Smart Bitches, Trashy Books

But who is she? Why would we care unless she was:
1. a character in a book
2. a character we’ve heard of in real life.
3. in other words, someone we know or had heard of.

And this “blind item” thing. Is that a common way of putting it and I missed the whole new phrase? Did it used to be called gossip?

This internet thing and all its new new phrases. So perturbing to always be saying HUH?  That’s the biggest part that drives me itchy burny crazy.

I’m still fuming about the whole milkshake thing. I drink your milkshake! I missed it entirely. A whole massive phenom came and went, affected millions, became a catchphrase and was scorned as passe….all in a less than a month. And no one told me heads up. So embarrassing to be left behind wallowing in cultural ignorance.

Cripes, my whole cast was on that “I drink your milkshake” thing for three months solid. “Uh, guys? That… wasn’t in the script… ah, buggrit.” *throws script in air* And so forth.

As for that blind item, oh, tell me that was Laurell K. Hamilton… :-)

Personally I’m not a fan of the blind items, especially after reading the various shades of the whole armpit-camera story. (It sounds like gossip to me also.) However it is your website so if you keep posting them I’ll just ignore them/ go somewhere else.

Awww who doesn’t love a bit of gossip, and especially when it comes to bad behaviour in public - the person in question did it to themselves! I don’t mind them :)

Am sooooo wondering if this was a cerhtain ahuthohr.  Can’t you tell us who???

Security word: respect18.  Hahahahahaha!

I love gossip.

I like blind items.  I’m like that.

But mostly, while reading this one, I find myself wondering why the waitress just *stood* there.  The Author was definitely in the wrong but a muttered “I’ll be back when you’re ready” and a quick departure by the waitress would have been timely.

For whatever it’s worth, I prefer attribution with stories like this.  If an author misbehaved in public, in a manner that may reflect badly on other members of the romance writing community because of the conference setting, then I’d like to know that.  However, if it’s simply hints and innuendos, it comes across as mean-spirited gossip.

I’ll be honest: I enjoy gossip. It may be shallow, but it sure is human. People like drama, and I’m not going to condem it when I like to read about it too. However, I do allow that there are people who are much nicer than I am, and don’t find joy in this kind of thing. :)

As for the vajayjay-armpit of death, the truth came out very quickly. Perhaps there’s an equally reasonable explination for this one. Even so, glad I’m not the only who thought of LKH though…

Yeah, I’m betting money that was LKH. 

Huh, security word: became37.  Not yet, dammit!  *clings to early thirties*

This was the most entertaining thing of my morning by far. I love blind items for every occasion. Keep ‘em coming!

The first name that popped in my head regarding the above is Deborah MacGillvray, but that’s just because I’d like to blame everything on her after her hijinx.

Eh, color me curious.  I’m shallow.  I admit it.

“Gossip” is, after all, a form of intelligence gathering - and therefore valuable.

Okay, I may like gossip, but I’m a bit chary about believing it. I can think of any number of situations in which this author’s behavior may have been perfectly understandable. For example, suppose she just found out that someone she thought was a friend had been smearing her with blind items?

blind item readr—Blind items have been around since the Regency (and even earlier) as a means of circumventing strict (particularly British) libel laws.  By not giving a name, the publisher is able to claim that they were not speaking about a given person.  Blind items usually include details which, while not entirely unique to one person, usually indicate very clearly who is meant.  The New York Post (bastion of journalism that it is) runs such a column on Page Six at least once a week.

Although…...blind items from books would be fantastically amusing.  :)

I’m personally a fan of gossip—part of the reason I come here is for the behind-the-scenes talk about what authors are really like and what goes on in the publishing world.  Besides, gossip like this keeps people accountable for their actions in public and the way they treat those in the service industry.

Well, blind item as far as I understand is one that hasn’t been vetted for attribution so it’s insinuating by nature.  I have no problem with them. 

And I have to admit I thought of LKH at once. 

I have a lot of sympathy for the waitress.  They put up with a lot of crap for little money and don’t deserve to be treated like a piece of furniture by anyone.  Good on her companions for trying to maintain a little decency in the face of the author’s lack of discretion.

I, by the way, always drag the people I am mad at into a private area and give them a dressing down in a very low, vicious voice.  Much more effective.

Kind of sad - I thought of three different authors when I read this, and wondered if it might be one of them.
Conversely, had you written a blind item about an author who was funny, warm, helpful and open, who reportedly handed a fifty dollar tip to the waitress, my mind would be crowded with possibilities.
So we’re doing okay.  I don’t let a few bad-tempered, ill-mannered, full of themselves divas spoil my impression of romance authors.
I just avoid them like the plague and don’t buy their books.

So the phrase “blind item” has been around since the regency? Cripes.
Gossip or whatever it’s called has been around since the start of communication.

I expect “blind item info” is something men exchange and “gossip” is the word applied to the same sort of conversation among women. Seems like the standard sort of divide.

About the incident? I’m fascinated and have read it at least three times, looking for more hints. Definitely time for a life.

I, too, thought it might be LKH, but then reread it and an author who appears beyond her prime ((IMHO) with the initials AR was racing for the finish line in my brain. I have no clue if she even left the Delta area for Pitt for the event.

Gossip is gossip and as long as folks don’t take it as gospel, I’m good with it. And as we all saw in the Case of the Masquerading Vajayjay (Ooooh…I see a whole new line of Nancy Drew meets the Gossip Girls books here) - but I digress - In that instance, we all learned the truth of the matter quickly.

Perception is an interesting critter. Just read witness statements sometime. No two are ever the same and if they are, a good investigator will start looking very hard at those witnesses as possible suspects.

spaminator: degree45 - Just what I need, mega deodorant for when I write those McSteamy lurve scenes. (No intent to plagerize or infringe on copyright here…That nickname just makes me giggle.) (and I LURVE the edit feature to catch my typos!)

