Facebook flog - Oct 18 2013
Oct. 19th, 2013 02:06 pm![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png)
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
Link: Oct 18 2013, 14:15
Disclaimer: This blog entry is verbatim, as originally posted on LKH's Facebook. Copyright belongs to Ma Petite Enterprises.
First, thank you so much for all the positive feedback. It was wonderful to hear from so many other poly people - we are not alone! :-) But also loved hearing from so many people who weren't poly, but were still supportive of our choice to have a lifestyle that wasn't theirs. It was refreshing and awesome to see so much good stuff in the comments.
Thank you, also, to all the women who offered to date me, and to the women who wrote things that made my on-line security person delete your posts . . . I'm flattered, but the reason I say, I'm heteroflexible, and not bisexual is that other than Genevieve, our girlfriend, I still don't seem that interested in women. She maybe my one exception. We've been dating her for several years, so sorry, ladies, but I seem to be a one woman, sorta girl.
And for some of the other comments, it's not just the three of us in a closed poly threesome. There are other people in our lives. (Closed poly means however many people are in your poly group 3 to 50, that you can't bring new people in without the group permission, and they usually get veto on lovers, or play partners) I found it very interesting that once I used the word "girlfriend" almost everyone assumed that there were no other men, besides Jon. Particularly interesting since I mentioned Goth boys in the first paragraph.
Also, thanks for asking, but we won't be posting pictures of Genevieve anytime soon. She's a very private person, and I respect that privacy. I got her permission before posting the Goth girl post.
Thank you again for all the positive energy. You guys rock!
Disclaimer: This blog entry is verbatim, as originally posted on LKH's Facebook. Copyright belongs to Ma Petite Enterprises.
First, thank you so much for all the positive feedback. It was wonderful to hear from so many other poly people - we are not alone! :-) But also loved hearing from so many people who weren't poly, but were still supportive of our choice to have a lifestyle that wasn't theirs. It was refreshing and awesome to see so much good stuff in the comments.
Thank you, also, to all the women who offered to date me, and to the women who wrote things that made my on-line security person delete your posts . . . I'm flattered, but the reason I say, I'm heteroflexible, and not bisexual is that other than Genevieve, our girlfriend, I still don't seem that interested in women. She maybe my one exception. We've been dating her for several years, so sorry, ladies, but I seem to be a one woman, sorta girl.
And for some of the other comments, it's not just the three of us in a closed poly threesome. There are other people in our lives. (Closed poly means however many people are in your poly group 3 to 50, that you can't bring new people in without the group permission, and they usually get veto on lovers, or play partners) I found it very interesting that once I used the word "girlfriend" almost everyone assumed that there were no other men, besides Jon. Particularly interesting since I mentioned Goth boys in the first paragraph.
Also, thanks for asking, but we won't be posting pictures of Genevieve anytime soon. She's a very private person, and I respect that privacy. I got her permission before posting the Goth girl post.
Thank you again for all the positive energy. You guys rock!
no subject
Date: 2013-10-20 05:02 am (UTC)It was just another ploy to get attention. When LKH posted about the girlfriend on FB the first day, the fan response was muted. In fact, it was even jokingly pointed out on Amazon that her post earlier in the week about pumpkins had gotten more likes/comments. She must have noticed that too. so she posted about it again... and again until she got enough attention.
I can happily report that I don't know anything about any other author's private life. I like it that way!! I consider the author/reader relationship to be merely a business arrangement. If they produce a well written novel that I think I'll enjoy, then I'll spend money on it.
As the quality and sales of LKH's books continue to deteriorate, her shenanigans to try and keep people's attention just get more desperate.
no subject
Date: 2013-10-20 06:00 am (UTC)As an author and former editor, I can say that not all of this is her fault, just to be fair--though I wish more readers felt like you, focusing on the books and letting the author just be in the background. But with the market more saturated than ever before and competition for readers' shelf space very, very stiff, more and more authors are encouraged to make themselves a brand, and not just their books. It used to be that an author name became a brand once their books gained a following, and while that still happens, there's also the phenomenon where authors create a following based on their personal brand, and then use that platform to sell books--something that used to be limited to the nonfiction market, but is now rampant in the fiction market as well, especially paranormal/urban fantasy. People (including me) can and have made acquisitions decisions based on a submitting author's social media presence and existing brand when that author's never even been published and technically doesn't have a brand where their books are concerned. Publishers (and their internal publicist teams) often encourage authors to find their gimmick, their hook. To find something that will make people like them, and buy their books based on that and not just based on interest in the story itself. Some authors do this through crafts/hobbies, reaching out to people with similar interests or people who just admire their craft work; some authors do it by taking a particular stance on an issue in publishing (or other issues--human rights, etc.) and speaking out regularly and vocally on it, making themselves a resource and a focal point for discussion for both readers and writers; some authors do it by bringing focus to their involvement in charity; some authors do it by building a reputation for being quirky and doing strange things; some authors do it by being funny and pithy and always having something witty to entertain the audience.
And some authors do it by inviting people into their personal lives--whether talking about their kids, their relationships, or sharing life-changing personal experiences that may have a positive impact and create an emotional connection with their readers. The business of selling books has become as much a cult of personality as pop culture in general, and with authors so easily accessible on the internet now, the pressure to be liked is very heavy. You're told you sell more books by being an attention whore, so get those stilettos and fishnets on and work that corner. When you start losing attention, your publicists freak out and next thing you know Wayne Brady's threatening to choke a bitch if you don't do something to remain in the forefront of readers' minds before sales start to drop.
...that doesn't mean LKH isn't going about it the wrong damned way. A lot of authors manage to be classy even when exposing very personal things about their lives. It's the ones who go about seeking audience attention in the wrong ways that end up causing these drama-tastic fiascos that might get them the attention they want, but end up ruining their public image and undermining their author brand. And those who take that drama into their writing and let it affect their books? Well...LKH's declining sales and waning readership speak pretty clearly on that.
no subject
Date: 2013-10-20 09:24 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-10-21 01:25 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-10-20 10:25 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-10-21 01:27 pm (UTC)...that was dramatic. Well. Yes. Anyway, yes. I respect Gaiman, and I think a lot of that has to do with the fact that he respects himself and his professional image.
no subject
Date: 2013-10-24 08:06 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2013-10-24 11:26 am (UTC)