Kate Rothwell posted some rather interesting reactions to the presence of bloggers and reviewers at the RWA this year. One author noted:
…that kind of bothered me at this conference. Stuff like [the costumed writers] and all the blog reviewers being there. It just started to feel like it was maybe turning into a fan conference rather than a professional organizations’ annual meeting.
I just think the two should be kept separate. You want to have a time for authors to meet the press (or reviewers)—like the librarians thing or the booksellers thing, great. But being a part of everything just didn’t seem appropriate to me. Like a conflict of interest. It’s our conference and a time for us to discuss our industry.
Conflict of interest was a rather interesting term to use, and I don’t think it’s accurate. Us bloggers (OK, I can speak only for Sarah and me specifically) went to the conference to a) report back on what goes on behind the scenes to the readers, and b) meet a whole bunch of people we’ve been interacting with on-line for ages, both authors and readers. I’m not sure what sort of conflict of interest there’d be in what we did, especially because all of us were pretty up-front about who we were and what we did. A lot of readers are curious about what goes on at Nationals, and they want to see it from the perspective of other readers, and that’s what we tried to provide. And to my mind, engaging the readers is a GOOD thing.
The authors-vs-reviewers divide is not a new one, but I really wish authors would see that we’re the biggest champions of the cause they could ever, ever have. Lookit, we love the books, and we love the genre. We love them SO MUCH, we’re willing to fly hundreds of miles to MOTHERFUCKING DALLAS in JULY just so we can observe and report on another aspect of the enterprise.
I can understand wanting to avoid turning the RWA into a circus, but despite my Ebil Plan to completely disrupt proceedings with my purple-streaked hair, my magnificent rack and my army of invisible midgets, things were pretty tame. Not even a single explosion, and certainly no limbs severed, nor any blood spilled. (Note to self: next time, more dismemberment, less re-enactment of silly Youtube videos for the benefit of people at the bar.)
And come, now: how many bloggers/reviewers were there vs. published and aspiring authors? Jane, Sarah, me, Sybil, Kristie, Wendy the Super Librarian and a couple of reps from AAR (I finally got to meet Anne Marble) were the ones I knew about; I doubt there were a whole lot more, because it’s a pretty small community. We’re a pretty small gang, folks, and unless you knew what to look for, we didn’t even register as a blip on the radar.
The overall impression I got from what was expressed on Kate’s blog was that the author wanted the conference to be more of a writers’ retreat than anything else. I know it feels like we’re invading a sort of safe haven, but based on the fact that the RWA allows non-members and associate members to join the conference, it’s a good bet that this isn’t what it was meant to be in the first place.
There was also a bit of a to-do about people like Marianne Mancusi dressing up like the characters for their Shomi books. I looked at the photo, and I honestly don’t see the big deal. The costumes look tarty and fun, and frankly, I want to steal those pink thigh-high stockings from Liz Maverick, because I have a similar-looking pair but they refuse to stay up. I wish I could grab the people who are worried by the cosplay, shake them gently and say “LIGHTEN UP. They’re having fun. A mini-skirt and flashing a bit of cleavage ain’t the end of the world, and we’re honestly not expecting this from everybody.”
We bitch quite a bit about how the genre is afraid of change, how much stagnancy there is, how we’re not drawing in the next generation of readers—but when somebody does something that will actively engage younger readers, that will help explode the myth that romance authors and readers are middle-aged housewives in terrycloth bathrobes and curlers in our hair, people throw up their hands, go “Lawksamercy!” and cluck worriedly. I know, I know, there’s a lot of anxiety regarding publicity and marketing, and the PR machine is indeed an ugly beast sometimes, especially for the authors who just want their books to speak for themselves without them having to put on any sort of a spectacle, but seriously: LIGHTEN UP.
*wants more pictures of Candy’s cleavage AND Candy in feather boa and/or funky cowboy hat some awesome editor gave her.*
I’m not sure which I would prefer: pix of Candy’s magnificent rack or Candy and Sarah dressed up like their Aiya vey! characters.
Congrats on the book deal, Candy 🙂
Vanity Press they name is alienist!
And it is not those drugs you took in college either.
EIEIO heheheheheh
Oh dear.
Candy, I hope you do succeed in saving the world with your book. But I’m not sure that addresses Nora Roberts’ point. Swanhats will still be swanhats. (It was a swanhat, right? Not a full-on demonic possession?)
