Susan, yup - but I was thinking more about the way in which those particular human foibles are handled. Always remembering, of course, that I love "Persuasion" above all else in the Austen canon.

You'd probably like Anna, then--it's a bit Persuasion-esque, come to think of it, albeit with a radically compressed timeline.

You're probably right. I'm nuts for "Persuasion".

Bev, Deena, sending you new stuff.

Damn. I'm 0-for-3. Just heard back from the editor at Harper Collins, the final place I sent a partial after the Oct. conference, and this is the first rejection that's actually making me a bit discouraged and self-doubting:

Thank you for sending LUCY AND MR. WRIGHT. While I thought this was a charming concept, I'm afraid I wasn't sufficiently engaged by the writing and ultimately thought the story wasn't strong enough to distinguish it from other books within this competitive genre. Therefore, I must decline interest.

"Charming concept?" I feel damned with faint praise. And this is the first person I've run across who apparently doesn't care for my writing itself.

t angry rant And what's this about distinguishing it from other books in the genre? At least I'm not submitting yet another implausible suspense scenario with Napoleonic spies, or yet another series about a group of brothers or army buddies. t /angry rant

Susan, All rejections translate ultimately as "This isn't a good fit for my book."

For some books, there is no good fit. But a rejection is ultimately a rationalization -- they all mean "this just didn't work for me". This rejection says "I get a zillion Regencies a year, and I didn't love this one enough to work with you on it." Which sucks to hear, obviously.

If she'd said "Resubmit it with a plague-ridden poodle", you'd care why she rejected it. This is a generic "not for us" rejection, and you just add it to the list of NOs that come before the final YES.

Yeah, I know. I'm just a little disappointed--it would've been nice to work with them, since they seem to treat authors well, turn out attractive covers, etc.

Susan, yup. What Betsy said, especially the bit about "I get a zillion Regencies a year, etc."

Who else are you submitting to? Want a shortlist of agents, just to see what they're after?

I've already got a shortlist of agents--I took the list of agents who are affiliate members of Romance Writers of America, and crossreferenced it against Writer's Market listings. I'm going to send it preferentially to those agents who let you send a partial instead of just a query letter, because I think my strengths, especially in Lucy, are style and characterization rather than plot. If none of those work out, I'll go to the ones who make you start with just a query letter.

I'm going to submit again as soon as I finish this pacing edit, and the rewrite I'm planning for the opening section. Goal is to get it out by the end of February.

Sorry to break in. X-Post from Firefly...

The editor of the local paper tracked me down via local academia*. She wants an article on the fan effect on TV-On-DVD, and the effect this revenue stream might have on the creative effort. I've read the Cassutt piece. I'm not sure how a background in chemical engineering helps me, here, but I'm thinking of assailing the piece.

In pursuit of this, I'm soliciting the best numbers available for budgets of shows (google helps not). Also, any anecdote of how fans have influenced the production of series DVDs, and how series DVDs might have influenced the production of … anything, in any medium, would be handy. (Profile addy good.)

• She was looking for an "adult fan" of a TV show. My name came up, pretty quickly.

Thanks (Again, for the interuption, sorry.)

edit: spelling. Gawd, I'm doomed.

Don't forget, you may not have had your story read by the head person. Often 'newbies' get read by a 'first reader'.

Takes a while. Don't give up.