I expect “blind item info” is something men exchange and “gossip” is the word applied to the same sort of conversation among women.

What?  I’m on a celebrity blind-item mailing list (secret shame!) and most of the posters there are female.  Blind item just means you don’t use the person’s name, that’s all.

I’m with the contingent who believe we have a right to know because of how it reflects on all of us.

Also… honestly?  I vote with my credit card.  If you are a pratt I refuse to pay your utilities with my own hard earned cash.  Being a trophy wife is not picnic!  (That was a joke… I am at the library in a hoodie, jeans, and a baseball cap.  The only kind of trophy I might resemble is a bowling trophy.)

Anyway… LKH did come to mind.  I stopped buying her crap already, though.

This qualifies as “none of the bullshit” ??

Bleh, crap I don’t care about and time I’ll never get back.

Whatever, I like the conference gossip.  And really, for “not caring” about what you guys post, a lot of people are wasting their time commenting about how much they don’t care.

In any case, I immediately wondered if this had any relation to the woman who shouted, “DO YOU KNOW WHO I AM?” at her waitress at the Pittsburgh hotel.

If this is an appropriate time for general bitching, I don’t like the new subheading font.  It’s harder to read.  When I haven’t visited for a few days or so, I tend to skim the headlines and that kooky font is too twisty for my reading pleasure.

Well who knew about blind items!? Now I know and interestingly, Dangerous Liaisons (the book, not the film) is all written as a blind item. huh…

For the record, I like the blind items.

I thought LKH too, but somehow it didn’t seem in line. Wouldn’t Jon-boy have been the one to raise the stink, while she aloofly stood in the background? Anyway, verrrrrrrrrrry interested in who the author is….

moment17: I hope there are 17 more blind items!

Oooo, I love reading about misbehavior.  I’m too old to misbehave, so these stories give me a vicarious thrill.  Besides, even if I did misbehave, nobody would give a rat’s patooty—except maybe law enforcement, whose attention is far more unwelcome than bloggers’.

I’m with Shiloh—wading pool shallow.

However, DS, I am personally acquainted with five (count ‘em—5) EMTs—like less expensive paramedics—who quit being EMTs to work in the food service industry.  They all say they get more money for less flak.

Shows you what’s important in the good ol’ US of A today.

Can I second the motion with regard to the new curly font? I don’t like it. It’s hard to read.

I also don’t like having my email linked to my name. I used to just be able to post my blog’s website in order to leave a comment, and I preferred that. If a crazy takes exception to something I’ve said, it’s easier to deal with that garbage when they’ve only got my blog URL, not my personal email address. (Yes, I can blacklist their email account, but they can also put me on spam lists.)

Going by what people are say here about a handful of authors, I would say that what really happens when gossip like this comes up is that your past behavious is going to always hobble you.  Everyone assumes this must be the actions of certain authors who have already acted crazy/rude etc.  Whether they deserve to be tarred with this brush or not, their past actions make their reading audience automatically assume they are capable of future craziness. 

As far as the blind itmes go, in general they are not my most favoritest part of SBTB.  However that said, I ditto Darlene Marshall.  I do want to know when an author has crossed the line ie: Anne Rice’s tirade on Amazon. Of course, I won’t stop reading SBTB because the blind items are my favoritest thing in the whold wide world.  I’ll just skim them and then move on for cover snark. =)

I love gossip too!

A little ‘on dit’ adds an extra spice. Not using the names keeps them from being too vendetti.

But I was curious: is there a behavior level that will cause publishing folks to no longer want to work with you? Does online mishigas or real-life mishigas create situations where the trouble is more trouble than its worth? And doesn’t that denigrate the writing community on the whole?

I know I’ve spoken with more than a few editors and agents who admit to checking out blogs and online presences before they sign someone.  Partially because they want to know how someone conducts themselves in a public forum.  Obviously, not all editors/agents are like this, but I think we’d be surprised at how many are.  My own agent confessed to checking out my website and blog after I queried her and because of reading the excerpt I had up of the work I was querying and because of how I wrote on my blog, wound up requesting a full rather than just a partial, which is what she would’ve normally asked for.

I also remember sharing a conference meal with an editor who was absolutely fuming about blogs—on principle, she didn’t mind them, but she had an author who was more than six months late with a manuscript, claiming writer’s block and was blogging, every day about her writer’s block.  As the editor put it, “All those damned words on the screen—tens of thousands of them, when she could have been making progress, any progress, on the damned book she owes me.”

So it’s definitely a fine line to walk.  I tend to follow the rule of not saying anything publicly on my blog I’m not likely to say to someone’s face.  Because it will come back to haunt your ass.  DAM, anyone?

If we are talking about this last RT convention, I don’t think LKH was there. She’s not listed in the agenda for the booksigning and she certainly would have been if present.

LKH

This is part of the concern I have.  I’m not a fan of her recent novels, in fact, I stopped reading them about five books back.  I’ve snickered over some of her public behavior, well documented at her website.

But now I’ve seen this woman’s name come up repeatedly in this conversation as someone who would have been likely to be involved with this kind of fracas.  How easily this could slip over from the realm of idle conjecture to people saying “Yes, I read just the other day that she had an implosion in a restaurant and screamed at people!”

I used to be a broadcaster for a living, doing the news.  Part of the lesson I took away from that was, once you broadcast it, it’s very, very hard to go back and say “Oops!  I made a mistake!” and have people unhear what was said.