I thought I addressed it in this comment:
And [Nora Roberts] has a point—I remember laughing in horrified amusement when I saw those pictures of Rebecca Brandewyne dolled up like her cover art, and Laurell K. Hamilton and her posse posing with pistols Anita Blake-stylee while wearing mom jeans. But there are costumes, and there are COSTUMES. Man Faye is one thing; Mancusi and Maverick having a bit of fun with short skirts and thigh highs is another. It’s all about knowing what looks stylish vs. what’s ludicrous, and in my opinion, Mancusi and Maverick stayed well within the bounds of good taste.
I’m not willing to issue a blanket condemnation of the costume thing. Sometimes it works. Sometimes it looks stupid. Personal judgement, y’all. Short skirts and thigh-highs at a signing are NOT the same thing as strapping a leftover prop from Swan Lake on your head.
Any reason we can’t be normal? Attractive, interesting, intelligent, blah blah blah? Must we feel we have to push ourselves into some out-of-the-box image—and let’s be honest—must we feel we must do that to get attention?
Looking normal is just fine, too—it is, in fact, the way most authors are, and I don’t think the less of any authors who don’t dress up. Eileen Dreyer, who was definitely one of my favorite people at the conference, confessed that she never wears make-up, and as somebody who almost never puts on the stuff, I just about cheered. I don’t think that if somebody wants to dress every now and again and have fun that it automatically constitutes rank unprofessionalism.
Here’s a question to ponder: whose version of normal are we talking about, anyway? What if somebody’s version of normal is a Chelsea, tattoos and hooker-red lipstick? Should authors who look like this be required to put on what would constitute a costume for them, then, for these conferences? Publishing is big business, and when networking and the like, there’s quite the pressure to look professional in a conventional sense, but as people have been pointing out, the words are the most important thing, no? I’m seeing a big push towards conforming to a certain type of appearance, a sort of IBM-ization of the wardrobe. Believe me, I cringe, too, at the over-the-top excesses of costume. But what about costumes that don’t especially go over that line? A big part of the reason why the Mancusi/Maverick costumes didn’t strike me as especially awful was because they reflected what I see myself (and a lot of my friends) wearing on a daily basis. They stood out in a sea of suits; they looked young, and sassy, and gorgeous. They looked like they were being themselves and having a whole lot of fun.
So, to break it down:
Swan on head: OW OW THE BURNING.
Looking bad-ass in a short skirt and knee-high boots: Yay.
It sucks that the media latches on to the sensationalistic and the silly as the representative image, but they’re there to make money, and they go for the most eye-catching images and movements. (If we romance readers think we’ve gotten the short end of the stick in terms of unfair media coverage, let’s talk to the feminists and Socialists some time, eh?) We can do our best to not provide them with fodder, but odds are high they’ll find something—and if it comes down to it, I’d rather have the occasional person parading around with dead bird roosting on her cranium if that’s what she REALLY wanted to do than pressuring everybody into a sort of sameness.
Complete side-note: I am so sad I never got to say hello to Anne Stuart. Ah well. I’ll have to stalk her at next year’s Nationals.
I wasn’t there, either, but god I love post-national deconstruction, so I just have to kick off my shoes and wade in.
Regarding upset over bloggers and reviewers – this I don’t get. We need bloggers, reviewers, booksellers and readers. This isn’t a writer’s retreat, it’s a professional convention, and as such, anyone involved in the business should be welcome. This blows my mind that anyone would think to have a problem with that. The luncheon chicken must not have been that bad this year if this is what people are thinking to complain about. Damn wow, that’s just stoopit.
As for the costumes… I’m torn. I’m not big on judging the marketing tactics of others. This business is insane, and what someone does in order to stand out is really between her and her God. Would I wear a big swan on my head for attention? Hell no. Not my style. Sherilyn Kenyon wants to wear a big swan, go ahead, babe. Life’s short. Do I think that being on the cover of the Dallas Morning News with a big swan on her head sold her some books? I tend to doubt it, but then what the hell do I know?
Now, Nora, I get it that you’re pretty much the romance poster girl, and so any time a romance writer does something questionable, you share in the raised eyebrow. That sucks, and it’s not fair, but the fact that you choose to present yourself professionally does all of us far more good than SK could ever do damage. I think you’re the best thing that ever happened to a romance writer wanting to be taken seriously, and god bless you. TIME took you seriously, and that was fabulous. So thank you for not being into swans, but baby, you don’t have to be.
The weight on my shoulders is considerably less. I choose to present myself professionally because that’s my style, and I couldn’t pull off costumes if I wanted to; even on Halloween, I dress up as me. Marianne and Liz are gorgeous and stylish and while I didn’t personally see the shortness of the skirts, my guess is that they looked great and were having fun, and I have no problem with that. I think the sweet spot lies somewhere between Anne Stuart’s feather boa (which I adore) and, you know, the big swan. I think there’s a line to ride between fun and patently ridiculous. Rule of thumb: If your gimmick is going to require six weeks in a neck brace afteward… maybe rethink.
