corrinalaw ([info]corrinalaw) wrote,
@ 2005-08-02 11:27:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
RWA National in Reno
I know, I'm doing this backwards, but I thought RWA members and attendees of the awards ceremony last Saturday night would be interested. This is from Nora Roberts and is either going to be published in the next Romance Writers Report as a letter to the editor or as an advertisement if it's too long.

**********************************************************

As Ms. Quinn refused to read my statement, as agreed, before the
awards ceremony in Reno, then again reneged on her agreement to read
it after the awards, I will write it here.

Nora Roberts declines to host tonight's awards ceremony as she feels
the content is inappropriate and believes the focus should be on the
nominees and the organization.

Oddly, I wasn't given a script by Ms. Quinn. One was provided by a
member of the production team when I requested it on Friday afternoon
in Reno. The only significant change I was able to implement, though
I argued and debated with Ms. Quinn, Laura Hayden and Diana Pershing,
was the deletion of the video containing the fall of the Twin Towers
and the Oklahoma City bombing. How painful those images would have
been to the many editors in attendance who lived though 9/11.

Instead of a celebration, a night of fun and anticipation for the
nominees, and an entertaining and sparkling event, the audience was
treated to a three-plus hour world history lesson, heavy on disaster,
death, politics, war and tragedy--in one memorable moment, Don't
Worry, Be Happy was played over those images.

I can't comprehend how such tragic events and images had a place at a
ceremony meant to showcase the nominees and the organization. Nor can
I understand how it was thought proper to juxtapose those with
presenters being driven on stage in a limo, walking to the podium to
Joan Riveresque commentary in a format that gave more play to the
presenters than those who were lucky enough to take home a Golden
Heart or a Rita. The emcee's place in all this seemed to be to recite
endless dry facts and figures of RWA dues, conference fees and sites
over the last quarter of a century, instead of relating the heart of
our organization.

It was tempting to resign my membership. But it wasn't RWA that
pushed this agenda. It was a handful of individuals. RWA has, as
always, my respect, affection and gratitude. The current president
has none of those.

Nora Roberts

(Post a new comment)


[info]griz_zel_dah
2005-08-02 07:09 pm UTC (link)
And isn't it nice that Miss Nora has the platform to say this, be heard, and get away with it. How often does someone with the platform speak out like that.
Brava!

(Reply to this) (Thread)
Nora's speech
(Anonymous)
2005-08-02 09:17 pm UTC (link)
Way to go, Nora. You are so right.

(Reply to this) (Parent)
RWA National in Reno
(Anonymous)
2005-08-02 10:48 pm UTC (link)
Thank you, Nora Roberts, for: 1) Sticking to your integrity and refusing to have any part of the RWA awards ceremony in Reno; 2) Stating the facts accurately and eloquently; 3) Remaining loyal to RWA (and recognizing that one tryannical president doesn't constitute an organization); 4) Just being the class act that you are.

I was at that ceremony, and many other writers and I agree it was a joke--and one in very poor taste, at that. It was negative, it gave give more attention to the presenters than it did the honorees, and it failed to focus on the many positive aspects of our society, of the accomplishments of the women that romance represents, and the positive impact and empowerment of romance (and love).

Brava, Ms. Roberts! If I see you in Atlanta next year, I hope you'll let me buy you a drink.

(Reply to this)

Yes!
(Anonymous)
2005-08-02 10:55 pm UTC (link)
I wasn't lucky enough to make it to Reno. But Dear Heavens Above ... This was a night for the GH and RITA winners, for the honored nominees, for the generous and hard-working judges, and for the membership. Doesn't matter what you haul out to upstage 'em ... it's still tacky. JoB

(Reply to this) (Thread)
Re: Yes!
(Anonymous)
2005-08-03 12:16 am UTC (link)
But it would have upstaged them plenty, wouldn't it, to have a huge bestseller vent before or after the conference. It could be that the ceremony should be refocused more, but I was there, and it wasn't any more focused away from the finalists than usual (and I've been a finalist, and never felt anything but happy about it). Now imagine if a very prominent writer had gotten her way and had a venting letter read-- everyone would have been whispering about that through the ceremony and not cheering the finalists. Notice that now we're not talking about how wonderful some Rita winner's book is... we're talking about this letter. Who's upstaging?

