My YA debut, WITH OR WITHOUT YOU, is officially in stores today! To celebrate, I’m having two contests with prizes for people who help me spread the word. Here’s how it works:
CONTEST #1: FOR WRITERS
Been slaving over your NANOWRIMO manuscript for months and would like a professional opinion? Thinking you need to do one more draft before sending your work-in-progress out to agents but need input? This is the contest for you!
As many of you know, during the day I’m the acquiring editor for Flux, the young adult imprint of Llewellyn Worldwide. In this capacity, I’ve worked with New York Times Bestselling authors Simone Elkeles and Maggie Stiefvater. And if you’ll help me promote my new book, I’ll turn my critical eye to your manuscript.
First prize is a manuscript critique. I will read up to 60,000 words of your work –in—progress and provide you with detailed, written comments.
Second prize is a partial manuscript critique. I will read the first 50 pages of your work-in-progress and provide you with detailed, written comments.
Third prize is a micro-critique. I will read the first 10 pages of your work-in-progress AND your query letter and provide you with detailed, written comments.
All prizes also include a signed copy of WITH OR WITHOUT YOU.
The more you enter, the more chances you have of winning. How to enter:
2)     For 1 entry: Tweet this exact message with hashtag (cut/paste, it’ll be easy): I can’t wait to read WITH OR WITHOUT YOU by @BrianFarrey  http://bit.ly/fPnlEk #wowy1
3)Â Â Â Â Â For 1 entry: Tweet this exact message with hashtag: Â Hey, writers, win a critique of your MG/YA WIP! (http://bit.ly/lCC6kC) #wowy1
Three chances to win right there!  And feel free to tweet #2 and #3 as often as you like for additional entries. (But, y’know, don’t scare away your own followers by filling up your feed.) The contest ends June 6 at 11:59pm Central time. Using a random number generator, I will determine the three winners and contact them via Twitter DM.
Rules/Caveats:
1)     My reading of all work is not in my official capacity as editor of Flux. Meaning that by sending me your work for review, you understand that it is not being submitted for consideration to be published by Flux. Flux, and its parent company Llewellyn Worldwide, have nothing to do with this contest.
2)Â Â Â Â Â I require a minimum of two months to respond after winners have submitted their materials.
3)Â Â Â Â Â All winners must submit their work to me within six months of winning. (In other words, winners should not start writing the moment they find out they won. Â Ideally, they should start tightening an existing manuscript before sending it.) Submissions must be in the form of an MS Word document (please no PDFs and definitely no Works files). No hard copy submissions.
4)     Why is 60,000 words the cut-off for a “full†manuscript critique? Because I firmly believe that if you are an unpublished writer, this is the ideal length (or even shorter) for your debut. If your manuscript is more than 60,000, I will only read the first 60,000. But, hey, that’s still a SUBSTANTIAL part.
There will be one first prize winner, one second prize winner, and one third prize winner.
CONTEST #2: FOR NON-WRITERS (aka “readersâ€)
Of course, not everyone who may be interested in winning is a writer. Some people just read for the thrill of it. I like those people and I want them to feel included. So here are the prizes for the non-writers.
First prize is an eclectic collection of signed, first edition hardcover books. This collection will include:
MOCKINGJAY by Suzanne Collins *
PLEASE IGNORE VERA DIETZ by A.S. King
THE REPLACEMENT by Brenna Yovanoff
LINGER by Maggie Stiefvater
NIGHTSHADE by Andrea Cremer
Second prize is an eclectic collection of signed paperbacks books. Â This collection will include:
GODLESS by Pete Hautman
THE ALCHEMYST by Michael Scott
M IS FOR MAGIC by Neil Gaiman
BALLAD by Maggie Stiefvater
Third prize is a $25 gift card to the book retailer of your choice (Amazon, Barnes and Noble, Borders, Indiebound, etc.).
All prizes also include a signed copy of WITH OR WITHOUT YOU.
The more you enter, the more chances you have of winning. How to enter:
2)     For 1 entry: Tweet this exact message (cut/paste, it’ll be easy): I can’t wait to read WITH OR WITHOUT YOU by@BrianFarrey   http://bit.ly/fPnlEk #wowy2
3)Â Â Â Â Â For 1 entry: Tweet this exact message:Â Win a collection of signed first edition YA books! (http://bit.ly/lCC6kC) #wowy2
As with the other contest, feel free to tweet #2 and #3 as often as you like for additional entries. The contest ends June 6 at 11:59pm Central time. Using a random number generator, I will determine the three winners and contact them via Twitter DM
*=Please note: the signature in this book is the stamp signature developed for Suzanne Collins when she went on the Mockingjay tour in late 2010.
