Ah, well, if we refer to the actual kerfuffle - my take on that is very much mediated by the various lenses through which I've glimpsed it. I know Betsy was there, and I'd got the impression you were there too, although I may have misunderstood that? Still, it sounds like whoever was responsible demonstrated a pretty astounding lack of empathy and imagination, to be able to juxtapose images of human suffering against a banal pop soundtrack in order to convey a message (presumably?)of "hey, bad stuff happens, but let's ignore it and read romantic novels!" I mean, setting footage of Tiananmen Square to 'Don't Worry, Be Happy' is a gesture of such startlingly black humour that it takes my breath away.

I mean, setting footage of Tiananmen Square to 'Don't Worry, Be Happy' is a gesture of such startlingly black humour that it takes my breath away.

I've been getting the impression that black humour wasn't the intent, unfortunately....

I know Betsy was there, and I'd got the impression you were there too, although I may have misunderstood that?

No, I wasn't--finances/Annabel made it impossible this year. I didn't hear about any of this until yesterday.

So, for those who have been reading the new series:

Just heard back from Jenn. She starts out with:

Read the book. Loved it. Beautiful writing. Compelling insight.

and goes on. But she also feels - I tend to agree, basically - that it might be tricky to market as a straight mystery, since it's really more about them than about the crime. That, of course, is a highly simplified version of her take - she feels the pacing is too measured for a straight mystery, that the flashbacks - which she adores and which she thinks makes the book as strong as it is - dilute the pacing that's a present requirement for the current straight mystery genre. What did I see it as?

My first reaction to that is, chick lit. It's a man telling the story, but it's the womens' story, they're at the heart of it.

So, readers of the Ws-I-P: opinions?

My own feeling is that the outgoing president is a dopey little Anne Coulter wannabe who ought to be dropped down a laundry chute into an escape-proof room containing thirty horny sailors.

I'm sorry, Deb, but even the average horny sailor (me included) is much too discriminating to accept such burnt offerings.

As to your current series? Chick lit, all the way. Romance and angst and, by the way, a little mystery for good measure.

I'm sorry, Deb, but even the average horny sailor (me included) is much too discriminating to accept such burnt offerings.

BWAH! I was thinking more along the line of Geoffrey Rush's character in PotC, bad teeth and all, but she's probably got a sooper-seekrit "fucked by pirates" fantasy in place, and why gratify her?

why gratify her?

Well, except I don't think it would. She seems very much the type to lie back, close her eyes and think of England/the Queen/GWB.

Well, except I don't think it would. She seems very much the type to lie back, close her eyes and think of England/the Queen/GWB

"Think unsexy thoughts. Think unsexy thoughts. Think unsexy thoughts."

RWA kerfuffle? I have heard whispers of such a thing, but know not what it is about.

Anne, go here: [link]

It describes what happened and links to several different blogs with their own takes.

Incidentally, RWA has just accepted its first authors of gay romance as members:

[link]

(As far as I know they're the first who've applied, though I'm guessing there are probably others already members who aren't published yet or haven't published with an RWA-recognized publisher, which would exclude most small press and e-published authors--recognition is based on print runs and sales figures, IIRC. Really, until you're published, RWA doesn't *know* what you write.) This has led some of us to speculate that one of the OTHER big summer kerfuffles was because the person(s) causing these problems heard that this author team had made a sale to an RWA-recognized publisher and intended to join, and was trying to block them.