I’ll bet we continue hearing about these “blind items” from RT for some time.  It sounds like this conference was chock-full of little tid-bits to remember.  *smile*

Sarah didn’t say it was the RT conference, and I was assuming (a dangerous thing to do anyway, I suppose) it was not, otherwise LKH would never have come to mind in the first place.

Darlene, I can totally see where you are coming from. It is a short step from nameless author freaks out to LKH has culinary meltdown, all because of some speculation in the comments of a blog.

However, I think this also backs up what Barb was saying about online presence of authors. Because LKH has made a point of documenting her eccentricities for the world to see, she was one of the first people I though of when I read this blind item. I think you need to be careful about how you behave in public these days not only to avoid an embarrassing situation you participated in, but also to avoid this type of speculation.

his is part of the concern I have.  I’m not a fan of her recent novels, in fact, I stopped reading them about five books back.  I’ve snickered over some of her public behavior, well documented at her website.

But now I’ve seen this woman’s name come up repeatedly in this conversation as someone who would have been likely to be involved with this kind of fracas.  How easily this could slip over from the realm of idle conjecture to people saying “Yes, I read just the other day that she had an implosion in a restaurant and screamed at people!”

Exactly. I mean honestly, it’s the first name that popped into my head as well. But the bad part about these blind items is that if it’s about someone else entirely, not at all related to LKH, then it’s too bad. She’s already been painted with that brush. And reading her site (which I also no longer do) it does sound like her. But still. Here she is being accused of something she well might not have done.

I tried to read Lick of Frost. Got it from the library because I was not going to pay $$$ for it. Got about 10 pages in, thought “ugh, not again,” and took it back. I decided it’s not that it’s all sex, it’s that it’s all sex and it’s the exact same freaking sex scene over and over and over, with just a few male parts added, subtracted, or switched. I’ve read that scene now about, oh, 30 times. Done.

This from someone who read her first novels in a frenzy, one after the other. Not bitter me, no. Not at all.

When someone it simply acting out in public in a manner that is unacceptable and rude, I don’t think there is any reason not to simply name names.  That said…

I don’t mind blind items.  I am a sucker for delicious gossip.  And a well constructed blind item is an invitation to solve a puzzle.  It should have a few well placed (but not too obvious) words scattered amongst the narrative that the discerning reader would pick out, put together and voila! come up with the person in question.

In this one, for instance, the words “deviltry”, “brash”, and “fury” stand out for me.  This leads me to believe that the writer writes Paranormal romance.  However since Paranormal isn’t my cup of tea, I can’t even begin to guess.  I do read LKH, but since I’ve never thought of her as a romance novelist and the words that jumped out at me don’t seem to fit her stories, I never seriously considered her.

When we will this site go back to book reviews and ferrit hotties?

I’m not all fangirl about my favourite authors and doubt I could pick them out of a line up, never mind recognize their behaviours.

So book reviews and snark, please!

I’m with Seeley on this one. It smacks of Entertainment Tonight when there haven’t been any new Britney sightings…

I haven’t read all the comments yet, but I would rather know who is the author this time—she threw the very public tantrum, she can live with people knowing about it.

But I was curious: is there a behavior level that will cause publishing folks to no longer want to work with you? Does online mishigas or real-life mishigas create situations where the trouble is more trouble than its worth? And doesn’t that denigrate the writing community on the whole?

Funny you should ask.

I was in the restaurant at the time. And the F-bomb was dropped - very loudly - as said author left the room. The place came to a stand still.

As someone who couldn’t get through her book, I found the whole thing (besides terribly embarrasing for her companions and the waitress) delicious!

And no, not LKH

I’m not good at puzzles—someone, anyone, please stop the merciless teasing and put a name to go with the unbelievable behaviour.

Robin, while I can understand anyone having explosions in public over something that pretty much explodes in your face while you are in public, I wonder if it is completely stupid/illogical/naïve of me to think that if your scenario was close to the mark, then the author in question would

A) have calmed down eventually;
B) remembered her public tantrum and regretted it;
C) decided to come clean about it.

Mind you, I’m not asking for names and gory details, but something along the lines of “I made an ass of myself publicly at *date and place* due to some extremely distressing events of a personal nature. My apologies to all those who were subjected to the spectacle I made of myself. I hope it’ll never happen again.”

How crazy am I? Let me have it, please.

[spamfoiler: could69—-really? I could?????? :grin: ]

And doesn’t that denigrate the writing community on the whole?

I was thinking a little more on this last bit of your statement/question, Sarah—I don’t know about the writing community as a whole, but certainly I think a genre or sub-genre can be painted with a negative brush depending on the behavior of an author/authors.  I recall back in chick lit’s heyday, when it was the genre du jour and at its very height, you had books like Nanny Diaries and Bergdorf Blondes as prime examples of the genre—certainly, among the most publicized of the genre—and Emma McLaughlin and Nicola Kraus and Plum Sykes were getting huge press because of the nature of the books and their provenance and acting like absolute bints in the process.  And to top it off, the books weren’t all that good.  Of course, they’re laughing all the way to the bank, while anyone who wrote chick lit at the time had to be faced with “oh, you write those pink books.”

And of course, anything that’s negative or laughable about a genre, and the press and/or public is going to glom onto it immediately and it has the unfortunate tendency to become the standard for the genre as a whole, at least, for a period of time.  It’s exceedingly unfair and I hate it like burning, but it’s the nature of the beast.

I wouldn’t miss blind items if they stopped. I haven’t liked everthing at this site, but unsubstantiated rumours about teen crotch shots was the first time I had a truly negative reaction to the content.

I’ll also agree about the font and will also mention I also liked having comments pop in a separate window. My first thought on seeing the new site and that lead article on   eateries was that SBTB had undergone or was starting some unholy transformation as part of promoting their book or as a response to the higher profile they might have because of their part in some recent romance firestorms.

