posted
Hmm ... though I understand what the author means, it kind of bothers my inner marketing guy to have Orson Scott Card's name associated with the phrase "terrible choice" ...
Posts: 1907 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, I'm thinking that rather than the ethical conundrum of which good but apparently impossible thing to do, this suggests the terrible choice of plaid pants and hawaiian shirt. Or something.
I'm reminded of the LDS Women's Conference last Saturday, where they said something about how it is harder to choose between reading your scriptures and doing some other virtuous thing versus to choose between reading your scriptures and robbing a bank. I think my husband pointed out that people who countenance robbing banks are typically weighing that not against reading your scriptures, but stealing a car.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
My terrible choice is, "Do I reuse the disposable diapers for a week so I can spring for this commentary?"
Posts: 1894 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote: Hmm ... though I understand what the author means, it kind of bothers my inner marketing guy to have Orson Scott Card's name associated with the phrase "terrible choice" ...
For what it's worth, your inner marketing guy sounds a lot like the "huh?" that emerged from my lips when I first saw it. Not great, especially when an explanation of the title wasn't easy to get to. Most of us are fans, but I have to wonder what those unfamiliar with OSC would think when seeing that book and title front and center on the main page.
Posts: 4344 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wow, reusing your diapers for one week would save $40? You must use huggies. I'm actually using disposable for one child and cloth for another.
But wouldn't it more likely cause you to pick it up than "Orson Scott Card, Author of Really Neat Stuff".
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, we like the title a lot at our house. And let me say, the book is excellent. Edith Tyson did really a wonderful job. The reason it's so expensive is that's how much scholarly books cost! But the nice thing is -- it doesn't read like a run of the mill scholarly book. Ms. Tyson is quite a delightful writer. Check it out at your local library Posts: 780 | Registered: Jul 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
If you click on the link to the store and keep going -- you will eventually get to the book description. And guess what, Edith Tyson is a wonderful person who reads this website and wrote a fabulous book for a specific market. It is the 10th book in a series of books about YA authors. Let's knock it off with the mean things said about her choice of title. If you don't like, don't buy, don't read it, but don't insult a lovely lady who has become a great friend of this household.
Posts: 780 | Registered: Jul 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote: If you click on the link to the store and keep going -- you will eventually get to the book description. And guess what, Edith Tyson is a wonderful person who reads this website and wrote a fabulous book for a specific market. It is the 10th book in a series of books about YA authors. Let's knock it off with the mean things said about her choice of title. If you don't like, don't buy, don't read it, but don't insult a lovely lady who has become a great friend of this household.
Wasn't eslaine joking? If not, then I stand by this. All I know is, if this author has the friendship and trust of OSC, and we all like OSC's books and the author himself, then how could we possibly justify any criticism of her without reading the book? I hate to use this saying, but "Never judge a book by it's cover" Or, in this case, title. Posts: 4229 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: Let's knock it off with the mean things said about her choice of title.
Rat started it! (((Rat))). I guess we need to pepper our comments with more smilies etc. kacard Edith
And I was saying it was better than my title idea. So what are the terrible choices? POSSIBLE SPOILERS (if you think things like knowing the main characters last name constitutes a spoiler Spoiler babies).
Saints : To get on the boat or go home with abusive philandering husband.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
First of all, my name is not Rat. Read the moniker again.
Second, I don't think the title is bad, I just thought it was funny that it could be taken the wrong way. Sorry if it came off too critical ... Posts: 1907 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I just talked to my wife, and asked what we would actually save for my two girls in a week, and she said, "About twenty two dollars a week." So it looks like I'm going to have to reuse the disposable diapers for a week and forbid my wife to buy Women's World for the next five months to make up the other twenty.
Doc
Who will be away at work most of the week anyway.
Posts: 1894 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
If I could just get my husband to skateboard to work and take an ambulance home at night we'd save that on gas in about three days.
