As a writer of romantic fiction, I would really like to become a member of the Romantic Novelists’ Association (RNA). As a self-published author, however, I am barred from doing so. Here are their requirements for full membership:
“Full Membership of the Association is open to all published writers of romantic novels and full length serials of at least 30,000 words. (Vanity and self-publishing do not qualify.)”
Vanity and self-publishing? These are two very different things, as we all know. Also:
“The author must have an enforceable commercial contract from a publishing company, which must be properly established as a bona fide business in an appropriate jurisdiction. This contract may relate to print and/or electronic media.”
and …
“The author should bear no part of the cost of preproduction costs or processes, nor undertake tasks that relate to: editing, copy editing, typesetting or other production costs, cover art or any commercial distribution tasks or costs.”
Well, that’s pretty clear. I’m not welcome there. What about their other membership category?
“The RNA is pleased to welcome unpublished writers into its unique New Writers’ Scheme.”
Oh dear! I’m not unpublished either. We seem to have a problem here, a great big gaping hole that I’ve fallen through. I sent the RNA an email, querying their decision to slap a great big ‘No Self-Published Writers Welcome Here’ sign on their membership rules:
Dear Linda,
I wonder if you could send me some information about how I could become a member of the RNA. I’ve studied the information on your website and I’m afraid I don’t fit into either of your existing categories. I’m a published author of a successful romantic novel, but this title is self-published. I know I’m in great company here: existing RNA members such as Talli Roland and Linda Gillard have both recently joined the ranks of self-published authors who are forging a new, respectable identity for those who choose this route. I’m sure you’ll agree that the practice of self-publishing has changed significantly in the last few years – maybe the time has come to open the doors of the RNA to those who have successfully self-published? With ebooks, KDP, and print-on-demand, I think we can safely say that self publishing and vanity publishing no longer need to be included in the same category.
I look forward to hearing your thoughts on this, and (hopefully) becoming an active member of the RNA very soon
Best wishes,
Joanne Phillips
and I received this response:
*tumbleweed blowing past*
That’s right. No response as yet. Maybe they are calling an urgent meeting to discuss opening their doors to the new breed of indie authors … Somehow, I doubt it. But I will keep you posted.
Related articles
- Author of the Week – Linda Gillard (joannegphillips.wordpress.com)
Joanne Phillips 
September 20, 2012 at 10:06 am
Go you honey!!!!!!!
I’d heard about this a few months back, and I think it’s OUTRAGEOUS! Wake up RNA, times have changed!
Good luck Jo 🙂
Xx
September 20, 2012 at 12:23 pm
Hi Vikki,
I know, it’s a real shame. And still no answer after almost a week … x
September 20, 2012 at 3:04 pm
I guess though, their argument will be that, like an organisation, they have the right to pick and choose who they allow in 😦
Have you thought about doing an article about it, seeing if one if the writing mags would be interested?
Xx
September 20, 2012 at 3:11 pm
Vikki, I’ve already been “allowed in” and short-listed for their awards. I’ve tutored members on writing. How can my writing credentials now be called into question? But when when my publisher dropped me and I went indy (and became much more succesful) I was suddenly out on a technicality – or rather my indy-published books were.
They haven’t thought it through, or maybe they have, but they just can’t agree. They have a one-size-fits-all policy that doesn’t get to grips with the variety of ways there are now to be a succesful author.
September 21, 2012 at 7:34 am
So have they refused you membership now Linda?
Xx
September 21, 2012 at 9:02 am
Oh no, I just didn’t bother to renew my membership because the ebooks I currently publish are lumped together by the RNA with “vanity publishing” and “do not qualify”, even though one of them, HOUSE OF SILENCE has sold 25,000 downloads and was selected by Amazon for their “Top Ten Editor’s Pick of 2011” in the Indy Author category.
I still have one traditionally published book in print (STAR GAZING) and I could be an RNA member on the strength of that, but the 3 novels I’ve written since then (two of which have been very successful) are not acknowledged by the RNA as proper books because they don’t have a traditional publisher’s endorsement. (The most recent, UNTYING THE KNOT, has just received a US indy book award, the B.R.A.G Medallion from the Book Readers’ Appreciation Group.)
