Form Rejections

In honor of the Rejectionist's blog birthday, I give you a top 10 list of what form rejections REALLY mean:

#10
"If it makes you feel any better, getting this rejection means you're not on my blacklist. Yet."

#9
"My cat threw up on my keyboard, but I still have to answer these stupid queries."

#8
"No."

#7
"Your query did not give my computer a virus. Good work."

#6
"Congratulations. You successfully bypassed my spam filter."

#5
"On the bright side, that query service you hired sent it to at least one real agent."

#4
"I can only request 1 partial per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow doesn't look good either."

#3
"I'm only rejecting you now because the queries never stop. They just keep coming and coming and coming, there's never a let-up. They're relentless. Every day they pile up more and more and more! And you gotta get them out, but the more you get them out the more they keep coming in. And then your computer freezes and it's the last day of NaNoWriMo!"

#2
"No!"

And the number one thing form rejections really mean...

#1
"This rejection means the same as if I said nothing. Except if I actually said nothing, you'd pester me with e-mails or (God forbid) phone calls asking why I haven't said SOMETHING. Even though you give your resume to hundreds of human resource departments without wondering if they received it. Even though you give your phone number to God-knows-how-many potential girl/boyfriends, yet never track them down to see if maybe they lost it. For whatever reason, those expectations do not apply to me.

"So consider this your non-interview. Your fake number. I am turning you down in the nicest way I have available to me. Please, please, PLEASE don't e-mail again asking why."


Happy birthday, Le R! Thank you for brightening our depressing, rejection-filled existences.

That Deeper Meaning Nonsense

When people admire art,* they often want to know what the artist meant by it. I get that. I do it myself. But honestly I don't really like "explaining" my art.

* I'm including books in this.

Part of it is plain old fear. If I have to explain it, it means I didn't do a good job of it, right? Or what if I explain it, and they don't like the deeper meaning of it, and therefore don't like the work? Orson Scott Card's Homecoming Saga is really thought-provoking science fiction, for example, but I know people who stop liking it when they find out it's patterned on the Book of Mormon.

Should that matter? Should the author's interpretation of what they wrote affect MY interpretation?

Shortly after it was published, someone wrote a review of my story "Pawn's Gambit". He really liked it (and I was bouncing for a few days after reading it), but here's what he got out of it:

We come to understand the true meaning of family, of love, of sacrifice. We have all had our differences with the ones we love, but even when we dislike our family we still do whatever it takes.

When I read that, I was all ==> O_o.

I mean, I see how he got that out of the story, but I can't say that's what I was trying to say. I can't say I was trying to say anything, really. It was just a fun adventure.

Does that invalidate his opinion? This is what the story meant to him. And like I said, he's not pulling it out of thin air. There IS family, love, and sacrifice in the story. There IS a father trying to rescue his daughter, even though his daughter wants nothing to do with him.

And who says I didn't mean all that, at least subconsciously? Fatherhood is something that's very dear to my heart, and a common theme in many of my favorite movies. So if it comes out in what I write -- even when I don't intend it -- I'm not surprised.

So what matters more? The author's intention, or what the reader brings into the text? Have you ever changed your opinion of a story because you found out the author didn't mean at all what you thought?

The e-Pocalypse Won't Be So Bad

Before we go anywhere, thank you to everyone who participated in Lurker(slash-Regulars) Week. I had fun, and I hope you did too. I'm not sure I trust the results (the first poll, in particular, seemed pretty buggy), but for what it's worth, here they are. We're going to talk about one in particular today:

E-books:
Good: 40%
Bad: 30%

I'm not sure where the other 30% disappeared to (thanks a lot, BlogPolls), but even without it, it's clear there are some fears concerning e-books. Personally I'm not so sure there's anything to be afraid of, but like any good sci-fi author, I asked "What if?" WHAT IF we took the e-book revolution to its extreme? What if paper books disappeared forever, and all we were left with were digital stories?

So consider this a thought experiment, and I guess an encouragement to not worry about the future -- to relax and enjoy the ride.

