by Aconite

Posted January 24, 2007 12:13 AM by

Hm, I can see how this story is going to end:

one by one, without any fuss, the vowels were going out.

Posted January 24, 2007 12:14 AM by Greg London

Wow, I wish I had fictional scenarious like Jim's. I could tell some author about them and offer to split the money if he writes the novel.

And yes, Benedict Arnold, you are clearly Mrk Yrk. Go Yrk off somewhere else.

Posted January 24, 2007 12:14 AM by Xopher

My work here is done.

Would that that were true. Will no one rid us of this tiresome wanker?

Posted January 24, 2007 12:17 AM by Xopher

Will no one rid us of this tiresome wanker?

Gee, thanks for that mental image, Xopher. I'm sure I'll be able to sleep now.

Posted January 24, 2007 12:19 AM by Aconite

And to Debra Doyle of #101

http://www.sff.net/people/doylemacdonald/

Ths hvng ld f bd SF nt nly mks fl f y, n pblc, bt dmnshs th dgnty f th hmn rc, rthr lk Rnld McDnld.

My rcmmndtn s t t yrslf t rck n th dsrt nd swt t yr nnr trll. Nxt, tk ll yr bks, sl thm n brrl wth trch, nd thn dpth-chrg thm nt th cn, t lst 50 mls ffshr.

Nxt, plgz t th hmn rc v th ntrnt nd swr y'll stp wrtng frvr.

Posted January 24, 2007 12:20 AM by Julie Field

Posted January 24, 2007 12:20 AM by

Posted January 24, 2007 12:21 AM by

Xopher, "tiresome wanker" is precisely the problem. Posting aimless abuse here is part of his kink.

Posted January 24, 2007 12:23 AM by Teresa Nielsen Hayden

Julie Field@131: This heaving load of bad SF not only makes a fool of you, in public

Man, doesn't it just kill you that more people have paid money for her books than will ever know your name?

Posted January 24, 2007 12:24 AM by Aconite

Mrk Yrk, you're still incoherent. I'm sure you think you're being "subtle," but actually it's that your word-salad is full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

Posted January 24, 2007 12:25 AM by Xopher

Seriously, Xopher, don't give him what he wants. He's probably sitting there right now with one hand on the mouse and the other hand not on the mouse.

Posted January 24, 2007 12:27 AM by Teresa Nielsen Hayden

Awww, Teresa, there was more candy in him! Oh well.

Seriously, good riddance. Thanks.

Posted January 24, 2007 12:27 AM by Xopher

Yes, I know. I'm sure the brief intervals between his appearances here...well, calling them 'refractory periods' seems appropriate.

Posted January 24, 2007 12:30 AM by Xopher

Xopher, that isn't candy.

In the meantime, anybody here want to see what they can make of the IP address 4.249.15.21 ?

Posted January 24, 2007 12:31 AM by Teresa Nielsen Hayden

wow.

Posted January 24, 2007 12:32 AM by Greg London

Well, sleep is out of the question now.

Ew.

Posted January 24, 2007 12:33 AM by Aconite