PDA

View Full Version : Have you rec'd your Aug. RWR?



IHeartWriting
07-27-2006, 05:56 AM
I haven't rec'd mine yet and I was wondering whether they're sending them out late this month, or if mine was lost in the mail. Figured I'd get a quicker answer here than if I emailed RWA.

Thanks for the info!
Jennifer

jbayley
07-27-2006, 07:42 AM
I got mine! I'm blogging about it.

L.Jones
07-27-2006, 03:27 PM
Got mine

Kinda weird, too, to read things that begin by talking about being back from conference etc

annie jones (Sisterhood of the Queen Mamas - Steeple HIll, Dec 06)
Luanne Jones (Heathen Girls - MIRA, trade out now, paperback Jan 07)

IHeartWriting
07-27-2006, 03:41 PM
Thanks so much!

Off to email RWA...

Marlys
07-27-2006, 04:40 PM
I got mine, too. And was immediately inspired to write a Letter to the Editor. Sigh. I hoped the "definition of romance" was behind us by now...

jbayley
07-27-2006, 08:37 PM
Did anyone else do the business plan?

Stacia Kane
07-28-2006, 01:40 AM
I haven't got mine yet, but I blogged about it, too. Grrrr.

BarbaraSheridan
07-28-2006, 02:06 AM
I hoped the "definition of romance" was behind us by now...

Oh geeze Defining Romance was the big "to-do" when I left RWA a couple years ago. What are they going on about now?

Sonarbabe
07-28-2006, 02:44 AM
Just got mine today. Haven't read it yet, but I think I'm going to have to do so now. :gone:

Sassenach
07-28-2006, 03:18 AM
I haven't received mine, but heard about that on one of the listservs. Soon we're going to need "red" and "blue" chapters!

Marlys
07-28-2006, 03:46 AM
I hoped the "definition of romance" was behind us by now...

Oh geeze Defining Romance was the big "to-do" when I left RWA a couple years ago. What are they going on about now?
Not "they" so much as "she"--there's a long letter to the editor about how if you open the definition of romance to any two people, next thing you know you'll be letting in the pedophiles. :rolleyes:

As a writer of gay romance, I took exception to that, and sent off a response. I'll be blogging about it soon as well.

(I should make it very clear that despite living in a red state, my home chapter has welcomed me with open arms.)

veinglory
07-28-2006, 03:51 AM
Given that this issue has not done the RWA any favors in the past they might have avoided stepping in it again. Just because a letter is sent in doesn't mean it has to be printed.

dragonjax
07-28-2006, 06:34 AM
Haven't cracked mine open yet...

BarbaraSheridan
07-28-2006, 07:48 AM
Not "they" so much as "she"--there's a long letter to the editor about how if you open the definition of romance to any two people, next thing you know you'll be letting in the pedophiles. :rolleyes:

As a writer of gay romance, I took exception to that, and sent off a response. I'll be blogging about it soon as well.

Oh for heaven's sake.

With nonsense like this I'm glad I haven't had the extra cash to renew since I started writing again. However the lure of being a rabble rouser to support we (us?) clearly unwanted mansmex writers is making me consider that rejoining.

If one of you has time could you PM me the criteria for beng in PAN? I wonder if I still qualify or if there's a time limit to qualifying books.

Thanks.

Marlys
07-28-2006, 04:24 PM
If one of you has time could you PM me the criteria for beng in PAN? I wonder if I still qualify or if there's a time limit to qualifying books.

Thanks.There's no time limit. You just have to have sold a romance to an approved publisher. Exact details are on their way via PM.

Marlys
07-28-2006, 07:34 PM
If anyone's interested, I blogged (http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog&pop=1&ping=1&indicate=1) about this woman who claims people like me belong to "fringe groups trying to impose their standards on the rest of us." Uh, pot...kettle.

(P.S.--anyone else having trouble with MySpace today? It let me post my blog, but when I try to get to my regular page, it says my account has been deleted. Hoping it's just a glitch...)

Robin Bayne
07-28-2006, 09:15 PM
I write Christian romance but fully support the rights of my fellow writers of erotica and romantica. I recall blogging about the big "signing" issue-- would I be upset to sit next to an erotica writer at a booksigning? Of course not. I've done it. I've signed my sweet romances next to a friend's vampire books. It shouldn't even be an issue.

I left RWA this past January over another issue, but this one drives me nuts too.

JulesJones
07-30-2006, 09:15 PM
Thanks for saying that, Inspiewriter. This stuff annoys me on two levels - because I write gay romance; and because I know a good many Christians who don't feel the need to impose their specific interpretation on other people in this way, and I don't like seeing my religion being presented as "all Christians want this banned". Whatever "this" may be, because as you point out, it's not just gay and erotic romance that is targetted by these attempts at censorship.

Sonarbabe
07-30-2006, 11:41 PM
Given that this issue has not done the RWA any favors in the past they might have avoided stepping in it again. Just because a letter is sent in doesn't mean it has to be printed.

