<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Harlequin Horizons, a mug&#8217;s game</title>
	<atom:link href="http://graysonagency.com/blog/publishing/harlequin-horizons-a-mugs-game/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://graysonagency.com/blog/publishing/harlequin-horizons-a-mugs-game/</link>
	<description>Agents, Publishers, Business, and your book</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 08 Mar 2010 04:36:15 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Harlequin&#8217;s vanity press and your bottom line &#171; Red Plume Press</title>
		<link>http://graysonagency.com/blog/publishing/harlequin-horizons-a-mugs-game/comment-page-1/#comment-3163</link>
		<dc:creator>Harlequin&#8217;s vanity press and your bottom line &#171; Red Plume Press</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Feb 2010 18:00:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://graysonagency.com/blog/?p=50#comment-3163</guid>
		<description>[...] http://graysonagency.com/blog/publishing/harlequin-horizons-a-mugs-game/ [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] <a href="http://graysonagency.com/blog/publishing/harlequin-horizons-a-mugs-game/" rel="nofollow">http://graysonagency.com/blog/publishing/harlequin-horizons-a-mugs-game/</a> [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Darci</title>
		<link>http://graysonagency.com/blog/publishing/harlequin-horizons-a-mugs-game/comment-page-1/#comment-2660</link>
		<dc:creator>Darci</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Feb 2010 18:01:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://graysonagency.com/blog/?p=50#comment-2660</guid>
		<description>As an aspiring romance writer and diehard Harlequin reader, I heard through the publishing grapevine that DellArte&#039;s first release is a Christian women&#039;s fiction. It received excellent reviews. I&#039;ll believe it when I read it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As an aspiring romance writer and diehard Harlequin reader, I heard through the publishing grapevine that DellArte&#8217;s first release is a Christian women&#8217;s fiction. It received excellent reviews. I&#8217;ll believe it when I read it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ed</title>
		<link>http://graysonagency.com/blog/publishing/harlequin-horizons-a-mugs-game/comment-page-1/#comment-2114</link>
		<dc:creator>Ed</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Dec 2009 20:12:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://graysonagency.com/blog/?p=50#comment-2114</guid>
		<description>Hi SK:
Thanks for the comment. Your point is well made but omits several key issues in self-publishing. The successful self-publisher, such as you, must serve a market well so that buyers will order the book. I strongly suspect you are Selena Kitt (&lt;a href=&quot;http://selenakitt.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://selenakitt.com/&lt;/a&gt;), an author of erotica. As such, the mainstream publishers, distaste for the genre channels all interest to you. Nothing wrong with that, but the typical self-published author is not focused on an audience but on themselves and self-publishes to get attention. Self-publishing in various forms can work for authors with rare, highly focused, or topically driven content. Self-publishing a mystery, romance, or fantasy, is much harder because there&#039;s so much already. The vanity presses appeal to the impatience and frustrations of beginners with the sole goal of charging fees. Not a good thing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi SK:<br />
Thanks for the comment. Your point is well made but omits several key issues in self-publishing. The successful self-publisher, such as you, must serve a market well so that buyers will order the book. I strongly suspect you are Selena Kitt (<a href="http://selenakitt.com/" rel="nofollow">http://selenakitt.com/</a>), an author of erotica. As such, the mainstream publishers, distaste for the genre channels all interest to you. Nothing wrong with that, but the typical self-published author is not focused on an audience but on themselves and self-publishes to get attention. Self-publishing in various forms can work for authors with rare, highly focused, or topically driven content. Self-publishing a mystery, romance, or fantasy, is much harder because there&#8217;s so much already. The vanity presses appeal to the impatience and frustrations of beginners with the sole goal of charging fees. Not a good thing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SK</title>
		<link>http://graysonagency.com/blog/publishing/harlequin-horizons-a-mugs-game/comment-page-1/#comment-2105</link>
		<dc:creator>SK</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Dec 2009 22:08:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://graysonagency.com/blog/?p=50#comment-2105</guid>
		<description>You&#039;re a snob. 