The ceremony went okay. There have been better ceremonies, there have been worse ones, in my humble opinion. But Nora Roberts's disapproval does not make a ceremony good or bad. That's for the individual attendees to decide for themselves, and I'm sure they have!

This is indeed the night for the honorees-- not for someone who wants to register a complaint.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)
Re: Yes!
(Anonymous)
2005-08-04 06:02 pm UTC (link)
At the awards ceremony, all eyes should be on the finalists and winners. We are in agreement -- the night should be about them, about Romance and about the RWA.

My understanding is that N.R. asked that the following statement (only) be read, either before or after the ceremony -->
>
Nora Roberts declines to host tonight's awards ceremony as she feels
the content is inappropriate and believes the focus should be on the
nominees and the organization.
>
>
I see this, not as an attempt to vent, upstage or prevent the members of the audience from judging the merits of the presentation, but as a straightforward explanation of why N.R. declined to act as MC at the last moment.
I do not believe reading this 27-word statement after the awards ceremony would have detracted from anyone's enjoyment of the evening.
>
The decision not to read this statement at the end of the ceremony may have been motivated by a kindly wish to keep everybody talking and thinking about the achievements of our winners.
In context, it sure looks like hunkering down to avoid embarrassment.
>
N.R.'s disapproval of the program contents was apparently responsible for removing several of the most horrific images ... the Twin Towers, the Columbine killings, the Challenger explosion. This could only have been an improvement.
>
>

Jo Bourne

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)
Re: Yes!
(Anonymous)
2005-08-08 04:29 pm UTC (link)
I was not in Reno and I'm new to this but I would really like to know what images of the Twin Towers the Oklahoma City bombing have to do with a romance novel?
I am working on a novel for the first time and it is challenging. It takes time, research and of course, re-writes. Shouldn't the awards ceremony have been a celebration of hard work coming to fruition?

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]volterraread
2005-08-03 12:03 am UTC (link)
I love how all these comments are anonymous. ;)

Seriously, I did wonder what had happened to Nora when I saw a program that had her name on it in big letters, but didn't get to see her at all, so thanks for sharing the letter.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

(Anonymous)
2005-08-03 12:11 am UTC (link)
Yeah, well, you know, everyone working on the ceremony, including me, is glad that we didn't have a preview or a postview telling people not to enjoy the ceremony. Maybe it worked for you, maybe it didn't-- but I really don't think your experience would have been enhanced by hearing that one person was upset. Letter to the Editor is exactly the forum for complaints-- not at an awards ceremony that actually wasn't as bad as is made out. In fact, many people enjoyed it-- there was a lot of laughter and applause. I don't think anyone would have had a better time if her letter had been read.

this is another one of those kerfluffles that seems very important in the moment, but later we think, "Why was that so important? Someone didn't like the awards ceremony script. So?
Alicia (who isn't really anonymous :)

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]volterraread
2005-08-03 12:32 am UTC (link)
True -- but now I know why Nora had gone -- and that doesn't necessarily mean I agree or disagree with her. I thought maybe she'd got sick, or something.

But now I know. Another mystery solved. ;)

(refusing to add fuel to the fire one way or the other about the actual ceremony itself)

(Reply to this) (Parent)

(Anonymous)
2005-08-03 01:43 am UTC (link)
The point that seems to be missed here is that RWA's president agreed to read the statement, but did not do so. Had she refused, Nora would have been able to make the choice of appearing or not, knowing her decision not to appear would not be explained.


(Reply to this) (Parent)
RITAs
[info]london_writing
2005-08-03 11:59 am UTC (link)
"Many people enjoyed it"

I know that the ceremony was a labor of love and no one was paid for their volunteer time on it, and that only the very best of intentions were meant. I firmly believe that the end goal was to create a memorable and fun ceremony for all, and I do thank those who participated because events like these are not the easiest things to pull off. And, y'know, I certainly didn't volunteer my own time, so hats off to those who did.

But.

In my opinion, this ceremony was anything but enjoyable. It was a Bataan Death March experience - and the taste of my remark is fully in keeping with the taste of the ceremony. Thank the deity of your choice that my tablemates had full flasks (which unfortunately were drained by hour one, the pain was so bad).

The laughter and applause? They did exist. But at the tables I observed, they were for the winners and their acceptance speeches. They demonstrated the grace, humor and true spirit of RWA far more than any of the scripted stuff. The biggest kudos of the actual ceremony went to the presenter who so wonderfully said, "A lot of terrible things happened this year, but I'm not going to read them." Bless her.

I honestly think there was a wonderful theme to the ceremony: That in a world that is often pessimistic and hopeless, romance brings optimism and hope. But that theme was just barely referred to at the end of an interminable ceremony, and was not at all carried throughout.

(And I don't care what side of the political spectrum you fall on, politics - whether with a Capital P or interpersonal, and both showed up - have NO place in a ceremony meant to celebrate 25 years of literary accomplishments.)

It isn't so much that one person didn't like the script, or the images/music chosen to accompany the script - it's that Nora Roberts (who, regardless of what one thinks of her work, is one of the best advertisements RWA has for the success and legitimacy of romance writing) chose not to participate as the host of 25th anniversary ceremony. That's not a kerfluffle, in my opinion - that's a major black eye. And by not reading her statement, RWA is only adding fuel to the speculative fire already raging across the internet and elsewhere.

I know my respect for the organization and especially for the current administration has fallen miles below where it once was.

Sorry, Corrina, for finding your LiveJournal this way! I do enjoy it.

Chandra
Survivor, RITAs 2005

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)
Re: RITAs
[info]corrinalaw
2005-08-05 09:19 pm UTC (link)
Hey Chandra,

No apologies needed. It's an important situation, I think, and should be addressed.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]jonquil
2005-08-03 05:42 pm UTC (link)
> I really don't think your experience would have been enhanced by hearing that one person was upset.

In point of fact, it would. Because I spent the first half-hour after the whole thing ended asking people "Did I just see what I thought I saw, or am I crazy?" EVERYBODY I talked to said "No, you weren't crazy." Hearing at the end of the ceremony that Nora Roberts had walked out would have saved me a lot of self-questioning.

> not at an awards ceremony that actually wasn't as bad as is made out.

I was there. I was banging my head against the table. I was angry and appalled and mortified. Don't tell me it wasn't a bad experience.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]fashionista_35
2005-08-04 08:33 pm UTC (link)
"Why was that so important? Someone didn't like the awards ceremony script. So?"

I'm certainly not going to forget why it's so important and it certainly goes beyond a simple dislike of the script.

**It's the third major misstep by RWA leadership, which stops with the President of the organization in as many months.

**Leaving potential political biases aside, the video montages were wretched, especially when combined with the very questionable music choices. The knowledge that they were edited to delete even more horrific visions simply boggles the mind.

**It's not just "someone" who didn't like the script. It was the emcee, the individual whose name and face were going to be associated with this show, especially with it being given such prominence as the twenty-fifth anniversary. That it was an absolute icon of our genre, one of the most recognized names in the industry, regardless of genre I think entitles her to a little bit more respect than just referring to her as "someone."

**There were several first-time attendees there, from members to respected industry professionals and that awards ceremony was the last impression they came away with from the conference. And let's face it, Last Impressions count every bit as much as First Impressions.