I think the sweet spot lies somewhere between Anne Stuart’s feather boa (which I adore) and, you know, the big swan.
EXACTLY! Oh, man, you just summarized my many tedious paragraphs of argument in one neat sentence. It’s almost as if you wrote for a living, or something.
Rule of thumb: If your gimmick is going to require six weeks in a neck brace afteward… maybe rethink.
HahahahaYES. That was gorgeous. Can we call it Lani’s Law?
Liz says: “You know you’ve made it when your thighs are being discussed on the Internet.†Heh.
Okay, seriously. The entire point of our marketing campaign for our books is this: We’re the Rebels of Romance and we’re going to give you a kind of romance novel you’ve never seen before. We want to expand the fan base for the romance genre and attract readers (young and old) who have never before been willing to give romance novels a chance. We want to show that romance novels can be cool and relevant to an entirely new generation of readers.
You can check out the media site we developed at http://www.rebelsofromance.com It h.as all of our messaging. The bottom line: Who knew the romance genre had a cutting edge?
On the issue of professionalism. Dressing up as manga-inspired characters was a fun way to promote our manga-inspired books. Obviously, it’s not for everybody. (It is, however, completely normal at SF/F events and SF/F readers are also a target readership for these books.) But it happens to suit our personalities, our image as “rebels†and the kind of out-of-the-box books we write.
Meaning, we don’t feel forced to do something “unnatural.†Dressing up and having fun is part of who we are. And we certainly don’t believe short skirts and thigh highs equate to being unprofessional. It seems unnecessarily pompous to go on about the advanced degrees, Emmy awards, etc that we have between the two of us, but seriously, we understand what it means to be professional. We’re not “silly women†or “tarty†in the worst senses of the words. (It’s not always bad to be silly or fun-tarty.) We just understand how to market ourselves and our books, we’ve taken a strong approach to branding, and we’re working it.
In any case, regarding concerns about the image we are projecting to the media and readers, this “Liz Maverick Q&A†with Publishers Weekly http://www.publishersweekly.com/article/CA6444597.html?industryid=47159
should ease your mind. We think it’s a nice example of how articulate and effective we can be as ambassadors for the romance genre rather than the reverse.
Whether the costumes turn you off or on, we hope you’ll give the Shomi books a chance. After all, as pointed out, great books speak for themselves. Marianne’s August book, MOONGAZER, received a fabulous review from RT and Liz’s July book, WIRED, received a starred review in Publishers Weekly. Again, these are really fresh, edgy takes on romance novels and the launch features a line-up of fantastic writers: Eve Kenin, Colby Hodge, Michelle Rowan to name a few. We should point out that every one of us is different and none of the other authors chose to don character costumes.
Yours in good humor,
Liz Maverick and Marianne Mancusi who are…The Rebels of Romance
http://www.rebelsofromance.com
P.S. Liz says: “If you see me at a conference or other event, definitely stop and say hi. I love to meet new readers and writers and you can tell me what you think of my new socks.â€
In my real life, I am a lawyer. I attend lots of conferences. Everyone is very professional and dignified.
These conferences are very very boring.
What I would give for a dead bird on someone’s head.
Oh and Barbara Cartland? Totally being herself in that outfit.
At first I thought I didn’t have an opinion then I decided that I did after looking at a couple of pictures. I don’t think I would have recognized what the Rebels of Romance were wearing as a costume. The swan hat was an eye-roller.
~Kenyon’s photo, btw, became the one photo of the RWA Literacy signing published in the Dallas Morning News the next day.~
That’s what I’m talking about.
If the photo had been a couple of pretty girls in short skirts I wouldn’t have blinked. And, I guess, if it hadn’t been for the black swan, I wouldn’t be having this conversation anyway.
~I’m seeing a big push towards conforming to a certain type of appearance, a sort of IBM-ization of the wardrobe.~
That’s certainly not what I’m talking about, and in fact, I said as much.
I suppose if you’d dress like your characters or wear a bird on your head and vampire teeth to—for instance—go to a business meeting or dinner with your editor or agent, then that would be normal for you.
Now, to me, Mancusi and Maverick’s short skirts and cool socks don’t look like costumes. They’re more the equivalent of Ms. Robert’s (totally awesome) leather coat portrait on the back of the J.D. Robb books. Cool and hip and evoking the atmosphere of the books, without looking like a freak. Then again, the stacks of manga take up as much room at our house as the stacks of romances, so I’m used to the look.
