Make your own Anita Blake book

[yendi]

In honor of the fact that we own a copy of Incubus Dreams for some reason (doorstop? Flyswatter? Emergency weapon? Target for throwing knives?), here's how to make your own Anita Blake novel (note: this technique only applies to later Anita Blake novels; to create early AB novels, you have to actually write):

1. Tear 100 pages out of any of the first five AB novels.

2. Head to http://www.asstr.org/ and pick 25 different stories at random. Include as many different kinks as you can, including at least one dealing with animals and one dealing with the supernatural.

3. Print all those stories.

4. Take all 25 stories and all 100 pages from the AB books and shuffle them together.

5. Do NOT, under any circumstances, edit a single word. If the porn you picked was well-written, in fact, add some mistakes.

6. Do randomly change a few actions and motivations to reflect your own personal life.

7. In fact, just go ahead and rename the main character "Laurell." or "Mary Sue." Whichever.

Comments

[parkerboy.livejournal.com]

actually I believe he is a voluntary critic. Professional critics receive some for of pay or compensation for their services. From what I've seen he earns his living elsewhere(I think is it working for a university-and not in the literature departments). Thusly he is an ameteur critic.

Anyone can be a critic, just as anyone can have an opinion.

You have the "right to free speech", there is no "right to be taken seriously".

[yendi]

Actually, an amateur critic (Harriet Klausen being the best example) doesn't have to be vetted to be published. At any of the publications I've worked for, my reviews have gone to an editor before being published. You're correct in presuming that I'm not a full-time critic, but few (even those who get reviews published in the NY Times) are, as compensation at even the highest levels isn't enough to keep someone employed.

As for me, I'm compensated, but I'd love to be compensated at a level that would allow me to not work full-time. Ain't going to happen in the near future.

As for you, is this an alternate sex-journal created by cariadwyn or fezabel? I'm assuming the latter, as you seem to have at least a basic command of the English language and a keyboard (oh, and please spare us both the humilation of claiming "neither," okay?).

[parkerboy.livejournal.com]

well...I had only read this thread(flipped over from another journal). Now that I have seen all the comments it is understandable why one might come to that conclusion.(however, it is false)

As for criticism, my belief is that the blake-books are mindless crap. And as such I don't buy them, I don't even borrow them. To do so would be supporting of such utter tripe. However she has managed to get published at least a few times(gotta love those multi-book contracts). She does manage to prove that anyone can get published, regardless of the lack of quality or originality of the work.

And yes this is alternative journal, it is mainly used to keep track of some other sexjournals(without offending those who believe I should have more delicate sensibilities as a lady).

[shadesong.livejournal.com]

Thusly he is an ameteur critic.

Actually, Laurell K. Hamilton spells it "amatuer".

[parkerboy.livejournal.com]

And she can, while eating biscuits with her tea(ones you helped to pay for by buying her crappy book).

Although I am sure it indicates a sad lack of a real life

[dragontdc.livejournal.com]

I will comment here on the fallacious nature of that statement. Financial success does not support or even excuse a lack of basic English language skills. Grammar and spelling are both fundamental to the writer's art, and should be approached as vital elements of any work of a commercial nature. Poor grammar and spelling are indicative of a disregard for quality, and should not be tolerated by the customer. The customer pays the writer for their work, and it is the writer's job to provide value for that pay. As the customers who purchase an author's books, it is not unreasonable to expect a product of excellent technical quality. Literary content is a matter of taste, but technical quality is a standard to which all writing can be held. Laurell K. Hamilton's products have been of low technical quality recently.

Although it is easy to criticize her editor because quality is ultimately his or her responsibility, in today's publishing environment an editor simply has little time to proofread an author's work. Most authors rely on either a group of talented friends or a professional proofreading service for this function. It is with the proofreader that her work's greatest technical weakness lies.

On a related matter that has arisen here,I do not believe the petty critique of LiveJournal posts for grammatical and spelling errors is appropriate, because this format is intended to be informal and free. When writing a journal entry, often one does so in a steam-of-consciousness mode that does not lend itself well to pause for technical correction. Attempting to use flaws in a person's journaling to indicate flaws in that person's character is a spiteful and spurious practice.

If you are wondering what my credentials are in this area, I have been supporting myself and my family nicely for the past ten years as a writer. My annual salary is modest by the standards of the famous, but nearly twice the national average income. I currently write for a major U.S. Aerospace company, where I am heavily involved in quality process implementation. I am a member of the Society for Technical Communication's Quality SIG, and a member of the IEEE Professional Communications Society. I am also a former winner of the President's Award for Excellence in Writing.

Re: Although I am sure it indicates a sad lack of a real life

[ktempest.livejournal.com]

Although it is easy to criticize her editor because quality is ultimately his or her responsibility, in today's publishing environment an editor simply has little time to proofread an author's work.

This might be true (though I have a strong suspicion that it's not quite) but it seems to me that the problem isn't just with grammar and spelling. However, even if it is, there is someone who does proofreading, and that would be the proofreader. They show up after the copyeditor does, who can also do some proofreading. So if these books really are as badly put together as people say they are, it shows not only was there no editor, but no proofreader or copyeditor as well. And that is BAD.

Re: Although I am sure it indicates a sad lack of a real life

[philrancid.livejournal.com]

actually, the book I'm studying self-editing techniques through supports the statement, that editors have less time for editing than they did way back in the days--which is why, the authors of the book (editors both) state that it's harder to get published in a major market these days, and why established authors are getting away with such shoddy work.

Re: Although I am sure it indicates a sad lack of a real life

[parkerboy.livejournal.com]

exactly. As a consumer I refuse to spend my money on shoddy and poorly executed work. If she were a restaurant I would not eat there(after several books she should at least have developed some basic skills).

By the public continuing to buy her books(even those that hate her writing buying one), she is able to continue to write them for money.

If the public stops buying them, then she will either have to develop a better product, or find a different source of support.

[denizsarikaya.livejournal.com]

Oh! Language puns!

I love you and want to bear your children.

Will you marry me?

[shadesong.livejournal.com]

Hee! You'd have to knock off yendi first; he has dibs. :)