I’ve read my fellow Riskies’ posts on contests with avid interest this week. I saw Diane win the Golden Heart AND the RITA at the RWA National Conference, and felt a vicarious thrill that my Beau Monde friends have done so well.

Me, I’ve never won any contest. In fact, I’ve usually ended up somewhere below the halfway mark in anything I’ve entered.

But I still believe strongly that they are helpful for unpublished writers, no matter where you place. Let me explain drawing, as always, on my own experiences.

When I entered the Beau Monde’s Royal Ascot, I thought I would final. I really did. This, despite my entry being THE FIRST THING I HAD EVER WRITTEN. This, despite knowing nothing of the caliber of writing from my fellow contestants. Shows how naive I was. I entered, I did not even come close to finaling, and I got my first taste of rejection. And then I read through the judges’ score sheets. I went through my files recently and threw out all but one of those score sheets, so I can’t quote what they said, but the judges who didn’t like my work that much had excellent feedback as to just why they didn’t like it. I listened, I edited, and I improved my manuscript and my writing knowledge. I thought those didn’t-like-it-as-much judges were dead-on in their criticism, and it was really helpful to get. (small pointer: I judge now, and I seldom receive thank you notes. I always send thank you notes to all my judges, even from the rotten scoring ones. I think that’s a courtesy that resonates.)

And then there was the judge who loved me. I got the highest score she bestowed that year, and in addition to my score sheet, she included a separate, single-spaced sheet of paper that started with this:

OK, here’s the deal. You are going to be published one day, probably soon. I feel it in my bones.

The judge went on to detail what she saw as the problems in my manuscript–again, she was dead-on (and I STILL info-dump! Megan, will you never learn?!?). And she was right! I took all the comments, sat on them in my head for awhile (and no, that’s not a visual you want to think about too much), and edited.

And then I sold the following year.

I entered a few other contests with one subsequent story, and again got excellent feedback, even though I was a mile away from finaling.

In my case, the key to finding a benefit to contests was being humble enough to realize I didn’t know everything about my story, or everything about my writing. Even if I ultimately disagreed with what a judge wrote, I had to treat it as a legitimate criticism, and think of ways to respond.

It all made my writing better.

I entered the RITA, and once again got three judges who loved my book, and a few more who were ‘meh,’ on it, and two who really disliked it. I decided not to enter my published work in anything but the RITA since those kinds of contests wouldn’t give me the feedback I wanted (the RITA I had to enter, just in case. I knew I wouldn’t final, but I had to know for sure).

So while Janet would say she entered contests to final, and Diane got hooked on the thrill of doing really well, and Elena’s a self-proclaimed contest slut (and I would be, too, if I finaled as much as she did!), I think the opportunity for someone to read your work who doesn’t know you and give you constructive feedback is incredible. Of course you’re going to get people who fuss about your margins, or tell you your hero isn’t heroic enough. If you can separate the wheat from the chaff, your writing will improve, even if your contest finaling percentage does not.

And I am so, so grateful to that one judge. And all the judges who took the time to analyze my story and my writing, and let me know what worked, and what didn’t.

Megan
www.meganframpton.com

…the smell of the crowd.

Or, why I love and hate contests.

I published as a result of a contest, when Dedication won the Beau Monde’s Royal Ascot and the final round judge asked me for a full. In fact Dedication has been a contest cow for much of its existence–it won the Best Regency category of the NJRW’s Golden Leaf contest a couple of weeks ago, to my delight. So contests have been good to me.

But I’ve never let them become too important in my life–I was smart enough as an unpubbed to realize that contests were their own thing. Here are my hard-earned nuggets of wisdom as a former unpubbed contest slut:

1. It doesn’t matter how you place. Finaling is the most important thing.
2. Editors will not care nearly as much about fonts, margins, or header styles as first-round contest judges do–they like legibility.
3. It’s possible to do very well with a ms. in contests but not be able to sell it.
4. Editors do not have nearly as rigid a view on what a romance is, should be, or can be, as contest judges.
5. The stronger your voice, the more widely divergent your contest scores will be (hint: enter contests where the lowest score is discarded or is sent for contingency judging).
6. It doesn’t matter if there’s a page missing in a final round entry. Honest!

All that said, I really urge any unpubbed writers to enter the Golden Heart. Once a finalist, always a finalist–you get on and off editors’ and agents’ desks fast (a mixed blessing) and you’ll make some good friends–Diane is one of my many 2003 GH finalist friends, aka The Wet Noodle Posse. That’s one way to crank up publisher interest in trads–particularly if you’re subverting the subgenre and going for the unexpected. Show them there’s life in the beast still–otherwise we may as well try to save unicorns.

