Wednesday, April 21, 2010

Write on!

The good news is that my novel, Golden Dawn, is at #62 in the rankings. And it is still being commented on favourably by well-wishers.

The bad news is that this rating is on the Slushpile Reader site, which is smaller and based in the United States. Meanwhile on the HarpersCollins Authonomy site I have been languishing at around #2000 for the past ten days.

My misgivings about Authonomy persist and I find that my views are shared by other writers. It is increasingly clear that the sport with Authonomy is gaming the rankings, using social networking stratagems to improve the score attributed to one's manuscript. "Read a chapter of my book, back it, and I'll do the same favour for you!"

But... cui bono? What is the point of being in an upper percentile if what you have written is crap? The author's work may indeed reach the 'Editors' Desk', but only for its essential lack of merit to be confirmed.

I suppose I could join in the merry game, using 'swaps' and other gimmicks to improve the status of.... Katy, for example.

I wrote this abominable tripe back in 1968. At the time I believed in it sufficiently to have a friend create cover art. Ah, sweet delusion!

"Loss of innocence in the Summer of Love..." might have been the log-line. The poor reader on the Editors' Desk would either fall over in hysterical laughter, wonder what is or her parents' generation were smoking (yesss!) or, more likely, wish his or her days in the publishing racket could end forthwith!

Katy I found lurking in my own personal slush pile which is made up mostly of film treatments and screenplays. I am looking for well-structured material which I can now novelize as I did with Golden Dawn.

I wonder if Authonomy has an algorithm which ascribes higher rankings to authors who are represented on the site by multiple titles? Heh, heh!


No comments: