So, Gentle Readers, how are you enjoying this fine April 2005
"Cool Jerk" issue of Lime Tea so far? That's good to hear-- I'm glad
you're made of stern stuff, because things are about to turn a wee bit nasty.
You see, what I'm about to present is the real, true, and unvarnished origin
of this very magazine, and not all of it is pretty. In fact, just this once,
I'm going to be a bad boy and say exactly what I think. Next month I'll go back
to being the angel you've come to know and love.
The names in this story have not been changed, and relevant links are, when
possible, preserved. [Editor's note: This was true at the time, but I have since removed the identifying information-- not even I am vindictive enough to carry this grudge for 3 years.] As I said, I'm feeling just a little bit ornery right now,
and as far as I know, there's nothing illegal about reporting people's true
comments in their own words.
So. It all began in the winter of 2003, when I answered the following craigslist
posting:
From: Michelle M_______
Subject: Re: LETHAL WRITERS GROUP -- need men/diverse people
Unsatisfied with the writing group postings at Powell's, I'm venturing to form
a group of my own. I'm seeking 30something (preferably experienced and nongenre)
male writers (we've enough women) for our own critique group.
This sounded promising enough, if a little ill-defined. The "Lethal"
part sounded sexy, and who could blame someone for being dissatisfied with the
writing group postings at Powell's? I mean, I'd never seen them, but it was
certainly easy to imagine them sucking. I wrote back:
From: Marty Smith
Subject: Re: LETHAL WRITERS GROUP -- need men/diverse people
I'm thirtysomething, at least nominally male, and somewhat experienced in that
I've published quite a bit of nonfiction-- but I'm trying to write fiction now,
and I admit that I've so far been hampered by the nagging suspicion that I'm
an idiot.
That said, I do believe that inspiration-- or at very least, productivity--
can be contagious, which has led me to the conclusion that a writers' group
might present certain points of interest. What would we do, exactly?
Respectfully,
Marty Smith
I got a response which described pretty much what you'd expect: "setting
and achieving goals," "critique each other's work," and the inevitable
"crack open a decent Chianti now and again."
Now, when I say that when I hear someone discussing "cracking
open" a bottle of wine, I reach for my revolver, understand that this does
not mean that I had no faith in the project. As Michelle presented it, there
was a full complement of writers, or at least warm bodies, in place. All were
eager to get started on the task of helping each other along the path to greatness.
All that really remained, it seemed, was to get together and let the creative
juices start flowing.
A time and place for the first meeting was duly arranged. Then,
while we were waiting around for the meeting of minds that was going to drive
us all inexorably into the pages of Publishers' Weekly, someone made
what would prove to be an irredeemable error: he introduced himself.
I'm not going to reproduce Ronnie Cordova's introduction here--
regular readers of Lime Tea are already familiar with his work. Suffice it to
say that the description was amusing, detailed, polite and modest-- especially
given that, as the owner of the popular blog/nonblog site sublethal.net,
Ronnie was, and probably still is, the most widely read of any of the authors
that were to comprise the "Lethal Writers Group."
Other members of the group, however, were not so forthcoming. Here was a typical
response to Ronnie's mini-bio:
From: d______@comcast.net
Subject: Lethal Writers Group: first meeting
Hey Ronnie,
I like your writing and look forward to meeting you. And thanks for the note.
Jake
We'll hear more from this guy Jake later, I assure you. In the meantime, the others
weighed in with equally terse notes, none of which did anything at all to shed
light on whether they were or were not the sort of total strangers with whom
one would wish to be cooped up in a strange environment for an unspecified period
of time.
While normally I'm as game for meeting total strangers as any other writer
(that is to say, I rate the experience as only slightly less appealing than
setting fire to my own genitals), I wouldn't have minded knowing a bit more
about the wordsmiths with whom I was throwing in my lot.
Ronnie apparently agreed-- he made a second overture, this time asking more
specifically for at least a brief howdy-do from the other members.
He got little by way of reply. About the most revealing and lengthiest came
from our fearless leader herself:
From: Michelle M_______
Subject: Lethal Writers Group: first meeting
Last book read: Chuck Palahnuik's Fugitives and Refugees:
A Walk Through Portland. Currently reading: Jay McInerney's Bright
Lights, Big City. Want to read: the French and Russian classics.
This is not a book to be tossed aside lightly. It should
be thrown with great force. -- Dorothy Parker
That was it. About all one could glean from this was that the
writer felt it important to plow through essentials like Bright Lights,
Big City before wasting time on airport throwaways like Anna Karenina.
Seriously, how does someone whose website boasts of a Masters in Writing from
USC manage to get through school without cracking "the French and Russian
classics?" I've only got a B.A.-- in film, for Chrissakes-- and
even I've read Madame Bovary. (And yes, in case you're wondering, this
person did end all her emails with some cutesy quote you've already
heard.)
There were a few other half-hearted emails from other members, some listing
a few terrible books they liked, all short on substance. The few concrete details
one could discern were not particularly encouraging.
For example, another member, Kristin R_____, had the wince-worthy
email address "kristincanwrite@yahoo.com." Ouch. I once read in the
submission guidelines for another webzine that "any submission from any
person whose email address contains the word 'writer,' 'write,' or any variation
thereof shall be summarily rejected." We're not that hardassed at Lime
Tea, but frankly, I can see where that magazine is coming from.