Dog... sorry, duh. Is the nature of your name entirely about snaring dopes like me? It's confusing because I was born in the year of the dog and my brother who is named for the other half of the couple who was in the White house at the time of our births was born in the year of the rat. So I keep thinking you are him for completely no good reason at all. How Faulkneresque is that?
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
What do you call marketing where you pretend to disrespect something in an effort to get people chatting about it? I think it's called interference or something. Like a while back Nike started a campaign about how Nike uses slave labor. It turned out to be Nike. They pretended to be slave labor activists.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
And I happen to like the title of the book. Especially after reading The Lost Boys for the first time. Oh my - yes, indeed - highly appropriate. Just think about it - Wyrms, Hart's Hope, Songmaster, Folk of the Fringe. Read the books a bit deeper than action/thriller type stuff and you really get to some hard core issues . . . but, I wax philosophic. I vote for the title - just like it is.
(Do I win a free copy for my fervent and vehement acclaim, Mrs. C? Pretty please? )
Posts: 5609 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm late, but I have to acknowledge Icarus with a and a for all of his comments.
Then, I have to kacard and point out the irony of who started this thread...and then laugh some more. Posts: 6415 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hi, folks. This is Grandma Edie, also known as Edith S. Tyson, author of ORSON SCOTT CARD: Writer Of The Terrible Choice.
I just logged in, curious to know if anyone has read my book yet. The "controversy" over the title has me laughing!
Don't blame me, entirely, for the title. I submitted to my long-suffering editor, Patty Cmapbell, three choices for a title. As I should have expected, she chose the one of the three that I liked the least. In case you are curious, my first choice would have been ORSON SCOTT CARD: Light In Dark Corners. (You will find the reason for that on the last page of the book, a paraphrase of a direct quote from Card.)
Don't blame me, AT ALL, for the price. I protested that!
You may hold me strictly accountable for everything else.
When anyone has a comment on the CONTENT of the book, (pro, con, or mixed) I will be happy to read it, and even (with permission, and due credit)make ammendments for the second printing, if the comments are applicable, and there is a second printing.
posted
Ohhhh - that's even better! Price notwithstanding, I will read and comment once our poor library gets a copy!
Posts: 5609 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Shan--If your "poor little library" practices Inter-library loan, you might not have to wait until they buy it. However--it may be a while before it is in any library, or most bookstores for that matter. The "official" release is in November, although the publishers gave Hatrack copies in advance. I've not spotted any reviews in print, yet.
The only online place, besides Hatrack, to get the book RIGHT NOW is Walmart.com, believe it or not! Not Amazon.com, Barnes and Noble,not Powells, or Booksamillion--they will all say "released in Novemeber." Only Walmart. I don't know why Walmart rates advance copies! Of course, a Walmart.com copy won't be autographed by either Card or me, but not everyone cares about that.
Best wishes, everyone
Grandma Edie
P.S. Thanks, KACARD, for the kind words! Posts: 74 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I really really want to get this for my English teacher, who denies literary merit in sci-fi. However, I don't like her enough to spend $40 on her.
I'm definately going to force my library to buy it though. I have a really really stupid question: To look it up in the library catalog, would I look under Tyson, or under Card? Posts: 4655 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
You could look it up by author under Tyson, Edith S. or by subject under Card, Orson Scott. Or title under Orson Scott Card.
Posts: 1894 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've found that Walmart seems to ignore release dates quite often, at least my local store does, so it's entirely possible that they've started selling it early without authorization.
as to the title, I love it. I wasn't thrown off at all, but even if I was, then it does catch readers attention pretty well.
and I don't know if there has been editing or if I just wasn't reading carefully enough, but I didn't really see anything that was mean or offensive on any of the comments. just my $.02
Posts: 557 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have a question concerning the title. And it has nothing to do with my tastes or preferences towards the title choice. But why did you (where you is refering to Grandma Edie) not choose the title that you thought fit the bill the best? The title, in my opinion, doesn't concern the editor or even the reader. The title is the most personalized piece of a book, and shouldn't be concerned with who it draws in. If the book to the author is best described as "Light in Dark Corners," then it should be "Light in Dark Corners." Let the readers come as the will, because only the most superfical readers will set down a book because of a title. If you had a choice of equally meaningful titles then there would be no reason not to pick the most profitable title, but it is obvious from your original comment that they were not equally favorable.
