More Harlequin Drama!

Status
Not open for further replies.

xccorpio

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 11, 2009
Messages
288
Reaction score
43
Location
U.S.A
BTW, I read somewhere, that this would be the last Present competition. I will see if I can find it.
 
Last edited:

Susan Gable

Dreamer of dreams, teller of tales
Absolute Sage
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
3,110
Reaction score
755
Location
Pennsylvania
Website
www.susangable.com
I think what is really aggravating people is that rule 5 has been broken

I agree. That IS aggravating. At this point, she should have her winner status "revoked." It's really the only fair thing to do. She broke the rules, should not have been awarded a "prize" and so now she either needs to bow out, or HQ needs to revoke it.



and the other runner up for the Presents comp appears to have just dashed off her entry on a whim. She doesn't seem to be a reader of the line or anything - researching the editor? I don't think the grumbling would be so bad if it wasn't for the obvious rule breaking and the second runner ups talk about how easy it was.

It's never in good taste to brag. Especially not publically. And if it were so easy for her -- how come she didn't have a Presents contract already?

Do HQ authors have better access to editors of other lines than someone outside? Could Carr have asked her Spice/Spice Briefs Editor if she would read something for Presents and pass it on?

In theory, yes. She absolutely could have done this. And I don't know why she didn't choose that route. Although I will say that there ARE occasions where authors want to move into another line and their editor doesn't want that to happen, for a variety of reasons. So it is POSSIBLE (again, I'm playing total conjecture here) that she tried that route, and it didn't work, and thought this would be a better method. :Shrug:

I feel that it was wrong of her to enter and wrong of them to give her the prize. I assume next year we'll have a free for all with Harlequin author's from other lines entering this contest.

Nah. I think next year the rules will be made a lot clearer. <G> Contracted HQ authors need NOT apply. <G>

Susan G.
 

Susan Gable

Dreamer of dreams, teller of tales
Absolute Sage
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
3,110
Reaction score
755
Location
Pennsylvania
Website
www.susangable.com
The good in this is that we are learning a lot. Many of us didn’t have a clue how things really work. I think we, the aspiring writers, should thanks the published ones for taking the time to give us comfort and advice. Being as busy as they are working in their current projects.


Very nice use of sarcasm. Way to continue to fan the "us vs them" flames. I was trying to present the other side of the coin. Because most of the time pubbed writers just keep their mouths shut when it comes to this kind of stuff -- because we end up getting rotten tomatoes thrown :e2tomato: at us -- or worse.

there is a chance she didn’t have an HQ editor who could just recommend her to the London staff.

There is a CHANCE, yes. But there is also a chance that she could have easily taken that route. Why she choose not to, I have no clue.

However, she should had read the rules, everybody did it, right?

Yes. She should have read the rules. And now that she knows she had no right to enter the contest, she should graciously withdraw. Anyone can make a mistake. For all we know, she asked someone at HQ if it was okay for her to enter, and they said yes, not having read their own rules carefully.

If not, then HQ should withdraw the win.

Susan G.
 

xccorpio

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 11, 2009
Messages
288
Reaction score
43
Location
U.S.A
Susan, I wasn’t being sarcastic, I really appreciate everything you, and any published writer said. In the announcement thread there are many stepping in to give their opinions, and their posts are really wise.

You know, I think that the delay in announcing the winners, and the addiction of another placement, might be related to the outcome.

A new theory is surfacing, that Susanna Carr is being published as part of an anthology. Which means her HQ contract is done. She didn't have a current contract at the time of the contest.

Susan, is that possible? I mean, if she finished her last commission with HQ, and no new contract was offered to her. Would that make her eligible? Eventhough, she would still receive royalties.

Now I’m confused.

This is an excerpt from the Transcript of the 2009 Presents Competition Editor Chat:

"Can partners of contracted authors enter or are they excluded under the family rule?
JG: Sorry, yes – as a partner of a contracted author you cannot enter. However, as with the age restriction, this doesn’t stop you submitting a partial to us in the regular way."


[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
 

xccorpio

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 11, 2009
Messages
288
Reaction score
43
Location
U.S.A
Yeah, you're correct. So when Susanna Carr's was certifying her eligibility, the whole thing had to come up.
 

Susan Gable

Dreamer of dreams, teller of tales
Absolute Sage
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
3,110
Reaction score
755
Location
Pennsylvania
Website
www.susangable.com
Susan, I wasn’t being sarcastic, I really appreciate everything you, and any published writer said. In the announcement thread there are many stepping in to give their opinions, and their posts are really wise.

Whoops again. <G> I'm very sorry. I read it as sarcasm. (Maybe because usually I'm a huge fan of sarcasm? <G>)

I apologize for misreading you. Phew. That makes me feel a LOT better, though. A LOT better! I get so darn tired of the us vs them crap, and we seem to have a lot of it around the romance campfire. (And the RWA campfire, which is an overlapping campfire. LOL.)