The irony is, my indy books have sold much better than STAR GAZING! My indy books now earn me a decent living – something I didn’t dream of doing when I was traditionally published, first by Transita and then Piatkus.
I don’t doubt the RNA will get up to speed in the end – so many of their members will be indy-publishing in future – but they’re being rather slow to adapt (which is probably why Jo hasn’t had a reply yet.)
September 21, 2012 at 12:59 pm
I was thinking of joining the New Writers Scheme Linda, but I’m not so sure now 😉
Xx
September 21, 2012 at 1:58 pm
Hi Vikki,
Their new writers scheme is brilliant – you shouldn’t let this put you off! The only reason I won’t join is that it is for unpublished writers, but it’s a great initiative with free critiques and access to all sorts of resources. xx
September 21, 2012 at 6:09 pm
Thanks Jo 🙂
I’ve got til January to have a think about it, so I’ll let you know.
Xx
September 20, 2012 at 11:13 am
I doubt they are calling big meetings before responding to your excellent email, Jo, because they went through all this with me last year when my ebooks took off (one became a Kindle bestseller) but they refused to allow me to promote them on the RNA blog because they were self-published. (Oddly, I was allowed to promote in the newsletter, but not on the blog.)
I know there *are* committee members who are sympathetic to our cause, but the final decision given to me was, they have to draw a line somewhere and strangely that line didn’t include self-published authors previously shortlisted for two RNA awards. (I also went through their New Writers’ Scheme years ago, the one you can’t enter owing to the fact that you are not a new writer.)
I very reluctantly withdrew from an organisation that I’ve belonged to for years as they just aren’t moving with the times. I joined the Alliance of Independent Authors instead which is more suited to my publishing needs and also has several tiers of membership.
But if the RNA relaxed their rules and allowed indy published authors to belong, I’d re-join. I miss my RNA friends. I miss the great conferences at which I taught popular workshops. I do understand that they want to maintain high standards, but excluding proven & succesful authors like you & me is just ridiculous. They could set a sales or review threshold which would exclude the vanity-published wannabes, but admit successful indy authors like us.
September 20, 2012 at 12:29 pm
Hi Linda,
Thanks so much for coming on to leave a comment. It’s incredible to me that the RNA would be willing to lose members like you over this – especially as they must realise that they are going to have to change this rule at some point in the future. Like you say, there are ways they can still keep their standards high, it just takes a little imagination, effort and a willingness to move with the times.
They will change, I’m sure of it, but let’s just hope they don’t leave it so late that progressive organisations like the Alliance of Independent Authors have taken over as the place to be. (If it hasn’t already!) I’m a member of Alli too – if anyone else is interested in finding out more about this great, not-for-profit alliance click here: http://allianceindependentauthors.org/a/588
Jo x
September 20, 2012 at 12:31 pm
Well done, Jo. That’s a great email.Perhaps it might be better, as Linda suggests, to look elsewhere, rather than towards an organisation with its feet planted in the past. There are some less than good self-published books out there, but the RNA is doing its organisation a disservice by automatically barring all self-published authors.
September 20, 2012 at 7:00 pm
Thanks Lindsay. I can appreciate that they might want to make a distinction between traditionally published authors and self-published ones, but to ignore them completely … and to be so graceless about existing members like Linda. It’s crazy, really x
September 20, 2012 at 2:37 pm
They will eventually get their act together and change the entrance requirements. It will just take time for people to understand that self-published books can be just as good as traditionally published books. Hang in there 😀
September 20, 2012 at 7:02 pm
You’re right, Michelle. I believe that too. I wanted to bring it to people’s attention because in the world of books right now there is a lot about how indie authors are breaking down barriers to sales and success, and not much about how old-fashioned views (I’d go so far as to say prejudices in this case) are still holding some back. x
September 20, 2012 at 4:23 pm
The RNA should take a leaf out of the Society of Authors’ book (ho ho).