WHAT I'LL MISS

• New Book Smell. Yes. Hi. My name is Adam Heine, and I'm addicted to new book smell (also new card smell, but I understand they have a different group for that).
• Browsing a Bookstore. There is something nice about looking at all the books I COULD own, even if I'm never going to buy them (because, really, not all of them are that good).
• Showing Off My Library. I realized a while ago that one reason I like to own books is so people can come over, see my bookshelf, and instantly know if they're going to like me or not (and vice versa). Saves lots of time and needless small talk.
• Loaning Books. I know you can kind of, sort of loan with the Nook. And maybe they'll get better about that in the future, but until I can loan and borrow my e-books indefinitely (and more than once), I'll miss that aspect.*
• Being Able to Read During Take-Off/Landing. Hopefully by the time paper books are extinct, they'll have figured out a way to shield airplane electronics from other kinds. Otherwise those first and last few minutes of every flight are going to be mind-numbingly boring.

* There's also a significant discussion to be had here about libraries, but that's way beyond the scope of this post.


WHAT I WON'T MISS

• Waiting for a Book. Driving to the bookstore is a pain. Waiting days for shipping is worse.** But if I could have any book I want RIGHT NOW, I think I'll forget that books used to smell good. (And maybe by then they'll have put some kind of odor software on the e-readers, yes?).
• Standing in Line for Harry Potter #8. I've stood in line for movies before, but a book? No. Not in the 21st century. I'd prefer my pre-ordered, ultra-anticipated, sold-out-in-20-minutes bestseller to be sitting in my library before I even wake up that morning. Thank you.
• Browsing a Bookstore. While it's nice to look at books I could own, it sucks to drive all the way to the bookstore to find they don't have the book I want. But not in the future. The future will be like Amazon where I can buy every book ever made, but WITHOUT...
• Added Costs. That's right, folks. While I'm sure they'll find a way to tax e-books eventually, right now they remain tax free AND shipping free. (I'm aware the e-reader costs money, but it would pay for itself pretty quick, I'm thinking).
• Choosing Which Book to Take on a Trip. I'm neurotic. When I go on a trip, of course I take the book I'm currently reading, but what if I finish it? I need to pack two. I'd like to read Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell next, but it's freaking huge. So I grudgingly toss in another Patterson novel. In the future though? I'll have all my books with me, all the time. Which also means I won't miss...
• Forgetting to Take a Book on a Trip. The worst vacation I ever went on was when I forgot to bring a book. I know: talk to people, see the sights, blah, blah, BLAH. NO! I go on vacation to read, dangit! And if I have my wireless e-reader, not only do I have my entire library with me, but if I finish them all, I can instantly buy a new book.

** And if you think you have it bad, move to Thailand. When I buy books, I have to go through my contact list to see who is both (a) coming to visit soon and (b) willing to carry 20 hardbacks from Amazon for me. Then I have to wait for them to take their vacation.


WHAT I'M PRETTY SURE WON'T CHANGE

• Prices. I don't see book prices coming down much. Sorry. Believe it or not, it costs a lot to produce a book, even if you don't have to print it. (I mean, hello? People don't expect computer games to be $5 each. Do you think that $50 goes towards copying the CD and putting it in a box?).
• Reading in the Bathtub. I've never read in the bathtub (though granted I haven't been in one since I was 10), but I guess this is something people do. I don't see this as a problem. (A) You don't drop your book in the bathtub, why your e-reader? (B) If they can make waterproof radios, cameras, and (dear Lord) laptops, how hard can it be to tub-proof an e-reader?
• Kid's Reading. I've heard it said that parents won't let their kids use an expensive e-reader. First of all, I let my three year olds read BOOKS, which although less expensive are a lot easier to break (trust me). Secondly, during our time in the States I saw many, many kids, ages 3 and up, playing games and watching movies on iPods without once being in danger of destroying them (including my own son, who had never seen one before). If they can do that, they can read books on the things too. In fact, most parents would probably prefer it.
• Reading a Good Story. Honestly, I don't read books because I like smelling paper and flipping pages. I read them because I want a good story. Sure, computer screens give some people headaches (although aren't you reading on one right now?), but that will go away with time and technology. What won't go away, ever, are the stories. No matter how we tell them.