First, let’s talk about The Bet. You can learn about it here. Â For the record, I won The Bet and don’t have to write a story (which I’m cool with because I’m on deadline and don’t have time to anyway so there). As a result of The Bet, today you will be treated to three original short stories by authors Catherine Ryan Hyde, Kimberly Pauley, and Andrew Smith. Â Go read and comment on their offerings. BTW, reading these stories from established and wonderful writers is 100% free.
Next, let’s talk about the third leg of the promotional blog tour for the release of WITH OR WITHOUT YOU. Â Over the next few days, Â on distinguished blogs across the blogosphere, you will learn:
My dream apprenticeship
What I learned from five of my favorite authors
And the saga of how a master’s thesis called CHASERS became a YA novel called WITH OR WITHOUT YOU
Here’s where you’ll find me guest posting over the next week.
And finally, we should talk about the Contest. Â Come back here to this blog tomorrow at 12pm CST to learn details about a contest where writers can win a full manuscript critique from a real, live editor and reading enthusiasts can win signed, first edition copies of books from today’s finest YA writers. Nothing to bid on. No purchase necessary. Â All you have to do is help me spread the word about WOWY and I’ll tell you how.
Just over a week until the release of WITH OR WITHOUT YOU! (Or, as we call it in these parts: WOWY!) Â My blog tour continues this week with a couple (planned) reviews of the book (I say [planned] because I’m hoping the reviewers have received their copies by now…) and my thoughts on any number of fascinating topics.
In this latest leg of the tour, you will learn:
My Numero Uno pet peeve when reading submissions as an editor
The best use for a pixie
The chili recipe that won me first prize in a contest
Coming next week: details on The Contest. Â You, too, could win a full manuscript critique from a real, live acquiring editor! Â (Or, if you’re not so much a writer, there’ll be a chance to win some awesome signed books.)
As May 24 comes precariously closer, I’m being bombarded by reminders that, yes, I actually am about to have my first book published. Â First up: the actual book!
It showed up at my door, looking all pretty!
The next thing that’s making this all too real is I’m doing a blog tour! Â I’ll be doing guest posts, answering interview questions, and imparting Things You Never Knew You Never Knew About Me on the blogs of some of the nicest book bloggers on the web. Â First up this week:
May 12–Zoe visits me at ages 6, 12, 16, and 20 for book recommendations over at In The Next Room
More blog tour stops to be announced soon. Â Much thanks to Kari, Mandy, and Zoe for sharing their blogs with me and kicking off the tour!
Coming soon: details on The Contest. (No, not the one from Seinfeld. Pervs.) Â This Contest will be a chance to win some fabulous signed books by some of the best YA authors around AND there’s a chance to win a FULL manuscript critique by an actual, real live, honest-to-goodness young adult editor (for you writers out there)….
I’m a bit behind (in all things, really) so I haven’t had much of a chance to talk about the Bet that I’m involved in.  For a good account of how this went down, check out Catherine Ryan Hyde’s post about it here. The short version:  three other writers (Catherine, Kimberly Pauley, and Andrew Smith) and I have a bet about the Kentucky Derby.  The losers must each write a short story based on a title of the winners’ suggestion. (CRH explains it all very well.)
This came about because Stephen King had just published a short story in The Atlantic and an accompanying interview revealed that he wrote the story because he lost a bet with his son (and his son provided the title: “Herman Wouk is Still Aliveâ€).  I mused on Twitter how fun this might be and suddenly these three wonderfully nutty people took me up on creating such a bet.
I’m the first to admit: short stories are not my milieu.  I adore reading short stories. I even dabble in writing them from time to time.  But I find them to be very difficult for how my brain works.  And I’m a bit out of practice. So I’m just a tad nervous.
Image from harlanellison.com
Harlan Ellison used to do something called “stories under glass.†He’d set up his typewriter in a store window and, right there under the watchful eye of spectators, produce a new short story based on a premise supplied by someone else.  Once I believe he got a suggestion from Robin Williams.  The one I recall vividly is when X-Files creator Chris Carter arrived with a sealed envelope.  Inside was a card that read “The 102-year-old pregnant
corpse.† What amazed me about Ellison was that he didn’t even stop to think about it.  He got the idea and immediately started typing.  And as he finished pages, they were taped up in the window for all to see.
No editing. No changing. No nothing.
For the record, *I* will not be doing that, should I end up writing a short story. *I* will think long and hard before I start writing. *I* will change and edit and, most likely, fret over the whole thing. Â But, I will also try to enjoy working outside my level of comfort.
