#they all have editors and peer critiques to help them

[em-dashes]

now that suddence is out to betas i'm oscillating between getting more and more self conscious and overthinking about everything that might be wrong with the story vs. knowing that is literally THE POINT of betas and i can't in good conscience let my story slide out into the world with a bunch of faults i didn't catch simply because i was too close to it

[waytooinvested]

Kara suddenly deciding to come out to the world bothered me so much, despite the fact that in many ways it IS a logical conclusion for her. She spends her life wrestling with the conflict of trying to balance these two sides of herself, never being allowed to just be honest about who she is, and also with the fear of what the world at large finding out will do to the people she loves. That is a massive weight on her shoulders, so of course it makes sense that laying that down and moving forwards as her full self could be part of her happy ending.

HOWEVER.

We have seen repeatedly that her fears around coming out are NOT unfounded. We get shown timelines in which she reveals herself and the people she loves pay for it. And that never really gets resolved before they leap straight to 'and now she comes out and it's all good and happy, weeeee!' while we (I) get left with the uncomfortable niggle of 'okay... and then what?'

Not to mention the fact that while she isn't the only one anymore, Supergirl is still THE big hero of National City, and coming out will thrust Kara into a spotlight that I really don't think she's prepared for. As soon as she's out she won't be able to just take off the cape and relax at the end of the day. She'll be a celebrity. A MASSIVE one. Constantly watched, observed, critiqued, plastered all over the tabloids at every turn. Everyone will want a piece of her. That's a lot even for people like Lena who have basically been raised to it, but Kara? Kara has been raised to hide. And I know hiding is not serving her anymore, but that is a HELL of cliff to jump over, and once it's done, there's no going back.

But all of that could have had a softer, more comfortable landing if they had kind of… laid the groundwork a bit more first?

There are inklings of it already in place - growing up for Esme and her peers is going to be a very different experience to the one Kara had with no need for power dampeners. The world is becoming a kinder place to aliens. If they had taken a bit more time to weave in more of that in the run up to the finale (yes I know, they were kind of busy with the totems and the imps and the, ah... giant cats), it might have changed the reception to Kara coming out.

What if other superheroes started popping up all over the city (the country, the world) so that powered people using their skills for good became just... part of the fabric of society? If there were Super training schools where you could go to learn to harness your gifts and join fire fighters or paramedics or search and rescue teams, and work with humans and make their shared home a better, safer place instead of being held apart from them? Where there are Superhero accreditations and ethical codes and a clear directive for how it's dealt with for when a Super goes rogue that minimizes harm to them and others (because that IS a consideration, and needs to be) without the answer being to lock them away without trial in a secret DEO prison forever.

If they wait for (and work for, and BUILD) that world, Supergirl is no longer particularly remarkable. She's (almost) the first, but she's no longer the only. She is much less in demand. No longer held in such awe and/or terror. She'd still be famous sure, but watered way the hell down, as the danger would be too, because it wouldn't just be her and her little ragtag bunch of vigilantes anymore. She'd still have people with a personal grudge against her (or her family) to deal with, but for the most part it would hardly be worth targeting her specifically, because there's this whole collective of Supers now, and taking down Supergirl isn't going to help your nefarious plan that much in the long run.

AND it would mean she might actually have time to make a go of being editor in chief, because the pressure would be off. She can still do her superhero thing, but she doesn't have to answer every call. There is a citywide network to fall back on, and chances are pretty good that if she is in an important meeting (or y'know, an important makeout session with a beautiful dark haired witch/scientist, because yes I WILL make every post about Supercorp. Every post IS about supercorp. There is no version of a happy ending that does not involve these two admitting they are hopelessly in love and flying off into the sunset together), then someone else will be there. She can't always be their saviour. She doesn't have to be. She gets to live her own life now.

[tarysande]

Can I ask, how does one go about becoming an editor? Like, where do you apply for jobs?? What kinda training do you do?? Are there companies that hire out editors to writers? Im just so confused about it. Ive always been interested in editing, and am considering doing it as a job

Editing is a weird career.

Really, I started as a writer. Like, when I was eleven. In jr. high and high school, I was in a writing critique group and I wrote a lot. I graduated from university with a degree in theatre, film, and creative writing. I was often the person my friends came to when they needed help with a paper (or the correct placement of a semicolon). I've been involved in fandom since I was about 17, and I was very fortunate to fall in with a group of excellent writers who were also excellent betas and editors. I learned a TON from them without realizing how much I was learning.

I started editing by accident, really. Sometimes, that's how it happens. I mostly got gigs here and there through friends or word of mouth. About ten years ago, I got more serious about it. I worked for companies that paid horribly. Then I did an editing test for a company that paid less horribly, and they hired me. After a couple of years editing countless academic papers, ESL academic papers, novels, emails, business documents, etc., I decided to branch out on my own (mostly so I could work on more fiction; I was burned out on academic papers).

I joined Editors Canada, started volunteering with them, got a lot more experience, and took a few continuing ed courses to gauge where my skills were at and to determine if I needed to upgrade my education. I decided I didn't need to do that, because I already knew the things I was being taught.

I read a lot of books on editing, writing, and craft. I familiarized myself with the Chicago Manual of Style, APA, MLA, and a couple of other style guides. I learned the differences in spelling, punctuation, and style between US, UK, and Canadian English. I went to webinars, conferences, and courses (all the major editing associations offer these, usually cheaper or free for members; they are a great way to determine what kinds of editing you actually LIKE). I learned the difference between rules and preferences, and when to apply them to a text.

I work freelance, which means I have my own business as a sole proprietor. I'm a contractor with a couple of companies who sometimes send work my way, but most of my clients are individual writers planning to either self-publish or polish their work before seeking traditional publication via the agent/tradpub route.

Freelancing has many perks but is not particularly secure. Especially if you're American and need an employer to provide health insurance, or if you're single and don't have another income to lean on when contracts are scarce. These days, most of my work comes via referrals, my website, or the listing I have in the Editors Canada directory. I follow a couple of editing-related Facebook groups; I've learned a lot there, and I've also picked up the occasional client. A couple of people have found me through LinkedIn. A couple of people have found me through here!

I've never worked in-house for a publisher--mostly because having control over how many hours I work and when I work them is my top priority. In-house is a whole different ballgame; I know a bit about it from my peers, but I don't have firsthand experience to pass on. These jobs are supposedly more secure--and they tend to be salaried, with benefits, etc.

"Editing" is a GIANT umbrella term. There are SO many types of editing out there. People tend to think of book publishing first, but that's only one avenue. There are also different kinds of editors who tackle different types of problems. I've done enough of everything to recognize that I am much happier when I'm working on big picture stuff--coaching, developmental editing, manuscript critique. Others specialize in the nitty gritty mechanical details that make proofreading or copy editing a better fit.

Right now, the bulk of my work life is actually spent ghostwriting. The client's business-materials editor posted that his client was looking for someone to help with characterization in a novel. I ended up winning that contract. He came to me with one monster book. I helped him realize it needed to be at least a trilogy, and now he has plans for a ten-book series--and I'm helping write it. But I got the job because of the work I've done on the development side of editing--and because I've spent SO MUCH TIME learning about characterization (via acting, fandom/writing fanfic, reading, etc.). So. It all feeds into the same place.

The tl;dr is that my experience has been a bizarre mix of being in the right place at the right time, ongoing professional development, and learning the value of volunteering with an association. If I were starting down this career path right now, I'd probably do an editing certificate (there are many out there, depending on country). I'd definitely join an association sooner (even as a student member) and volunteer.

Actually, the ultimate tl;dr is ... this industry IS CONFUSING. So, don't feel bad about being confused. It's actually probably about eight different kinds of job wearing a trench-coat and pretending it's something called "Editing."

[anna-jowanowitch]

Hanford 2018 & 2020 What's Hot in Literacy Report

Big Takeaways: A big takeaway that I had from the first reading by Hanford 2018 is that phonics and phonemic awareness are a reading skill backed by science that dates back to the mid-1900s but was not embraced until recently. Many teachers are still against this practice and believe that reading is a skill you naturally have. The second reading "2020 What's Hot in Literacy Report" States that teachers are not equipped to teach their students effective literacy practices. If we want equity in literacy instruction, then we need to prepare our teachers equally so that all students can grow.

Nuggets: In the first reading Hanford (2018) I learned about the big war when it came to phonics instruction. Growing up I had no idea that there was so much controversy over teaching strategies let alone something so foundational as teaching students how to read. In the second article, I learned more about how teachers are not equally equipped to teach their students correctly, when I was a student, I assumed that all teachers went to a conference every year to learn the same things or that all teachers went to college's that taught them all the same thing. It's interesting to see how the lack of structure in future educators college careers is leading to controversy in education. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Read texts deeply in order to interpret, critique, and analyze the various layers of meaning a text might offer a reader.

Learn something about the author of the assigned course reading(s) and use that to draw conclusions about the motivation behind the reading or the credibility/quality of the writing.

For the first reading, Hanford 2018, there is some debate around whether Hanford was qualified to talk about this issue. While she is talented at public relations having been a reporter, producer, editor, news director, and program host. It seems that her sources on the science backing up phonics-based reading instruction are a little hazy and not totally correct. There is also a note that what she submits is not peer-reviewed before it is published which also adds questions to her credibility. I personally don't care about the credentials all that much. It doesn't take a scientist to see that children are growing and understanding better when they learn phonics to read vs. when they don't. Only teachers in the classroom would be able to testify to that, and she gives them a voice to do so.

For the second reading, I could not find information on who exactly put it together so I looked at ILA as a whole. The organization seems extremely credible due to the fact that they are able to give awards and stamps of approval to other companies. Also, the fact that they're internationally recognized helps their credibility too.

[izzyspussy]

how different is writing an actual book as opposed to writing fanfiction besides the obvious (og characters/backstories/plots)? Bc publishing my writing is something i’ve always wanted to do, but i’ve never felt compelled to be in depth with metaphors/subplots/motifs, and I’m sure they show up but in a natural way? Does that make me a less efficient author for just wanting to create vs putting together a puzzle? I’ve always liked books with plots to be clear and forward, while leaving room for dissection as like an extra activity vs something thats necessary, if that makes any sense, and I feel like that reflects in my own writing and I can’t tell if that makes it less — and for lack of a better word — good. Ik this is a lot, but generally if you’ve got any tips regarding the process and importance of some aspects of professionally writing, id greatly appreciate it <3

Hi, anon! Thanks for asking, let's see what I can do for you for some answers! ♥

How different is writing a book compared to writing fanfiction?