The publishing industry as we know it is scared to death of what&#039;s happening with outfits like Smashwords and CreateSpace. An author CAN get published and distributed widely and actually make money. Without paying exorbitant amounts of money to folks like Harlequin. I made $25,000 last year off my self-published works alone. Not exactly the &quot;zero&quot; you claim as a self-pubbed author&#039;s profit. 

Harlequin is just ahead of the game in anticipating what&#039;s coming - really, what&#039;s already happening. They&#039;re trying to corner the market early and set a precedent. They&#039;re scared of self-pubbed authors taking - oh my god! - ALL of their profits!? They want a cut of that pie, as usual.

I imagine you, as an agent, don&#039;t like the idea of a self-pubbed author making money. They don&#039;t have to give 10% to you... or anyone else. 

Finally, the ARTIST is actually most if not ALL of the money their work merits. Finally. This isn&#039;t a crime - royalty paying publishers are the criminals. 

This is a revolution!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You&#8217;re a snob. </p>
<p>The publishing industry as we know it is scared to death of what&#8217;s happening with outfits like Smashwords and CreateSpace. An author CAN get published and distributed widely and actually make money. Without paying exorbitant amounts of money to folks like Harlequin. I made $25,000 last year off my self-published works alone. Not exactly the &#8220;zero&#8221; you claim as a self-pubbed author&#8217;s profit. </p>
<p>Harlequin is just ahead of the game in anticipating what&#8217;s coming &#8211; really, what&#8217;s already happening. They&#8217;re trying to corner the market early and set a precedent. They&#8217;re scared of self-pubbed authors taking &#8211; oh my god! &#8211; ALL of their profits!? They want a cut of that pie, as usual.</p>
<p>I imagine you, as an agent, don&#8217;t like the idea of a self-pubbed author making money. They don&#8217;t have to give 10% to you&#8230; or anyone else. </p>
<p>Finally, the ARTIST is actually most if not ALL of the money their work merits. Finally. This isn&#8217;t a crime &#8211; royalty paying publishers are the criminals. </p>
<p>This is a revolution!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Get the word out-vanity presses, assisted self pub, etc. &#171; Trivial Pursuits</title>
		<link>http://graysonagency.com/blog/publishing/harlequin-horizons-a-mugs-game/comment-page-1/#comment-2070</link>
		<dc:creator>Get the word out-vanity presses, assisted self pub, etc. &#171; Trivial Pursuits</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Dec 2009 15:48:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://graysonagency.com/blog/?p=50#comment-2070</guid>
		<description>[...] Harlequin Horizons, a mug&#8217;s game [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Harlequin Horizons, a mug&#8217;s game [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris</title>
		<link>http://graysonagency.com/blog/publishing/harlequin-horizons-a-mugs-game/comment-page-1/#comment-2001</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 11:41:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://graysonagency.com/blog/?p=50#comment-2001</guid>
		<description>These comments reflect many sentiments—apprehension, intolerance, concern, vision, and outrage. No doubt they are well-intentioned, yet it seems we may have lost the plot. Many of us are writers, published and unpublished, who have taken various paths to attain our goals. Others are agents, publishers, or interested individuals who help writers reach those goals in various ways.  All have a stake in the issue, yet in our haste to condemn a new concept we have forgotten that publishing, as with any other industry, must adapt.  Adaptation requires trying new things—stretching the boundaries of the old ways to include new methods. 

The publishing world is changing or, rather, change is being thrust upon it. It is becoming less exclusive and open to a wider field of participants—more writers, more diverse readers. The expanding field of e-books is leveling the playing field. Anyone can publish an e-book, price it low, and sell it cheap. There are more people able to publish than at any time in history.  The loss of exclusivity threatens some of us and encourages others. It means we must share the realm—this realm we have fought so hard to gain entrance to--and that is a concept many cannot accept. 
Why do we write? For notoriety? For money? For membership in an exclusive club? For the right to contend for a certain award? Or do we write because we love to share information, ideas, magical realms, tragic experiences, or compelling romances? Do we write because our readers long to escape into a good story—to take a journey only we can orchestrate? There are many ways to make money.  There’s only one way to provide good books, and that’s to write good books.