Mind you, I’m not asking for names and gory details, but something along the lines of “I made an ass of myself publicly at *date and place* due to some extremely distressing events of a personal nature. My apologies to all those who were subjected to the spectacle I made of myself. I hope it’ll never happen again.”

It wasn’t clear to me that the incident in question here (as opposed to *there*) was connected to any professional event or context, which to me changes its terms (both as gossip and in regard to implications).  If the author simply made a public ass of herself *as a private person* then I don’t think she owes a public apology at all, beyond those she directly affected like the waitress and those at her table.  If there was some professional context here, though, I’d be more inclined to see a public statement, a mea culpa of sorts, something that might win some points back.

I don’t know about the writing community as a whole, but certainly I think a genre or sub-genre can be painted with a negative brush depending on the behavior of an author/authors.

As a reader, I need a pretty convincing pattern of behavior from a wide variety of players to detect this kind of tarnish.  Like I think the public perception of epubs has been negatively affected by the repeated issues cropping up over a good amount of time.  But I don’t see any subgenre as characterized by particular author behavior.  I’d have to see repeated similar behaviors over a good while before I jumped to the macro level with these incidents.  That doesn’t mean I don’t unfairly lump authors together at times, but it’s not usually an issue of community behavior (it tends to run along the lines of viewpoint most often).

Hmmmm. Tammy? You couldn’t finish her book? As in she’s only got one?  Or maybe she’s only famous for one? 

I’d say Margaret Mitchell, but she’s dead.

AHA! It’s that Harper Lee! She’s causing scenes again?  (Happy Birthday to her, btw)

As a reader, I need a pretty convincing pattern of behavior from a wide variety of players to detect this kind of tarnish.

Robin, I think a lot of readers of a genre probably follow your line of reasoning.  I was thinking more of the general public, who might not be as familiar with an overall genre or sub-genre and when something attains the kind of mass-popularity that something like Nanny Diaries or Bergdorf Blondes did, tend to take their cues from what they’re seeing/hearing/reading in the media.  Which makes those battles we’re constantly fighting, to get the general public to take our genre seriously, that much more difficult.

Blind Item Readr: More than one book.

Robin: this event was in a public context. I think SB Sarah said it was at a “recent conference.”

I wonder, Barb, how much the public notices or takes note of this kind of stuff.  But honestly, most of the cranky stuff that happens insider the genre, industry, and community bugs me more because it smacks to me of an imbalance between taking things too seriously, and not taking other things seriously enough.  Like readers who write negative Amazon reviews are tracked down and harangued by some authors, but other authors who have been shown to be plagiarists are defended and continue to be published (and I know there are contrary examples of bad reader behavior, as well).  Sometimes it feels like we’re all down the rabbit hole, as either Alice or the Queen.

Robin: this event was in a public context. I think SB Sarah said it was at a “recent conference.”

Thanks, Tilly; it was unclear to me whether the incident occurred in the context of the conference or at a restaurant after hours, so to speak.

But honestly, most of the cranky stuff that happens insider the genre, industry, and community bugs me more because it smacks to me of an imbalance between taking things too seriously, and not taking other things seriously enough.

I meant to say more clearly that this stuff bugs me because of how it reflects *internally* more than *externally*—how I’m less worried about public perceptions than I am about how the genre and industry represents itself *to itself* in other words.

I thought LKH at first simply because her history of nasty behavior.  She hasn’t been kind and generous to her readership to say the least.  So seeing her lash out in public would not surprise me.

And really and truly an authors actions, in the real world AND in blogs, WILL AND CAN AND DO reflect on their sales and whether or not people will buy them.  Maybe not for every reader but for some it will either fuel the readership or cut it off.  For example I never ever ever ever read Nora Roberts.  I admired her as a writer and I also admired her attitude and poise.  I felt she really made being an author a classy job.  And her writing and her knowledge of her craft was reflected in her outward appearances and actions.  So that made me pick up a book or two.

The opposite is true for LKH.  I eagerly bought her books and when I had questions found an unresponsive abusive personality at the other end.  That made me unresponsive in buying her books.

It’s a symbiotic relationship.  What the author puts out, BEYOND the words, the author will get back.  And likewise for the reader.  Be nasty and you’ll get nastiness in return.

Argh!  Forgot to uncheck the “notify me of follow-up comments” box and came home to 48 emails.  Ouch.  Would be nice if the default on that was off instead of on.

Now that I’ve thought about this some more, I still want to know who it was, but my puppy has the runs and that’s taking up valuable googling time.  Just thought you all should know.

Oh crap! My last three blog posts on Myspace were:
Are sex toys your friends?
Sex and Sandwiches - Or what did you put in your mouth?
Booty Pops and Bottoms Up ...truth in advertising

Have I become more trouble than I’m worth before I even got a decent start?  At least only my Myspace friends can view them. And here I mistakenly thought I was “on” to something with my big jump in traffic. Now I’ll probably be on the Author’s Behaving Badly list. Oh well, I did aspire to make the “lists”. 

Brit - who has a headache now…thank you very much

Personally, I find these blind items rather boring.  I’m not “in the know” enough to have a clue about who these things refer to, so I don’t really care.  It reminds me of being in school when someone would say, “I’ve got a secret,” and then not tell you because it made them feel cool.  I know that’s not the intent here - but it still takes away my enjoyment from your site.

Plus, getting angry in a restaurant or doing junior high-ish stuff with a camera isn’t that interesting.

It reminds me of being in school when someone would say, “I’ve got a secret,” and then not tell you because it made them feel cool.