And before anyone goes off on me for my criticism make note that it was constructive criticism, and you can take it or leave it. I may not have read the book but my critique is here because the only thing it can do is help the author.
Note: I don't need any crticism for my poor writing ability(speeling errors, grammer errors, and things of that sort), because I am fully aware of it and I've doomed myself to eternal writing 'heck.' Posts: 129 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Some one gave me a [miscellaneous activity] for IDIOTS book last year and over the word IDIOTS they taped "really smart person who doesn't know how to do it yet".
I can entitle my book whatever I want to because I am funding all printing and distribution costs myself. Once it is even written down.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Unfortunately, the publisher has a LOT to say about the title of a book. They are the ones putting money behind promoting it and they usually insist on a title that their marketing people can get behind. Several of OSC's books have not been published with the title he hoped for. Sometimes the later negotiated title has turned out to be better. Only once did a publisher absolutely force the issue -- That was with Saints. The publisher insisted on the title "Woman of Destiny". It was a bad title from the beginning, but Scott had no choice. Thankfully TOR restored Scott's original title "Saints". Bless them Posts: 780 | Registered: Jul 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
If the quality of a book is self evident then there is little that a publisher can do to force the author to change the title. The option of threatening to take your book and its future comrades to a diffeent publisher is the way in which an author can control most if not all aspects of their books. If the threat doesn't prevail, follow through. Back your backs, and see how your publisher likes it. Make them believe that you don't know how to bluff and then control will lie more directly in your owns hands. Besides in this case any title with the name Orson Scott Card will draw its own crowd. With or without the help of the current publisher. And besides we can take the example of The Hive Queen and The Hegemon to prove that a publisher is an unneccesary piece of the puzzle. There was no publisher in the case of the book/books ritten by the Speaker for the Dead and almost everyone had read the book/books. And I grant you that the revenues dwindling in from the book/books were smaller than the ones a publisher undoubtly could have gotten for his/her client, but isn't true that main purpose for any artist, which includes authors, is to get the meaning across. And due to wide-spread and longitivity of the book/books it would be hard to make an argument saying the meaning wasn't put across. If you accept that then you would most likely agree with my following point. If the title holds such an important meaning, which can be gotten out witout the assistance of a publisher, isn't only ethical if you stand firm in keeping that meaning whether some unneccesary capitalist likes it or not. Exercise your right to walk.
Posts: 129 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
I had the oddest and strongest sense of déjà vu when reading this thread last night. I read it after LockeTreaty's post at 10:57, and I was thinking to myself, "Well, Saints is a counterexample for the idea that the author's title choice always wins." Only I didn't post it, because I knew Kristine was going to. Knew it. Knew it. I also knew that the response to her post was going to refer to The Hive Queen and The Hegemon.
I'd seen it before. I'd never seen Grandma Edie before a few days ago, since she had never registered, but somehow her posts were too familiar. I remember her referring back to her own post, but I remember it happening long, long ago. I remember her mentioning her "later post" of October 5th, even though there's only one on that date in this thread, and thinking of questioning it, but realizing what her meaning probably was.
This was probably the second-most powerful déjà vu I've ever had. The first was when I was in cub scouts, and I still remember it vividly, as well. At least I'm only losing my mind slowly. I've probably got a few years left yet.