In my personal experience the biggest difference - just in writing, not editing, publishing, etc - writing a book versus writing fanfiction is actually with characterization. If you have a fully developed character in your mind from knowing what happens to them it can be kind of difficult to write them pre-development and have them change on-page. In fanfiction, usually you already have your starting point with the character and you only have to worry about how to get them where you want them.

(And also you usually can't use lyrics for your titles lol.)

In Depth Subplots & Motifs (& Foreshadowing, etc)

These things are super hard and can be very complicated, so don't worry too much if they're not your favorite thing to work on!

I think at least in regards to motif, if you're really writing from a genuine place it pretty much takes form as you go. Sometimes in the plotting stage you have only the "point" or you have only the fun delivery mechanisms - the characters, plot, setting. Whatever little pieces you start with, in this particular case most of the time the easiest way to figure out the shape of everything else is to just dive in and let it happen.

I also do that a lot with fanfiction, actually, because often it's a total accident. @kedreeva has a post about why sometimes you can realize you have to rework your plot only to find that what you've already written already supports your new direction. I think pretty much everything said there can apply just as readily to motifs and to the purpose your story is meant to fulfill for the audience, or for you. I don't remember any exact words from the post though so I don't think I could find it lmfao. It might be a ways back in my /writing-process tag, but maybe they have easier access to it and can share it again, in which case I'll come back and add the link.

As for subplots, those are really fucking hard and there's not much else I can really tell you about 'em. However! You don't always necessarily need a subplot. They can add extra depth to your characters and to your world, or they can emphasize your main plot, but frankly good character development alone can do those things just as well. It can be a little difficult to get a full novel if you don't have a subplot, but not everyone is a novel writer and that's good! Not everyone is a novel reader either.

Metaphors are also mostly for good flavor. Depending on your subject matter and your style, you might not need them either. Off the top of my head I don't think Steig Larsson (Girl With The Dragon Tattoo) used many metaphors in his series, and that mostly just made the content feel more grounded. It's not for every reader (some might call it 'dry' or 'dense' or something like that) but for some people that's their preference!

You do of course need some background and flavor text other than just A, B, and C things happened, of course, but they can be in any style or amount of detail that you prefer. Your editor and test readers will let you know if something doesn't make sense or seems incomplete.

Does that make me a less efficient author?

If you're writing fiction, it's not really about efficiency! It's about being engaging. Stephen King and J.R.R. Tolkien both spend pages upon pages giving textbook-like information on their worlds or on character backstory that I personally would have said to cut if I was their editor, but again some audiences prefer that kind of read!

If you think it's more interesting/important/fun to spend time on literal description versus making your work fit an aesthetic, then that's what will be interesting/important/fun for the audience you'll find eventually.

The only thing you can really do to find a style that you are satisfied with and is readable is to practice, share your work, be open to critique (when appropriate ofc), and read a lot.

Other Tips

In fanfiction having an editor, beta-readers, critique partners, and maintaining a group of peers is all really kind of optional and honestly even above and beyond. In publishing that is 100% not true. You absolutely need an editor and test readers, and you need to keep up with other people in the industry and especially in your genre and/or publishing method (traditional, indie, self). Mutually assured success is necessary - not a nice extra - in publishing. You have to be willing to spend time on others' work and to accept the value of their input on yours if you want to make good art and reach an audience.

Again, thanks for sending in an ask. I hope this helped!

♥ Jack

I'm an award winning author. AMA!

[misterbitches]

i live in a universe where if i were to walk down the street i could get murdered willy nilly cos im black but men are out here going around being like “my boyfriend and i met when he was a junior in high school” i don’t believe in jail and i try not to make jail jokes but HOW IS THAT FAIR? JAIL!!! GUILLOTINE!!!! GET THIS MAN A RETIREMENT FUND AND A THERAPIST

that dialogue was fucking embarrassing. he shoulda just said “im 12 yrs older than him” no one needs to know u were 30 dating a 17 year old u insecure freak. retire bitch and get away from her

 i wanted muren so badly to be like “LMAO SRY didnt mean to seem surprised i just like men my own age i guess?” i wouldnt have even apologized if i was surprised. my friend was dating someone ten yrs younger than him and i made fun of him for it and he was like “i know” bc he does know.

just a tip: i don’t like getting hit on by men way older than me, a lot of people don’t. i’ve had men who are 36 interested in me when i was 23, and i reciprocated, but now as i am 29 and older i realize how much it confused me and how i didn’t like it.

age gaps are what they are. ther’es many times i do not like it especially if it is a pattern (this is what happens in tv shows and movies and the opposite of that isn’t gay age gaps or power imbalances or women much older than a younger man ok that’s not progress it’s just peopl ewanting to be like cis men and no one wants that) and esp if the person’s peers are all their ages. people seem to forget that we travel in the same social circles on purpose due to our environments and also our world experiences. the only way to meet an older man is outside of school and yet adults can’t seem to control themselves?

i saw this person who was one of the editors of sexual hegemony (a book on capitalism and homophobic laws and sex basically idk google it it’s interesting) and he was trying to have a foucultian outlook (i hate focault btw doesn’t mean what he says wasnt interesting but it does mean i am not okay with psychosexual philosophers who take advantage of people. the only testament against him having reltaions with younger people is a bunch of young people i nfucking tunisia and there’s an excuse that he wasn’t a fucking pedophile he was those ebebebbeopopopo people and it doesnt matter when ur in fucking tunisia as a white french algerian fucking preying on children) how age of consent laws desexualize younger people. they were passed for  abunch of reasons like any law but here is the thing

we have no business in being in spaces to determine children’s sexual identity and teenagers in their own realm. THEY need to figure it out. our job as adults is to PROTECT THEM full stop. not intrude on their lfe and not give them the tools to decide for themselves. age of consent laws are meant to protect not to facilitate children against some boogeyman of sex. the issue is the way our society views it but young people are sexual AS YOUNG PEOPLE. it has NOTHING to do with adults and it shouldn’t. that’s why it is extra fucking intrusive when you are literally wedged into someone’s life who you have no business being around. it’s only by fucking circumstance. it’s abysmal and not cute. 

what this tells me is that the age gap is salacious. not in the way that i was 23 and a man was 36. in the way that he was 17 and this dude was 29. that’s interesting right? it’s “oooh” and it means we shouldn’t balk at it. saying 12 years would have sufficed, raises some eyebrows, and we can figure out the dynamics after but you just had to put that in BECAUSE YOU FUCKING LIKE IT but the thing is there’s no part of it that was fun. i’m just going to assume you like fucking teenagers bc that’s what it’s telling me lmao

i rarely talk about this couple but to put them in my eyeballs and then have that stupid conversation it was insulting lmao god please get a fucking script supervisor fuck but none of them care about sotry or any of what i fucking laid out. how stupid and careless and just unfun. i don’t like it. also ew at the idea of 2 tops and 2 bottoms talking oh my god i am gonna give myself a heart attack i’m already so fucking anxious i have to see my family lemme chill

im 29 and feel bad having a crush on a 23 year old CELEBRITY ok and i SHOULD feel ashamed and it’s not even a big deal that’s how everyone should approach life tbqh u walk around like ur 100 yrs old to avoid children. oh what’s that this korean cebrity learned english and moved to america to start a family with me and i find him very hot and i like his voice but we’re 6 years apart i’m not sure if i would work (how fun of a drama would that be. pointless and ridiculous. i love it.)

oh there’s a great review on CMBYN and its history and how the isolation and seeclusion was so fuckign capitalist bougie patriarchy and yea idk if anyone is interested. i think it’s ironic the ending for the people in CMBYN irl bc it’s just. so indicative of this shit. i dont like guadignino (idk is that how u spell his name) and think he’s not a great....person or director (i love the look of suspiria tho likke visually and edited. the DP was thai btw! he did an amazing job!!!) but it critiques this film from a perspective of someone who clearly at least cares about artistry, no matter how poorly i think he executes it, and just how hollow it is. the thing about “escapism” is that it relies on the harsh realities of the world to make it opposite, everything has context, nothing is apolitical. to make something that exists in a vacuum is negligent and it doesn’t help you escape it makes you even more tied to this world and its flaws because it doesn’t do anything to mitigate it.

people view it as like “we can put something stupid on screen and people have to accept it in this world” but that isn’t how IT WORKS. you hvae to build up the stakes of the world. but i can’t see introducing some “taboo” (see: stupid) elements and pretending the escapism is seeing this and allowing it. how could it be when the problem is the nature of the rship itself? what world are you taking us to? and why does this world ignore the pressing realities? and i wouldnt say either of these are explicit escapism (i think i hate that word now) becuase um they arent. this fantastical generally rich people escapism isn’t about bending things that don’t work to mold it into our society because WE DO THAT ALREADY it’s about taking those things and twisting them to something we can accept and like or something that has real consequences for people. it’s so funny how marketing and the idea of pc culture and shit and conservative ideology seeps into these. they have  an explicit interest in holding the status quou of taking advantage of people and using their power; age is a huge structure to do so. in this society when we struggle why would its existence not be challenged? because rape, ridiculous rships, abusive rships, torture etc is a power move, conservatives rest on it and people who gain power. what about that is appealing? making it gay? well, no. especially because men DO have power. 

every fucking thing in BL is a reflection of of patriarchy honestly. i can admit that and i’m not okay with it but it’s consumption. there’s a way to make this decent or entertaining without it being so fucking poorly done. and atp i dont even want to call things bl it’s a tv show just bc it’s for a certain audience doesnt mean anything do better idiots

[bitchesofostwick]

6, 7, 10, 24, 38 and 49 if you want? You always have such good writing advice. :)

6. how did writing change you? i don’t know. writing has changed me twice, really. first writing made me realize i wanted to pursue a career in writing. but i hated the peer review process and the way your work was picked apart into pieces a million times before it ever had a chance of seeming acceptable. and then having to pitch your work and sell your work and tailor your work to a publisher and to a buying clientele seemed awful. and i was better at editing and grammar anyway, so i became an editor, professionally. i stopped writing for a long time. but i started writing again, as fanfic. and i started loving it again. so writing made me realize i don’t have to be writing in order to sell. i just have to write what i like. it’s why i don’t have a beta reader, ever. i did the whole “let someone else read and critique your work before you can put it out there” and i hated it. i know what i want my writing to be. i don’t want someone else telling me what it should be. so i don’t do betas. i just write because it makes me happy, and if it makes other people happy too, that’s even better.

