New Title Reveal!

One of the first things I learned about being a debut author was “Don’t get attached to your title.” Even if it sounds perfect to you, it’s still part of the book’s editorial journey and, just like particular scenes or characters, is very likely to change*.

That change was part of my book’s journey. I’m happy to announce my brand new title…

…dramatic pause…

…suspense…

…drum roll…

THE CHANCE YOU WON’T RETURN

Tada!

I’m feeling really good about the new title, and I think it suggests a lot of the themes/emotions from the book–loss and hope and grief and uncertainty and searching. I really liked Queen of the Air, but ultimately I think The Chance You Won’t Return hits the vibe of the book way more, and feels more like YA.

With any luck, that means lots more reveals to come. (Covers! Blurbs! More kittens!) Major thanks to my wonderful editor and agent for working through the new title process with me; you guys are the best!

*Check out where some classic titles came from; one famous book was originally called Something That Happened.

Links Galore

Some great links for your afternoon:

Links Galore

Lots of great links to start your week:

Links Galore

Links help us through Tuesday:

Em Dashes, Fact Checks, and Timelines: Fun with Copyedits

photo 1-2

I love getting mail with this letterhead.

One step closer to publication–copyedits!

Copyedits are different than the editorial letters you may get from your editor. These all deal with the nitty-gritty of your manuscript–consistent spelling, where the commas should be, if your character is supposed to be going to the moon on a Tuesday or Wednesday, etc. Basically, copyeditors are like Nancy Drews for the book world.

This week I received my copy-edited manuscript from Candlewick and, thankfully, it was a pretty painless process. This is probably helped by the fact that I a) have worked in publishing, so I’m familiar with the process/terms and b) I’m a huge grammar nerd at heart. I feel like copyediting is basically a game in which you have to find all the secret, hidden mistakes. Get all the points with correct grammar!

A few things my copyeditor caught:

  • The manuscript!

    The manuscript!

    When I switched the spelling of one minor character’s last name and then switched it back.

  • Missing words in quotes by Amelia Earhart (which is probably why I shouldn’t try to type while holding a book open).
  • That if Halloween is on a Sunday, Christmas shouldn’t fall on a Tuesday.
  • Missing commas (a comma fan like I am was only too happy to put them in).
  • When I try to use words that almost sound like the one I actually meant to use.

I’m so happy that someone went through my manuscript and was able to pick out all these little errors that would have looked so horrific in print. And I’m even more psyched that this means we’ve taken another big step in the editorial process!

Links Galore

A few links for today:

Power Through the Slush

In recent book news, the New Yorker unknowingly rejected a story it had previously published. In fact, so did lots of other well-regarded literary journals. What submitter David Cameron learned from this experiment:

“Slush sucks. It’s as simple, and as unhelpful, as that…A part of me really wanted to be outed, to have some vigilant editor write back and say, “Nice try. Consider yourself blacklisted.” Or even to put me in the horribly awkward position of an acceptance!* That would mean there’s hope, that open submissions weren’t just, in so many cases, empty gestures.”

Okay, the slush pile does suck. It’s way easier for editors to overlook a slush gem than it is for them to pass on solicited story #54 by Famous Writer. Otherwise, my reaction to the experiment:

Submissions are all kind of a crap shoot, no matter how you look at it. Maybe the submitted story originally hit the New Yorker on a day when the exact right editor was reading and had the right amount of coffee and was really thinking about the story, not about her next meeting. Maybe when it was resubmitted, it was a really bad morning for that editor and she didn’t get captured quickly enough to counterbalance the lack of coffee. Or maybe it was read by an intern who is quick to hit reject on pretty much everything. Maybe it’s a story about dogs, and it was read by an editor who’s more of a cat person.

Basically, the submissions process is totally subjective. It depends entirely on one particular reading by one particular person at one particular moment. It doesn’t matter if this story is perfect or not. It could be the ideal story for that journal or publishing house or agency, and it could still get rejected. I’ve been on the reading side of the slush pile, and I’m sure I bypassed a lot of great stuff.

That said, it doesn’t mean that there’s no hope. You just have to wait for that moment the right editor at the right place will read your story at the right time. Does that suck? Kind of. But it’s the writing business. Literary journals and publishing houses aren’t putting together a puzzle and need one particular piece to fill their spaces. Anything can be rejected at any time. But that can also mean that this could be the moment that the right person reads your story.

The New Yorker experiment didn’t change any of my views about writing or publishing or submissions. Maybe it means I was cynical to begin with, or that I’m ridiculously optimistic. Either way, I’m powering on.

Links Galore

A few links for today:

Start off with a Bang

The cold, hard truth of submitting your work: your opening better be kick-ass. At the Ploughshares blog, Sarah Martin Banse shares her thoughts on why you need a great opening:

“If you want to get out of the slush pile, one of the worst things you can do is write a lackluster first paragraph. Don’t make the mistake of thinking: the really fine writing starts on page three of my story, and I’m sure they’ll appreciate it when they get there.  By page three, I’m frustrated. If you want out of the slush pile, you must prove it from the first paragraph, from the first line.”

I think this is great advice no matter what you’re writing or who you’re submitting to. Editors and agents only have so much time in the day, and if you can’t hook them right away, there’s no way they’re going to keep reading to get to the really exciting part later on.

That doesn’t mean your first page has to be all explosions at the unicorn factory. (Although if anyone has that opening, I want to see it.) It can be quiet, but it has to challenge the reader in some way–an interesting image, the suggestion that today is going to be significant for the main character, a hint that this world is different from the one we know, etc.

I’ve been on the reading side of the slush pile for both literary fiction and YA/children’s, and if a story didn’t grab me within the first few pages, chances are that I’d end up scanning the rest without much interest. Maybe some agents and editors are much more forgiving readers, but why take that chance? Make sure your first pages are irresistible.

The Glamorous Movie Life of Editoral Assistants

From the Onion, the movie version of publishing:

“After being offered her dream job as an editorial assistant at a high-powered, nationally syndicated magazine last week, area film character Eleanor “Eddie” Edison moved into a beautiful brownstone home in the heart of Brooklyn, sources confirmed. “This place is perfect!” said the attractive, if naively hopeful, protagonist, who graduated with a degree in English/Creative Writing from a well-known northeastern university and now lives in a 5,000-square-foot waterfront property overlooking lower Manhattan.”

Change that around to “writer” and you’d have the same movie scenario, too. For anyone who wants to get into publishing/writing for the money, Amy Poehler has a suggestion:

Okay, so those of us in the book world may not have perfect brownstones, but we sure do love literature!