Grandma Edie, welcome to Hatrack. I hope to read your book after it arrives in the library, too. Or when someone gets it for me for Christmas. Or my birthday. Or Father's day. But as for books that come out in November, there's this other one I need to get first.
posted
The Hive Queen and The Hegemon were fictional works. (As opposed to works of fiction.) Even within that context, their author's sole purpose was to communicate an idea. The author had no financial motive at all, because he already had virtually limitless funds. The non-fictional Mr. Card, on the other hand, needs to make money at his craft in order to be able to continue to practice his art. Otherwise, the simplest solution, in line with the events of the Enderverse, would be to "publish" all of his books in downloadable format at this website. Of course, then he would lose the services that the publisher provides him, such as marketing, shelf space at the stores most of us go to to buy books, artwork to entice us into buying his books, etc. The artist who is willing to starve in exchange for total control of his art is, in reality, a fictional construct. Or a sociopath.
And if you "walk" from too many publishers, it is likely that you will come to have a reputation as a prima dona, and be considered by many publishers to not be worth the trouble.
The author does not hold all the cards. ( ) In reality, it is a two-way street. The publisher (hopefully) wants the work, because it is the product that they will make money off of. The author, on the other hand, enefits from the services the publisher provides. I'm not commenting on whether the relationship is an equitable one: most business relationships aren't. I'm just saying that each finds the other indispensible.
*frown*
I was trying to be gentle, but I think this needs to be said: consider whom you are talking to when you smugly tell somebody "the way it is" in a field in which they are experts. I'm not saying this merely to be a sycophant. I would feel the same way if anybody told me what teaching was all about or what the latino experience is, or if I saw someone explain French people to Anne, or the realities of medicine to Theca or CT, breastfeeding to Ela, social work to mack, etc. etc. Perhaps the post was not intended in this way, but it came accross to me as arrogant, condescending, and smug.
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thanks again, Kristine. You said it. My father was a respected writer of history text books (18 in all) and only a few times did he get the title he wanted. Before the publisher put some utterly unacceptable title on the book, I thought that I had better offer a choice of (more or less) acceptables; the editor chose the one she thought would attract the most attention, and I guess she was right about that! Another thing that the writer often has little to say about is the cover. But you can thank Kristine for that one. She supplied the photo. I will post again when somebody (besides Kristine, bless her forever) has a comment on something BETWEEN the covers. Ta-ta! Grandma Edie Posts: 74 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Icarus if you would kindly scroll up a few posts you will see that I was asking a question about why Grandma Edie didn't push for the title she thought the book should have. This should have given you a clue that I was assuming that I didn't have all the information. My question's purpose, like all questions(except those of the rhetorical kind), was to get an answer. I received somewhat of an answer from kacard; however, the answer didn't seem to be complete. And my assumption was that the quality of the book would make the publisher reluctant to let the author go just because they disagreed about the title. And I'm sure that if Grandma Edie would have wanted to push the issue hard enough she could have had the title she wanted. That is why I was asking why she didn't. AND if she was to be considered as a "prima dona" it would be rediculous because it is her own work and she has the right and the responsibility to make sure it comes out the way she wants it to. I of course don't like to be considered smug by anyone whether or not I see them on a daily basis or even at all. But when told to remember whom I'm talking to, I must reply that it never slipped my mind. I was talking to an equal. I don't decide who's opinion is worth hearing and who's is not. An opinion is an opinion, and it should be heard whether or not the speaker is educated in that particular field or not. SO at the risk of being seen as a hyprocrit, I would prefer if you had an opinion of such anger that you express it in a calmer manner or keep it to yourself. However, if this will put the matter at rest I'm sorry for any misinterpretations of my question might have caused that made me seem smug, arrogant, or in general any sort of know-it-all. With that hopefully put to rest, I was ondering if you could answer my question? Why didn't you push for the title you thought the book should have?
Posts: 129 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thanks, Grandma Edie. ... ... wait that face could be considered smug. Better change to the typical smiley. (sorry I couldn't resist, no hard feelings intended)
Posts: 129 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Icarus if you would kindly scroll up a few posts you will see that I was asking a question about why Grandma Edie didn't push for the title she thought the book should have. This should have given you a clue that I was assuming that I didn't have all the information. My question's purpose, like all questions(except those of the rhetorical kind), was to get an answer.
