[Display site] Algonkian Author Salon

[Theo81]

Hi...I just checked out this site. Nice site. No it's not like this site.

Authonomy is a site where you can go on, like on here, ask for critiques, get a lot of references, etc. It's pretty clear in accessing your way around it.

To sum up, Author Salon is running essentially an online teaching system that works by forming peer groups with others on your level, advancing through those levels where larger portions of the manuscript are then brought under scrutiny (You start with about 10 pages, by the top level the critiques involve 50-100 pages), with the writers expected to improve their work through the process...if a work, its pitch and other elements are perfect in every way, this would reflect in the overwhelming response, and those people will obviously advance faster.

That's it in a nutshell.

And, to add to that, it doesn't seem to be in the interest of the people running this site, known to their own peers in the industry, to recommend novelists whose pitch and narrative hasn't reached a certain level. They are keen on seeing writers successfully get published, and believe their "system" works. The people on there...maybe 70 plus or minus, who've already gotten past the first level, have seen huge improvement in their works and pitches and it's enlightening seeing their posted critiques from their peers...and see the "system" utilized working for them.

I am a cynical auld harriden.
You are working on the basis that what AS really wants to do is help novelists, make them better and connect them with the people who can make their publishing dreams real.

Publish America's acceptance letter says something like "we are going to give this book the chance we think it deserves."

Now. I am not saying AS are scammers, or incompetents or anything of that nature - I'm saying that altruism is rarer than you'd think.

ETA - This is, at the end of the day, a business, one which is generating revenue (or intends to) from subscription fees. I'm sure everybody in the AS office will do a little dance every time somebody from the site lands a publishing deal, but I think it would be wrong the push the idea that it will happen *because* of the site until it happens *because* of the site. Am I explaining this clearly?

(still on the edit) If this works in the way it's intended to, that's fantastic because good critiquers are few and far between. The critique system may well provide the kind of framework which some new writers need at the pace they are able to use it, along with a support group.
The thing is, there have been many varieties on this idea and I've yet to see any of them work. What are they offering that I can't find (for free) either elsewhere, or with a bit of self-discipline?





There are plenty of anonymous users around here who can hook you up with publishers and agents and the like, and it would not be good for their reputations to recommend just anybody. So, they don't recommend anybody.
Only time will tell if AS manage to attract the calibre of authors they can go on to recommend to the industry. There's nothing to say they need to recommend anything at all. And, if they don't, I'm sure the planned site fees will help them keep going until they find somebody they *can* recommend. If they do. There is an element of chance in that because communities evolve in their own way, so, we'll just have to wait and see.

ETA How "hands-on" are the AS mods (or equivalent) in these critiques? Are they overseen by somebody who knows what they are talking about?

Again, I have no ulterior reason to "pitch" the site. I'm just an Absolute Writer user who was searching for something like this to hone my pitch and first novel. The site is very new, yet seems to be creating some sort of emotional response on this site, and from what I'm reading, others. Beyond the one writer on here who had a bad experience, I don't really understand what the fuss is about, why there seems to be a need to make comparatives of that site with this one and the rest.

I'm not emotional in the slightest. I have nothing invested in whether this site works or doesn't because it's not appropriate for me.

We're also trying to work out where it fits in the current industry and if this is the same useless time sink as those others. Hence the comparisons.

ETA My concern was prompted by your saying AS was better than AW for getting critique (which I'd put down as "might be probable by this time next year if the website continues to grow and establishes itself as a place to get critique") but - you haven't received any crits from AW. You made a direct comparison about something you, as far as I can tell, haven't used. However, as long as you are happy with the critiques you're getting, that's all that matters.

I just think writers should find what works for them without breaking the bank, and without putting their work at risk of internet "exposure".

SYW is not accessible by the Google search bots or by anybody who isn't logged in. Yes, people could create accounts and get your work that way, but that's true of everywhere. There's threads with advice of how to keep your work safe.


I'm happy if you're happy, and I hope you'll continue to update this thread with how you're getting on.

 

[James D. Macdonald]

Calmly, everyone.

 

[LillyPu]

a turn off

Author Salon offending

Actually, giving offense isn't intentional, it's just a matter of course with certain types of writers, the thin skinners. If you squirm angrily or feel attacked when a fellow writer or a professional tells you something about your writing or story you don't wish to hear, then you are certainly offended. If you react with rage and seek to smear or punish, then you have what we call Offended Writer Syndrome, or OWS for short. But our critique is based on specific rules and we keep it sane and polite. Critique from professionals can be firm, of course, but it's fair and well informed. Not everyone can handle that.