A new theory is surfacing, that Susanna Carr is being published as part of an anthology. Which means her HQ contract is done. She didn't have a current contract at the time of the contest.

Susan, is that possible? I mean, if she finished her last commission with HQ, and no new contract was offered to her. Would that make her eligible? Eventhough, she would still receive royalties.

Well...it didn't say CURRENTLY contracted authors. You'd think that for people who specialize in the written word, things could be edited so that they're CLEAR, right? LOL.

I suppose that's a very grey area. When they said contracted authors, did they mean CURRENTLY contracted? And if they meant that, why didn't they say that???

:Shrug:

But is that possible? I suppose. Most anything is possible. :)

"Can partners of contracted authors enter or are they excluded under the family rule?
JG: Sorry, yes – as a partner of a contracted author you cannot enter. However, as with the age restriction, this doesn’t stop you submitting a partial to us in the regular way."

Ummmmm...and how are we defining partner? Writing partner? Spouse? Partner in crime? Partner is another word with loads of meaning that serves to muddy things.

Wow. It's just total insanity.

I'll have to go back to the original thread and see what else is being said.

Sheesh, can we go the rest of the year without any trainwrecks? LOL. It's only a few more weeks! LOL.

Susan G.
 

Jersey Chick

Up all night to get Loki
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 9, 2007
Messages
12,320
Reaction score
4,278
Location
in the state of carefully controlled chaos
Website
www.kimberlynee.com
Is it just me or does this make you go "Hmmm...???"

Once we had decided on our winners and contacted them (it was so exciting to call them all up to break the good news!), we discovered that both of our Presents/Modern winners were North American and have some recent publishing experience, whereas both of our Modern Heat winners are from the UK and are unpublished. It is so great to think that through our competition we have found talent from both sides of the pond with such different levels of experience.

The bold part especially. They discovered that the winner has some publishing experience... um.... yeah - with YOU! :D

This sounds like a case of the right hand not knowing what the left hand is doing...

I just thought this was kind of funny.

:D
 

xccorpio

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 11, 2009
Messages
288
Reaction score
43
Location
U.S.A
Susan, it’s fine, I can be sarcastic at times.

I’m conscious of how much I still need to learn, so when someone who knows more than me talks, I listen.

About the chat transcript excerpt, that was referring to partners(like you said, who knows what kind), so the contracted authors are ineligible by default. At least, that was what everybody thought of it.

Some of the things I discovered about being an aspiring writer is that, we all assumed that being published is like being hired.

I was surprised to learn that we have to send a query/ synopsis to an editor trying to sell the next book, like if it was the first time, every time.

I learned that one while reading this article about synopsis. The part after Why is the synopsis so important?

It's logical, but I didn't know how the process was.

This will be sad Holidays for some of the participants, no doubt about it.
 

xccorpio

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 11, 2009
Messages
288
Reaction score
43
Location
U.S.A
Is it just me or does this make you go "Hmmm...???"



The bold part especially. They discovered that the winner has some publishing experience... um.... yeah - with YOU! :D

This sounds like a case of the right hand not knowing what the left hand is doing...

I just thought this was kind of funny.

:D

Exactly! :D
 

girlyswot

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 1, 2007
Messages
2,227
Reaction score
389
Location
Cambridge
Website
myromancereviews.wordpress.com
I really think that either Susanna Carr or, better, the HQ editors need to make a public statement explaining how it is that she is eligible for the win. Because at this stage it really doesn't look good for anyone involved. And if it turns out that she isn't eligible after all, they should revoke the win. They can still pick up her ms if they want, anyway. And it would make a lot of people feel better. Plus, you know, it would be fair and right and legal.

It is Maggie Marr's comments that are still sticking in my craw, though. I didn't enter the competition, and I have no intention of writing for Presents/Modern Heat, but for someone to be so dismissive of the skill required to write for those lines - at the very moment when she has won a prize that is coveted by 540 other authors, many of whom poured heart and soul into those entries - well, it doesn't make me think nice things about her.

It did make me laugh though, when I read the comment on the I Heart Presents blog about how kind and giving the romance community has always apparently been, before these mean girls came along who don't know they are supposed to suck up whatever Hq gives them.
 

para

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 2, 2008
Messages
442
Reaction score
29
The problem with revoking Susanna's win is that it would make Maggie Marr the winner by default. I don't know if that won't be even worse after her comments. HQ really seems to be stepping in the dog business these past couple of months.
 

girlyswot

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 1, 2007
Messages
2,227
Reaction score
389
Location
Cambridge
Website
myromancereviews.wordpress.com
The problem with revoking Susanna's win is that it would make Maggie Marr the winner by default. I don't know if that won't be even worse after her comments. HQ really seems to be stepping in the dog business these past couple of months.

No, it wouldn't. They originally said one winner and two runners up, so that's what we'd have.
 