This is not an exclusive club existing for the benefit of its members. This is a passion shared by many, many people on both sides of the page. Some want to safeguard the ‘purity’ of literature by allowing only those favored few to provide it.  While that is understandable, the concept of what constitutes ‘literature’ has always been open to interpretation.  Granted, many indie books should not have been allowed outside the author’s basement, but some have been as good, and even superior to, books with a more recognizable logo on the spine.  A great book is a treasure regardless of how it reaches the readers’ hands. 
 
I admire any writer with the perseverance, patience, and dedication to break into the difficult arena of traditional publishing.  I also admire the independents with the courage to put their work out there anyway, to shoulder all the duties and responsibilities of promotion, editing, and design. To take all the risk.  Whether they produce the book themselves or sub-contract a subsidy publisher is completely, utterly irrelevant, though some folks just love the term ‘vanity publisher’, as it implies the author’s work is only worthy in his/her own mind.  How very narrow-minded of them.

I dabble in many creative fields; writing, illustration, songwriting and performance.   As such, I have occasion to find myself among writers, artists, and musicians. One might imagine they would be similar--they are all creative people--but it’s the writers who demand to see a pedigree before they will accept a fellow writer. Musicians are by far the most welcoming. They love to play together, to try new forms of music, to share what their fellow musicians are doing, and to cheer one another on. I don’t understand why that is, but I do know one thing: writers would do well to take a lesson from them, because the traditional model is in need of a makeover.

 The good news is that there are enough appreciative readers to go around. The bad books won’t survive. The good ones will. The deluded writers (those who don’t understand basic proofreading, let alone editing) will learn some hard lessons. If they are dedicated they will adapt. If not, they’ll fall by the wayside along with the ‘failed’ musicians and artists. At least they will have seen their work in print, which is enough reward for some.  It’s not our place to deny them the opportunity.

As I read these comments, many of which are filled with outrage on behalf of the poor, deluded, unworthy writers whose dreams will be hijacked for money, I cannot help but wonder whether some of the concern lies not for them, but for the ‘exclusive club’.  Writers have worked hard to attain that distinction and they deserve esteem, but we need to play together.  Yes, some indie authors are talentless, deluded, and hopeless. Others are willing to develop their talents, to polish their skills and manuscripts, to seek editorial help, and to produce a product of quality. The market is stacked against them yet they persevere, and their reasons for ‘going indie’ are their own.