But how do the deliverers of OWS know they're right? How does a 'member' know when they're wrong? Who will tell them?

It rubs my skin the wrong way when half the interview is spent bad-mouthing a former member, who, to 'them' had thin skin.

And as far as comparing apples with oranges? I'd say Author Salon is a lemon compared with an MFA course.

I hope all who join get the much needed help they seek.

 

[LillyPu]

Sifting through your post, I get: You've had a falling out with a moderator. The administration ignores moderators asserting power over new people. What kind of power?

According to Author Salon's definition, are you suffering from Offended Writer Syndrome -- what they call OWS?

Heads up: Of course AS is in it for the money.

I've looked over the AS site and wondered about their qualifications to determine writing that 'works' or doesn't 'work' and I wonder about their 'entrance exam' of profile critiquing. Curious here, how have your critiques gone? How qualified do you feel critiquing others' work on that site? What genre do you write in? It's my understanding they put writers in genre groups for reciprocation?

Thanks for any clear insight you can offer to help others determine if they want to join.

 

[LillyPu]

I'm not really sure who is running the site and if they're actually oversee what their moderators are doing, and how it all shakes down in the end as I haven't been through the whole "process" yet. I'm simply assured by an administrator it will work and to take what I can work with from anyone, including these moderators, who are all humans and novelists like the rest of us are

Humans... as opposed to aliens?

So you don't know who runs the site? Is it a secret... as in anonymous?

I hope everything gets smoothed out for you. Sounds a bit too Nazi for my tastes. At least from what you've described.

 

[LindaJeanne]

First off never did I say ANYWHERE that getting a critique on AS is better than on AW

Even if it's not how you meant it: can you see how Theo81, in good faith, may have read the following as a direct comparison between the two in which AW came up short?

I've found already I've gotten a huge amount of insight on my novel and pitch that I haven't gotten at conferences or on websites like Absolute Write both from critiquing and being critiqued...

And once having inferred the direct comparison, been confused as to how someone who can't have had an AW critique yet could make a direct comparison?

It's frustrating to be misnunderstood, I know. But can you see why someone might respond to what seemed to be, from their reading, a contradiction in your statements?

 

[Theo81]

Fantasycreature, your posts are very long and quite confusing to read at times. It would really help me (and others, I'm sure) if you could try and be a bit clearer. Maybe bullet points?

What I'm definitely seeing is it seems there's a bunch of "moderators" some who are apparently on the "mast" which means they work for the site, but I'm seeing some of their backgrounds are working at agencies mentioned who are asking for "submissions". Again, the agencies are legit, but I notice two of these people on the mast are the most requested novels by these agencies, who are represented in the credits of some of the people working here....so, while it's applaudable some people got together to start a site, I'm wondering how many of these people are agent/editors who put together a site to pitch and develop their own work and how much interest they have in assisting those of us who aren't them.

Can you confirm if I've understood this correctly:

1)AS has a number of agencies listed whom they work with and will look to forward good work onto.

2)A number of AS moderators work for these agencies. If so, does it specify in what capacity? Are they agents or interns or what? (If you didn't know, AW has editors and agents posting here. Some openly (like Janet Reid), some anonymously.)

3)You suspect AS has been put together by agents and editors for the benefit of their own work.

This third point - when you say "own work", do you mean the work they represent? A good agent will not need to do this and is unlikely to have the time. Do you mean work they have written themselves? Offhand, I can't think of any agent-authors who rep themselves.

So I'm sort of thinking no indeed this site's objective by those who started it might be much deeper than the money someone hopes to make...it may be it's a site started by agent/editors who want to sell their own work and are using all their connections to push out their work and are bringing in a bunch of other writers to create a sort of appearance of excitement when their work shows up on all the lists of these agencies requesting work...as many of you know, requesting work based on a pitch is never an indication of the writing...in the end, an agent sees the actual writing and it might not cut it...because I do see some nice work by some of these moderators, I see some that's not exciting whatsoever.

I doubt that's what's happening if the agencies connected with AS are reputable. If you are a good agent, you don't *need* to do this.