Smarter folks than me have posited on what e-books will do to the publishing industry. I'm not in the publishing industry (yet), but I am a reader, and honestly? This future looks pretty good to me.

Or it will once they figure out that odor software.

Feedback Friday

You guys are awesome. I was all worried Wednesday's post would get nasty for some reason (even though I know you guys; who would be nasty?). Thank you to everyone who shared, to everyone who wasn't mean, and to everyone who is still reading this blog even after learning that I hear voices and indoctrinate my children. I have the best readers in the world.

So we've had the small talk. We've had the deep conversation. All that's left now is to collectively answer the most important issues facing the world today, via online poll.

If at any point you don't see an option you like, feel free to expound in the comments. (Although I intentionally limited the options so you'd have to choose. Mwa-ha-ha!). The first poll is for me. The rest are for the world.

Note: if you're on Reader or e-mail, you'll have to click through for the polls.

UPDATE: There may be some problems with voting. Try voting anyway, and with luck they'll sort themselves out. Otherwise, uh...have a nice weekend I guess.



















And here you thought today was going to be even harder than Wednesday. (Heck, maybe it was. Choosing between Picard and New Kirk? That's like asking me to choose my left or right eyeball.)

The Thing No One's Supposed to Blog About

Welcome to Day 2 of Lurker Week here on Author's Echo. I really enjoyed reading your answers to Monday's random questions. I loved learning more about the regulars, and I'm so happy to see the poking heads of folks I've never met, or haven't heard from in a while. Hi, guys! Glad to meet you and/or see you again!

Today's topic is a little tougher than having tea with Gandalf though, but I think it's important. See, I'm aware that a lot of the blogs I read are written by quiet Christians, quiet Mormons, and more. Their faith is a large part of who they are, but they don't talk about it online, just like I don't. There are many, many good reasons for this, but just once I'd like to tell you what I believe, and hear what you believe, about this crazy existence we're all stuck together in. (For the purpose of this post, atheism totally counts by the way).

Some ground rules:

• This is NOT about converting people. The point is to learn about each other, not to prove a point.
• Likewise, this is NOT about who is right or wrong. Please don't put people on the defensive about their faith (and if I do so without realizing, please tell me).
• DON'T be a meanie head. Nasty comments will be summarily destroyed.

Here are some questions to help voice your thoughts. Feel free to use them or skip them as you want.

1. What is your religion (just the label here)?
2. What's one important way your personal belief differs from what people normally think of when they think of that label?
3. How does your personal belief impact your daily life?
4. Most religions agree that the world sucks: people are hurt, get sick, die. How does your personal belief address that?
5. Why do you believe what you believe?
6. Anything else you'd like to share about your beliefs?

And my answers:

1. Christian (non-denominational Protestant, I guess).
2. I'm not your stereotypical conservative (not conservative at all, actually). I don't froth over the mouth about issues like gay marriage, for example. I tend to believe that loving people is more important than making them follow "the rules."
3. Little ways: I go to church. I teach my kids to love Jesus. I read the Bible and pray most days. Big ways: I believe God called my wife and I here to Thailand to do what we do.
4. Short, short answer is that I think it's a combination of sin and free will. That is, God gave us life and the ability to do what we want with it, and a lot of us (all of us, really) have screwed it up. I have a slightly more in-depth answer here, if you're interested.
5. For years, I was Christian just because that's what I knew. I grew up in the church, a Christian family, everything. When I left home, I realized I had to decide for myself if this was my religion or just my parents'. Over the years since, I feel like God has proven himself to me in a number of ways, to the point where I trust him.
6. I really think the most important thing is to love God and love people, not beat people over the head with their sin (nor make laws so we can punish them for it, for that matter). Beyond that, there's still a lot I'm trying to work out for myself.

I know this is scary (it is for me), but I do really, really want to both share what I believe and know what you believe. We put on these internet personas that are really only part of who we are. Sometimes I want to know the whole person, you know?

Likewise, I understand if you need to protect your internet persona by NOT talking about this. That's okay too. Feel free to say as much or as little as you like.

Lurker Week

As I write this, I have 97 followers, almost the magic number 100,* but (a) I'm pretty sure that many people don't actually read this blog and, more importantly, (b) I hardly know any of you.