Maybe it’s the ‘would you go to the mall in this outfit’ test. If the author of historical romances shows up at an event in a calf-length skirt and a frilly blouse, it’s a theme and clever marketing. If she shows up in a full Civil War era ball gown, complete with hoop, it’s over the line because the ball gown and hoop look really wouldn’t work at the mall. Same with short skirts and striped socks. That would work at the mall, even here in the wilds of Southern Illinois.
The swan hat? Maybe not so much.
Sandy, really? They look straight out of Sailor Moon to me—very costume-y. I’d even do a double-take if I saw them in NYC. Okay maybe not there, but Hartford, CT, definitely.
uh oh, how outdated is a sailor moon reference?
My perspective: I work for an uber-Baptist organization, and their beliefs do not coincide with mine in the least. I have to tone down my personality when I am at work to the point that I have to be someone else completely. BUT, when I am at a professional event with other librarians, I can be myself. I’m still in “professional” mode, but I don’t have to worry that I’ll be written up for saying damn or having an second or even *gasp* third button undone on my shirt.
I see that you’re saying that job-interview level of professionalism (in both demeanor and dress) is appropriate, but I think that in this instance something a little more causal can be allowed. It’s a way for them to “brand” themselves, and they did it in an interesting, but not absurd *cough* swan hat *cough* way.
The swan hat: Kenyon said in the PRO retreat that she’d received a cover one time that was hideous—the only thing she liked about it was a black swan on the back. So it became her totem animal. Much like Kleypas’s armadillo handbag, I suppose, but one she decided to wear on her head. That’s the leap.
The self-styled Mavericks are getting positive notice because those styles are cute. If they showed up in Barbara Cartland hoopskirts, there would be more general ridicule. But the gimmick is the same.
Oh, and why must JR Ward always wear the rock star sunglasses? She even wore them in line at the desert reception, which looked nearly goofy. Are they prescription, maybe like Bono? Is she deep into the method acting?
And dude, I expected more blood and dismemberment. After talk of boob grabbing in Hotlanta and the whole Reno fiasco, I wanted guts and catfights. Granted, I was at the AGM…but that was a bit heavy on legal speak for a true throw-down. Mostly, conference featured a lot of enthusiastic and nervous and professional fans of the genre. Go figure….
I’m already on record that I’m uncomfortable with what I see as the overidentification of authors with their characters, especially for marketing purposes, and for me that does extend to the Shomi-dress at National (and SandyW, you made my morning). OTOH, I respect what Maverick and Mancusi are saying about rule-breaking, and I have no sense that they actually think they’re the characters from their books (although I have all sorts of ambivalent feelings about author branding). BUT, if they were each 50 pounds heavier and ten degrees less attractive, how would this conversation be going?
Maybe it’s just that I don’t think the genre/industry is yet at a point where the swan costume and the Shomi costumes can be distinguished as to degree of credibility. Or maybe it’s because I’m just as uncomfortable with the author branding model of corporate Romance as I am with the “I’m my own heroine” model of overpersonalized Romance.
Yeah, I recognize that they’re supposed to be based on different models, but I’m not a big fan of either, in part because I’m not sure Maverick and Mancusi aren’t simply exploiting a rule long in place in Romancelandia (i.e. that authors representing their characters is effective marketing shtick). In other words, except for the nature of the getup, how is what Mancusi and Maverick are doing new to the genre (is it the fact that they’re in charge of it and not a publicist or publisher marketing dept.)?
Despite the fact that I’m not convinced the branding technique is particularly revolutionary, though, I am interested in seeing if the books themselves are more rebellious, since that DOES appeal to me.
Oh my god. The swan. I think I need therapy. And I wear hats.
I’m reminded of that SF truism: Cons and Fandom means never having to say “But where would I wear that?”
Am at the day gig furtively catching up on my Smart Bitches news and had to relate the costuming aspect of RWA to one of my co-workers. Did I mention that I just started working for an international women’s association for insurance professionals? No? Well I did.
“So,” said I to my co-worker, “the whole thing about costuming kinda bugs me. I mean swan head is on the cover of the Dallas Morning Whatever—it just reflects badly on the industry.”
She said, “Well, there’s is this one group of our members who dress up at our national convention every year. One year they dressed up as the heavy metal band Kiss. One year they looked like Chiquita Banana Vegas showgirls and one year *drum role* they were Playboy playmates.”
“Shut the fuck up,” said I. “At a national insurance convention?” (Background info: major women’s insurance association with about 10,000 members and a ginormas annual convention that was in Puerto Rico last year and will be in Scottsdale next year. Sound vaguely familiar?)