Also, being in it for the money isn't a bad thing. It means they are taking their business seriously. A serious business is one which survives and is worth getting involved in. I'm always suspicious of anybody not in it for the money because they've nothing at stake.

I've not had an issue getting my work looked at from a pitch, it's getting an offer off it when I'm not sending it to agents looking for my kind of work...everyone says they like the characters, or like the premise and that it will "find a home" but it's not what they're looking for...maybe this is what everyone gets...but it's what's driven me to identify exactly what I have which was why I needed a "system" like this...however, the political controversy around it...well, I don't know if it's warranted or not, but when i see so many moderators and staff members pitching their written work, or working for the agencies that are requesting work, it's eye opening, but it is the sort of thing that might then pull over other agencies etc. and maybe that's how they're approaching it as they're a start up. If you've ever tried to start a serious website, it's hard even if it's a good idea, so from a practical viewpoint, it seems a smart way to start this site with these people coming together to do this...

Yes, it is what everybody gets. Any rejection which doesn't SPECIFICALLY mention something about the book (as in a name, a situation, etc) should be thought of as a form rejection. It doesn't mean a thing.





Is there anybody overseeing the critiques given to ensure people are giving good ones? Is there anybody there to tell you that a critique like "I didn't like that you don't know the MC's name right away. Start out introducing them and have them look in a mirror to show what they look like" isn't any good to you?

 

[falconesse]

Supposedly after we finish our critiques and get our own work reviewed, we do a final revision based on those critiques, and then are Judged by the AS stuff on those. They warn people it will take months to get through this first group...once you go to the second level you do it with a larger portion of the manuscript all over again...we start with 10 pages then go to 50-100

That, to me, seems extremely slow. A months-long wait to get 10 pages critiqued, then another months-long wait (I'd assume) to get the next 50-100 critiqued? Assuming say, three months for each, that's six months to get 1/8-1/4 of your book looked at.

Is there a ballpark on how long the process as a whole takes? If I'm doing the math right, that makes it sound like it could be a year before your book has been completely critiqued.

It's also troubling to me that you can't get to stage two unless the judges agree with your changes to the first 10 pages. What if that's not where your story actually starts, and you're spending months revising something that, later on, you realize is backstory or unnecessary? (For clarification on what I mean by that, see the Learn Writing with Uncle Jim thread, http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?p=82322#post82322 .)

Or, what if you're happy with the first 10 pages, and other beta/crit readers say they're fine, but the AS staff disagrees? Does that mean you can't move on unless you make changes that you, the author, might feel are wrong for your work?

 

[LillyPu]

I'm dense. So what people are critiquing on Author Salon are pitches? Or at least... at first? And NOT the first pages of your manuscript? But aren't 'pitches' face-to-face things you do at conferences? With agents, editors, or publishers--real working ones? I admit, I've never been to a conference and have never pitched anything other than a softball.

If anything, wouldn't it make more sense for queries or synopses to be critiqued, for those 'sending out'?

Now I'm really confused what AS is all about. And the folks on the 'mast' are in the industry, but 'displaying' and promoting their own work as aspiring writers? Baffling.

I still don't really think any agent or editor or publisher worth their salt will be interested in seeking out aspiring writers this way. Don't they have enough to do with all the submissions they get?

Anyway, thanks fantasycreature, for the info you've provided. I wish you good luck with it, and also with your film internship. Sounds like a great opportunity.

 

[Lyxdeslic]

Interesting. Don't know anything about AS, but in a personalized rejection I received from Veritas Literary they recommended I join Author Salon to help me flesh some things out with my MS.

Not sure what to think about either Veritas or AS after sifting through this thread.

FWIW.

Lyx

 

[James D. Macdonald]

On the plus side, with another 18 posts you can join SYW here.

And we have a whole lot of other areas full of good stuff. May I invite you to Learn Writing with Uncle Jim?

 

[Bufty]

And having waded through this thread all I can say as a potential critter is - thanks a million, James.

On the plus side, with another 18 posts you can join SYW here.

And we have a whole lot of other areas full of good stuff. May I invite you to Learn Writing with Uncle Jim?

 

[James D. Macdonald]

If you were spending 50+ hours a week there they should have been paying you.

 

[falconesse]

...the 50 plus hours a week I've been spending on that site...