So I'm devoting my three posts this week to getting to know YOU -- in serious ways, funny ways, and maybe even potentially uncomfortable ways (don't worry, you won't have to play if you don't want to). While I'm exceedingly happy to hear from my regular commenters, I'd love LOVE to hear from folks who read but don't normally comment (commonly called lurkers). I swear, you'll never have to comment again if you don't want. But if you just let me know once this week that, yes, you're reading my blog, it'll make me all kinds of happy. Even more so if I get to learn a little bit about you.

So today it's question and answer time for you. Feel free to skip questions you don't have an answer for. Post your answers in the comments (I will too--shouldn't this go both ways after all?):

1. Where are you from?
2. Favorite genre to read?
3. Favorite genre to write (if you're into that sort of thing)?
4. Which Star Wars character would you be?
5. Best book you've read in the last 6 months? 
6. Gandalf the Grey stops in for a cup of tea. What do you talk about?
7. Name up to 5 favorite movies.
8. Your pirate crew/ninja clan/former employer has given you the Black Spot. What do you do about it?

* Though 100 is really only magic in base ten. 97 is actually better: a palindrome in octal, the beginning of the lowercase characters in ASCII, the number of characters that can be typed on a standard English keyboard, and the seventh happy prime. (And really, how can you go wrong with something called a "happy prime"?).

Kids to the Rescue! (or Adults are Stupid)

Stop me if you know this one. A group of spunky, intelligent kids gets mixed up in a plot to destroy/kidnap/steal/control the world/their parents/other kids/a ton of money/puppies/etc, and the adults they would normally rely on to solve problems like this are dead/captured/kidnapped/stupid and/or otherwise don't believe the kids.

It's the plot all children's fiction must rely upon, because children's fiction must have child (or teenage) protagonists in order for its target market to enjoy it. And those protagonists must somehow become involved in an otherwise adult plot, even though they're not (adults, that is). It's the plot of Spy Kids, Goonies, Parent Trap, and every single Home Alone movie.

It's not always bad, but it can be done badly. It all depends on why the kids have to save the world instead of their parents.

LESSER REASONS

1. Adults are too dumb, disinterested, or just plain grown up to believe the truth. The spunky kids, then, must deal with the problem on their own, often with the parents working against them. I'm sure kids love this trope, but I can't stand it. It's insulting, sure, but it's also unrealistic and teaches kids unreasonable amounts of disrespect (says the guy who's had to parent kids raised on this trope). Examples: Home Alone, Parent Trap, Lost Boys, Goonies.
2. Adults are incapacitated or otherwise out of the picture, and the spunky kids must fill their shoes, even though they're totally unqualified. It's even worse if qualified adults exist, but are too dumb, disinterested, etc. to get involved. Example: Spy Kids.
3. Child of prophecy. The adults cannot save the world because it is not their destiny--even though they're more qualified. Example: The Sword in the Stone; The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe; The Hobbit; Lord of the Rings; Mighty Morphin' Power Rangers.

Not all these reasons are inherently bad. Combined with one or more of the better reasons below, they can work quite well. (Also I should point out that I really like Lost Boys, Goonies, and pretty much any plot with a Chosen One (Power Rangers notwithstanding)).

BETTER REASONS

1. Supernatural or unnatural ability. The spunky kid is actually capable of something nobody else can do. Their ability just happens to be needed before they have a chance to grow into adulthood. Examples: Harry Potter, Ender's Game.
2. Adults are incapacitated or otherwise out of the picture, but qualified adults don't exist, and the kids manage to win in spite of their shortcomings. Examples: Eragon, Star Wars.
3. Adults cannot be involved, either because the rules of the conflict don't allow it, or because the spunky kids will fail if the adults know. Examples: Jumanji, Zathura, Adventures in Babysitting.

If you're writing kid's fiction, the main thing is to think about why this kid is the only one who can save the world. Why are they the most qualified, or the only available option? Is it because they can do something no one else can, or because all the adults in the story are useless?

Anyway, that's just my opinion. How do you feel about this trope? Where have you seen it done well? Done poorly?