So maybe the annual convention IS a fine time to put a swan on your head whether it be for fun or promotional purposes. After hearing about insurance playmates on parade I really have no idea anymore.
HahahahaYES. That was gorgeous. Can we call it Lani’s Law?
Oh, sure. I’ve got a million of them. Never argue with readers is a big one; also, Always wear clean underwear to a literacy signing in case a big swan head falls on you is another classic. I’m gonna pitch a book of Lani’s Wisdom someday. You just wait.
I suppose if you’d dress like your characters or wear a bird on your head and vampire teeth to—for instance—go to a business meeting or dinner with your editor or agent, then that would be normal for you.
I don’t know, because an agent dinner and a literacy signing are two different animals. I think there’s a point where a person is quirky and interesting (like Liz and Marianne) and a point where they’re just desperate for attention – which is where the big swan head comes in. I mean, it’s not like she was wandering down Fifth Avenue one day and saw it in a store window and had to have it. You have to hunt down the big swan head with a mission in mind. That was not an impulse buy. I think the forethought that went into it with everyone still saying, “Yep, GREAT idea!” is what disturbs me the most. You’d think somewhere along the line, SK would have had a buddy who cared enough to gently say, “Baby, no.”
I think, like Nora said, it’s when the Dallas Morning News runs the picture of the big swan head that it makes us all look crazy. But the thing is, we’re an easy target for most mainstream media outlets because they either don’t read us or don’t want to admit it, and they go into stuff like this keeping an eye out for the big swan head. If it had been a reader, it would be less damaging to our image, but only marginally so, because the people whose eyes flicker over it while drinking their coffee digest only “Romance Writers” and “Big Swan Head.” Me, I’m just grateful that most of the big media surrounding the romance industry focuses on women like Nora, Jenny Crusie, Pat Gaffney, Susan Elizabeth Phillips, and the like. Let’s face it, most of the really big hitters in our industry are wonderfully smart, tough, brilliant women who make the rest of us look good, and I’m thankful. As someone relatively new to the industry, I’m benefitting greatly from what women like the above are doing, which makes the occasional big swan head less of an irritant to me. But then, I try to bright-side stuff over which I have no control.
But if any of the Bitchery are friends with a romance writer who wants to wear a big swan head or a southern belle outfit or something equally ridiculous, start practicing now: “Baby, no.”
I confess that I have a room in my home dedicated to the construction and storage of costumes.
I confess that I have a collection of metal dance bras, Afghani tribal belts, full caberet costumes, sequined shoes, tackle boxes full of costume rhinestones, 3 tiaras, 10 to 20 yard skirts, about 20 veils and 10 saris…..to start with.
I confess that I have and still use on occaision my half-sister’s anti-bellum hoop skirt from the 50’s.
I confess that until recently, I had and still wore on occaision my ballet tutu from my 20’s.
I also confess that I have at one time attended the Sweet Potato Queens St. Patricks Parade in Jackson, Mississippi dressed in a different bustier every day.
So, what’s the problem with a Swan hat?
You have to hunt down the big swan head with a mission in mind. That was not an impulse buy.
I think (think being the key word that means I’m passing on a rumor I heard) that she was sent that hat by a fan. And it reminded her of the previously mentioned bad cover, but a part of the cover which she had actually liked. So she adopted it as part of her signing attire.
I have no idea if that’s true or not, so take with a grain of salt, but it seemed at least feasible, so I thought I’d mention it.
I said: “I’m seeing a big push towards conforming to a certain type of appearance, a sort of IBM-ization of the wardrobe.”
And La Nora replied:
Ach, perhaps the IBM-ization was a bit of a low blow to get in—but your comment about dead swans and vampire teeth at an agent’s meeting also doesn’t address the nuances of my point, yes? In terms of certain costumes being over the line, and others not so much? And also whose version of “normal” we’re subscribing to? Because being, say, a Punk is also a different thing from strapping the dead bird to your head.
This is perhaps an indicator of how clueless I am when it comes to fashion, but I’d totally wear a similar get-up to Mancusi/Maverick to lunch with an agent. Not what I’d wear to a wedding or a super-formal occasion, or even to work at a conservative company (like I do now), but very similar to I’d wear to something like an editor’s meeting. *shrug*
BUT, if they were each 50 pounds heavier and ten degrees less attractive, how would this conversation be going?
This is true. If the clothing fit them properly, I still wouldn’t blink. The Shomi outfits really don’t look all that out of the ordinary, to my eyes.
They look straight out of Sailor Moon to me—very costume-y. I’d even do a double-take if I saw them in NYC. Okay maybe not there, but Hartford, CT, definitely.