They allow membership to self-published authors who have sold more than a certain number of copies in a year. This way, they very reasonably exclude people who write rubbishy books and never sell any copies other than to their mum. Here’s the link to their membership application form showing the precise entry requirements:
Click to access SOA%20Application%202012.pdf
I should think you’re in, on that basis, Jo!
If the RNA doesn’t move with the times, they’ll end up an ageing membership comprised only of the likes of Barbara Cartland and Georgette Heyer – and they’re both dead. Oops!
September 20, 2012 at 7:05 pm
Thanks for this Debbie, I didn’t realise the Society of Authors had these criteria. And bless them for it! Isn’t that lovely to see on the application form: all those categories designed to give everyone who calls themselves an author a chance to join. It’s an inclusive approach, not an exclusive one, and in today’s society I think it’s just what’s called for. RNA – check it out!
September 20, 2012 at 5:16 pm
Seems bizarre to me; if they’re that hung up about it, why not just create a separate membership category? They seem at least five years out of date on their thinking.
September 20, 2012 at 7:06 pm
Hi Pauline, yes absolutely. Look at the link Debbie provided above – the SoA have done just that (and they are a well established organisation with a long pedigree).
September 20, 2012 at 11:33 pm
Debbie’s right. I was a member of the RNA too, but won’t renew because of their stance on self/indie publishing. But I’m currently on the committee of the Society of Authors in Scotland and there’s a lot of interest in eBook publishing among members. I know a few older authors who are publishing their whole backlists to Kindle (and are making a good income in the process) others like myself have been traditionally published but are much happier self publishing now and there are some members who are wholly concentrating on eBooks. It’s an organisation that embraces all kinds of writing – I’ve just written an article for the Author magazine about writing for the video games industry – not that I do it, but my son is a game designer and writer and there are unexplored opportunities there, too!
September 21, 2012 at 9:27 am
Hi Catherine,
Your experience is similar to Linda’s – and yet another loss to the RNA. Still, their loss is the Society of Authors in Scotland’s gain, and that sounds like a really progressive organisation. Is the society part of the Society of Authors, or a stand-alone? Good luck with the article x Jo
September 21, 2012 at 9:12 am
Try forwarding the email again – and ask if they received it. It is always possible that it’s been ‘lost’. However, I’ve had an issue with two different organisations this year and (a little underhand) eventually found them on Twitter and asked them the question. The last organisation’s enquiry had been outstanding since July. That same day when I’d asked how long it would take for them to answer a simple question – I had a response and all of a sudden my emails were received and replied to within an hour or two and they were even willing to telephone me too.
September 21, 2012 at 9:29 am
Hi Penny,
Yes, that’s a good point – giving them the benefit of the doubt, that might explain why they’ve not answered yet 🙂 I did tweet to the RNA’s Twitter feed some time ago about this and also received no response, which was why I then emailed. But maybe the lady who deals with membership enquiries is on holiday … I’ll keep you posted xx
September 21, 2012 at 9:43 am
Hello Jo,sorry to hear you’re having this difficulty. Although I am not a committee member, I am in the RNA and aware that the whole self-publishing issue is under consideration at the moment, so please hang in there. As the person responsible for the new releases on the blog at that time, I took up Linda’s case when she fell foul of the blog rules, and the committee agreed that as an already published member promotion of her indie should be allowed. Unfortunately, by then Linda had made up her mind to leave. We miss her and would certainly welcome her back into the fold. This was back in summer 2011, when the self-publishing industry in the UK was still at pioneering level. I’m quite sure there will be further changes, which, as I say, are under discussion, but it is not my place to say when and how.