My thoughts exactly, veinglory. I about spewed iced tea all over my RWR when I read that letter. I could not believe what I was seeing. I fully believe in everyone having their own opinion, but if the editors at RWR knew it was going to stir up trouble--and let's face it, they had to know that this would--they should have just filed it away.

*Sigh* But what do I know? I'm just a crazy woman who talks with squirrels, likes to write steamy romances and wishes people would leave well enough alone.

Marlys
07-30-2006, 11:55 PM
I fully believe in everyone having their own opinion, but if the editors at RWR knew it was going to stir up trouble--and let's face it, they had to know that this would--they should have just filed it away.
On the other hand, I've seen several comments online that people are writing their own letters to the editor in response--I know I did. It just might help in the long run if the RWR prints them all (or at least a good sample of them), so that it's firmly demonstrated that this woman's view is not the majority.

Plus, I hope, the responses will give members who are still on the fence other perspectives to think about, and may win them over.

Sonarbabe
07-30-2006, 11:59 PM
Good. That was quite possibly the most offensive letter I had ever read and to think it came from a fellow romance writer. I think that's what burned my britches the most. I hope they do print your letter and if they do, let us know--me especially!!!!--so we can all do the snoopy dance.

JanDarby
07-31-2006, 01:41 AM
Just please remember that one letter does not an entire organization make. There are a lot of good folks in RWA, a lot who are appalled by this letter, a lot who are bombarding the magazine with their own rebuttal letters. It's also highly unlikely, given the overall antagonism last time, that the "one man, one woman" thing is going anywhere official. The group as a whole does not support any such definition.

And, just as an aside, please don't be too quick to assume that the magazine or anyone official in the organization is supportive of this letter-writer's position. The organization has to be careful, for legal reasons, not to censor its members when they write letters, especially on touchy socio-political issues, and as long as the letter is not libelous, the editor may have felt obligated to run the letter.

I don't have any inside information on this, and I'm not giving a legal opinion, but I'm just suggesting that we need to keep an open mind to the possibility that there may be legal reasons for a non-profit organization (which has to be careful not to be advocating a political or religious stance that censors the opposing view, or possibly risk losing its non-profit status) to run most letters, as long as they're not libelous.

JD, who is NOT endorsing anything in the letter, whatsoever, and who finds it offensive herself, but who also acknowledges the right of the person to say it, no matter how offensive and stupid it is.

Sonarbabe
07-31-2006, 03:38 AM
No, I understand what you're saying, Jan and I see your point, but in this day in age, it just strikes me as completely small minded. 50 years ago, you never would have seen erotica, gay/lesbian/bi-sexual, etc type of romances on the market. Most of them were sweet or they were the "bodice rippers". We have come such a long way in that time. We've embraced that changed and so have our readers. I understand that RWR may neither agree or disagree with that woman's letter, but they still had to know that their would be dozens if not hundreds of letters of rebuttal. I personally write my stories based on a man and a woman, but you know what? That's because that's what I know. All I know is that it disturbs me as a mother of two young children and a friend to several amazing homosexual friends to have that comparison made.

Marlys
09-25-2006, 12:16 AM
Good. That was quite possibly the most offensive letter I had ever read and to think it came from a fellow romance writer. I think that's what burned my britches the most. I hope they do print your letter and if they do, let us know--me especially!!!!--so we can all do the snoopy dance.Start the Snoopy dancing! They printed my Letter to the Editor. And letters by Nora Roberts, Patricia Gaffney, Elaine Fox, Jenny Crusie...

To sum it up, there were 11 letters objecting to Butler's sentiments, and not one of support. The Board of Directors also chimed in to remind people that they'd already decided, over a year ago, that "any definition of romance should be broad and inclusive."

I'm so happy that these members (including some of the greats) chose to speak up in favor of diversity and inclusion. Three cheers for the RWA! :Hug2:

Sonarbabe
09-25-2006, 01:09 AM
:snoopy: :snoopy: :snoopy: :snoopy: :snoopy: :snoopy: :snoopy: :snoopy: :snoopy: :snoopy: :snoopy:
You get an entire row of Snoopy dances for that one! Woo-hoo! I'm so glad! I can't wait to get my copy of the RWR so I can read that rebuttal. :D

JanDarby
09-25-2006, 02:29 AM
My RWR is always late for some reason, so I haven't read the current one yet, but I trust that the listed authors did what needed to be done. I hope this will set to rest the anxiety of any folks who might have thought the infamous letter represented the opinions of the majority of the group. I have been to a number of RWA and chapter conferences and met only really, really wonderful people through the organization.

JD

Stacia Kane
09-25-2006, 02:40 AM
Which issue is this? I assume October?

I still don't have September...I get them so late here!

Marlys
09-25-2006, 05:54 AM
Which issue is this? I assume October?

I still don't have September...I get them so late here!Sorry, I should have said: it is the October issue. I got mine this weekend.

I posted quotes from several of the letters on my blog (http://blog.myspace.com/mjpearson), if you all want to get a feel for them.

And Jan, I agree: all of the RWA members I've spoken to in person, and most of those I've been in correspondence with have been wonderful people.

Stacia Kane
09-25-2006, 12:04 PM
Thanks, Marlys!