7. early influences on your writing: my english teacher during my freshman year of high school. she was the biggest stickler for grammar ever, but she helped me get a really good grasp on it, and a good grasp of grammar is essential to developing your own voice and style. you can’t break the rules of grammar if you don’t learn them and know them well first. plus, she really encouraged me to pursue more advanced writing courses, which eventually led to me studying writing in college, continuing writing as a hobby, and starting a career in publishing. so that’s cool.

10. how do you do your research? my personal style is actually so character- and emotion-driven that i actually try to work from my memory, or better even, my perception of the source material than i do the actual word for word, action by action material. because you can tell when someone is trying too hard to follow the source material—writing dialogue word for word exactly how it is in the game, for example. and i sort of feel like if i wanted to see an exact reflection of the game then i would just...play it? part of the creativity in fanfic is making the source material play to your own imagination and story. so if i really need important details i’ll usually just look it up on the wiki but really other than that i don’t do much research before writing my fics.

24. favorite scene you’ve ever written: THE LAST SCENE IN AWA. it’s a perfect third piece in ellinor and cullen’s relationship. dancing is a motif for them and the three times dancing comes up in AWA mark very different landmarks in their love for each other. i wrote that scene very early in the story. i knew it wanted to end like that. i wrote the last couple paragraphs so long before i finished publishing the fic because it seemed so perfect to me.

38. do you reread your own stories? yes oop—i reread AWA all the time. i can’t help it!! i love ellinor and cullen so much. and like idk i’ll brag it’s a good story haha. i’m very proud of it. i think if it’s not something you’d want to read yourself then maybe you shouldn’t write it!

49. writing advice: my advice is don’t follow tumblr advice. 99.9% of tumblr posts about writing advice are horrible advice. like that post that’s like “ideas for furthering the plot when your characters are stuck” and it’s like “kill off a character!” or “introduce a new character!” and stuff like that? idk i personally find that bad advice. like good advice if you’re in a dnd campaign maybe but bad advice if you’re actually working on a story. throwing in a curveball to spice up your plot halfway through a story will only read as unplanned and jarring. maybe it’s because i’m personally such an advocate for planning and outlining. idk. but that’s one example. otherwise i usually think tumblr writing advice is bad because they come off as being The One True Advice, or like a must-follow rule. rules need to fit your style. no one piece of advice will be good for every single writer’s style and voice. you need to know yourself well enough as a writer to know what’s good for you. and if you don’t know yourself enough yet, read more of other people’s work. professional publish work or fanfic, it doesn’t matter. see what you like or don’t like in other writers’ styles. develop your own voice. be true to your own preferences, have a unique style, create something that speaks to you and for you.

fanfic writer asks

[nyfacurrent]

Business of Art | Literary Submissions 101

Top tips for getting your work seen by editors and publishers.

When it comes to getting your work published, writing is only half of the job. Submitting your work to publications is also a big part of being a writer, and it requires some strategizing. Not sure where to begin? We compiled a series of tips from previous NYFA Current articles, plus updated best practices, and some very helpful advice from former #ArtistHotline guest chat participants Elisa Gabbert and Lincoln Michel. So take a deep breath, gather your courage, and take note of the tips below before starting to submit your work!

Step 1 - Doing the Research

It might sound obvious, but we will say it one more time for the people in the back: you must read and familiarize yourself with the publications you’re considering sending your work to. What kind of work do they typically publish? Do any of their published works stand out to you? Who is their audience? When do they usually have open calls? 

If you’re not sure how to begin this research, a good place to start is by following the steps of your main inspirations. Where have they published before? Have they written about their process anywhere? Do they talk about it in interviews? Interact with them on social media, but don’t expect them to take you by the hand and answer all of your questions, especially if unsolicited. Every now and then writers will feel like engaging on Instagram or Twitter, either creating threads or soliciting questions. Take advantage of these moments, but don’t be invasive. You can also follow hashtags like #pubtip and #querytip, used by writers, agents, and editors to share snippets of advice for aspiring writers. Another great way to understand where your heroes currently are and how they got there, is by reading the “Thank Yous” and “Acknowledgments” in their publications. 

Step 2 - Getting Organized

Step number one means you’ll collect a lot of information, which can quickly become unparsable. Before that happens, we suggest preparing a spreadsheet where you can organize all the publications you believe are a good match. Here’s a sample spreadsheet with some basic information you should have on hand for tracking your submissions. You might have to submit several times before getting a yes (and that’s totally normal), so make sure to track your “yes” and “no” responses and feedback received (if any) for future applications.

Feeling overwhelmed? Prioritize your submissions. What is your dream venue? If it’s a super-selective place, they’ll probably require a more extensive publication history. Focus on building this history first, perhaps applying to smaller names in the industry, and then aiming for the powerhouses. The most important thing here is to make sure this process doesn’t compromise your writing time. Here are a few tips on how to balance your time between submitting work and making it. 

Step 3 - Selecting Materials

Your “favorite-ever-thing-you-have-ever-written” is probably great, but it still might not be the best fit for a particular open call. When choosing what materials to send out, ask yourself the following question: does this work fit seamlessly with the other stories, essays, or poems this platform typically publishes? Choose objectively.

Along with your writing, open calls may ask for other supporting materials. The main one, and arguably, the most feared, is the cover letter. According to Lincoln Michel, writers don’t need to worry so much about them, focusing on keeping them short, direct, and simple. It's still important to know who you’re writing to, though. Show you did your research by matching the style of the publishing venue, Elisa Gabbert advises. CVs, references, and bios are other common files requested. Learn how to prepare them with these older, but golden tips from BinderCon. In terms of design, err on the side of cleanliness. Stick to the basics unless formatting is a big part of your text (for example, if you’re writing concrete poetry). 

Last but not least, follow the guidelines! Remember, one very important thing must happen before an editor even gets to read your submission: you must make it out of the slush pile. Due to competitiveness or likely lack of time on the side of jurors, you might receive a rejection simply because you did not follow simple rules like sticking to the word count or labeling your files correctly. 

Step 4 - Dealing with the Nos

Rejection is normal and does not necessarily mean your work is not good enough. Maybe your manuscript got lost in the slush pile—it happens to the best of us—or maybe it was not a good fit for the platform at that particular moment. 

Use rejections as a teachable moment. Ask for feedback if possible, but don’t be offended if editors are not able to answer. If you do get a response, don’t feel pressured to internalize all critiques or to revamp your work completely. Know your writing and your value as a writer so you can process useful commentary and disregard the rest. Follow the advice of Gabbert and develop a network of trusted peers (folks in the industry, friends) that can be your beta-readers and be ready to accept and learn from honest criticism. 

- Luiza Teixeira-Vesey, Designer/Marketing Officer

This article draws inspiration from #ArtistHotline, an initiative dedicated to creating an ongoing online conversation around the professional side of artistic practice. Our goal is to help artists discover the resources needed, online and off, to develop sustainable careers. You can follow NYFA at @nyfacurrent​ on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook. Find Elisa Gabbert and Lincoln Michel tweeting at @egabbert and @TheLincoln.

Have an arts career question? You can contact NYFA staff directly by emailing source@nyfa.org.

Image: Gil Avineri (Fellow in Printmaking/Drawing/Book Arts Fellow ’14); Ghastly Spread Between; 2009; color pencil, ink, acrylic, photo,collage on paper

[generalcreatortiger]

Scientists said claims about China creating the coronavirus were misleading. They went viral anyway.

Craig Timberg

Feb. 13, 2021 at 7:48 a.m. GMT+8

Scientists from Johns Hopkins, Columbia and other leading American universities moved with rare speed when a Chinese virologist, Li-Meng Yan, published an explosive paper in September claiming that China had created the deadly coronavirus in a research lab.

The paper, the American scientists concluded, was deeply flawed. And a new online journal from MIT Press — created specifically to vet claims related to SARS-CoV-2 — reported Yan’s claims were “at times baseless and are not supported by the data” 10 days after she posted them.

But in an age when anyone can publish anything online with a few clicks, this response was not fast enough to keep Yan’s disputed allegations from going viral, reaching an audience in the millions on social media and Fox News. It was a development, according to experts on misinformation, that underscored how systems built to advance scientific understanding can be used to spread politically charged claims dramatically at odds with scientific consensus.

Yan’s work, which was posted to the scientific research repository Zenodo without any review on Sept. 14, exploded on Twitter, YouTube and far-right websites with the help of such conservative influencers as Republican strategist Stephen K. Bannon, who repeatedly pushed it on his online show “War Room: Pandemic,” according to a report published Friday by Harvard researchers studying media manipulation. Yan expanded her claims, on Oct. 8, to blame the Chinese government explicitly for developing the coronavirus as a “bioweapon.”

Online research repositories have become key forums for revelation and debate about the pandemic. Built to advance science more nimbly, they have been at the forefront of reporting discoveries about masks, vaccines, new coronavirus variants and more. But the sites lack protections inherent to the traditional — and much slower — world of peer-reviewed scientific journals, where articles are published only after they have been critiqued by other scientists. Research shows papers posted to online sites also can be hijacked to fuel conspiracy theories.

Yan’s paper on Zenodo — despite several blistering scientific critiques and widespread news coverage of its alleged flaws — now has been viewed more than 1 million times, probably making it the most widely read research on the origins of the coronavirus pandemic, according to the Harvard misinformation researchers. They concluded that online scientific sites are vulnerable to what they called “cloaked science,” efforts to give dubious work “the veneer of scientific legitimacy.”

“They’re many years behind in realizing the capacity of this platform to be abused,” said Joan Donovan, research director at the Harvard Kennedy School’s Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy, which produced the report. “At this point, everything open will be exploited.”