Best wishes and every success with the book,
Freda
September 21, 2012 at 10:11 am
Hi Freda,
Thanks so much for commenting. That’s great news – I’m really encouraged to hear the RNA are reviewing the self-publishing issue. To be barred from an organisation like the RNA can feel like an extra blow to authors who have, by definition, often already taken many blows in their journey so far, and yet have forged ahead and achieved success against the odds. The comments thus far have mainly focussed on authors who have been traditionally published but have chosen the indie route, but there are many others who are indie by necessity not choice, and yet still have commercially viable and successful books out there. The publishing industry has changed so much – the general consensus even amongst editors is that lots of talented writers go unsigned because of tighter budgets and market forces. And where do these talented writers go? If they are willing to work very, very hard and not give up on their dreams they self-publish. And some of them sell lots of books – often more copies than if they had been signed to a publisher who may not have pushed their title as hard as an author will push their own.
I can understand completely that the RNA have set the bar very high (which is what makes it a desirable organisation to a potential member) but maybe the committee could consider this: If they are using a publishing contract as a kind of validation document of an author’s worth, maybe it’s time to look for other means of validation. All sorts of “writers” get contracts these days, and a celebrity name can often open more doors than writing talent. Publishing contracts are no longer the benchmark they once were. You need to find a new benchmark which is meaningful to the RNA and rigorous enough to stand the test of time. Good luck 🙂
September 21, 2012 at 10:20 am
Glad to hear things have now improved, Freda, but I didn’t renew my membership because I was told my indy e-books didn’t qualify. The RNA’s change of heart wasn’t communicated to me. Before I pulled out I was told I could promote my books in the newsletter, but not the blog (an inconsistency I failed to understand).
In any case, the new Alliance of independent Authors beckoned and the Society of Authors also allowed me to remain a full member. With much regret, I decided the RNA was no longer an appropriate professional organisation for me. To judge from the membership requirements sent to Joanne, succesful indy publishing is still lumped together with vanity publishing. I think the RNA still have a long way to go in catching up with the e-pub revolution.
September 21, 2012 at 9:47 am
You’re leading edge Joanne, until slower moving organisations catch up, it might be best as suggested to go with those already on your wavelength and moving in the same direction. Then you will be where authors will eventually flock towards perhaps.
September 21, 2012 at 5:38 pm
Comparisons with the SoA do the RNA an injustice. The SoA is a professoinally organised body with very deep pockets, a permanent staff and regular meetings of a management commitee.which enables decisions as to changes of policy in respect of membership elegibility to be examined, reported upon and brought into effect fairly quickly. The RNA is an association ‘stuffed’ if that’s the word by a volunteer, elected committee answerable to the membership as a whole. Decisions therefore take longer. In any case if your opinion that the RNA is a long step behind the market changes I can’t understand why you feel that promoting your titles on the blog would be beneficial to your sales.
September 21, 2012 at 7:35 pm
Woah, Hugh, I certainly haven’t said that I want to join the RNA to benefit my sales! The attractions for me are the parties, the chance to mix with like-minded authors, and the nice pink logo.
If your comments are directed at Linda, I think this is a little mean spirited and quite devisive. Linda’s objection was to the disparity between being allowed to promote her traditionally published books on the blog, but not her self-published ones, the latter being in fact more successful than the former.
I also think that your assertion that volunteer-run organisations are any less responsive than paid-for ones could be seen as insulting not only to the organisation’s members but also to the volunteers. And hey, if the RNA is struggling for warm bodies to carry out administrative jobs, it really needs to open its doors to self-published authors. This bunch are also incredibly committed and hard-working – they have to be, doing it all themselves.
Jo
September 21, 2012 at 8:00 pm
Hugh, I think your remarks should have been directed at me, not Joanne.
My reason for withdrawing from the RNA was not that I wished to boost my sales by using the blog. (They hardly needed the boost. I sold 10,000 downloads of my first ebook, HOUSE OF SILENCE in 4 months.) I decided not to renew on a principle. My indie books were categorised with the “vanity published”, even though I’d been short-listed for 2 RNA awards, including Romantic Novel of the Year. (I’d been short-listed for quite a few other awards too.)
Apparently this distinction would now no longer apply to my books, but the RNA membership requirements still say, “Vanity and self-publishing do not qualify”. Inconsistency of policy was another reason I felt disinclined to renew.