The horse I’ve chosen to win is called Dialed In.  Fingers crossed.
There’s a lot of advice out on the web on how to write a book. Some of it’s good advice, some of it’s awful. What I’m noticing, though, is a dearth of information on how to approach writing a book. This unsung step is crucial to the development of any novel. It’s where ideas are nurtured and shaped. It’s where worlds are born and characters are birthed. It’s where inspiration and intuition conspire to parent dreams.*
Here, then, is my contribution to this seldom discussed piece of craft.
HOW TO APPROACH WRITING A YA NOVEL**
1.   Get an idea (check the Sunday paper, sometimes Target has a sale).
2.   Make sure it’s a really good idea. Ask your cat. If she sleeps, it’s a really good idea.
3.   Research the YA market and learn that someone else did your idea. Sort of like how you planned, only better.
4.   Buy a live chicken, some salt, and a ceremonial dagger.
5.   In a field near a graveyard at midnight, draw a pentagram with the salt and sacrifice the chicken.
6.   Curse the name of the author who stole your idea. Said curse might include, but should not be limited to, poxes, bodily leakage, poor judgment, spontaneous combustion, spontaneous tap dancing, unrelenting sorrow and porridge, intermittent gravitas, and mistaken identity.
7.   Google the author to see if the curse worked.
8.   If the curse did not work, repeat with step 1.
9.   If the curse worked, supply me with a list of ideas you’d like me to stay away from and I’ll do so unreservedly thank you very much and my you’re looking nice today unholy one.
*=Yes, I”m aware of how completely awful that metaphor is. I’m giving it to you as a gift. Consider it a weapon the next time someone criticizes your writing. Â Whip that puppy on them and watch their brains implode. You can thank me later. Or now.
**=Please note that while the term “YA novel” is used, these methods can be invoked as you approach writing just about anything. The advantage of using this as you prepare to write a grocery list is that the chicken doubles as both sacrifice and dinner.
First of all, I want to thank everyone who hasn’t berated me for not exactly sticking to my Blog Manifesto mandate of blogging every Monday. (Those who’ve berated me? A pox on you.) I try. I really do. Â But, in the words of the immortal Trekkie Monster: “Me busy.”
So, it will probably come as no small source of amusement to learn that, despite my inability to keep what should be a fairly moderate schedule, I’ve joined another blog, in addition to my activities here. The redoubtable Holly Schindler used her wiles and influence (AKA, she put me in a headlock and gave me the Noogie of Death) to get me to join Smack Dab in the Middle, a blog written by a diverse collection of middle grade authors. Â Never mind that my first middle grade book won’t even by out until late 2012. Â I’m diving in now and making my presence known there. Â Holly won me over with the promise that I would only HAVE to blog once a month–on the 25th. I figured that would be doable.
I didn’t mention that I’d completely failed to even do ONE post during the entire month of February.  You know, just shortly after issuing the Blog Manifesto.
If nothing else, ya gotta stick around to watch me self destruct while I try to juggle what, in all reality, should be a completely manageable blogging schedule, yet I’ll find a way to change it into an earth-shattering cataclysm. Â I am here, if nothing, to entertain.
My first post is up today. Â We were asked to blog about why we write middle grade. Â All the good answers were taken so I chose an unusual course: blunt honesty.
To be clear, I’m not giving up this blog. I will continue to blog here EVERY MONDAY (go ahead: laugh).  I will talk about the imminent release of my debut YA novel, WITH OR WITHOUT YOU (in stores just shy of one month from now).  I will talk about work on my middle grade series.  And I will talk about whatever else pops into my somewhat demented mind.
With the new series of DOCTOR WHO starting in just two days, I had started a rather lengthy, rambling post about my lifelong love of the show with a butchered attempt at explaining my fondness.
I looked over what I’d written—an analysis of how gay men tend to be drawn to escapist fantasy and how DOCTOR WHO epitomizes the ultimate getaway—and it didn’t make sense to me anymore. I’m sure a psychologist would zero in on these reasons for my attraction to the show.
But really, I loved the show because of Sarah Jane.
Steven Moffat, the current showrunner, once commented that DOCTOR WHO isn’t about the Doctor. It’s about the companions. They’re our surrogates. We get to live the adventures through them. And while the Doctor has indeed flown solo a few times, he always manages to surround himself with people the audience can identify and sympathize with.
Sarah Jane was the first companion I knew. She was my first connection to the show. Sure, I was thirteen and a sci fi geek and that alone should have drawn me there. But being drawn there and staying there are two different things. And I stayed for Sarah Jane. She was funny. She was flawed. She was clever. She was strong.