Yan, who previously was a postdoctoral fellow at Hong Kong University but fled to the United States in April, agreed in an interview with The Washington Post that online scientific sites are vulnerable to abuse, but she rejected the argument that her story is a case study in this problem.

Rather, Yan said, she is a dissident trying to warn the world about what she says is China’s role in creating the coronavirus. She used Zenodo, with its ability to instantly publish information without restrictions, because she feared the Chinese government would obstruct publication of her work. Her academic critics, she argued, will be proven wrong.

“None of them can rebut from real, solid, scientific evidence,” Yan said. “They can only attack me.”

Zenodo acknowledged that the furor has prompted reforms, including the posting of a label Thursday above Yan’s paper saying, “Caution: Potentially Misleading Contents” after The Washington Post asked whether Zenodo would remove it. The site also prominently features links to critiques from a Georgetown University virologist and the MIT Press.

“We take misinformation really seriously, so it is something that we want to address,” said Anais Rassat, a spokeswoman for the European Organization for Nuclear Research, which operates Zenodo as a general purpose scientific site. “We don’t think taking down the report is the best solution. We want it to stay and indicate why experts think it’s wrong.”

But mainstream researchers who watched Yan’s claims race across the Internet far more quickly than they could counter them have been left troubled by the experience — newly convinced that the capacity for spreading misinformation goes far beyond the big-name social media sites. Any online platform without robust and potentially expensive safeguards is equally vulnerable.

“This is similar to the debate we’re having with Facebook and Twitter. To what degree are we creating an instrument that speeds disinformation, and to what extent are you contributing to that?” said Stefano M. Bertozzi, editor in chief of the MIT Press online journal “Rapid Reviews: COVID-19,” which challenged Yan’s claims.

Bertozzi added, “Most scientists have no interest in getting in a pissing match in cyberspace.”

Catch up on the most important developments in the pandemic with our coronavirus newsletter. All stories in it are free to access.

Coronavirus fuels prominence of online science sites

Online scientific sites have been growing for more than a decade, becoming a vital part of the ecosystem for making and vetting claims across numerous academic fields, but their growth has been supercharged by the urgency of disseminating new discoveries about a deadly pandemic.

Some of the best-known of these sites, such as medRxiv and bioRxiv, have systems for rapid evaluation intended to avoid publishing work that doesn’t pass an initial sniff test of scientific credibility. They also reject papers that only review the work of others or that make such major claims that they shouldn’t be publicized before peer review can be conducted, said Richard Sever, co-founder of medRxiv and bioRxiv.

“We want to create a hurdle that’s high enough that people have to do some research,” Sever said. “What we don’t want to be is a place where there’s a whole bunch of conspiracy theories.”

Online publishing sites generally are called “preprint servers” because many researchers use them as a first step toward traditional peer review, giving the authors a way to make their work public — and available for possible news coverage — before more thorough analysis begins. Advocates of preprint servers tout their ability to create early visibility for important discoveries and also spark useful debate. They note that traditional peer-reviewed journals have their own history of occasionally publishing hoaxes and bad science.

“It’s very funny that everyone is worrying about preprints given that, collectively, journals are not doing a great job of keeping misinformation out,” Sever said.

After Wuhan mission on pandemic origins, WHO team dismisses lab leak theory

He and other proponents, however, acknowledge risks.

While scientists debate — and sometimes refute — flawed claims by one another, nonscientists also scan preprint servers for data that might appear to bolster their pet conspiracy theories.

A research team led by computer scientist Jeremy Blackburn has tracked the appearance of links to preprints from social media sites, such as 4chan, popular with conspiracy theorists. Blackburn and a graduate student, Satrio Yudhoatmojo, found more than 4,000 references on 4chan to papers on major preprint servers between 2016 and 2020, with the leading subjects being biology, infectious diseases and epidemiology. He said the uneven review process has “lent an air of credibility” to preprints that experts might quickly spot as flawed but ordinary people wouldn’t.

“That’s where the risk is,” said Blackburn, an assistant professor at Binghamton University. “Papers from the preprint servers show up in a variety of conspiracy theories … and are misinterpreted wildly because these people aren’t scientists.”

Jessica Polka, executive director of ASAPbio, a nonprofit group that pushes for more transparency and wider use of preprint servers, said they rely on something akin to crowdsourcing, in which comments from outside researchers quickly can identify flaws in work, but she acknowledged vulnerabilities based on the extent of review by server staff and advisers. A recent survey by ASAPbio found more than 50 preprint servers operating — and nearly as many review policies.

And the survey didn’t include Zenodo, which, Polka said, should not be considered a preprint server given its broader mission. Rather, she said, it’s an online repository that happens to host some preprints, as well as conference slides, raw data and other “scientific objects” that anyone with an email address can simply upload. Zenodo has none of the vetting common to major preprint servers and isn’t organized to easily surface critiques or conflicting research, she said.

“Without that kind of context, a preprint server is even more vulnerable to the spread of disinformation,” Polka said. But she added, in general, “Preprint servers do not have the resources to be arbiters of whether something is true or not.”

Yan defends her work

Yan said in her interview with The Post that Zenodo’s openness is what drove her decision to use the site. She had initially submitted her paper to bioRxiv because as a researcher whose work has appeared in Nature, the Lancet Infectious Diseases and other traditional publications, she knew that this preprint server would appear more legitimate to other scientists.

Trump pardons Steve Bannon after ugly falling out early in his presidency

Yan has a medical degree from Xiangya Medical College of Central South University and a PhD in ophthalmology from Southern Medical University — both in China — and was a postdoctoral fellow at the University of Hong Kong, she said. That university announced she was no longer affiliated with it in July, following an initial appearance on Fox News, saying in a statement that her claim about the origin of the coronavirus “has no scientific basis but resembles hearsay.”

After she fled Hong Kong, she harbored deep suspicions about that government’s potential to block publication of her work, she said. When she checked bioRxiv 48 hours after making her submission, the site appeared to have gone offline, Yan said. Fearing the worst, she withdrew the paper and uploaded it to Zenodo.

Sever, the bioRxiv co-founder, said he could not comment on an individual submission but said that, despite occasional glitches, he was aware of no “prolonged outage” on the site during mid-September and no sign that the Chinese, or anyone else, had hacked it.

For Yan’s paper on Zenodo, she did not list an academic affiliation, as is customary for research. Instead, she listed the Rule of Law Society and Rule of Law Foundation, which are New York-based nonprofit groups founded by exiled Chinese billionaire Guo Wengui, a close associate of Bannon, who in 2018 was announced as chairman of the Rule of Law Society. When Bannon was arrested on fraud charges in August, he was aboard Guo’s 150-foot yacht, off the coast of Connecticut. (President Donald Trump last month pardoned Bannon, his former campaign chairman and White House chief strategist).

Chinese dissidents say they’re being harassed by a businessman with links to Steve Bannon

Yan said she listed the Rule of Law entities out of respect for what she said was their work helping dissidents in China, and that they paid for her flight from Hong Kong and provided a resettlement stipend while she largely lives off her savings. She said her work is independent, and she rejected notions that Bannon was helping her spread political claims.

“I didn’t know he was so controversial when I was in Hong Kong,” Yan told The Post.

On Sept. 15, the day after Yan’s paper appeared on Zenodo, she was a guest on Fox’s “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” an appearance watched by 4.8 million broadcast viewers and 2.8 million on YouTube, and that also generated extensive engagement on Facebook and Twitter, according to the Harvard researchers. Bannon appeared on Carlson’s show that same week and discussed Yan’s claims. He also interviewed her on “War Room: Pandemic” 22 times last year, both before and after the Zenodo publication.

The political context was obvious in the midst of a hotly contested election in which Trump was attacking Democratic rival Joe Biden for supposedly being overly sympathetic to the Chinese government, dubbing him “Beijing Joe.” Republicans, including White House trade adviser Peter Navarro, pushed Yan’s paper along with the hashtag #CCPLiedPeopleDied, a reference to the Chinese Communist Party.

Archives showed the paper had more than 150,000 views on its first day on Zenodo — spectacular reach for a scientific paper, especially one that had not yet been reviewed by any independent experts.

But this surge of attention also generated backlash, including critical news reports by National Geographic and others, raising serious questions about Yan’s claims.

In the academic world, the Center for Health Security at Johns Hopkins issued a point-by-point response one week after Yan’s paper appeared on Zenodo, raising 39 individual issues in what it said was “objective analysis of details included in the report, as would be customary in a peer-review process.”

A few days later, the MIT Press online journal “Rapid Reviews: COVID-19” featured four scathing reviews, including one from Robert Gallo, a renowned AIDS researcher and a titan within the field of virology.

He labeled Yan’s work “misleading” and cited “questionable, spurious, and fraudulent claims.” Most points were highly technical, but Gallo also questioned her logic regarding the alleged role in creating the coronavirus for the Chinese military, which Gallo noted would be vulnerable to covid-19.

“And how would the Chinese protect themselves?” Gallo asked in his review. “Well, according to the paper, the military knew it could be stopped by remdesivir,” a drug later shown to have some benefit in treating covid-19 while not necessarily reducing the risk of death. “I would surely not want to be in the Chinese military if they were that naive.”

The idea to recruit Gallo came from Bertozzi, the journal’s editor and dean emeritus of the School of Public Health at University of California at Berkeley. Like Gallo, Bertozzi had worked extensively in AIDS research. After seeing Yan’s appearance on Fox, he was eager to use the online journal founded only months earlier to correct the scientific record.

“I felt it needed to be quickly debunked by people with scientific credibility,” Bertozzi said.

He soon thought of Gallo.

“We need somebody of your stature to say this is garbage science,” Bertozzi recalled telling him.

The reviews by Gallo and three other scientists also came with an editor’s note raising questions about the preprint process itself, saying, “While pre-print servers offer a mechanism to disseminate world-changing scientific research at unprecedented speed, they are also a forum through which misleading information can instantaneously undermine the international scientific community’s credibility, destabilize diplomatic relationships, and compromise global safety.”

But these public rebukes from some of the biggest names in virology did not deter Yan. Nor did a detailed report on Oct. 21 by CNN quoting her critics and documenting flaws.

Yan declined to be interviewed for that story, she said, because CNN did not allow her to address the issues they unearthed, point by point, on live television.