For me this feels kind of like high school too, except that it’s the part where all the popular girls run in a clique and the rest of us are deliberately excluded because we aren’t cool enough. In this case the clique is the industry and I’m the one who just loves reading books and reading stuff that talks about books.

C’est la vie, I hated high school because I wasn’t one of the “in” girls there either.

I’m a little ashamed to say I love Authors Behaving Badly stories, mostly because I am evil and like to point and laugh. That said, if I ever make an ass of myself, you’re all welcome to point and laugh heartily. And you can even include my name in your point-and-laugh post.

For me this feels kind of like high school too, except that it’s the part where all the popular girls run in a clique and the rest of us are deliberately excluded because we aren’t cool enough.

To me, there’s a crucial difference from high school, which is that there seems to be strong disagreement about who does and doesn’t constitute a clique.  For example, I think sometimes that some readers see some authors as a powerful “clique,” but those authors see the readers as the powerful clique.  In other words, those we see as “inside” themselves feel outside (and not as powerful as they are ascribed to be) and vice versa.  It’s a very interesting dynamic, and sometimes really frustrating.

To be clear, I wasn’t talking about the blogosphere itself, but about blind items to do with the industry specifically. I do think it’s an interesting dynamic. And I think it’s very, very cool that overall almost all authors are fun, interesting, and gracious, willing to give of their time on these and other boards.

I have had more fun and laughed more since discovering SBTB than I have in years.

I also love gossip.  Many of the items fly right past me regarding who and why, but it’s almost always entertaining, and it’s always good fodder for my own fiction.  Also, it’s useful as filler for between-review and between-really-interesting-commentary items.  It’s nice to see the site being updated daily, even if not every entry blows my skirts up.

And it’s nice to be reassured that I’m not the only one surrounded by ass-headed children masquerading as adults.

So, keep it coming.

A day without Britney on the tabloid covers makes the angels cry.

I don’t know why, but I keep thinking J. R. Ward.  I know her sailorish vocabulary rivals mine.  Of course, it’s been a while since she bought me a beer, so I’m not familiar with her recent behavioral quirks.

Heh.

I wonder, Barb, how much the public notices or takes note of this kind of stuff.

Well, I guess the obvious answer to that is they see what’s readily available and they follow what appears to be populist convention without question.  It’s variations on a theme of the Oprah effect, is how I tend to think of it.  How many people, within context, would have known of James Frey if she hadn’t chosen him as her book club selection? Or would have even liked the book, if she hadn’t raved about it?  And if the book hadn’t achieved such cult of personality status, prompting even more reviews and interviews and public exposure, etc. would the Smoking Gun have been prompted to dig a little deeper into this guy’s background and story?

Then… and this is where things get interesting, to me.  After it was exposed that he was a class-A bullshitter, the fact that Oprah defended him, kept a lot of people on his side, until she then turned on him like a rabid pit bull because her own public profile was suffering somewhat.

During all of this, I saw very little in the way of individuals forming their own opinions of Frey and his work, but rather, a following of the masses.

Obviously, any Oprah example is an extreme, because she has a beyond remarkable influence over product popularity, but it was the best way I could think of to illustrate what I was trying to say.

But honestly, most of the cranky stuff that happens insider the genre, industry, and community bugs me more because it smacks to me of an imbalance between taking things too seriously, and not taking other things seriously enough.

Can’t argue with you there.  Makes me crazy, both as a writer and a reader.

A day without Britney on the tabloid covers makes the angels cry.

This reminds me of that joke from Kathy Griffith where she says that every pound Oprah gains is a gift from Jesus.

duh, I mean Kathy Griffin.

Then… and this is where things get interesting, to me.  After it was exposed that he was a class-A bullshitter, the fact that Oprah defended him, kept a lot of people on his side, until she then turned on him like a rabid pit bull because her own public profile was suffering somewhat.

Kind of like Miley Cyrus?

I understand what you’re saying, though.  I think that some of this is just inevitable, and that for every item like a tantrum-ing actor or author in the restaurant there’s an item like the Cassie Edwards copying—that is, if you do away with what some consider scurrilous gossip (not SAYING anything is scurrilous gossip, just saying that some people think some stuff is) you do away with the incidents that are of importance to discuss.  Of which the Frey thing is one, IMO, especially with the more current examples of publishers pushing fiction books as memoirs, sometimes consciously.  I mean, how do you decide what should and shouldn’t be discussed when some of these issues really need to be aired and debated?  God knows I wince at a lot of what I read online these days, but I don’t always know where to draw the line (although I personally dislike ad hominem attacks for sport).  And btw, I REALLY hated the way Oprah turned on Frey.

Yes, I love y’all but the Blind items about the conference seem a little stale now. (No issue with the teen crotch turned armpit incident as it was “of the moment”.) And I would dearly love more reviews. I don’t think Candy has mentioned any of Lisa Kleypas’ contemporaries and I thought the second one was really good (in comparison to her first) and you’ve never done Shanon Mckenna. Shame on you. She’s written some crazy ass books people and I’d love to know what you’d have to say about it. (The latest one is almost surreal—clit scratching of half-naked servers and child slave traders…just…wha?)

But but! I’m glad this post is here if only so I could get the link to the Wilder & Jacobs incident. How sad & hilarious. Wasn’t Jacobs the same author who came over here insisting that a lawsuit against a publisher is private business? LOL. Oh, dear. Romance publishing what are we to do with you?

I enjoy gossip in the short term, and it can certainly drive web traffic, but I think the gain is likely to be transient. From a business-blogging perspective, I think the cons probably outweigh the pros:

Pro: Gossip generates web traffic.

Con: Gossip is available at a lot of different places.