Companions came and went like the Doctors but losing Sarah Jane was hard. She’s one of what I call “the tragic companions.†The list is relatively short: Jamie, Zoe, Adric, Peri, Rose, and Donna. Most of the Doctor’s companions left of their own accord. They chose to leave on their terms. Turlough returned to his homeworld, Jo got married, Mel went to explore the galaxy with Sabalom Glitz. The tragic companions didn’t get a choice. They had to leave the Doctor. Their departures tend to hit me the hardest. Largely because it’s obvious that most wanted to travel with the Doctor for much longer. Lis often said how much she treasured her association with DOCTOR WHO and how it brought so much good to her life.  I can’t help but think that, when she passed, nothing pleased her more than to know she was still making children happy playing Sarah Jane, some 30 years after originating the role.
I’ve met a few of the WHO actors over the years but I regret never having met her. The online tributes have been astounding and the one consistent fact in everything people are saying is what wonderful person she was. Sure, everyone says that when somebody dies. But not this effusively. Not this convincingly.
In many ways, I owe my writing to DOCTOR WHO. Â But that’s a story for a different time.
Thanks, Lis, for having such a profound effect on my life. When the TARDIS flies again on Saturday, your presence will be felt.
The New York Times has an interesting article on the history of the Muppets franchise and how, essentially, it’s been almost destroyed several times over by mismanagement since Jim Henson’s death.
While the article refers to MUPPETS CHRISTMAS CAROL and MUPPET TREASURE ISLAND as bombs, I liked both movies. Liked, but didn’t necessarily love. They both have their moments. Odd as this may sound, I believe one of things that’s led to a sense of disembodiment for the Muppets is the strange decision to put Kermit into the background.
In both the aforementioned movies, Gonzo has a more prominent role and the disastrous MUPPETS IN SPACE centers around him. MUPPETS TONIGHT (which I did love, if it was a little uneven) gave hosting duties over to Clifford. (I like Clifford a lot but, again, I kept wondering why Kermit wasn’t featured more.)  I think in most people’s minds, Kermit is the heart and soul of the Muppets. It’s always been peculiar to see him relegated to second banana duty. (Full disclosure: I’ve never been much of a Gonzo fan.  He tends to irritate me. So my analysis may be biased a bit. But you can’t deny a correlation between the downward spiral of the Muppets and the sudden, inexplicable prominence of Gonzo….)
I agree with the article that the Muppets are best when they’re being themselves, not when they’re taking on roles in THE WIZARD OF OZ or such. I have high hopes for the movie that’s coming out this fall.  It sounds like the people working on it have returned the Muppets to their roots.  Definitely a step in the right direction.
I still watch episodes of the original Muppet show and wonder why they aren’t more prominent in today’s culture. There’s something timeless about the sketches. (OK. Not all of them. The Mummenshanz? Seriously?)  Or maybe nostalgia provides a sheen that mimics timelessness.  Sales on the DVDs have been iffy at best. I just don’t get it.
Well, I sort of do. I think this article hits on some ugly truths. And an ugly reality is: can the Muppets unique style and brand of humor compete with evolving tastes and technology? DOCTOR WHO essentially re-invented itself when it rebooted in 2005, shedding the shaky sets and awful SFX for cinematography and spectacle more in tune with 21st century audiences.  BATMAN was been re-imagined so many times, it makes the original comic books look cutesy and quaint by comparison.  Is there such a revamp that can make the Muppets hip again? Or are they destined to become memories of a different time with a different sense of humor, going the way of Little Orphan Annie, Captain Kangaroo, and Kukla, Fran, and Ollie?  And will such a reboot remove what made the Muppets who they are?
A lot is riding on this new movie. No pressure, though.
My debut novel, WITH OR WITHOUT YOU, is out next month. May 24, to be precise. Â A bit earlier than I’d anticipated. Yay for being out early but AAHHH! now must think promotion sooner than I’d planned.
But, thankfully, the internet works in mysterious ways. (Or rather, I’m learning I have very cool writer friends who hook me up with very cool websites.) Â See my first official GUEST BLOG POST over at Gay YA where I talk about resonating with readers and one YA book in particular that did so with me.
I guess I consider this the official kick-off to my WOWY (ain’t that a great acronym?) media blitz. Other promotional plans (a blog tour, for example) are in the works AND a contest. Â In fact, TWO contests! Â Details forthcoming in early May.
Now, if you’ll excuse me, I need to go avoid spoilers for the upcoming series of DOCTOR WHO, which premieres three terribly long weeks away on April 23. (Seriously, if the anticipation doesn’t do me in, fighting off the temptation to read spoilers will.)