September 21, 2012 at 10:09 am
Hi Joanne,
I’m really sorry you’ve been left feeling unwanted. I’m a member of the RNA (and also looking to move into self publishing) but I’m still very new and like Freda can’t comment on what discussions might be in progress. But I have no doubt that the changes will come, so please don’t write off the RNA just yet!
Also, in their defense, this is an organisation run by volunteers, so answering emails, having meetings to revise the constitution, and everything else they do for the RNA, has to fit around other schedules, so responses may not always be immediate.
At the very least, I know your email and your blog post will encourage healthy debate and pave the way for future changes, so thank you.
September 21, 2012 at 7:38 pm
Hi Romy, we’re certainly having a good debate about it on here, and thanks for coming by to comment. I know the RNA do a great job, and so do their volunteers. Which is why, I guess, I’m so eager to join 🙂
September 22, 2012 at 12:34 am
Linda and Joanne, would you feel better if the RNA adopted the SoA principle of taking on e-published writers, irrespective of sales figures, as Associate members, or would you regard that as creating a further division and a category that might, repeat might, them them to regard themselves as second class citizens?.
September 22, 2012 at 8:46 am
I don’t see sales figures for self-published authors as being the criterion, Hugh. 50 SHADES OF GREY (now endorsed with a traditional publisher’s contract) has demonstrated that badly written, shoddily edited books can be taken up by publishers and sell millions of copies. A publisher’s contract is no longer a guarantee of quality writing or even quality editing. Indeed there have been many complaints about the formatting quality of trad pubbed e-books which, coupled with their high prices, has inclined readers to sample indy-published ebooks.
If an organisation wants to set itself up as a gatekeeper site (and we do need these), indy-published books would need to be vetted for quality and content once a certain threshhold of sales was reached. That would exclude so called “vanity published” work which doesn’t sell. This may well be beyond the remit of the RNA, staffed by hard-pressed volunteers. But this discussion began because Joanne couldn’t find an entry level for the RNA and I’d withdrawn because my indy ebooks were deemed “vanity publishing”.
You only have to read Joanne’s or my many Amazon reviews to see that we’ve produced quality indy books that sell. My own 5-star Amazon review of Joanne’s CAN’T LIVE WITHOUT says, “And for those who care about these things, this was the first ebook I’ve read in which I didn’t spot a single formatting error.”
September 21, 2012 at 10:31 am
Hello Joanne. I’ve been on the RNA Committee for a while now. You’re right, publishing is changing very fast at the moment. The RNA does its best to respond. We have changed our rules on qualifying criteria for membership (and also entry requirements for our main award and other activities) more in the last five years than in the whole of the preceding forty-seven of the RNA’s existence. And the pace does not look as if it will slow down any time soon.
I admit that it does take us a while, not only because big issues take time to consider but also because the RNA’s various activities are run by volunteers, like Freda and myself and the Hon Membership Secretary.
September 21, 2012 at 12:39 pm
Hi Jenny,
I totally understand about the volunteer and their time constraints. Thanks for coming on to comment, and it’s good to know that the changes are being recognised.
Best wishes,
Jo
September 21, 2012 at 11:08 am
Dear Joanne,
Technically you could join us – because you are self-published you would still be welcome in the NWS because, as our current rules stand, self-publishing doesn’t count as published. However, I see where you are coming from; you’ve got books out there, doing well, so you are published, and if you’re making money, successfully published.
The trouble is, and let’s be honest here, there are some self-published books out there which may never sell more than a handful of copies because they don’t deserve to – the sort of books which might give the quality controllers at vanity publishers a bad name. So, our problem in the RNA, is where do we draw the line? Because the thing is, we do want people to join as full members, especially authors of quality romantic fiction (such as your book) but not all self-pubbed fiction can be described as ‘quality’. And that’s our problem – how on earth can we differentiate?
I believe some organisations are addressing this by asking for authors to provide evidence of their success by offering evidence of their income through sales. It’s certainly a consideration and one which I expect the committee will address, but as Jenny said things are moving at one heck of a speed in publishing and it’s darned hard to keep up.