Jersey Chick

Up all night to get Loki
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 9, 2007
Messages
12,320
Reaction score
4,278
Location
in the state of carefully controlled chaos
Website
www.kimberlynee.com
I did see (here? There?) speculation that HQ knew they effed it, and that's why there were two winners selected. I dunno, though, and haven't read through the newer comments (if there are any - I think it was around 122 last time I flipped through.)

Actually, if Ms Carr knows she is ineligible, I think she should step aside and publicly explain why. That would make her look very gracious, IMHO.
 

girlyswot

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 1, 2007
Messages
2,227
Reaction score
389
Location
Cambridge
Website
myromancereviews.wordpress.com
I did see (here? There?) speculation that HQ knew they effed it, and that's why there were two winners selected.

Someone on the eharlequin forums was speculating that. It sounds like total rubbish to me. If they realised she wasn't eligible, they shouldn't give her the win. They could still ask to see her ms and take her on as a Presents author. And then they would have had the one winner and two runners up we were expecting.

Actually, if Ms Carr knows she is ineligible, I think she should step aside and publicly explain why. That would make her look very gracious, IMHO.

Yes, that would do a lot of good.
 

para

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 2, 2008
Messages
442
Reaction score
29
No, it wouldn't. They originally said one winner and two runners up, so that's what we'd have.

Oh yes I forgot about that.

I see the thread is over on the presents blog is turning wanky - I wonder if it will end up on Fandom wank.
 

xccorpio

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 11, 2009
Messages
288
Reaction score
43
Location
U.S.A
Susanna's win is offending to other HQ contracted writers who might wanted to participate, and did not because what was stated on rule #5.
 

ChristineR

What happened?
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 23, 2009
Messages
1,307
Reaction score
124
Location
Ann Arbor, Michigan. Downtown. Near the Universi
Carr has at least four works with e-Harlequin--the short story in the print anthology coming out in March 2010, and four e-books, one of which is scheduled to be in the print anthology. I think it very unlikely that the four e-books were contracted after she entered the contest. I searched her blog, and she mentions the print anthology back in May, which is pretty good evidence that at least the third e-book was selling well back in May when they decided to include it in a print anthology.

I'm honestly not sure how they would define contracted, but there's no doubt that she had a valid contract with Harlequin which would pay her some sort of royalty for her books had you purchased them on the day she entered the contest.
 

Susan Gable

Dreamer of dreams, teller of tales
Absolute Sage
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
3,110
Reaction score
755
Location
Pennsylvania
Website
www.susangable.com
I'm honestly not sure how they would define contracted, but there's no doubt that she had a valid contract with Harlequin which would pay her some sort of royalty for her books had you purchased them on the day she entered the contest.

I might be confused again. LOL. If so, please forgive me.

Are you saying that as long as a writer is receiving royalties, they're "under contract?"

Because that's not the case. I was almost 4 years without a contract. During that time, I still received royalties on my previous books. But I was considered "out of contract." Once you've sent in option material, and it's been rejected, you're offically "out of contract."


Susan G.
 

para

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 2, 2008
Messages
442
Reaction score
29
Well they've clarified - this was in the comments.
Joanne Grant
Dec 14th, 2009 at 10:00 am

I just wanted to stop by and clarify a couple of points because I can see that has been a lot of discussion regarding the announcement of our competition winners.

This particular contest was aimed at finding new authors for the Harlequin Presents and Modern Heat series and was open to unpublished and published authors. Those who were not eligible for entry included authors who were currently contracted with Harlequin. One of our winners had previously been contracted with Harlequin for a different series and she completed her contractual obligations in 2008. We checked with our legal department and they reassured us that she was both eligible to enter the contest and to win because she is not currently a contracted author with Harlequin.

We read each and every entry and judged them on their own merit. All four of our winners deserve recognition for standing out from the crowd of 544 entries and we would like to once again extend our congratulations to Susanna, Maggie, Gill and Joanne.

We hope this clears up any misunderstanding and we will take the concerns raised here into consideration for any future competitions.
 

dragonjax

I write stuff and break boards.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 20, 2005
Messages
3,421
Reaction score
370
Age
53
Location
New Yawk
Website
www.jackiekessler.com
Frankly, Harlequin did nothing wrong. That being said, the publisher came across appearing to be unfair.
 

Bubastes

bananaed
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 7, 2006
Messages
7,394
Reaction score
2,250
Website
www.gracewen.com
Frankly, Harlequin did nothing wrong. That being said, the publisher came across appearing to be unfair.

And that's the key. Harlequin seems to be forgetting that "perception is reality," judging by the way they've been stepping in it lately.
 

Deb Kinnard

Banned
Flounced
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
2,382
Reaction score
311
Location
Casa Chaos
Website
www.debkinnard.com
I hope they've learned something. Next year, if/when they run this contest, it'd be good to have it aimed at unpublished only. And that should be defined as non-published, uncontracted at the time of entry.

As far as what words mean... :Shrug: RWA's been trying to decide what "published" means for years.

(that WAS sarcasm)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.