**This has now become a media firestorm, at least within our industry, making the press outside the genre and once again, reducing us to laughingstock status amonst our peers again, for the third time in as many months. I'm proud to say I'm a romance writer. I will always be proud to say I'm a romance writer and I will defend RWA tirelessly, but because I do, I also reserve the right to be critical and to voice my displeasure with the President's behavior.

And yes, I've written to the board.

(Reply to this) (Parent)
The reason I posted Nora's comment
[info]corrinalaw
2005-08-03 12:52 am UTC (link)
The main reason is that it is information directly from the source.

While I agree with Nora on this one, I would also be perfectly happy to post any statement from RWA President Tara Taylor Quinn on the objections many had to both the tone and the length of the ceremony.

My main complaint, though I was appalled at the choice of "Don't Worry, Be Happy" playing over images of Tianamen Square, is that this was RWA's 25th anniversary and honoring its accomplishments played a very small part in said ceremony.

And poor Linda Howard, waiting until nearly midnight to be honored, when many attendees had already slipped away. I know Ms. Howard is certainly not reading here but I feel compelled to offer my sympathies and apologies for what should have been a shining night for her.

As someone on the cherry list pointed out, some people solve problems as warriors and some by trying to bring consensus. Nora did try to get changes made but felt compelled to walk away when she did not feel comfortable with the words she was given to say. Others stayed and tried rewrites and did their best. Neither approach is wrong.

The best information I have is that the ceremony was planned by Tara Taylor Quinn, that she appointed herself to be in charge. I do think her method of entrance overshadowed Linda Howard's entrance in a similar manner and that's unfortunate because, again, it should have been Linda Howard's moment.

And I was very angry at some of the choices. Especially the choice of Michael Jackson's music and image and some of the sexual focus, particularly on Bill Clinton and Lorena Bobbit. Surely, there were better ways to celebrate RWA's anniversary than these images?

In response to the comments below, I do believe Nora's objection was that the night did NOT honor the finalists, so it can be seen both ways. As for the comment below that was a personal attack on a specific person, I've deleted it. Everyone here is free to speak their mind, say the ceremony was planned well or badly but please stick to criticizing the actions of an individual instead of attacking an individual's personality.

Thanks!

(Reply to this) (Thread)
Re: The reason I posted Nora's comment
(Anonymous)
2005-08-03 06:12 am UTC (link)
I was at the ceremony Saturday night and agree with the statements above...

The ceremony was like a long-running joke that gets tired after the umpteenth telling. Specifically, the "fashion show" with running commentary was tacky and farcical. The introductions of the presenters actually lasted longer than the winners' speeches, and that's a crying shame. If I hadn't had friends nominated that evening that I wanted to cheer for, I would have walked out.

I thought it was appalling that several of the attendees cheered for the images of Tianamen Square during "Don't Worry, Be Happy". The choice in music was ill-planned and callous, as those poor students are either dead or languishing in prison. Clips of Micheal Jackson? Princess Diana's funeral? I actually gripped the sides of my chair while the images of the space shuttle were playing, thinking, "Tell me they're NOT going to show what I think they're going to show!" Several people at my table expressed the same thoughts aloud. (Thankfully, we were spared that clip!)

It is my humble opinion that to fulfill the billing of "a celebration", the ceremony should have focused on how far romance has come in the last 25 years instead of a bad PBS documentary. The announcements of the nominees and winners was almost anti-climatic.

The ceremony lasted so long that that the usual post-RITA celebrations in the past didn't occur. The attendees were exhausted and several had early flights the next morning...or should I say - later that morning?

My feeling upon exiting the theater several hours later can be summed up by quoting Deana Carter's country music song of a few years ago, "Did I shave my legs for this?"

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)
Re: Analogy
[info]clarentine
2005-08-03 12:38 pm UTC (link)
Here's another way to look at the ceremony and evaluate its flaws that may appeal, given it's a writers' organization's ceremony we're talking about.

