Okay Francis Bruno, kick me for getting involved in this. I should probably just stay out of it, since the last time I wrote on here and said I enjoyed the Algonkian conferences I was blasted and called a "sock puppet."
...
I suppose now everyone can bring on the name calling...
Mac has already said what I would have, but since I'm the one who said it, let me just explain. My point was that since you said you weren't coming back, there was little point in my taking the time to respond to your comments. Period. YOU called yourself a "dive-by" and said you would not be back. Sorry if I insulted you by repeating your own words back to you, or by deciding not to challenge or question your statements since you claimed you were not interested in being part of a dialogue. But to claim I "blasted" you with the line Mac quoted above is either disingenuous in the extreme, or shows you to be extremely sensitive.
For those who are interested---I was recently invited to speak at
Michael Neff's conference. (Which is named for a park in Virginia where the workshops were originally held, by the way)
I knew very little about him, and so searched for him and found this posting. Immediately I put out an all points bulletin to people I knew who were also invited to speak and/or people who would know him better. I said I was leery of him because of what I had read here. The responses I got from people I trust were vehement in his defense. So much so, that I felt terrible for having doubted him in the first place. (Hence this public note.)
Can you please show me one place in this thread where anyone has said anything negative about Mr. Neff's intelligence or accused him of scamming people, or of being untrustworthy? Just one, is fine.
I can show you lots of quotes where we've said the opposite. I can show you lots of quotes from myself personally saying "I'm sure he's very intelligent and sincere etc. etc.," and that "Not one person here believes the conferences aren't sincerely trying to help people or that the organizers aren't working hard for the attendees." (Those are both paraphrases, but I can find you the exact quotes easily.)
(By the way, the Algonkian name has already been discussed in detail in this thread, and the reason for it well-established.)
Here are the people who absolutely vouch for him, his work, his integrity and his conference:
Elizabeth Pomada and Laurie McLean of Larsen-Pomada Literary Agency and
Jane Friedman of F&W Publishers. I ended up apologizing to Michael for having doubted him, and am happy to be speaking at his conference taking place in Corte Madera, California, on July 31, 2011.
And here in this thread are people who have not questioned his integrity. So? I have lots and lots of industry professionals who can vouch for my integrity, too, as do all of the other posters in this thread.
Also
Red Hen Press which published Michael's book,
Year of the Rhinoceros, is indeed a legitimate press.
FFS. Where did I say it wasn't legitimate? Where did I make any sort of judgment about it at all, except to say that it requires writers to pay to submit (which is true) and that is not how commercial publishing works (which is also true)?
What have I learned from this? We clearly need to check not only what's being said about publishers, agents, conference organizers, etc. but then double check that the credentials of those who badmouth them and/or praise them also hold up to scrutiny.
Indeed. Would you like to check the credentials of those posting in this thread, who believe the Algonkian conferences are unnecessary and a waste of money in general?
(Forgive me if I leave some things out. I'm unfortunately not an expert in any of their careers, so I this is just off of the top of my head.)
There's me. Publishing with small presses since 2006 (nine novels). Six novels currently out with two different NY houses (not including HarperUK, Amber Poland, and Egmont Lyx Germany), with whom I've been working since 2008. Three more under contract. My agent works for one of the most highly-regarded agencies in NY. I'm happy to provide you a list of his other clients should you deem it necessary.
Hapi-Sofi is an acquiring editor for a NY house.
Priceless1 is the acquiring editor for a small independent publisher, much like the ones who've published your own books, Ms. Davis.
Medievalist has so many degrees they fall out all over the floor if you hold her upside down, including at least one Ph.D. In addition to her academic qualifications she's worked in and around commercial publishing in many different areas for about twenty years, if memory serves.
Old Hack has also worked in commercial publishing for about that long.
Jim Macdonald has been NY-published for so long I don't think anyone can remember a time when he wasn't. He's been an instructor at
Viable Paradise, among other places. I don't think there's a person in the writing community who doesn't regard him highly, and consider him an expert in commercial publishing (and publishing in general).
Ice Cream Empress has been working as a freelance editor for years (both independently and with NY publishers) and is a commercially published nonfiction author of some acclaim, if memory serves.
Sheryl Nantus is multipublished in fantasy with several other respected small presses.
Again, I may be leaving some things out; this is just from memory. And I may have left some commenters out, in which case feel free to jump in. I'm sure any of these people would be very happy to elaborate further should you feel their credentials prove them unworthy to express an opinion on the subject of preparing oneself for NY commercial publishing.
In fact, you should check
my credentials. I trust you will find them legitimate.
Thank you for your time,
Patricia V. Davis
editor-in-chief,
HS Radio e-magazine
author of the upcoming The Diva Doctrine:16 Universal Principles Every Woman Needs to Know (May 2011
Cedar Fort Press)
Of course they're legitimate. I see three non-fiction sales to some good small presses, a master's degree and a lot of work in teaching, and that you run an e-magazine and a webshow. You sound like a very busy lady, and I'm sure a talented and intelligent one. No one is disputing that, and I'm certainly not going to make disparaging comments about you or your credentials (the way you did with regards to us and ours, really, but I'll assume you didn't intend to belittle us all with your "check the credentials of those who badmouth them" comment).
In short, there's about a hundred years' worth of combined commercial publishing experience, from all different areas of the business, in this thread, all of which is saying that the Algonkian conferences are not going to give anyone a special edge towards being commercially published.
I'd like to welcome you to AW, Ms. Davis, and say I hope you stick around and join in some of our other discussions. As has been pointed out, this particular forum is for background checks, and often seems rather contentious; you won't find discussions like that elsewhere, and we're generally a fun, friendly bunch of people.
