The RWA conference is just 60 days away.  It’s a place to learn, network and feel the love and support the organization offers aspiring writers and published authors.  Opps, my bad.  RWA only supports authors published in 2007 or 2008 and everyone else can take a seat.  Granted, I’m probably chiming in late here but I just found out that RWA is excluding published authors from the literacy signing who didn’t have a book out in that timeframe.  Excuse the pun, but what a novel idea.  A non-profit organization raising funds for literacy turning away people whose books are available for sale when selling those books adds to the overall donation.

 

Worse yet, the reasons given make my skin crawl.  Citing space problems and the costs of stocking books released in years other than 2007 and 2008, RWA has decided to ban those authors from participating in the literacy signing.  To put it bluntly, what a dumb-ass move.  Not every published author can afford to go to Nationals every year.  They skip a few while saving the money and this year were told – without warning - that the book they wrote that was released in 2006 (or some other year) isn’t welcome at the party.  Talk about disappointed.  If I happened to be one of those authors, I’d be crushed. 

 

We give out freaking pins to people so they can prove they are more unpublished than other unpublished people (Pro pins) while granting the former better access to agents and editors at Nationals.  I’ve yet to meet an agent or editor who doesn’t think the PRO thing is a joke since the only requirement is proof that you failed to write something and sell it.  If she met the age requirement, my daughter could achieve PRO status in a week or less.

 

RWA is so inclusive it has become exclusive.  And excluding published authors from the literacy signing is just moronic.  Lest anyone think I’m suffering sour grapes here, I have three books that meet the criteria, so I’m welcome to sign.  RWA already has enough trouble enticing published authors to participate in the conference, why create a situation where members are shoved aside?  If anyone should be excluded from the signing, it’s non-romance writers and authors who don’t have an actual book to sign.  RWA is a well-oiled machine.  It would be very easy to stick a note in the registration packet telling an author his/her book was a no-show.  Clear that seat and give it to the next person.  Signing bookmarks or something else because your book hasn’t been released or because it can’t physically be on the table for some reason, well, sorry, maybe next year.

 

There, that solves the space issue and if no books are available, it also solves the size issue – two of the reasons for this new policy.

 

Why is this important?  What if an author is making a comeback after a dry spell and wants to sign excerpt booklets to let people know their next release is in 2009?  What if you’re an author who has to work a fulltime job and only have a book out every three or four years?  Sorry, RWA is too busy creating PRO pins and funding academic studies to validate the genre.  I know this is a nutty idea, but if the organization insists on allocating funds on a study, how about one on why RWA has such a bad reputation among other professional writers’ organizations and why winning a RITA™ doesn’t carry prestige or earn the author a bigger advance; and why winning a Golden Heart™ doesn’t always translate into a sale.  Or, maybe RWA could fund a study on why including a separate, perfectly valid genre – erotic fiction – gets a place at the table when romance writers are being turned away?  It isn’t the Erotic Writers of America; it’s the Romance Writers of America. 

 

I’m jaded and biased by my membership in Thriller Writers and Mystery Writers of America.  Those organizations have retained their focus on their respective genres.  Their workshop presenters are always published authors and/or publishing professionals and/or experts in a given field – forensics, packaging and distribution, etcetera.  Thriller Writers came about, in part, because thrillers didn’t always meet the definition of a true mystery.  Other subgenres have branched out to form their own national organizations as well – the Private Eye writers even gives out their own award – the Shamus – and winning one, like winning an Edgar, carries some weight.  In fact, MWA goes out of its way to promote Edgar winners by sending them to events (yes, they pay for those considered the best of the best by a juried panel to speak at various events). 

 

What a shame that our national organization has opted to ignore its own mission statement:

 

Romance Writers of America (RWA) is the national association for published and aspiring romance writers.  Through education, networking, and advocacy, RWA supports the professional interests of its over 9,500 members. RWA's more than 140 local and special-interest chapters provide opportunities for members to come together to discuss the industry, build connections and find support. The camaraderie and friendship members find within RWA are invaluable.  (right off the RWA website)

 

How does excluding authors from the literacy signing fall in with the claims in the mission statement?  Specifically, to “. . . support the professional interests,” or provide “. . . opportunities . . . and find support,” for the members.

 

Ah, well, leave it to RWA to find a solution that only creates more problems.

 

Rhonda

And what about authors whose publishers aren't "welcome" without paying significant $$$$ for space. We may have books out, but we're excluded as well, since our publishers aren't going to be forking over the bucks.

I'm all for literacy. I've been a volunteer for the Adult Literacy League in Orlando for 15 years. I guess my dollars will go to this local organization rather than the parent group since I won't be signing this year.