Their outfits wouldn’t raise a single eyebrow in Portland.
In other words, except for the nature of the getup, how is what Mancusi and Maverick are doing new to the genre (is it the fact that they’re in charge of it and not a publicist or publisher marketing dept.)?
Sometimes a difference in degree is so large that it ends up being a difference in kind, y’know? I think the Mancusi/Maverick schtick (and it very much is a schtick) didn’t give me the jibblies because I perceived it as being done well, and with a sense of fun. That makes alllllll the difference between “awesome” and “holy crap creepy.”
A few random thought. 1) Bloggers and reviewers at National. I so totally enjoyed the reports back from the conference. While the reports centered mostly on fun aspects, they also touched on the importance. The workshops, the networking, the meetings with agents and editors. 2) Big ass black swans—you know someone is going to do something stupid and you know they’ll be the one making the front page. It’s maddening, it’s infuriating, and it’s a fact of life.
All in all, the Conference sounded like one of the most fun and least controversial in a long time.
spamword men27, don’t know what that means, but it could be fun figuring it out. 😉
So, what’s the problem with a Swan hat?
Hey, Najida! I think the difference is… do you wear your crazy outfits when you’re in public in a professional capacity, representing your industry and your co-workers? I think that’s what it comes down to. If SK had chosen to hang out with the swan hat during her private time, then we wouldn’t be having this discussion.
I think (think being the key word that means I’m passing on a rumor I heard) that she was sent that hat by a fan.
Okay. Well, that would mitigate it a bit. Still, there should have been someone saying, “Baby, no,” I think. Like, for instance, I’m big on daisies. They’re kind of my signature flower, they end up in my books and on my covers, I love them. If I were to bring a daisy purse to a book signing, or wear a daisy print dress, or a daisy pin, I think everyone would love it. As a matter of fact, I might just start collecting.
If, however, I were to do this:
I can’t think of a single close friend who wouldn’t immediately say, “Baby, no.” I have to say, even the fact that I went through the trouble of creating that image doesn’t say a whole lot of good things about me.
I think the Mancusi/Maverick schtick (and it very much is a schtick) didn’t give me the jibblies because I perceived it as being done well, and with a sense of fun. That makes alllllll the difference between “awesome†and “holy crap creepy.â€
It may also be because you see the Shomi-wear as much closer to street wear, Candy. Which goes back to the issue of what people wear *normally* and what is a costume. If Maverick and Mancusi dressed that way *normally* then I say, go for it. I have no problem with people not conforming to some business dress model if that’s their norm. But I think that’s substantially different than costuming oneself as a branding mechanism. That I just don’t get into. And even more, in this discussion, at least, I find it not rebellious or revolutionary—as Mancusi and Maverick want me to believe—but same old shtick in a shiny attractive new package. To me what Kenyon is doing and what Maverick/Mancusi are doing is basically for the same purpose, and therefore whatever differences manifest in terms of extremity or taste are only of degree and not kind. If that makes sense.
“…Any reason we can’t be normal? Attractive, interesting, intelligent, blah blah blah? Must we feel we have to push ourselves into some out-of-the-box image—and let’s be honest—must we feel we must do that to get attention?…”
Oh my god… I’m going to be disagreeing with Nora. Somebody please help me and remind me that the internet is NOT my friend…
That said – I think we as writers are being PUSHED to do more outrageous types of marketing, self promotion and publicity. If you read what their agent says about how GREAT and creative they are about marketing their books – it’s no wonder that they think dressing up is a cool thing.
(Personally – I thought they were cute too – I want their SHOES. The hat was over the top.)
But to answer Nora’s question – No. I don’t think we can be JUST intelligent, attractive and interesting. I don’t think we can JUST write great books – not for people starting out, trying to make a name for themselves or promoting a new line of books.
IMO this is a result of the tremendous pressure being put on writers by the publishing industry and agents too – to PROMOTE. Just look at how many workshops were dedicated to that at this years conference.
The more this goes on – the more outrageous people are going to get.
I am so sending that photo to the Dallas Morning News, Rich. 🙂
Oh, just to set the record clear, the swan hat in all its dubious glory was in the Dallas Morning News but not the front cover. It was on the back cover of the Entertainment Section. I saw it because I read newspapers front to back. Old print reporter. Can’t get that newsprint out of my blood. 🙂
I do understand that SK is a big SF convention goer and has a more elaborate costume for those cons. To her, the swan was mild. But…you know…swan on your head?
IMO this is a result of the tremendous pressure being put on writers by the publishing industry and agents too – to PROMOTE. Just look at how many workshops were dedicated to that at this years conference.
Oh, great. It’s not enough that publishers are pimping the genre through clinch covers and the like, now they’re pushing authors to do so? Oh, yeah, mainstream respect for the genre is just around the corner . . . of Never Never Street.
I love lurking on this site but oh boy now I just can’t keep my mouth shut.
I have mixed reactions to the whole costume thing.
1) I had never heard of Shomi or Mancusi/Maverick before this contro. Now I will be going out to buy their books. After all my kvetching (over at AAR, usually) about genre death by HEA and stagnancy, how could I not? Also, I kinda *know* people who dress like Mancusi/Maverick only they’re, um, not in costume. I find that at times both ridiculous and refreshing. Certainly entertaining, as I hope these Shomi books will be.
2) The old school vs. new school tension between the manga costumes and the grand-diva Black Swan Sherrilyn Kenyon hat. I don’t like the distinction I’m hearing in these comments that one is acceptable and that one is not. If we’re going to embrance feminine power via marketing, let’s embrace it in all ways.
3) Much as I am impressed by Maverick and Mancusi, I am uncomfortable with how they have set themselves up as “The Rebels of Romance.” Um, what does that say about most of the other ladies who write romance? Boring, old, fat housewives. Sorry, sometimes what is left unsaid or implied is as important as what the explicit branding message is.
Hope I am making sense. Have enjoyed the pix and posts from RWA!
To me what Kenyon is doing and what Maverick/Mancusi are doing is basically for the same purpose, and therefore whatever differences manifest in terms of extremity or taste are only of degree and not kind. If that makes sense.
It makes sense, however, I’m going to politely disagree.
Disclaimer the first, though—I’m friends with Liz and Marianne so take that as you will.
I think what Liz and Marianne are doing are drawing attention to their books—to the idea that this line and their books within the line are different and fresh takes on romance. Their dressing to rep the covers wouldn’t have drawn more than a sidelong glance or a “cool.”
An enormous swan worn on the head at a romance conference where such things aren’t the norm is done for no other reason than to garner attention. I also happen to think that she’s very smart and I have to think she knew that. Now, don’t get me wrong—I LIKE Sherrilyn Kenyon. I think she’s overcome tremendous obstacles and I think her success in the face of really adverse odds is amazing. Additionally, she’s never been anything but nice in our few brief exchanges and I love seeing how great she is to her fans and how much she appreciates them. That’s the thing though—she’s made it—her fans are going to find her regardless. The lines are going to form, and be long, and they’ll stay for her even if she’d been wearing her exact same outfit sans swan.
I’ll confess, my only thought when I saw the swan hat was to wonder how she was keeping her head up. That sucker looked heavy!
I liked the Shomi clothes. I wish I were young enough to get away with those socks!! I heard through the grapevine that it was promotional and for a line I was very interested in—so I checked them out.
But then…I normally run around with four colors striped in my hair—I just goofed it up right before the conference. Plus,I get a kick out of wearing my “Feeling evil today. Be glad my weapon of choice is a pen.” shirt to elementary school meetings. Sometimes it’s fun to stir things up. 😉
Personally, I loved Maverick’s and Mancusi’s outfits…but then, I know people who really dress that way on a daily basis—so I saw nothing outrageous about it.
The swan hat scared me a little, mainly because by the time I saw it, I was nose-to-nose with it. I swear, I nearly yelped right in Ms. Kenyon’s face. 😉
And it was awesome meeting the Smart Bitches! 🙂
The “image” of the romance industry will likely always come back to things like Kenyon, I fear. I think of it in a way similar to how I think of actors: there’s a certain kind of personality that’s drawn to writing romances as opposed to any other kind of writing – and that kind of personality rejoices in Black Swans. And since the Black Swan image is how the general public sees the romance industry anyway, the 9,999 other people who write in the industry and who wouldn’t be caught dead dressed like that will continue to fade into the background of the general consciousness. That’s probably a defeatist or cynical kind of attitude, but then again I think it’s one that points to the importance of those 9,999 not worrying too much about it and just continuing to be their more professional selves.
Costuming of any kind in this context would make me a bit nervous, though. The positive and negative aspects of it are all in the same statement which is that it automatically defines you to whoever sees you. Obviously Kenyon’s costume defines her as something altogether different than the Rebels’ costume, but even still – forevermore that’ll be their identifier. Perhaps long after they’d prefer for it to be their identifier.