Hmm. Okay. Let's see.
quote:And before anyone goes off on me for my criticism make note that it was constructive criticism, and you can take it or leave it. I may not have read the book but my critique is here because the only thing it can do is help the author.
Oh, I'm sorry, I thought you were asking questions. Now I see that, in fact, you are teaching.
Nope, this doesn't come off as arrogant at all. My mistake.
After KACard answered your "question" with some realities about publishing, you returned with:
quote:If the quality of a book is self evident then there is little that a publisher can do to force the author to change the title.
Actually, I stopped quoting here because otherwise I would have to quote your second post in its entirety. Virtually every sentence in it explains to KACard and Grandma Edie how they should conduct their business affairs. You ask no questions in it (contrary to your claim), you simply lecture.
quote:And I grant you that the revenues dwindling in from the book/books were smaller than the ones a publisher undoubtly could have gotten for his/her client, but isn't true that main purpose for any artist, which includes authors, is to get the meaning across.
Granting some understanding of publishing to Mrs. Card are you? How magnanimous of you. How thoughtful of you to include with the gesture your reminder of what an artist's main purpose ought to be, in case the Cards and Mrs. Tyson forgot. Um, what was your question again?
quote:If the title holds such an important meaning, which can be gotten out witout the assistance of a publisher, isn't only ethical if you stand firm in keeping that meaning whether some unneccesary capitalist likes it or not. Exercise your right to walk.
Actually, I'm not quite sure what these sentences mean, but I'm sure KACard and Grandma Edie are grateful to you for reminding them of what ethics demands.
By the way, what was you question again?
quote:And I'm sure that if Grandma Edie would have wanted to push the issue hard enough she could have had the title she wanted.
Sounds like you didn't listen to any of the answers given to you by the people who know something about the industry.
quote:But when told to remember whom I'm talking to, I must reply that it never slipped my mind. I was talking to an equal. I don't decide who's opinion is worth hearing and who's is not. An opinion is an opinion, and it should be heard whether or not the speaker is educated in that particular field or not.
You were not talking to an equal. All people are equal in their human dignity, in their rights, and in the eyes of their creator, but not when it comes to their areas of knowledge. If you think you are "equal" enough to other people to lecture them about areas that are within their expertise but outside of yours, then you grossly misunderstand what equality really means. I don't lecture zgator about engineering. I may ask questions, but I don't refute his responses with my greater wisdom. I am not his equal in that context. I am not KACard's equal when it comes to knowledge of the publishing life. And neither are you.
quote:I would prefer if you had an opinion of such anger that you express it in a calmer manner or keep it to yourself.
Actually, I was unbelievably calm. I treated you with absolute kid gloves, and more restraint than you deserved, frankly. If you will kindly scroll up a few posts you will see that I granted that perhaps you did not intend to be smug or arrogant, and thought that perhaps you either did not know better or were not aware of the fact that the people you were explaining the publishing industry to had far more knowledge about it than you do. I see now that I gave you too much credit.
quote: Since my question has been answered Icarus, I'll allow you your parting shot. Have a nice day.
First off, the "parting shot" was deserved in my opinion.
Second, you're new. Show some respect to the senior member.
Third, we will let you have your opinion of the book that you have never read, and let you "ask questions" all day long. You can do that if you want, but you won't make any friends here doing that.
Posts: 4229 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
Locke- I'd suggest you look up the word 'humility' in a dictionary, it might help you out in the future.
Posts: 4655 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[No No]](graemlins/nono.gif)
(((Rat))). I guess we need to pepper our comments with more smilies etc. ![[Hail]](graemlins/hail.gif)
kacard ![[Laugh]](graemlins/laugh.gif)
Spoiler babies). ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Taunt]](graemlins/taunt.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
for all of his comments.![[Wave]](graemlins/wave.gif)
![[Hat]](graemlins/hat.gif)
@ Narnia![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Blushing]](graemlins/blushing.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Evil Laugh]](graemlins/evillaugh.gif)