Janet

Enter my contest all this month at roadtoromance.ca
DEDICATION~Winner, 2006 Golden Leaf Contest (Regency)

Overall, my own contest experiences have been wonderful.

I began my contest career with the Beau Monde’s Royal Ascot, a contest for unpublished writers of Regency era romance. After entering just to get some feedback, I won it in 1999 with what became my first book, LORD LANGDON’S KISS. Since then, my books have won or finaled in the Booksellers’ Best, the National Readers’ Choice Award, the Holt Medallion, the Award of Excellence, the Golden Quill and the Golden Leaf.

Which means that, good Risky that I am, I’m a contest slut and have done pretty well at it!

However, my results haven’t been consistent. Books that won one contest sometimes didn’t even hit the finals in others (and often the competition was the same). In the RWA contests, the Golden Heart and the RITA, I’ve had very mixed scores. With 5 judges, I usually get 3 very high scores and 2 that are low to abysmal. I once got a 8.2 and a 2.0 for the same book, out of 9 possible. (Don’t ask me why they don’t use a scale of 10, maybe to keep us from getting swollen heads?)

Taking off my contestant hat, I’m sometimes surprised that books I’ve loved haven’t always hit the finals. I mean, how could anyone not recognize Laura Kinsale’s FLOWERS FROM THE STORM as one of the best historical romances ever, not just of that year? Julia Ross’s historicals are amazing and have not hit the RITA finals either though they’ve won all sorts of accolades elsewhere. (It’s possible these books weren’t entered, though it seems unlikely.)

So how does one explain these discrepancies? I’ve got a couple of theories.

There’s the polarizing writer theory. I use it to console myself when I get the love/hate spray of scores. I’d rather be a polarizing than boring. But controversial books have sometimes won. Laura Kinsale’s SHADOWHEART is the best example I can think of.

Then there’s the category expectations theory–that a book that is well-written but doesn’t quite fit its category may also get mixed scores. I am guessing that some of my low scores have been from judges who don’t believe there should be sex in traditional Regencies. I entered LADY DEARING’S MASQUERADE as a Short Historical due to length reasons, and though it didn’t final the marks were consistently high. (I’m taking this as a Good Omen.) OTOH sexy Regencies have won, including Sophia Nash’s A PASSIONATE ENDEAVOR and our own Diane’s A REPUTABLE RAKE. So it’s not a definitive theory either.

I honestly think it comes down to a combination of a good story and luck in getting the right panel of judges who appreciate it. I’ve heard debates on how to make judging more objective, but I doubt it’s possible because reading itself is so subjective. I think it’s best for a writer not to stress too much about contests, though that’s easier to say than do.

A final thought…without the luck factor, awards ceremonies would be much less exciting, wouldn’t they? So what are your opinions on contest judging? Do your favorite books usually win or not? Any ideas why?

Elena, proud contest slut
LADY DEARING’S MASQUERADE, Desert Rose Golden Quill Best Historical Romance, 2006
www.elenagreene.com

So, what are your favorite Regency Rita winners? (Except for Diane’s book, of course. We all like that best. It says so in our contracts.)

To refresh your memory, here are a list of the Regency Rita winners over the years:

2006 — A Reputable Rake by Diane Gaston
2005 — A Passionate Endeavor by Sophia Nash
2004 — Prospero’s Daughter by Nancy Butler
2003 — A Debt To Delia by Barbara Metzger
2002 — Much Obliged by Jessica Benson
2001 — A Grand Design by Emma Jensen
2000 — The Rake’s Retreat by Nancy Butler
1999 — His Grace Endures by Emma Jensen
1998 — Love’s Reward by Jean R. Ewing
1997 — The Lady’s Companion by Carla Kelly
1996 — Gwen’s Christmas Ghost by Lynn Kerstan and Alicia Rasley
1995 — Mrs. Drew Plays Her Hand by Carla Kelly
1994 — Deirdre and Don Juan by Jo Beverley
1993 — An Unwilling Bride by Jo Beverley
1992 — Emily and the Dark Angel by Jo Beverley
1991 — The Sandalwood Princess by Loretta Chase
1990 — The Rake and the Reformer by Mary Jo Putney
1989 — Brighton Road by Susan Carroll
1988 — Sugar Rose by Susan Carroll
1987 — Lord Abberley’s Nemesis by Amanda Scott
1986 — The Beauty’s Daughter by Monette Cummings
1985 — The Lurid Lady Lockport by Kasey Michaels

Have you read any of these? Which did you particularly like? Are there books by some of these authors that you like better than the ones which actually won the Rita?

All opinions welcome!

Cara
Cara King — www.caraking.com
My Lady Gamester — with 150 % more card playing than the leading brand