Good books must be written, and good stories deserve to be shared.  I’m a self-taught guitar player, but the ‘real’ musicians will jam with me anyway. Each of us lends talent to the circle. Why can’t writers do the same?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>These comments reflect many sentiments—apprehension, intolerance, concern, vision, and outrage. No doubt they are well-intentioned, yet it seems we may have lost the plot. Many of us are writers, published and unpublished, who have taken various paths to attain our goals. Others are agents, publishers, or interested individuals who help writers reach those goals in various ways.  All have a stake in the issue, yet in our haste to condemn a new concept we have forgotten that publishing, as with any other industry, must adapt.  Adaptation requires trying new things—stretching the boundaries of the old ways to include new methods. </p>
<p>The publishing world is changing or, rather, change is being thrust upon it. It is becoming less exclusive and open to a wider field of participants—more writers, more diverse readers. The expanding field of e-books is leveling the playing field. Anyone can publish an e-book, price it low, and sell it cheap. There are more people able to publish than at any time in history.  The loss of exclusivity threatens some of us and encourages others. It means we must share the realm—this realm we have fought so hard to gain entrance to&#8211;and that is a concept many cannot accept.<br />
Why do we write? For notoriety? For money? For membership in an exclusive club? For the right to contend for a certain award? Or do we write because we love to share information, ideas, magical realms, tragic experiences, or compelling romances? Do we write because our readers long to escape into a good story—to take a journey only we can orchestrate? There are many ways to make money.  There’s only one way to provide good books, and that’s to write good books.</p>
<p>This is not an exclusive club existing for the benefit of its members. This is a passion shared by many, many people on both sides of the page. Some want to safeguard the ‘purity’ of literature by allowing only those favored few to provide it.  While that is understandable, the concept of what constitutes ‘literature’ has always been open to interpretation.  Granted, many indie books should not have been allowed outside the author’s basement, but some have been as good, and even superior to, books with a more recognizable logo on the spine.  A great book is a treasure regardless of how it reaches the readers’ hands. </p>
<p>I admire any writer with the perseverance, patience, and dedication to break into the difficult arena of traditional publishing.  I also admire the independents with the courage to put their work out there anyway, to shoulder all the duties and responsibilities of promotion, editing, and design. To take all the risk.  Whether they produce the book themselves or sub-contract a subsidy publisher is completely, utterly irrelevant, though some folks just love the term ‘vanity publisher’, as it implies the author’s work is only worthy in his/her own mind.  How very narrow-minded of them.</p>
<p>I dabble in many creative fields; writing, illustration, songwriting and performance.   As such, I have occasion to find myself among writers, artists, and musicians. One might imagine they would be similar&#8211;they are all creative people&#8211;but it’s the writers who demand to see a pedigree before they will accept a fellow writer. Musicians are by far the most welcoming. They love to play together, to try new forms of music, to share what their fellow musicians are doing, and to cheer one another on. I don’t understand why that is, but I do know one thing: writers would do well to take a lesson from them, because the traditional model is in need of a makeover.</p>
<p> The good news is that there are enough appreciative readers to go around. The bad books won’t survive. The good ones will. The deluded writers (those who don’t understand basic proofreading, let alone editing) will learn some hard lessons. If they are dedicated they will adapt. If not, they’ll fall by the wayside along with the ‘failed’ musicians and artists. At least they will have seen their work in print, which is enough reward for some.  It’s not our place to deny them the opportunity.</p>
<p>As I read these comments, many of which are filled with outrage on behalf of the poor, deluded, unworthy writers whose dreams will be hijacked for money, I cannot help but wonder whether some of the concern lies not for them, but for the ‘exclusive club’.  Writers have worked hard to attain that distinction and they deserve esteem, but we need to play together.  Yes, some indie authors are talentless, deluded, and hopeless. Others are willing to develop their talents, to polish their skills and manuscripts, to seek editorial help, and to produce a product of quality. The market is stacked against them yet they persevere, and their reasons for ‘going indie’ are their own.</p>
<p>Good books must be written, and good stories deserve to be shared.  I’m a self-taught guitar player, but the ‘real’ musicians will jam with me anyway. Each of us lends talent to the circle. Why can’t writers do the same?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike Johnson</title>
		<link>http://graysonagency.com/blog/publishing/harlequin-horizons-a-mugs-game/comment-page-1/#comment-1972</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike Johnson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Dec 2009 22:47:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://graysonagency.com/blog/?p=50#comment-1972</guid>