Bear with us, don’t write us off yet, we’re pedaling as hard as we can but we’re all volunteers with books to write and day jobs and families….
Best
Catherine Jones
Committee Member
September 21, 2012 at 1:52 pm
Hi Kate,
I did consider the new writer route, it just felt wrong for me as I’m not unpublished – it’s like saying that everything I’ve achieved so far is irrelevant.
I agree 100% about the self-published books which don’t make the grade. I think we might be looking at it from the wrong angle – yes, differentiate between quality fiction and poor-quality books, but why differentiate between traditionally published and self-published? Maybe a new route to take would be to ask all new members to meet certain criteria, whether trad or self published. Many authors with contracts don’t go on to sell as many copies as self-published authors, or gain so many readers’ approval. If we can accept that the contract is not the tool of validation it used to be, why not put all types of authors on a level playing field?
As to what those criteria should be, I would go beyond sales figures alone. While sales figures are a good indicator of a book’s value to readers, for some authors, marketing efforts seem to take the place of continued professional development in their field, and while an author should be able to demonstrate some sales over a reasonable period – traditionally published authors too (how many never earn back their advance?) – this can’t be enough on its own. And we all know how reviews can be manipulated, although a certain number of reviews would indicate that the book or books have found a readership.
Maybe potential new members could be invited to find a sponsor – an existing member to read and ‘approve’ their book, once it meets other criteria? Or maybe existing members could be asked to sit on a review panel occasionally, to look at samples from prospective members and ensure professional standards are met? Just suggestions, not without their own problems, but I’m sure there is a way around this problem if the will is there.
Best wishes,
Jo
September 21, 2012 at 2:04 pm
I agree that there are some poor quality traditionally published books out there too, and yes, authors with contracts don’t always earn out their advances. But they have been through a selection process to get a contract. With self-publishing there is no gate-keeping and so it’s harder for us at the RNA to sort the wheat from the chaff, and frankly we just don’t have the time. I agree – there has to be some sort validation for the self-pubbed so that the quality can be recognised. Getting a ‘sponsor’ might be one route. TBH I think getting a review panel together might be a long shot – we’re all so frantically pushed for time the thought of taking on any other jobs leaves me feeling wobbly. But we will look at it. And if you want to contact me with other suggestions as to how we might come to a workmanlike solution I’ll be happy to put them to the rest of the committee at our next meeting.
September 21, 2012 at 2:05 pm
The RNA doesn’t need to do it all over again. If they’d just liaise with Novelists Inc, they’d find they didn’t need to reinvent the wheel.
September 21, 2012 at 11:43 am
Well said. I think they need to blow the cobwebs off their rule book and wake up to the current times. Many established authors are having to turn to self-publishing their work as the big publishing houses scale back their portfolios. They need the modern membership to keep them going. Good luck with your campaign.
September 21, 2012 at 1:53 pm
Thanks Pete 🙂 It does seem to have become a bit of a campaign now!
September 21, 2012 at 11:47 am
This looks really interesting, Jo, and something I want to inv estigate – will do so after free promo weekend. ps, have you had message from Jan Ruth re an FB group? If not, let me know 🙂
September 21, 2012 at 1:53 pm
Yes I have, Terry, all joined up now x
September 21, 2012 at 12:32 pm
Novelists Inc is an organisation for multi-published novelists only, and you have to have had two books published to join. Ninc (as it’s familiarly known) has addressed the issue that is bugging you, as I’m sure the RNA will do. Ninc ask self-published people to provide proof of reasonable sales. You can find out further info on their website http://www.ninc.com
I’m a member of both organisations and love them both.
September 21, 2012 at 1:54 pm
Hi Anna, thanks for letting us know about this organisation – when I’ve got my sequel out (and sold enough) I’ll definitely look into that.
September 21, 2012 at 1:34 pm
Hi Joanne,
A couple of years ago I headed a sub committee that looked into the emerging technologies on behalf of the RNA. The sub committee consisted of RNA members, an e-publisher, a traditional publisher and an agent. We produced the current criteria for full membership.