Con: Gossip generates an emotional response, and emotional responses can turn sour and bite you on the ass, to mix metaphors. Gleeful Reader on a day Author X is gossiped about becomes Irate Boycotter when Author Y gets her turn.

Con: Juicy gossip isn’t always available. If readers who want reviews and industry news fall away, traffic can really suffer when there’s no good gossip.

Con: I’m guessing that reviews and news generate more reciprocity in terms of blog promotion. If my book or site is mentioned, I’m more likely to link to SB, as are my friends and fans (assuming I get some of the latter). Whereas people who come for the gossip probably mostly come here and comment. I think that means i’s good for traffic but not so good for search-engine ranking.

Con: There are only so many bestselling authors. They’re the most visible and therefore the most likely to generate gossip tidbits. Pissed off fans could flame the pants off you and make everyone too uncomfortable to come by. Also, people might not be as motivated to advertise their books on a site if it generates bad feelings/is controversial. Traffic is validating, but ads are what generate da monies.

Anti-spam word: include54. I hope I didn’t list that many cons.

Kind of like Miley Cyrus?

*SNORT* 

Anything I’m liable to say about Miley is going to begin with “Suck it up, Buttercup.”  I mean, she was already on record as saying she loved the photograph and it she was thrilled it wasn’t skanky, now all of a sudden she’s embarrassed?  *pauses to throw flag* 

However, going back to things that are important to discuss—absolutely the Frey thing is important, especially in light of the recent events like Peggy Seltzer and Misha DeFonseca.  For me, as both reader and writer, it’s actually a really interesting topic to tackle, with respect to publishing as a business rather than the promotion of an art form, since in the case of both Frey and Seltzer, they had attempted to sell their books as fiction and it didn’t fly because it’s not what the publisher felt the public would want.  (Or in publisher speak, “I don’t know what to do with this” as a novel, but if it’s a memoir, they then have a platform. *rollingeyesforever*)

Yes, this is me being a geek—sorry.  *g*

And btw, I REALLY hated the way Oprah turned on Frey.

How it happened?  Absolutely.  The minute it became clear that the majority of the book was a fabrication, she should have slapped his wrist and issued an apology to her fans/readers of the Book Club choices.  But that whole phoning into Larry King and supporting the “essential truth” of the book?  WTF?  Come on, Oprah.  What was that about?

Of course, Nan Talese isn’t blameless here either, given that she says the incident hasn’t changed how she handles memoirs, which to me implies, she’d publish it again, given her druthers.

Honestly, it’s enough to make a girl weep some days.

I don’t care who it is- I love seeing and or hearing about people behaving assily and getting called on it. 

Blind item or not…

Count me among those who feel slightly excluded and would prefer to see names (I’m just so bad at riddles and would rather not have to speculate and
‘accuse/assume’ the wrong person). 

I am definitely one of those readers who will stop buying books when author behavior is not to my taste.  I stopped giving my hard earned cash to Coulter when she basically said that she didn’t give a rat’s ass about her romance readers, now that she was writing suspense, since they had already financed her million dollar mansion.  Not that much of a loss because her new stuff stinks anyway. 

I do regret Deborah Smith. I really liked her books, but after the stuff she wrote about Cassiegate and then some other opinions of hers I saw online, I’d never fork over any of my money to her ever again.

I’d stopped reading Crusie since I didn’t care much for the direction she was going in (slapstick ain’t my thing), but after seeing her blog and what she has to say there (in reaction to Cassiegate and in general), I won’t buy her again either.  I just don’t dig snobs and hypocrites.

I stopped reading Robert S Sawyer because reading his mailing list made me realize that I didn’t care for his attitudes at all.

I love interacting with authors, but on occasion I wish I’d never found the interwebs, since I obviously cannot separate the author from the work and have had to ‘give up’ some books I would most likely have enjoyed hugely if the author behavior hadn’t gotten in the way.

Conversely for me that doesn’t work the other way. :)  I won’t like a book just because I like the author… which does seem kinda unfair… grin

Don’t know if there are many folks like me or not, but considering that once upon a time I used to buy all these authors new upon release in pb or HC, there is at least a little impact.

I’m ambivalent about these Blind Items. They’re fun, juicy gossip… and I do enjoy me some of that.

But I will echo sentiments expressed earlier in the comments: If everyone jumps to the conclusion that it’s Person A, and really, it’s actually Person B (or C, D, E, F, G, etc)... it could end up being unfairly damaging to Person A’s reputation, depending on how far the (unaccurate) gossip spreads.

PS It’s not Ward.

Silver James - “the Case of the Masquerading Vajayjay (Ooooh…I see a whole new line of Nancy Drew meets the Gossip Girls books here)”

Oh lordy, I just about died of the giggles!

I’m so-so on the gossip/blind items issue. I enjoy a little, but if I read too much I start to feel a bit squicky, not to mention that I never know who the heck y’all are talking about. I lift my rock and go “Wha—Huh?”

I never could keep up with the here and now in the world of gossip. *Sighs*

What I do love about the blind items on this site are not so much the gossipy bits themselves, but the discussions they generate. This is the only site where I often enjoy reading all the comments just as much as the blog posts because of the insightful, intelligent, and often downright hysterical input from everyone else. So even if I don’t pass the “Wha—Huh?” part of the post, I enjoy reading the ensuing discussions.

I don’t know who the heck the actual post was about, but the comments from all the authors here are a good indicator of how well other professionals in the industry conduct themselves. It just kinda negates the bad behavior of the other, in my opinion.

So thanks y’all. :)

To Tilly W: If it’s not Ward and it’s not LKH, is it an author who has previously behaved badly, or is it someone we wouldn’t automatically think of?