Instead, she published her own response on Nov. 21, on Zenodo, titled, “CNN Used Lies and Misinformation to Muddle the Water on the Origin of SARS-CoV-2.”

In her Post interview, Yan acknowledged — as CNN had reported — that her three co-authors on the original Sept. 14 paper were pseudonyms, used to protect what she said were other Chinese researchers whose families remain in peril back in China. Authors are typically discouraged from using false names in academic work.

Her claims suffered another blow this week, when a World Health Organization team sent to China to investigate the origins of the pandemic issued a statement saying it was “extremely unlikely” that the coronavirus came from a lab.

One of Yan’s earliest vocal critics, virologist Angela Rasmussen, who was at Columbia when Yan’s paper first spread, agreed with WHO’s assessment but did not rule out the possibility — however unlikely — of laboratory origin for the coronavirus. But she said the argument lacks concrete evidence.

“There needs to be a lot less speculation and a lot more investigation,” said Rasmussen, now an affiliate at Georgetown’s Center for Global Health Science and Security. “It takes a really long time to figure this stuff out... This is going to take years or even decades to solve it, if we ever do.”

Yet Yan continues to double down on her claims and to attack her critics as spreading “lies.” She still argues that the Chinese government intentionally created the coronavirus and continues to do everything it can to silence her.

Yan also offers no apologies for making common cause with Bannon and other Trump allies. As a dissident, she said, she doesn’t necessarily get her choice of supporters.

“If China is going to do this crime, who can hold them accountable?… Trump was the one who was tough” against China, Yan said, adding that her claim “is about real fact. I don’t want to mislead people.”

Even now, she is preparing another paper, nearing 30 pages, that she hopes will refute her critics and bring fresh attention to her claims about China, covid-19 and what she says is an international coverup campaign.

Yan plans to publish it in a few weeks, she said — on Zenodo.

[lightread]

meu amado (0.5)

pairing; tour guide and dancer!hoseok x journalist!reader 

genre; fluff, angst 

word count; 1.3k

warnings; mentions of anxiety, implications of smut (later updates), alcohol consumption (later updates), slow burn (??)

author’s piece; good day, everyone! i present to you my first fic! this idea has been cultivating in my cabezita (little head) for a month. my inspiration reached a high after watching ego (stream it on youtube!) and rewatching yeh jawaani hai deewani, which brought upon the title of this project. i’m excited to go on a journey with these characters, and with you, the readers! 

“I can do it, just give me time,” your voice desperate as you push your iPad towards your father, observing his grimace of hesitation and ignoring how his little sigh of exasperation has your hands feeling clammy. “This editorial is going to blow your mind, I managed to get an appointment with Cut-”

“Y/n-,” your father takes off his glasses as he reclines deeper into his leather chair, pinching the bridge of his nose-almost as if a headache’s coming on. Standing in front of him, you can’t help but feel inferior. You can sense his dejection, so you push forward, pointing back to the bright screen on his desk. 

“Pa, no, listen, Headline is gonna be ahead of its time with this piece! I scheduled the appointment with Cutthroat’s top producers, getting the behind the scenes look of the making of the top 40 hits,” you reach towards your bookbag on the chair behind you, rummaging through its contents, but before you could take out the mood board you had put blood, sweat, and tears into for the past week, you hear the little click of the iPad. 

Your hands freeze. You close your eyes. You take a deep breath. You turn back to face him. You hang your head and your shoulders seem to lose their confidence, sagging as the tension in the room gets heavier every passing second. 

You lift your head to glance over at the device, observing his stern reflection on the black screen. You narrow your eyes at the obnoxious piece of technology. No, your inner monologue says, not today. You huff and you straighten your back, pushing your shoulders back, folding your arms as you look up at him. You refuse to look defeated in front of him. How dare he cut me off, you think to yourself. 

“That’s what you said about your last three editorials, y/n. I don’t need the ‘ahead of its time’ piece in my magazine, I need a ‘make an impact’ influence,” leaning forward, he pauses and sighs, staring at his folded hands, and with the gesture alone, you start feeling a dull ache in your chest. You clutch your sleeves a little tighter as the seconds go by. 

“Sweetheart,” you grimace at the nickname, “your pieces are predictable. Your last 3 have the lowest reads on the website and do you want to know why?” Your father stands up from his chair and steps around his desk, walking to the window that looks over Headline’s floor-interns and journalists chatting and typing away on their computers as if their life depended on it. The wall behind his desk joins your father’s reflection; the frames surrounding his various awards and words of praise seem to give him a glow through the transparent glass. 

Your eyes lock on the awards, and as you open your mouth to respond, he turns to face you, cutting you off before you even began, his finger wagging too close to your face, his hands resting at his hips, “I’ll tell you why; it’s because you’re not having fun.” 

As you take a step back, you swallow, your voice tight, “What does that even mean?”

“It means that you’re writing for the sake of writing. There is no personality in your words. It’s like I’m reading a textbook, a condescending and boring one,” he says matter of factly. 

You scoff, “Thanks for that, dad,” you roll your eyes, tucking a strand of loose hair behind your ear. 

He puts his hands up, “I’m critiquing you because I want you to be better. I want you to grow. And as you grow, the magazine will too.” He places his large hands on your shoulders, squeezing them. “You need to practice.”

Your eyes narrow, you push his arms away from you, your lips setting themselves into their usual grim line, and your arms positioning themselves back into their comfortable crossed state. “I don’t need to practice, I’m good at what I do. I graduated top of my major, my articles have been published in major newspapers and magazine-”

“And yet, with the time privileges that I give you, you just can’t seem to organize a good editorial or write an adequate article for Headline.” 

You close your eyes out annoyance, your hands now clenched and your tone defensive, “My articles are informative-” 

“Informative with no substance-”

“They teach the audi-” 

“ I didn’t realize you were a teacher-”

“Stop interrupting me!” You can hear your heartbeat drumming in your ears, your breathing becoming heavier as you open your eyes to look at the man in front of you-his eyes sharper. 

“Then start listening. Readers don’t care about your fancy credentials. In fact, they don’t care about you at all. They care about what they read, “ He strides back over to his desk and hands the iPad back to you, “The goal that I have for this magazine is enlightenment. I want our readers to be in love with the world they live in, so much so, they’ll want to pay 5 dollars to know it each month. All the while getting a free tote.” He points to the device in your hand, “Your job is to exemplify that goal in your projects, y/n. I’ve read your past works, I’ve read and felt the emotions you put on those papers. So why haven’t you been able to do the same here?” 

You look down, away from your father and the gaze trying to understand you. Instead of answering, you direct your gaze to the words of affirmation and praise that surround him, given to him by the most respected writers and journalists; artists. The frames don’t seem to give you that same glow when you’re in his space. Do the awards in your apartment give you that same glow? Will you glow when you have your own editor’s office? 

You bring the iPad towards your chest, clutching it like a lifeline. How do you tell your dad that you’re scared? How do you explain to him that even though you have been able to write piece after piece for other magazines in the past, you feel like whatever you write for him or Headline now will never be good enough? And that him telling you all this just confirms those fears? 

Knowing there would be judgment behind the eyes of your peers, you decided to work for your father. You thought it would be a great way to get to know him better, you thought you could even learn from and adapt to his work ethic; all this with the possibility of him seeing how capable you could be. How you could be just as good as your older sister. The sister that graduated from university at the age of 18, published her first novel at 22 and started her own publishing firm 5 years later. Successfully, might you add. 

You rearranged your entire life to meet the highest of unspoken expectations for your parents, for him. So, why is it when you want to prove to them that you can, the universe and your brain decide to work against you? 

Your fingers tap against the iPad, creating a steady beat as you rack your brain for something to say, something to do. After a couple more silent taps, you decide to take a seat on the dark violet guest chair. 

Clearing your throat, you look up at your father, “You said I had to practice. What did you have in mind?” 

The corners of his mouth quirked up, and you pick up on the mischievous glimmer in his wise eyes,  “How do you feel about Rio de Janerio?”

[thedistantdusk]

Wut r ur thoughts on concrit? Ps hope Noticing is going good!!!

Was that you in Discord last night, Nonny? 😉

We had a great conversation on concrit, but I will elaborate here for anyone curious!

Ok. So. To give you my insights on concrit, I have to explain a little backstory. Bear with me.

I was an English major at a relatively competitive university, so I spent my college years regularly getting both fiction and nonfiction stuff marked up/critiqued/torn to shreds. This stung at first, but you know what I figured out pretty fast? The best way to avoid getting a page full of red marks is to listen to the feedback from peers and professionals alike. Pretty soon, I did better.

After graduation, I submitted two novel manuscripts for publication. I fully expected each to be rudely rejected everywhere. To my rather pleasant surprise, they were only rudely rejected most places. A small publishing house took me on — under the condition that I’d accept of multiple rounds of very aggressive edits. I agreed, and after a few grueling rounds of this, I was published. More than anything else, though, I learned what the industry was looking for. This was a very valuable lesson.(Side note, tradpub proved far less lucrative than selfpub, so I can’t recommend selfpub highly enough.)

These days, I exclusively self-publish romance novels — which means I pay (good money!) for someone to edit my books and tell me what’s wrong with them. And I gotta say, getting a manu back with a fuck-ton of edits is like a drug... because the more feedback I get, the more I’m convinced I got my money’s worth. Every correction in that docx file proves that the editor wants to help my book meet market standards. It shows me that she cares. It demonstrates that she read every single word. The writing industry is brutal and scathing, but having someone by my side helps... provided, of course, that all feedback is designed to help. (And sadly, I’ve yet to encounter an editor who is as hardworking and dedicated as my fanfic betas, but that’s another story for another time.)

Overall, I like to think I have the same attitude towards concrit in my fanfic. I won’t pretend that a few comments here and there don’t sting, but in general, most vaguely “negative” comments I get are about simple differences in headcanons. There’s not much I can do to fix my understanding of character motivation, but I still respect the time it took to comment.

However, not everyone is open to concrit — nor should they have to be. It’s your (mostly) original work, you’re not being paid, and if you don’t want the slightest critique, that’s 100% your choice, too. The issue, though, is that fanfic really lacks a system for authors to announce/identify the feedback they want. I don’t think I’ve ever read a story where the author bluntly said something along the lines of, “I’m sure everyone means well, but I find concrit reviews a little discouraging. If you have concrit, I’d appreciate getting it over a PM instead of on a review. Thanks!”