The problem is, as others have said, that it’s difficult to check the quality of self-published work. We can all publish absolutely anything, and some people do, with none of the professional selection, typesetting, editing or copyediting that usually comes with a traditional publishing contract.
Other professional bodies can control membership via professional qualifications but that’s not appropriate to our industry. The sub committee looked closely at the Society of Authors’ model and took advice from them, too. Their model may be looked at again, but the Society differs from the RNA in all kinds of ways – we don’t advise on contracts or represent writers in conflict, for example. Our mission is to promote the profile of romantic fiction and quality control seems integral to that.
We don’t chuck out existing members who once were traditionally published but are now self-publishing. Once you’re eligible, you’re eligible.
And, of course, non-members can attend RNA events for a modest sum above the members’ price, so there’s no need for anyone to lose contact with friends in the RNA or miss out on the parties (we’re quite good at those), meetings, conferences etc. Why not come to one? The website is at http://www.romanticnovelistsassociation.org/.
September 21, 2012 at 1:56 pm
Hi Sue,
Yes I’ve heard about the parties 🙂 I didn’t realise non-members could also attend, so that’s good to know. Thanks for coming along to comment, Jo x
September 22, 2012 at 10:55 am
Linda, not for one moment do I disagree with your advocacy of e-published writers as being just as talented and professional as print published writers.To that, however, you do, alas, have to add ‘some of them,’ Vanity publishing, per se, has gone or is rapidly going the way of the wheelwright and the candlestick maker and the differences between v.p. and self-published e-books is sometimes hairfine and in some cases hard to define..
The rapidity with which e-publishing has consumed large chunks of the market, and the appetite of the global reading public for Kindle product has caught everyone on the hop – though, arguably, it shouldn’t have.
Apropos the RNA and ‘quality control’, the problem for the Association is one of adjusting the criteria for membership to include indie writers and yet keep up certain standards in both content and presentation. Open the door too wide and the Association is flooded with 20p drek and self-styled authors clamouring for space and attention on equal terms with seasoned professional writers, like you and Joanne. Open the door not wide enough and thoroughly professional e-book writers feel, naturally, agrieved to be excluded.
Gateway committees to vet works by authors anxious to join the Associaton is, unfortunately,impractical. Minimum sales figures, on the SoA scale, is clumsy but might be the only way to go. As Freda, Jenny and Sue have already pointed out – the problem is being addressed. The RNA is not a net-based organisaton like the recently formed Indie groups and cannot, therefore, move with keystroke speed. Meanwhile, I’d hate to see not yet published writers like Vikki being put off joining the RNA and sharing its many benefits during this period of adjustment.
Hugh
September 22, 2012 at 2:15 pm
I think we agree fundamentally, Hugh. I would also urge new writers like Vikki to consider taking advantage of the RNA New Writer’s Sceheme which has always been an excellent entry point for those not yet published and very good value for money.
September 24, 2012 at 1:51 pm
Well said, Linda. And thanks to everyone who commented and shared their thoughts on this topic. I’ve now received a reply from the RNA (the lady who deals with membership was on holiday as we suspected), and while there won’t be any wholesale changes to their membership rules just yet, the committee will be voting on it at next year’s AGM. Which is great, I think you’ll agree. And non-members can still attend many of the RNA’s events.
Having read back through all the comments, I think everyone is coming from the same place. I’d really like to sum this up into the following points:
An organisation like the RNA has the right – and the responsibility – to keep its status as a place for professional romance writers.
To lump professional self-publishing in with the old label of vanity publishing isn’t appropriate anymore.
There are many, many self-published books out there where the author’s main agenda isn’t necessarily to produce a well-edited, professional book for profit. And while this is fine, there needs to be a realistic way of separating – and recognising – indie authors whose values and production standards are more in line with trad-published authors.
There are lots of other organisations which do welcome self-published authors, and many are finding new ways of assessing a potential member’s suitability.
Any organisation, including the RNA, should ensure that it is fair to its members and consistent in its opportunities for book promotion – allowing an author to promote some books and not others is confusing. The RNA did change this rule in Linda’s case.