Well, I’m with Growlycub. I have definitely stopped buying books by some authors that have ticked me off by their behavior ( Dailey, Coulter, LKH come to mind right off).
And while I think it’s fun to speculate ( in my mind- not out loud) who could have been so…well… crass, I can see the reasoning in not making that name public.
I mean- perhaps something personally tragic happened right before dinner- and she just lost control? ( yes, I know- I’m a optimist!). 
What she needs is for a friend to sit her down in PRIVATE and explain to her that her behavior is not beneficial for her career. ‘Cause if it does get out who she is?

NOT.GOOD.AT.ALL.

SarahT, I don’t think this particular author’s books have ever been reviewed on this site, or even mentioned here, except maybe in passing.

I love blind items.

I’m also sitting on one that nobody will care about, but I know it. ;-)

-S

So far I have not felt that the blind items are too much on this site.  They are, to my mind, part and parcel of the romance “community” thing that we love, and love to snark!  Tag ‘em so those who aren’t interested can skip them, sure, but don’t censor yourselves or your blog.

Does anyone else think Miley Cyrus is way older than fifteen in real life?  I think they forged her birth certificate or something.

Ok, on topic:  I, too, like items on people behaving badly because there’s a little part of me that says: Hey, if you’re rude and inappropriate, you deserve public censure, because that’s how society works (peer pressure, woot woot!  It’s good for more than just pushing high schoolers into damaging behavior).

On the other hand, I too dislike the fact that if you aren’t up with Every. Tiny. Detail. of the romance authors’ world and blogosphere (this is really the only romance blog I read, I just can’t keep up with all of my favorite authors) you’re left totally clueless as to what’s going on.  It does remind me of high school, when everyone’s talking about the weekend party you didn’t get invited to (or your parents wouldn’t allow you to attend) and when you ask for more details you get told, “Oh, I shouldn’t gossip. Tee hee!”  So only the “in” kids really “get” the funny part of the joke.

I’d also like more discretion as to what is, and isn’t, considered worthy as a blind-item.  The vagina debacle?  That was pretty funny, because it was clearly an outlandish, out-there story. It doesn’t need names to be funny.  It’s something you don’t encounter in daily life, and even if it was true, not seriously damaging to a girls’ reputation in the long run.  And honestly, in five years, would anyone even remember the girl who took pictures of her nethers on another girls’ camera, or would it be chalked up to the vanity of youth and forgotten altogether? 

This story, however, is not so unusual or unique.  If it’s really meant to hold an author accountable for their actions - great, fine.  But again, we aren’t really given enough information to form a solid hypothesis as to the identity of the author, so the chances are they will slide by unchecked while another, undeserving author, gets saddled with the blame.  Further, if you want to call attention to bad behavior, wouldn’t that be better achieved with a column about “authors behaving badly” where it is made clear who the author was, what they are accused of, and where said author is given a chance for rebuttal? 

As for whether or not audiences will pay heed?  I don’t know, some will, but maybe not enough to effect the bottom line. I once went with my brothers to a book signing for an extremely prominent fantasy writer.  We were in line when the person in front of us gushed, “I love your XYZ series.  Shaneria was my favorite character!”  The author stops signing, looks up, and says in a scornful voice, “The character’s name is actually SHAH-NAH-REE-AH and if you can’t say it correctly, I doubt your claim that you truly love my books.” (details changed because of my poor memory - I don’t want to falsely accuse someone)  My brothers left the line immediately, putting their books back.  But more people stayed in line, effectively condoning the author for being a rude jerk.

Ahh!  I hate that I’m even bothering to ask this, but what has LKH done in the past?

I too am someone who is totally out of the industry loop, so I know jack all unless it’s a major headlining story on CNN International (which pretty much just limits it to JK Rowling, really).  I’m intrigued by hearing gossip, but I don’t want to be.  Can’t we just have more HaBOs and cover snark?  I like those posts a lot.

Writers are people.  I went to Robin McKinney’s website. I was shocked by her bad tempered rant. Included in her gripes was the failure of people to address her by married name in their emails. McKinney isn’t her married name. As a woman who never changed her name and who gets called by her husband’s last name, I cut people slack. How should they know how you want to be addressed unless you politely inform them. Did I think the rant reflect badly on McKinney. Yes. Do I still read McKinney? Hell, yes. She is a great writer.

Why did she rant????? Who knows? Maybe ranting made her feel better. Maybe life was a little overwhelming. When my sister was dying from a brain tumor, I had a meltdown myself. Not very adult of me, I admit. But honestly, people do have breaking points. 

I don’t read the Anita Blake stories, because I hated NIC. I still read the Meredith Gentry series.  The frustrating thing about LKH rants on her site is her failure to accept constructive criticism. 

Bottom line isn’t it enough that a writer provide me with a good read. Must I require all writers to adhere to a certain standard of conduct. Of course, if you are a new author, I would recommend being nice. I have often bought a book because I found the author to be charming online.

Jane said…
A day without Britney on the tabloid covers makes the angels cry.

*snort*... Beautiful… it Brought tears to my eyes… just beautiful.

I was raised on blind items. Not quite Regency era but Louella Parsons and Ed Sullivan columns where often discussed by my mom and her friends so I think they’re often fun to read. They become less then fun when innocent people are named—in print—when they are not even a part of the stupid behavior, so it’s a warning to me to “be careful who you harm” sort of reaction before I post a response.

If some silly fans want to sit at a table with a mouthy bitch who needs to learn some manners then they deserve what they get with her behavior. And if they buy her books… it’s their problem, not mine. 

I suppose, if I were to think about it, the authors in the Romance community are the same as the people in every community… some good, some not so good, some nasty,  some so sweet you could pinch their cheeks. I don’t care. Write the books, make me want to buy your next book.