What if you looked at the ceremony--script, music, video--as if it were a book you'd picked up off the shelf? Would you look at the disconnect between title and blurb (surely the blurb would comment about how it's RWA's 25th (did I get that right? Not a member) anniversary celebration), read the first couple of pages of moderator's text, see the video/photos and music, and think you'd gotten what you'd paid for? Or, as a writer or at least a discerning reader, would you look at the disconnect, the lack of focus, and put the thing back on the shelf?

Bottom line, the audience is no more than a set of consumers, and the performance (whatever sort it is) is the product. You can't please all consumers with a single product, but you can try to focus your product so that the majority of your audience appreciates it.

Judging by the comments I've read here and elsewhere, I'd say that was not accomplished with this particular ceremony.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)
Re: Analogy
(Anonymous)
2005-08-03 05:24 pm UTC (link)
I didn't have a chance to go this year, but I tell you, if I had, I would have never gone back. Romance is all about the positive in life, not the negative. We aren't writing about issues with unhappy endings, why parade them across the tables as if we were. Hats of to Nora, my hero, for standing up for what she believed in, and thumbs down to the residing committee of RWA for thinking we didn't have eyes to know what's been going on for the past twenty-five years in the first place. Michelle in Texas

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)
Re: Analogy
(Anonymous)
2005-08-03 06:59 pm UTC (link)
You all haven't even hit on the fact that the poor awards nominees (of which I was one) were trapped for 3+ hours right in front of the speakers that horrible music was blaring out of. It took 2 days (I kid you not) for the ringing to stop in my left ear. And our seats were crammed in so close (and locked together so they couldn’t be moved) that anyone who was bigger than a size 6 or over 5 feet tall (which was everyone in my section) was simply cramped and uncomfortable the whole time. I wanted to leave soooooooo bad, but I just couldn’t being myself to be so rude (especially when I was right there in the front row.

I agree with most of what's been said above, and then some . . .

-Tonda

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)
Re: Analogy
(Anonymous)
2005-08-03 11:12 pm UTC (link)
Yes, I was there as well, and as my first RWA conference and ceremony, I was simply embarrassed. I had to leave at 11:15, despite the fact I wanted to stay and watch the remaining rewards, because I was simply shaking with exhaustion. I really wanted to see the focus of this ceremony on the nominee's not the presenters. I’m still having flashbacks of that shuttle blowing up, which thank god, they spared us, however Di’s death put tears in my eyes. Was all that necessary, just because someone delegated reviewing the script? Shame on RWA!

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)
Re: Analogy
(Anonymous)
2005-08-04 01:52 am UTC (link)
I wasn't there, but if I had been I would have been very angry from what all of you have described.

Kudus Nora! You tired to fix the speech, and when you found yourself at an impasse, one that would compromise your beliefs, you walked away. I'm proud of you.

Judy Soifer in CA

(Reply to this) (Parent)
Nora Roberts
(Anonymous)
2005-08-04 01:27 am UTC (link)
Bravo Nora!
How could any committee agree to show a disaster movie at a time like that. When everyone is high with excitement and infected by the fabulous energy that must have been in the room.

I'm sure there were a lot of unhappy people who didn't get to hear Nora speak.

Valorie Grant
Aspiring Writer

(Reply to this)

Awards ceremony
(Anonymous)
2005-08-04 04:24 am UTC (link)
I was a finalist at the ceremony. Before the ceremony, I already knew that Nora was upset and had refused to read her script, and Laura Hayden and others had worked long and hard to make an awful production more workable. Therefore, I tried to appreciate the good parts, mostly listening to my fellow finalists accept their awards. I'm grateful that Nora had to courage to take a stand and prevent a bigger disaster, and that Laura stepped in to change things and moderate.

I've been a finalist for the last three out of five years, and I can tell you that for all five ceremonies, I've enjoyed the presentations and any pictures of the past years which are put up on the screen. I could care less about any skits, and wish they'd be cut out in favor of pictures of RWA national and local events that occurred throughout the year.