Maybe I’m alone in this, but if I saw that author’s note, I wouldn’t be offended or snarky at all. I’d be relieved, actually, that the author was self-aware enough to identify reviews that detract from their writing experience.

So. I personally feel the solution here would be implementing some sort of tagging system for writers. Perhaps AO3 will have that one day. (If @ao3commentoftheday has thoughts, I’d love to hear those too!) In the meantime, I will continue to only offer concrit on stories for which I’m a beta, simply because I know that some folks find concrit overwhelming/discouraging.

Everyone is different, though — and truly, I respect that, too. 😊

[plotlinehotline]

Help please. How does one start a Dragons!AU fanfiction? I got the other details (like the character and setting) just fine but I just can't find the correct scene or approach on the first chapter. Thank you very much.

Act One, Scene One (or Choosing an Effective Starting Point)

The one potential advantage you have with fan fiction is that you don’t have to lay the groundwork as much in the opening scene. Readers will already be familiar with your characters and settings. The only backstory you may have to provide is enough to inform your reader at what point in canon your story occurs. If the story is an AU, or non-canon, then you’ll probably need to add more details to explain this so a reader knows what to expect.

Apart from this, I think the idea of first scenes applies to all types of stories, fan fiction included, so I’m going to generalize this to cover all opening sequences.

Choosing Your Starting Point

We all know the pressures of that first chapter. I attended a panel earlier this year where agents and editors listened to readings of the first page of a novel and raised their hands when they would stop reading. It was astounding how quick they were to give up on each work! I think the average reader is a bit more patient than paid readers, since their time does not equal money, but the same principle applies. You need to engage readers from the beginning if you want to keep them invested.

To simplify this process, we’re going to start wide and slowly narrow to that precise moment.

Step One: Fix Your Mindset

I could do a whole post on ignoring structure and just getting the story written. I could say that you should choose your opening scene later once you’ve drafted a good portion of the story. However, I do not think that advice would help my anon since they’re writing fan fiction, which isn’t typically written in drafts. I also think at some point, you do have to worry about structure.

Nonetheless, you shouldn’t enter into any outline or first draft with that first scene carrying so much weight. It simply needs to exist so you can move on to later chapters. When the story is more developed, the opening chapter might be clearer to you. It’s okay to start the process of writing a story with a flimsy first scene. You can find that sweet spot in later drafts.

Step Two: Choose a Point on the Timeline

A good plot includes far more than the opening line and “the end.” There will be events that happened before chapter one, and maybe even events that will happen after the final sentence. A novel isn’t necessarily a complete story from beginning to end - it’s a snapshot of the most important, most interesting part of something’s life, whether that’s a character, a monster, a story universe, ect.

Maybe you already know what point in your timeline you’re going to begin, but if you don’t, start there. Write out everything you know about your characters and your plot and decide which portions of this are going to be backstory and which portions will occur in real time. Once you’ve chosen that point, you’re one step closer to narrowing your focus.

Step Three: Choose a Character to Start With

This character doesn’t have to be the protagonist, but I strongly recommend it. When we start reading novels, we latch onto the first character we meet. If the character is engaging, we dig deeper. If they’re not, we let go. Likewise, if the character dies in chapter one, we let go.

This was one thing that bothered me about how Leigh Bardugo began Six of Crows. The first chapter reveals a POV character, and at the end of that chapter, we’re done with that character. We get a small detail late in the novel that reveals that character’s fate, but it was kind of like a “gotcha” moment. It put me on shaky ground for chapter two, and I was slower to sink my talons into Inej’s perspective (who is actually a protagonist).

I don’t like investing my energy in chapter one into a character that I have no reason to care about. An exception to this could be changing the “chapter one" heading to “prologue.” We have less character expectations for prologues and tend to assume that a character introduced in a prologue is not necessarily a protagonist - they’re simply involved in an important event of the story. Prologues are honestly a topic of great debate, and I won’t offer my opinion one way or the other in this post, but when it comes to choosing the star character of your opening scene, I highly recommend you make that character an important one.

Step Four: The Perfect Moment

Okay, we know the general point of the timeline, and we know which character we’re going to introduce first. Now, we need to find that sweet spot. A good opening scene will do several things:

Introduce a main character

Show the status quo

Present a short-term problem

Hint at a greater problem

A popular way to start a novel is by showing the “status quo” of the world you’ve created and showing a typical problem within that status quo. This is what I mean by “short-term” problem - it’s a problem that your character faces on a regular basis and they’re solving it like they normally would (with some possible hiccups along the way). For the character, this might be routine, but for us, it’s new. We’re learning about this character and their world in an exciting and suspenseful way.

I just started rereading Red Rising by Pierce Brown, and this novel does an excellent job of showcasing this. Our main character Darrow is shown mining in the dangerous depths of Mars, solving a problem when he runs into a potential gas pocket. This particular moment does not define the story’s later conflict, but it shows us what Darrow’s routine looks like in an “exciting and suspenseful” way. The author shows us the status quote and presents a short-term problem.

Brown also hints at a greater problem in this opening scene by briefly describing the conditions that Darrow’s peers work in and how much they compete for rations. The hierarchy in this universe becomes hugely important later on, so it’s a detail that begins to set up the later conflict.

Step Five: Don’t Make It Complicated

If your reader needs five pages of backstory to understand what’s going on in your opening scene, then it’s not a good moment. It’s possible that you’re overthinking how much your reader actually needs to know, and it’s also possible that you’ve chosen a moment too far into the timeline. If you’re in a position to have your first scene critiqued, experiment by eliminating most of the backstory from your draft. Have someone read it and ask them what points were confusing. That’ll help you decide which details are absolutely necessary.

This isn’t the only way to choose an opening scene, but it’s a popular method that should help you start your story off with a bang.

Good luck!

-Rebekah

[recentanimenews]

Naruto Turns 20: How Its Worldbuilding Remains Unmatched

  There's something effortless about Naruto creator Masashi Kishimoto's worldbuilding. In fiction, you usually spend a bit of time in the beginning waiting for the pieces to come together, waiting for the hook, waiting for the "Oh, THAT'S what this thing is gonna be." And that's not some cutting critique, it's just how most narrative art works in general. But Naruto makes this process invisibly, almost deceitfully smooth. Twenty years after its debut in Weekly Shonen Jump, I'm still amazed by just how easy it is to get into Naruto.

  �� Naruto was first published on September 21, 1999. Its author and artist, Kishimoto, had been trying to get several different stories started throughout the late 90s, but hadn't had much luck. This instilled within him a "fierce desire," an attribute that he'd openly lend to the character of Naruto himself. It would also be the attribute that would set Naruto apart from his action manga peers. Goku wants to be the strongest, but he's always been a kind of prodigal child. Luffy wants to be King of the Pirates, but he balances his insane amount of grit with a sense of aloof naivete. Naruto, though? Naruto reaaaaallly wants to be accepted and he reaaaalllllly wants to be Hokage. 

  There's something immediately identifiable about that, and it actually aids in the aforementioned worldbuilding. Because if you see yourself in the lead character, you don't have to make a major leap to accept the story that revolves around them. It becomes your journey, too. When the anime first premiered in America in 2005, I was in high school. And my classmates and friends that got into it were able to intensely relate to Naruto, as it was the perfect time for them to. In middle and high school, all you want is to have a place and "have it together" and be acknowledged for the strengths that you know you have. Strengths that many can't seem to see. 

    Kishimoto lets this tie into Naruto's backstory to create a main character that is both sympathetic and aspirational. With his parents long gone, Naruto is sort of forced to develop his personality from scratch. It's why he's so rough around the edges in the beginning, and probably plays into why he's had trouble adjusting to the duel role of father and Hokage in Boruto. Poor, orphaned Naruto has had to develop his own lessons to follow. Thus, the very general "I'm gonna be Hokage!" becomes a personal mission statement. It's purely him. 

  It doesn't hurt that the universe that Kishimoto built for Naruto seems so gently constructed, the Leaf Village coming off like a place that you were always destined to find. It's like The Shire in Middle Earth, as there's something uniquely comfortable about it when you first dive into the story. It's obviously a fantastical place full of fantastical people, but it's still familiar. You can see yourself walking its streets and hanging out with its residents and eating its delicious ramen. Obviously, the myths and themes and adventures of Naruto would only open up as the series progressed, but to a fan, reading Naruto can feel somewhat like coming home. 

    Kishimoto's strengths don't just lie in the locations and the lead character, though. The rest of his main cast, from Sasuke to Sakura to Rock Lee to Kakashi to Gaara to Hinata to even Orochimaru, rarely feel obtuse, as they all play off of eachother so well. They feel defined from the beginning, even if they haven't revealed their full hands when it comes to their personality traits and histories. And this is especially helpful when you see them in action.

  Kishimoto obviously puts a lot of thought into "match ups," with the clashes and trials usually being based around what would be most interesting to see at what time. It's why the Chunin Exams are often placed alongside such classic tournaments like the Dark Tournament from Yu Yu Hakusho when ranking the best anime tournaments. It would be super easy to just say "Naruto fights Sasuke at the end of the tournament because they're both the lead characters and it's hype or whatever." But instead, as we see, Kishimoto lets battles like Hinata vs Neji and Rock Lee vs Gaara get the spotlight. When creating a rad anime battle, it's just as important to consider its timing in a character's arc as it is to consider which characters are actually dueling. 

    And finally, what is Naruto's place in 2019, aside from being a great show to rewatch? Well, you can see shades of the lead character in the current batch of young anime protagonists, ranging from Deku in My Hero Academia to Asta in Black Clover. And you can see how the "rivalry" between Kishimoto and One Piece creator Eiichiro Oda still influences the latter series to this day. But in the end, Naruto remains infinitely readable and watchable after twenty years because Kishimoto crafted a world that you want to experience, with a lead character that often reflects you. And it's hard to find better praise to give a story than that.

  When did you first start reading/watching Naruto? What is your favorite character or story arc? Let us know in the comments!

    -----------------------------

  Daniel Dockery is a writer and editor for Crunchyroll. You should follow him on Twitter!

    Do you love writing? Do you love anime? If you have an idea for a features story, pitch it to Crunchyroll Features!