		<description>Before deciding to go with AuthorHouse -- 4 books ago -- I sought counsel from 4 other published authors.   They had been published traditionally, old-fashioned self-publishing (via Bookmasters) and POD.  One had been published both traditonally and vid POD.  Then I thought about my age -- 59 as I was working on my first book -- and asked myself: do I want to spend perhaps two years searching for an agent who might want to represent me and who then might take a year or two to connect with a publisher which then might take another year or more to get the book out?  Given my untamed Type-A personality and my goal of writing multiple books, the idea of being 65 or so before my first book was published was decidedly unappealing.  Back in the 1970s I spent 6 years as a senior editor at a national business magazine and so was reasonably confident in my editing skills.  Additionally my wife began her career as an editor.  My editorial backstop is a woman who is extremely skilled as both a copy editor and proofreader.  Feedback -- positive media reviews and a torrent of emails and snailmail -- from readers has me feeling positive re my decision to go with AuthorHouse.  Question: Do I ever wish that my books had been published traditonally?  Yes, but I&#039;ve no regrets about going the POD route.  Chief reason: feedback from readers that has served as a continuing dose of nourishment for the soul.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Before deciding to go with AuthorHouse &#8212; 4 books ago &#8212; I sought counsel from 4 other published authors.   They had been published traditionally, old-fashioned self-publishing (via Bookmasters) and POD.  One had been published both traditonally and vid POD.  Then I thought about my age &#8212; 59 as I was working on my first book &#8212; and asked myself: do I want to spend perhaps two years searching for an agent who might want to represent me and who then might take a year or two to connect with a publisher which then might take another year or more to get the book out?  Given my untamed Type-A personality and my goal of writing multiple books, the idea of being 65 or so before my first book was published was decidedly unappealing.  Back in the 1970s I spent 6 years as a senior editor at a national business magazine and so was reasonably confident in my editing skills.  Additionally my wife began her career as an editor.  My editorial backstop is a woman who is extremely skilled as both a copy editor and proofreader.  Feedback &#8212; positive media reviews and a torrent of emails and snailmail &#8212; from readers has me feeling positive re my decision to go with AuthorHouse.  Question: Do I ever wish that my books had been published traditonally?  Yes, but I&#8217;ve no regrets about going the POD route.  Chief reason: feedback from readers that has served as a continuing dose of nourishment for the soul.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ed</title>
		<link>http://graysonagency.com/blog/publishing/harlequin-horizons-a-mugs-game/comment-page-1/#comment-1970</link>
		<dc:creator>Ed</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Dec 2009 18:43:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://graysonagency.com/blog/?p=50#comment-1970</guid>
		<description>As Kathi just noted, an author with experience, and a business purpose can self-publish to self-satisfying results. The furor over these vanity presses is that they hijack the &quot;author&#039;s dreams&quot; for their own profits.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As Kathi just noted, an author with experience, and a business purpose can self-publish to self-satisfying results. The furor over these vanity presses is that they hijack the &#8220;author&#8217;s dreams&#8221; for their own profits.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ed</title>
		<link>http://graysonagency.com/blog/publishing/harlequin-horizons-a-mugs-game/comment-page-1/#comment-1969</link>
		<dc:creator>Ed</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Dec 2009 18:39:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://graysonagency.com/blog/?p=50#comment-1969</guid>
		<description>Thanks for sharing your experience here. The key to your success is your combination of: experience, mastery of several crafts and a well thought out business purpose for self-publishing. That can work.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for sharing your experience here. The key to your success is your combination of: experience, mastery of several crafts and a well thought out business purpose for self-publishing. That can work.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Vicky</title>
		<link>http://graysonagency.com/blog/publishing/harlequin-horizons-a-mugs-game/comment-page-1/#comment-1963</link>
		<dc:creator>Vicky</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Dec 2009 01:54:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://graysonagency.com/blog/?p=50#comment-1963</guid>
		<description>Interesting to read all the opinions here, most against the new deal with AuthorHouse and Harlequin. Without getting into all the gritty details of the deal, I&#039;d just ask everyone here to think about ridding your life of the &quot;I&#039;m better than another writer simply because I&#039;ve been traditionally published&quot; and replace it with the thought, &quot;I&#039;d like to support other writers, no matter where their book is published, because I know they have a dream just as I do.&quot;  We may take different roads to reach our destination, but it doesn&#039;t mean taking a certain road to a dream makes you a better writer, person, or mentor than the person who chose to take an alternate route.  Thanks for considering my input.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting to read all the opinions here, most against the new deal with AuthorHouse and Harlequin. Without getting into all the gritty details of the deal, I&#8217;d just ask everyone here to think about ridding your life of the &#8220;I&#8217;m better than another writer simply because I&#8217;ve been traditionally published&#8221; and replace it with the thought, &#8220;I&#8217;d like to support other writers, no matter where their book is published, because I know they have a dream just as I do.&#8221;  We may take different roads to reach our destination, but it doesn&#8217;t mean taking a certain road to a dream makes you a better writer, person, or mentor than the person who chose to take an alternate route.  Thanks for considering my input.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