The good thing about this is that a committee or the board will oversee future ceremonies so this doesn't happen again.

(Reply to this)


[info]technosage
2005-08-04 04:31 am UTC (link)
Just... thanks for posting this. I've never respected "our Nora" more. Brava for her having the courage of her convictions.

I'm writing up what I saw and heard, but I wanted to thank you before I linked to you. ;-)

(Reply to this) (Thread)
So curious
(Anonymous)
2005-08-04 10:48 am UTC (link)
I'm brand new to this forum, but I appreciate all the info posted here. I missed the conference this year, but I haven't attended the award ceremony in years anyway. I'm an early bird with an aversion to dressing up.
I just wanted to say that there's been a lot of buzz about the ceremony, and while I don't automatically believe everything I've heard, I certainly trust Nora Robert's opinion on it. It's so nice to have an exact quoting of the events, directly from her so there's no room for misinterpretation.
I hope that in future, the organization of the event (planning, etc...) will be handled differently so that conflicts can be avoided. I'm sure they aren't pleasant for anyone.

Lori Foster

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]stephanielynch
2005-08-05 06:40 pm UTC (link)
I am a member of RWA. I was at Reno. I sat through the Golden Heart portion of the awards. I threw my heart and voice and hands into cheering for the GH Finalists that I knew.

The ceremony (and this was my fourth one to sit through) was the FIRST one I have ever walked out on. It was too long, poorly planned, and obviously didn't focus on the people it should have... the nominees.

One GH award winner turned her speech into a diatribe that I could have lived without.

Nora Roberts did what she felt was the right thing to do. I admire her for that. I admire her for her short statement that should have been read on her behalf.

I guess now we know why TTQ was bawling at the luncheon on Saturday.

This is, as someone else points out, not the first misjudgement of TTQ's presidency. I, for one, am delighted that she is on her way out. She may be on helluva an author, but her leadership abilities are lacking.

The obvious Reich Wing overtones turned my stomach. Tianamen Square as a backdrop for "Don't Worry Be Happy" was in incredibly poor taste. RWA board does realize that people died there, yes?

Corrina, thank you for posting this. I have sent the link and letter from Nora to my chapter loop.

I will remain with RWA. This organization has done me a world of good and the conferences remain the best way to network and learn. Perhaps Gayle Wilson can provide a less politically swayed board for next year. One that won't tell me what romance is. One that won't tell me what I can or can't say on my book or webstie. One that does waht it is supposed to and listens to the membership.

(Reply to this)

Reno and Nora
(Anonymous)
2005-08-06 02:53 am UTC (link)
Bravo!!! I have a new found respect for Nora Roberts. This was my first conference and while I enjoyed the signings and MOST of the classes, the awards ceremony was difficult, at best, to sit through. I was horrified at some of the most of the scenes shown to us. I must say that I have even have reservations about attending next year. The awards started late, it was hot in the room, we were crammed into our seats and what the hell was up with the chocolate "RITA award" sitting at our places!?!? I believe that my 18 month old grandson could have done a better job. The commentary as the presenters "walked" to the podium was horrible. My poor husband didn't want to say anything but I could tell that he was completely relieved when I suggested that we leave an hour into this joke of a celebration. The ceremony was depressing and one of the winners went completely off the scale in the uncomfortable speech category and was yanked off stage as she tried to continue. I now know what they feel like during the Academy Awards except without the laughs OR the big celebrity emcee. RWA, I hope that you have learned from this horror that you presented at 2005 National Conference. I am sure that you will have a much smaller crowd to contend with in Atlanta at the awards ceremony as it seems that is your goal.

(Reply to this)

Ms. Roberts
(Anonymous)
2005-08-06 02:27 pm UTC (link)
I think her decision is apropo. Those occurences over the last 25 years, while important to our history and ourselves, have no bearing on the festivities and placed an almost macabre tone on what would have been a more enjoyed night.

(Reply to this)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…