By: news+feed@crunchyroll.com

[theanimeview]

Reboots: They’re for who?

When I was interning a handful of summers ago, I remember talking with a handful of editors and peers about our favorite comic to television adaptations. I said honestly that I am not a fan of Teen Titans Go because I don’t think it has a lot of substance when compared to Teen Titans or Young Justice. It’s a problem I have with a lot of reboots, and I remember distinctly one of the editors saying that reboots “aren’t for you.” That’s a fair statement, they’re not for me specifically, they’re for... who exactly?

What the editor meant, I believe, is that a reboot isn’t really for the original fans of a series. It’s for a new generation to experience the characters and become fans. The characters we see from one show to another are kind of like reincarnated versions--they may have similar names and art styles but, the characters are kind of new because their stories are new. I think that this is often correct. However, I want to disagree a little with the idea that reboots aren’t aimed for older fans. Good reboots should have something that the older fans can enjoy too. I say this because clearly reboots in some ways market to the audience that watched the previous iteration(s), sort of like a big sign saying, “Hey, remember this show you loved as a kid? The one that we sold a lot of for a long time? Yeah? Great! Why don’t you check out our new version and show it to your kids/younger siblings/others?!” Their’s nothing really wrong with that, its an effective sales/marketing strategy, but for it to work the new iteration needs to have something old fans will appreciate.

A great example is My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic - the series takes the older characters, characters that fans of the previous iterations have loved for a long time, and translates them to the current climate of television, allowing for a new generation of fans to fall in love with the characters. The new show still holds some elements of the underlying message that the original show or stories held. What I mean is that My Little Pony has always focused on friendships and what it means to be a good friend; this message has carried on over the years to what we see today. The old fans can appreciate that the morals or backbone of the show are still there and the new fans can fall in love with these reborn-characters on their own.  

I remember watching the vintage version of MLP on youtube in middle school and loving it. When the new version came out around my junior year of high school, I never quite got into the show again, but when my nieces started watching it, I had no problem enjoying episodes in passing. The same thing happened in college when many of my friends liked binge-watching seasons of it on Netflix. While I still wasn’t a die-hard fan again, I enjoyed that the friendship elements were still there and felt comforted that my nieces not only enjoyed a collection of characters I had loved previously but also by the fact that the show was still teaching aspects of how to be a good friend and responsible individual. MLP FIM is a perfect example, to me, of what a reboot should be. It’s easy to merchandise to new and old fans (which the company producing it will like), it’s still got the elements needed for the nostalgic appreciation and a revival of the fandom in older viewers, and it provides something a new generation can enjoy. If I’m babysitting and my nieces and they say let’s watch it, I’m 100% down for the reasons stated above.

Now let’s look at shows like Teen Titans Go from 2013, or The Powerpuff Girls 2016. Are the shows merchandisable, of course--but do they hold true to the same values that we saw in the originals? I would say, No.

Teen Titans was a beloved show. We saw a mix of comedy and adventure expected of a story with teen superheroes, but we also saw some serious elements befitting characters who are transitioning between childhood and adulthood-for all intents and purposes-alone. They’re, in many ways, outcasts who are bound together by their friendship and a mission to protect the planet from harm. Their episodes are memorable and often have a deeper underlying message. In many ways, the show begins with an examination of crime, and the adult world at large, as being one of black-and-white. It’s how children often see the world, but as the series progress or even single episodes, characters learn that there is a lot more grey area and nuances than we previously thought or understood.

Like, I remember the episode “Sum of His Parts” where Cyborg confronts, not for the last time, challenges with his disability as a half-man, half-machine individual. While the robotic parts give him great abilities most of the time, there are situations where they become more of a hindrance than helpful. It was a meaningful episode that allows us to see that despite having a cool robotic exterior, and the name “Cyborg,” the character himself is a human being with complex emotions that will not always show on his face or in his interactions with others. When I first saw the episode, I remember Cyborg’s last line, “I am just like you, but it’s not your arm that makes us the same, its the stuff that’s connected to it.” It reflects a lot about the character and the emotions he has, as well as stating something about image and what’s inside. While I don’t have a robotic arm, I felt like a part of me was reflected in his character in that episode because I have insecurities (everyone does), and while I sometimes hide them well it doesn’t mean they aren’t there. I also remember the episode “Troq,” in which Starfire faces racism. She and her team (once they are informed of how she is being treated) must set aside their anger for the greater good. It’s a difficult episode for many reasons, the most important of which is that 1. Racism still exists and is something people must fight against 2. Sometimes you have to work with your enemy to prevent a greater evil from taking place. Both are difficult to accept, especially as children, but they’re realities of our world. As I get older, both seem to become more prevalent in my life, particularly the later as sometimes you have to work with awful people to get a job done. Even the former though is something I’ve had to see and face in life.

The original Powerpuff Girls, likewise to TT, had memorable episodes not so much for their imagery but for their stories. For example, “Equal Fights” is an episode I may never forget. In it, a female thief behaving like a radical who hates men points out to the PPGs that women have suffered a lot in history and uses this as an excuse for her behavior. It seems almost justified as retribution against the patriarchy for how women have suffered, at least, until the PPGs’ primary female role-models step to remind the girls and the audience that two wrongs don’t make a right. The common theme with these memorable episodes in these memorable shows is that we, the audience, should learn something from the presented morals and ideas. They encourage us to think more about our situations and our autonomy in society.

Overall, these shows attempted to help children navigate the difficult world around them--that is what made them beloved by their audience. Perhaps the greatest proof of this is that new shows that have gained popularity today seem to continue this message of helping youth transition into thoughtful adults - like, Steven Universe.

However, some of the reboots seemed to have missed this point entirely. Rather than aiming to create an encouraging message for kids, they instead aim to briefly entertain--like a meme. The episodes aren’t memorable, not really. I think the most memorable thing I’ve seen from Teen Titans Go is "Let's Get Serious!" where Young Justice characters make a unique appearance. Aqualad critiques the Teen Titan Team about their ridiculousness and, in all, a very meta-episode in which the end leads us to believe that Teen Titans Go is just supposed to be a joke and we shouldn’t be so serious all the time about a children’s show. Ha Ha. (Let that sarcastic laugh sink in.)

I don’t have kids (yet), but I have nieces and nephews that I care about--and I know how easily kids can be led astray or tricked. Hell--I remember being a kid and how easily adults could manipulate me and my peers simply because they hold the authority. Adults can be manipulated too, I mean look at the Milgram Experiment. So when I look at these poorer reboots and see nothing of substance, when I look and see things that seem to encourage stupidity and lack of thought, I don’t feel like letting them watch the show because some of them aren’t old enough to understand that Beast Boy’s inability to open a textbook is supposed to be a joke. Particularly when he “saves the day” at the end. Sure, I can laugh at it, because I can see it as a joke, but one of my nephews might see a cool and funny superhero shoving a banana into his ear and think “that’s funny, I’ll do it too to make someone laugh” and end up with an ear infection (which is something a friend of mine’s little brother actually did).

In the case of Teen Titans Go, perhaps the creators really do intend for it all to be a joke, like a subversion of the original’s message(s). But then that, to me, is evidence that these are not truly marketed to a new generation of viewers--it’s marketed to the adults that watched the show previously. The joke is that the series is meant to be a form of high comedy with low comedy dialogue (if you don’t know what high comedy and low comedy are, please see here: https://www.enotes.com/homework-help/tell-me-about-origins-comedy-whats-difference-276012). If it is, in fact, not for the older audience, but to a growing generation, then I don’t think the joke is a good one because in some cases it insults the audience’s intelligence and in others overestimates the still-developing cognitive abilities of some viewers.

If TTG is for the former audience, I can appreciate it as a joke. I mean that sincerely, as I’ve found a handful of episodes to be funny and enjoyable. However, I would not recommend the show to kids.

As for I’ve seen some of PPG 2016, I can’t remember anything story-wise, only a collection of meme-like images, like the girls twerking. It’s, again, a show I wouldn’t want kids watching simply because it doesn’t seem to have any value--even from a comedic standpoint.

Of the reboots I’m mentioning, there are many more.

In conclusion, I think that good reboots are intended to be primarily for a new generation of viewers but also hold something that a majority of the previous iteration(s)’s audience(s) can appreciate or even love. Bad reboots focus on the “instant gratification” of entertainment and seem to ignore part of what made the originals so great. They seem to be created for meme-like instant laughs, not memorable content. That seems like a flaw to me but clearly works as a selling point for some shows. Of the two reboot examples I gave, TTG continues. Why? Probably because it holds comedic value to an older audience while providing content that’s not entirely unstable for kids to see. PPG, though, struggled with its release because it didn’t really have value to the older audience that formerly loved the show and relied to much on instant comedy to create a storyline that would keep a younger audience interested. 

Essentially, TTG assumes that the new audience is smart enough to understand that the Teen Titan team is acting stupid. It likewise creates comedy that the older audience can laugh at. TTG will never have the same level of appreciation for storytelling that it’s original once provided, but it’s not intending to. PPG’s creators may have had similar intentions, but didn’t fulfill. 

[wellesleyunderground]

Chatting union organizing with Hailey Huget ‘10, Georgetown Alliance of Graduate Employees (GAGE)

Hailey Huget ’10 is a PhD Candidate in Philosophy at Georgetown University who, for the past several years, has been working to organize a labor union of her peers. In November 2018, 84% of graduate employees at Georgetown voted in favor of unionizing (with 555 voting ‘yes’ and 108 ‘no’). Now their union, Georgetown Alliance of Graduate Employees (GAGE), is bargaining their first contract with Georgetown. 

Photo: the day we won our election. This is the group that delivered our letter declaring our 'intent to bargain' a first contract to the President of Georgetown.

Interview questions by Hoi-Fei Mok ‘10 (@alifeofgreen), WU Managing Editor

WU: Thanks for joining us, Hailey! Congratulations on winning the recognition for your union at Georgetown University. Let’s start at the beginning, why is it important for people to unionize?

HH: There are so many reasons it is important to unionize, but the most important boils down to principle: you deserve a voice in your working conditions. Bosses wield an enormous and disproportionate amount of power over their employees, so forming a union is one way to tip the balance of power back toward workers. Doing so can have all kinds of great benefits for employees, like higher pay, better benefits, access to neutral grievance and reporting procedures to address harassment and discrimination, among many others.  