That's one of the things that struck me as odd when I looked at the profile guidelines: Author Salon seems to put a lot of emphasis on filling out the profile, and expecting members to continuously update it to reflect the changes that come about from critiquing. It sounds like a lot of time spent writing about one's writing rather than improving writing that already exists.

Which means spending a lot of time tinkering, and not much time writing your next book.

(I'm seconding or thirding or eleventy-millionthing the Uncle Jim thread, by the way. So much excellent information in there.)

 

[saphirablue84]

If you were spening 50+ hours a week there they should have been paying you.

I agree with this. I've been told to spend as much time as I could spare from other parts of my life on my writing. But I have NEVER been required or asked to spend 50+ hours on something revolving around writing that wasn't actually improving my writing or writing its self. It just doesn't make sense to me.

 

[James D. Macdonald]

I'm going to quote myself from elsewhere:

To be a writer, you must write.
Thinking about writing is not writing. Talking about writing is not writing. Researching is not writing. Pre-writing exercises are not writing. Only writing is writing.

 

[Deleted member 42]

Yes but...say in a college courses, you do critiques of writers, poets, etc. in critical essays, you have creative classes you go in and listen to others, this improves your writing...it's the same deal here.

Well, no, actually it's not.

You pay for college classes, and in addition to, we hope, learning something, you receive college credit.

You receive that credit because your teachers have credentials and experience.

Author's Salon is at heart a display site.

And while I love AW, I don't get paid to write here.

So I do the stuff that pays (or will pay) first.

Write your first book. Start subbing it. But start on the next book asap.

Because a new book will sell more than any display site ever.

 

[Chazevelt]

Wow. I feel as if I've just witnessed the rise and fall of an empire.

>>>Chazevelt, also trying to hit that magical 50 posts mark.

 

[James D. Macdonald]

Guys, doing the Fifty Post Dash in one evening isn't cool. Move around a little. Engage. Get to know folks.

 

[BenPanced]

I don't have the time or interest in having to be qualified to get peer critique with 50 posts. I'm on Author salon and immediately started working with peers to get critiques. I am driven to get my work out there, not wait to get 50 posts. This isn't a game for me I have two finished novels and that sort of "rule" to me makes no sense.

All I'm saying.

 

[Deleted member 42]

All I'm saying.

Oh, I'll be watching. And counting the prepositional phrases as well as the posts.

 

[James D. Macdonald]

Oh, Ghod. Michael Neff.

There's already a thread, if not threads, about him and his empire of wank.

 

[James D. Macdonald]

Do you know what pitches are? Useless. Do you know what training people how to give pitches is? Useless.

But that's a discussion for another time and place.

 

[fantasycreature]

Do you know what pitches are? Useless. Do you know what training people how to give pitches is? Useless.

But that's a discussion for another time and place.

Alas if this were so, I say sadly, because it is eye opening publishers get upwards of thousands of such a year, and for unknown writers if they aren't able to put across the story/genre they don't get a toe in the door. The same if they have a great pitch but the work isn't coming across as the work the agent requests because the pitch indicates another sort of novel to what the pitch is....

In my case the first agents I submitted to specialized in books that weren't by their very nature their interest, yet my pitch sounded like they were because I was ignorant of how to put over my story for what it was as general fiction, not knowing it was general fiction. It is true these conferences don't match the actual work to the pitches people prepare, which ultimately sabotages any submission if an agent gets work that isn't resembling what they've been pitched. I personally experienced that.

And then of course, ultimately, no pitch gives an indication of the merits of the literary work. True. In any case, getting a request for a submission or a deal from a publisher is more likely going to get someone an agent than pitching the agents without that already in your pocket. Am I wrong? (oh...by the way...that IS the Algonkian "secret"! which I saw being discussed on another thread)

In any case I saw you have a thread on this on another thread or you can repost here thanks!

 

[Deleted member 42]

fantasycreature honestly, you'd do better to listen to James D. Macdonald.

He makes a living and has done for years writing books. Books people and libraries and bookstores buy.

Michael Neff doesn't.

Macdonald has a super thread called Learn Writing With Uncle Jim. Read all of it. Carefully. Read the second part too. Do the homework.

I note that not only do I like Macdonald's books, I've seen him teach, and he's very very good. That's coming from someone with years of experience teaching college writing and lit classes. I'm not a pedagogical pushover.