Yes, I’ll read about how Nora decorates her bedroom (OH please don’t write that) or what J.R. Ward wears to the signings (black) or if Amanda Quick has a multiple name disorder (yes) but I’ll be wondering why they aren’t writing the books… because in the reader’s community where I reside VERY happily ... it’s all about us. We want to read. 

submit word: four98… hmmmm, I doubt I’m up to it.

I’m not a big fan of gossip, but I will listen to an interesting story. I’ve met LKH a couple of times, and she’s always been pleasant, but I don’t know her public personna.

I think it’s unfair to name or allude to any individual without solid facts. It’s just not playing nice to throw around anyone’s name, like LKH if it’s just a guess. Some initials immediately popped into my mind, but I’d be hurting a person’s reputation if it’s not her. I wouldn’t say, though, regardless.

My word is house94.  I think today I don’t feel like leaving it. A nap sounds better.

I’m on the burny, itchy side of the debate.

Blind items seem too close to flaming someone and signing yourself ‘anon’  - having the fun of the kerfuffle, without having to accept responsibility for the accuracy of the piece.

If you feel it’s worth reporting, I’d include a name.

I don’t let a few bad-tempered, ill-mannered, full of themselves divas spoil my impression of romance authors.
I just avoid them like the plague and don’t buy their books.

Ah. But what if it’s someone whose books you like?

Not condoning public tantrums but don’t you think all the smiling giggly chocolate-y generic niceness does us as much damage as blatant bad behavior? After all, Jane Austen said nasty things, Charles Dickens was an adulterer and ... oh, I know someone out there had a pet haddock named Norman, but I just can’t remember who.

It’s all about the writing, folks. Isn’t it?

I like Authors Behaving Badly stories simply as a “Thou Shalt Not Go There No Matter How Big You THINK You Are”.

I have a rule: Rant in private, shine in public. I try very hard to hew to that rule no matter how tired or pissy I am. If I’m really cranky I go home and rant at the cat. She ignores me. That’s the sensible approach for such idiotic behavior.

Ah. But what if it’s someone whose books you like?

Then I do what I described above.  I decide that condoning the author’s behavior is not something I want to do albeit in some cases regretfully so.  But in most cases the enjoyment of the books is over once the author idiocy is revealed.

Some things are just too important and no, for me it’s about the whole package and not just about the writing.

Wow!  I’m assuming this happened at RT?  If so, I’m sooo not going…ever!

There is absolutely no excuse for being rude.  Ask Miss Manners and she will say the same.

Was this author drinking, perhaps?

Fewer blind items, more cover snark!  That’s my two cents.  :)

Best to look at the episode as Book Fodder. Write that scene into your next bestseller. Or the book you hope to be a bestseller. Then mentally thank the clueless author in your mind, but not in your acknowledgments. She would probably sue you.

The gossip from “the front line” was fun, but, this far after the event I feel it’s a little stale.

Not condoning public tantrums but don’t you think all the smiling giggly chocolate-y generic niceness does us as much damage as blatant bad behavior? After all, Jane Austen said nasty things, Charles Dickens was an adulterer and ...

Why does it have to be one or the other?  Writers are human and subject to bad hair days, if you will, but there has to be a modicum of self-awareness.  I know I’m snarky and have a temper that my mother loves to blame on my father although I suspect I come by it equally on both sides of the genetic fence.  However, again, I try to adhere to the dictum of if I wouldn’t say it to someone’s face, then I don’t say it in a public forum.  If it’s really bad and I still have to rant, I either email or call someone I trust implicitly or talk to the dogs.  They lick my face and then, how I can I continue to feel bad?

(Or as Jana does, the cat, who ignores me.)

Besides, the examples you cited, you have to put in historical context.  Would Jane be as well regarded had she been mean and snarky in the age of the Internet prior to becoming known as a world-famous author?  IJS…

Count me against. Blind items don’t work for me.

If there was a valid reason for it (i.e. if it was in the public’s interest), I wouldn’t care if the author was named; but the idea that we should instead engage in gossip, innuendo and speculation doesn’t sit well with me.

To be honest, I don’t think it reflects well on the blog, either. It’s like tabloid journalism; it infantalises (if that is a word) debate, incites and sensationalizes without solid facts or consideration. If you wanted to spark a debate about how a lack of professionalism might effect an author’s success, it wasn’t made at all clear in the body of the post.

Just my opinion! Maybe it has something to do with being on the ‘outside.’

And I second Arethusa: A McKenna review would be awesome. ‘Crazy ass’ doesn’t do her some of her work justice…

I LOVE gossip and reported misbehavior by important folks (or by folks who think they’re important), but I HATE blind items.

I’ll take my gossip straight, thankyouverymuch. If someone is being an ass, I’d like to know it instead of trying to guess who it might be. I also feel like it puts some onus on the gossip-er to be truthful about the gossip-ee.

Authors are very lucky in that they have to put extra effort into having their fans be aware of their behaviour, much less have that behaviour affect their audiences’ decision to buy them.  Most authors are essentially anonymous to me, and I kind of like it that way.

In contrast, Charlie Sheen and Lindsay Lohan have put out some stunningly good work as actors, but as people, I think I’d rather not have to ever come into contact with them.  I’m not even a fan, I don’t go looking for juicy tidbits on them; it’s delivered right into my eyeballs as I’m channel-surfing.  I can still enjoy their movies (most of the time, some of them suck monkey sphincter), because their art is separate from their behaviour.

With authors, of those whose bad behaviour I’m aware of, I didn’t really like their writing style anyway (e.g. Orson Scott Pompous and Wrongheaded Windbag Card) or their writing has moved out of my taste (Janet Daily, with whom I got bored long before the plagiarism thing came out).