WU: You mentioned that when the Georgetown Alliance of Graduate Employees (GAGE) first started a few years ago that you never imagined winning union election a in this political climate against unions. How were you able to build pressure for a win? What conditions at Georgetown were you looking to change?

HH: The close to 1,000 graduate student-employees that GAGE now represents have a huge range of conditions that they are looking to change, but some of the highest-priority issues (based on a recent survey of GAGE members) include higher pay; more comprehensive healthcare, including dental, mental health, and vision care; and better protections against harassment and discrimination. These priorities weren’t really a surprise to me, insofar as they align with issues that grads brought up in the many conversations we had with them about unionizing. For example, I would have guessed that pay improvements would be among the top issues to emerge from the survey that we did, as by some estimates, we don’t get paid a living wage for the cost of living in DC. I also wasn’t surprised about mental healthcare being a priority either, as graduate students are disproportionately likely to struggle with mental-health issues and the resources we have to address this at Georgetown are inadequate.  

We built pressure for a win by, primarily, building our base of support among graduate employees and by putting their needs first in our messaging. One tactic that was really effective was the ‘one-on-one conversation,’ which is just as it sounds—just sitting down with another grad to ask them questions and figure out what they’d like to change, if anything, about their experience at Georgetown. In doing this, it’s crucial not to assume that you already know what they care about or ‘fish’ for specific issues; you have to listen, letting them do most of the talking. Once you’ve listened to someone and figured out what their authentic issues and concerns are—maybe they struggle to pay their rent, maybe they were sexually harassed, maybe they were unable to take disability or medical leave without losing their health insurance, etc.—you as the organizer can help them connect the dots to show how forming a union would help them address their specific issues. This tactic helped us build a strong base of support going into our election, where 84% of grads who cast votes voted in favor of unionization.

WU: What role does the National Labor Relations Board play in union creation? Did they pose a challenge to your organizing and if so, what was your strategy for circumventing them?

HH: The NLRB is the federal agency that is supposed to enforce your rights under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA); they typically oversee union elections, for example. They also issue interpretations of the NLRA where there are contested issues or where the law is underdetermined. This is important for understanding our campaign at Georgetown because in 2016, the NLRB issued a ruling that held that graduate & undergraduate employees at private universities are workers and thus have rights to unionize. (More specifically, the ruling held that you can be a student of a private university and an employee of a private university at the same time; that having a ‘student’ role doesn’t preclude you also having an ‘employee’ role.)

Unfortunately, the NLRB is staffed by political appointees, so the 2016 ruling that declared us ‘workers’ with rights to unionize happened because Obama’s appointees sat on the board. Now, Trump’s appointees sit on the board. Because they are anti-labor, there is a strong possibility that they would, if given the opportunity, reverse the 2016 ruling that gave grad workers the right to form unions at private universities.

This is why we were so keen on circumventing the NLRB in forming our union. We did that by pressuring Georgetown to agree to a private election agreement, where our election would occur outside of the auspices of the NLRB. The reason we advocated for a private election is that if we went the NLRB route, Georgetown could legally challenge the outcome of the election on the grounds that they don't think we are workers. This could result in not only the results of our election being overturned, but in Georgetown being the school that challenged the 2016 NRLB decision and took away union rights for grads all over the country. Our private election blocked that possibility and guaranteed that Georgetown would not only respect the outcome of the election but that the 2016 ruling would be protected.

WU: When GAGE first approached the Georgetown president with the request to unionize graduate students, there was pushback from the university. What was that experience like to negotiate with them?

HH: Georgetown’s first reaction in response to learning of our union campaign was pretty extreme: they declared that graduate employees didn’t count as employees at all, because the work we perform for Georgetown is primarily for our educational benefit. All graduate employees knew this was total BS, as did many other members of the Georgetown community who signed our petitions, attended our rallies, wrote letters of support, etc. After all, many grads at Georgetown—like me—teach undergraduate courses as the sole instructor of record. In other words, I perform the same job that tenured faculty do. Undergrads also pay the same amount in tuition for a class taught by a graduate instructor as they do for a class taught by a tenured faculty member. So it’s bizarre to claim that graduate employees’ work isn’t ‘work’ solely on the grounds that we are also students working toward graduate degrees.

One reason there was sustained pressure on the Georgetown administration from the broader community was because Georgetown prides itself on being a pro-labor university. Their pro-labor stance is rooted in Georgetown’s Jesuit affiliation and specific Catholic teachings emphasizing the dignity of labor. Grads, and many other members of our community, felt the administration’s response to our campaign was hypocritical. We were able to use that sentiment to put pressure on the university. Eventually enough important people and constituencies within the university came around to supporting us that the Georgetown administration caved and agreed to let us vote on whether or not we wanted to unionize—and, even better, to respect the outcome of that vote. This meant that, if we won the election, they agreed to recognize our union and sit down to bargain a contract for graduate employees. (And now that we have won, they are making good on that commitment and have been meeting with our Bargaining Team to negotiate a contract.)

WU: Was there a catalyst moment that caused a change in the university to allow the union vote after the initial refusal of support?

HH: I’d say rather than one moment that caused them to shift their opinion, it was more of a sustained pressure campaign that spanned several months. After Georgetown initially came out strongly against even our right to vote for or against union representation, we began a pressure campaign that sought to shame Georgetown for hypocritically abandoning its Jesuit values. Once it became clear to higher-ups at Georgetown that we had community support on our side, that we were prepared to drag their pro-labor ‘brand’ through the mud in the media, and that we were planning to picket outside of venues where they were hoping to raise money from alumni, they started gradually backing down and softening their position.

WU: Union membership in the US finally saw an increase in 2017, after a long decline (as illustrated in a comic by the Nib). Young people under 35 are particularly joining unions more than other age groups. What do you think has contributed to that? Do you see other academic institutions following suit after Georgetown?

HH: The question of why young people are joining unions more than other groups is a great question—and I’m sure it has a long historical and sociological answer that I’m not equipped to give. My vague sense, however, is that it is related to the reasons why ever-increasing numbers of young people are adopting more and more left-wing political views, including critiques of capitalism. The economic system that saddles many of us with enormous student loan debt and then requires us to compete with huge numbers of other candidates for low-paying, precarious, or unfulfilling jobs is clearly making us miserable and also making us feel like we have no control over how our lives go. There is also a sense, I think, in which young people feel alienated and isolated from one another, as economic pressure forces us more and more to see our peers as competitors for scarce jobs. One way to fight this lack of control is to reclaim power in your workplace and ensure that you have a voice in your working conditions. Unions are also a great way to break out of feeling alienated from your peers and help you start to conceptualize your well-being as fundamentally bound up with the welfare of others.  

I hope that other graduate employees follow us in organizing unions at their institutions, just as we followed in the footsteps of some pioneering campaigns that came before us (such as Yale, Columbia, NYU, University of Michigan, etc). I hope that, in particular, graduate employees at Catholic and Jesuit universities will be able to point to our campaign to pressure their own institutions to honor religious commitments to the dignity of labor.

WU: Do you have any advice for workers out there looking to unionize?

HH: There are differences in job sectors, employment contexts, etc. that make it the case that the strategies and tactics that we employed to win at Georgetown won’t necessarily succeed everywhere. But there is one general thing that I can say. It is a good default position to expect your bosses—no matter how friendly or beneficent they are or have been in the past---to react badly to your unionizing efforts. If they don’t resort to breaking the law, they will almost certainly do other things to disingenuously smear your efforts. They may say manipulative things like, ‘we are a family,’ ‘my door is always open for addressing concerns,’ or even, ‘you’re too privileged for a union.’ All of these are well-worn talking points that bosses use to try to make you lose confidence in your conviction that you need a union. It’s important to be able to recognize these as boilerplate anti-union propaganda and also to prepare prospective union members for hearing this kind of pushback.

[exeuntstormtroopers]

Hi!! So I love writing, but I’m really not the greatest at it. I’m pretty repetitive and use the same words/phrases over and over again. Also, I want to be able to share my writing with other people in my writing club, but I’m too shy and anxious. Do you have any tips for these two things?? Thanks!!

Hi! Here’s a list of words/phrases I repeat ALL THE TIME and have to comb through my manuscripts to remove:

- just

- took a breath

- blinked

- mostly

- actually

- So

- Um

- Honestly

- definitely

And like five billion more. I don’t think I know any authors who don’t have phrases and words they use too much, and here’s the reason: writing is hard, and to make it easier, our brains repeat the same things over and over again so we can just get through it, and get out ideas on the page.

So here’s what you do to fix that: You write the thing you want to write, and don’t worry about how often you repeat words or phrases while you’re writing. Then, after you’re done with the draft, you take a little time away from it, and don’t think about it. Then you come back and edit it. Find all those words and phrases you repeated and decide where you want to keep them, and where they can be changed or removed.

Honestly, that’s the big secret of publishing: editing. Editing makes everyone’s writing better, in one way or another. It’s excellent to be a good editor of your own work, but having others look at it (and learning how to interpret and understand their feedback) is the real clincher.

For the writing club problem, I’m afraid the only answer is just (see, keeping this one in) to do it, and know that once you get used to receiving peer critique, your writing will get better by leaps and bounds. So here are some things to keep in mind to do that:

- It’s going to be scary at first. It definitely was for me. What you need to keep in mind is that even if what you write isn’t “good” or even if people don’t like it, that doesn’t mean it’s worthless. Everything you write is a step on the path. As long as you’re still trying to get better, you will get better, I promise.

- There are almost certainly other people in your writing club who are also anxious about having their work critiqued, even if they don’t show it. Some of them may have been doing it longer than you, so they’ve built up a thicker skin, but I’ve been showing my work to people for a long time now and I still get nervous when I show my early drafts to my critique partners.

- I cannot stress enough how okay it is to be nervous and shy. I know how hard it is to put yourself out there, and you will experience some scrapes and bruises, but accepting that nervousness and using it to try something new has been the main thing that has helped me with my anxiety. Anxiety is this evil thing that tells you the worst is always going to happen, and you should always keep things exactly the way they are. What you have to do is remind yourself that it’s your anxiety talking, and that new and unknown things are not always bad.

I hope these help!! Good luck with your writing!