Oh, and why must JR Ward always wear the rock star sunglasses? She even wore them in line at the desert reception, which looked nearly goofy. Are they prescription, maybe like Bono?
lovelysalome, I’ve been giving Ward the benefit of the doubt on this since I’m a Bono fan and “get it” in his context. Of course, most people don’t even “get it” for Bono and think of it as an affectation, which will likely be the case for Ward, too. Especially since, to my knowledge, she’s never commented publicly on the topic.
And shaunee you TOTALLY made my day. As someone in the industry (though I’ve only ever taken classes from the group you mentioned, I’ve never joined the group) I’ll be cracking myself up for a good long while (and shuddering, too, I must admit) picturing the women I know dressed up like Playboy Bunnies. I can’t wait for the colleague in the cube next door to get back from vacation next week so I can quiz her on Puerto Rico. I’ve been around long enough to remember days when the booze flowed freer and deals were made with a handshake so it’s actually kind of nice to know in some small way there’s a little life left in these people.
Kate R, Sailor Moon works very well as a reference. It says ‘Japanese schoolgirl look’ to just about everybody. My kids are 18 and 25; I see a lot of teenagers, most of them big fans of anime, manga, gaming, etc. So I’m used to the look. But, yeah, I see folks dressed like this at the mall or the movies occasionally. They don’t seem to get stared at too much.
Najida, I just have to say that I want to come play at your house some time. Even if I haven’t danced in years.
Having thought about the swan hat some more, I believe it doesn’t really matter, image wise. The photographers would have found something else just as eye-catching to put in the paper. I’ve done American Civil War living history for a long time. A hundred women in sedate cotton dresses and bonnets, looking like they stepped right out of a time machine and the reporters will head straight for the one neon pink Scarlet O’Hara Goes to the Prom dress. They come looking for news of the weird and they are determined to find it.
Okay.
I finally figured out what squicks me about the clothes. Women dressing like sexy little girls gives me the willies—even though it’s all the rage in Japan.
This is entirely a *personal* response and, no, I don’t actually think the cute costumes encourage pedophilia or anything horrible. But at least I understand why I had a shiver of yick (unrelated to my own thighs).
Gives me the creeps to see little girls dressing as sexy women, too. Those little girl beauty contests? eewww.
Funny to learn how conservative I actually am.
Let me preface my following possibly incendiary comments by a disclaimer. I want romance to be taken more seriously however . . .
Swan hats? This is what we are getting excited about? I thought the swan hat was over the top and was certainly noticeable and if your job is to get noticed, to get people to pay attention, to get publicity, god that just seems like savvy marketing to me.
Not unlike the author photos in both the Eve Dallas and the new Christina Dodd paranormal series, where the photos are edgier, more fitting with the tone of their books (both are wearing leather if I recall correctly and looking fiercely into the camera).
I do understand where Nora is coming from when she is tired of answering the constant barrage of questions as to the respectability of romance and she feels like what is the point of standing up for the genre when no one else will.
I guess I wonder whether we are seeking validation/approval/acceptance from people who will never give it, swan hat or no. There is so much else about the genre that plays to the idea that it is frivolous and worthless and very little of it has to do with the swan hat.
Also, As for whether Shomi authors have to be young and cute and play dress up, Eve Kenin is also a Shomi author whose book Driven is the best of the three and comes out in September. She dressed up not at all so Dorchester is not requiring this of anyone.
…forevermore that’ll be their identifier. Perhaps long after they’d prefer for it to be their identifier.
I am reminded of what George Michael sang in “Freedom 90”: “When you shake your ass, they notice fast. Some mistakes were built to last.”
Who knows how it will turn out? But I’m curious—not about the books, actually, but about the ploy. After all, I didn’t see Sherry Thomas running around wearing thigh highs or a swan, but Private Arrangements is getting plenty of buzz anyway.
Bwahahahahahaha, Lani
That was ABSOLUTELY precious, and a great way to make a point.
Kudos
“And shaunee you TOTALLY made my day. As someone in the industry (though I’ve only ever taken classes from the group you mentioned, I’ve never joined the group) I’ll be cracking myself up for a good long while (and shuddering, too, I must admit) picturing the women I know dressed up like Playboy Bunnies. I can’t wait for the colleague in the cube next door to get back from vacation next week so I can quiz her on Puerto Rico. I’ve been around long enough to remember days when the booze flowed freer and deals were made with a handshake so it’s actually kind of nice to know in some small way there’s a little life left in these people.”
And here I thought I was being so discreet. Guess the con mention in P.R. gave me away, huh? Oh well. Still, if staid insurance folk can dress up like playmates, then I suppose it’s okay to turn yourself into Swan Head the Amazing.
Nope. Swans on the head feels very Copacabana to me, not really RWA.