One could hardly help but notice that, the more one looked at it, the less
promising this enterprise was starting to appear. Still, it seemed worth a shot.
Then we got this:
From: Michelle M_______
Subject: I may have to miss tonight's meeting
Hey, gang--
(Un)fortunately, I received a last-minute project with a 24-hour turn-around.
Depending on my progress, I may or may not attend/stop by tonight's meeting.
If I do miss, please brief me on what I missed. And perhaps another meeting
next Tuesday or the following?
Thanks! Michelle
When you are down and out, something always turns up--
and it is usually the noses of your friends. --Orson Welles
Ah, that pithy Orson Welles! How true, how true!
Okay, but seriously. We are now down to five total strangers,
only one of whom has shared any personal details at all, who are supposed
to get together in the absence of the hostess and somehow just get along.
All in all, it was shaping up to be a pretty uncomfortable evening, and both
Ronnie and I, in my opinion ever-so-gently, expressed some misgivings. Judge
for yourself whether we were acting like huge dicks:
From: Marty Smith
Subject: Re: I may have to miss tonight's meeting
Well, what do you know. I was sort of counting on Michelle to, um, explain
exactly why we were there and what we were supposed to be doing. All I knew
was that I was supposed to show up.
I'm still planning to be there, though. It won't be the first meeting I've
gone to where I didn't know what I was supposed to bring, say, or do, and I
doubt it'll be the last. Just so you'll all know me, I'll be the guy sitting
down, drinking coffee.
yrs rspctfly,
Marty Smith
And here's Ronnie's:
From: Ronnie Cordova
Subject: Re: I may have to miss tonight's meeting
Tonight's meeting? Two people haven't said a single word, and getting something
above perfunctory input has been difficult. I wrote a good chunky little intro
and invited others to follow suit, with minimal response. Normally I'd not overthink
that lack of response, but these are writers we're talking about. I told my
friend, "I still don't have any kind of idea who these people are, what
kind of writers, what they're looking for from the group, nothing" and
he said "Some people are better in person, they don't express themselves
well in text", and I go "These are WRITERS! This is supposed to be
right up their alley."
Ronnie
Does that one sound a little snippy? If so, perhaps it's because he'd just
received the following response to his previous request for more info:
Subject: Re: I may have to miss tonight's meeting
From: Kristin R_____ <kristincanwrite@yahoo.com>
To: Ronnie Cordova
I write. I write to get paid. I get paid. And I write for
pleasure. And pleasureful it is. I don't have time to tap-dance for anyone about
my seriousness or realness about what I do, because I'm too busy writing.
We chose this life. The writer's life can be one of disappointment. If I took
every bump personally, I wouldn't be gaining writing jobs, learning off other
people, and getting my goals accomplished.
So I'll be there.
-Kristin
She doesn't have time to tap-dance about the seriousness or realness
of what she does. Hell, she doesn't even have time to look up "pleasurable"
in the dictionary.
Whatever. Everything you've seen so far pales by comparison to
the message where the member known only as "Jake" finally weighs in
to tell us what he thinks of people like us who ask too many questions:
From: d______@comcast.net
Subject: Re: I may have to miss tonight's meeting
Ronnie, Marty:
These attitudes would never work in a self-sustaining writers group. Have you
ever belonged to one? There's no reason why the possible absence of any single
person should turn us into needy, whiny brats who can't take charge of our own
actions much less contribute to a greater good.
I mean, what kind of thing is this to say: "Well, what do you know. I
was sort of counting on Michelle to, um, explain exactly why we were there and
what we were supposed to be doing. All I knew was that I was supposed to show
up."
Count on yourself, dude. Step in, take charge. Or at least
read your emails. It was clear in Michelle's original post that she didn't consider
herself the leader of this group... It goes without saying that an attitude
of good will, kindness, contribution, and self-responsibility would HAVE to
be there from the start.
And then, somewhere along the way, somebody demanded that we introduce ourselves
over email, or even "spill our guts", before he'd be willing to appear
in the flesh...even though we'd just gone out of our way to make him feel welcome.
OK, I'll introduce myself. I'm a science editor/rewriter by day and a novelist
by dark. I have an MA in fiction writing from the Writing Seminars at Johns
Hopkins, where I also taught undergraduate workshops. My book, Foreign Devils,
is set in a once-German city (Tsingtao/Qingdao) on the east coast of China,
where some expat Germans are waiting out the war. I'm midway into the second
draft and am following up with a few agents. Almost all my publications are
under the names of the people who paid me over the past 16 years. I've been
in several workshops and writing groups, some that were just starting up and
others that were as old as any in the country save Iowa's.
Each of us probably could've been your friend and ally. And yes, my own attitude
here doesn't reflect what I just preached. But preaching shouldn't be necessary
in the first place, and what I've seen today is enough. Good luck.
If any of the rest of you feel as I do, let's arrange a new meeting and try
to find ways to recruit the right kind of writers.
Jake
Did you catch that? This guy just unilaterally disbanded the group, offered
to form a new one where Ronnie and I were pointedly not welcome, and still won't
give his full name-- though, admittedly, it's not too hard to suss out. His
name is Jake d______, he has, according to Google, precisely one published article
(from 1999) online under his own name, his novel appears to be unpublished to
date, and he's a fucking asshole. (This latter is my personal opinion and should
not be construed as a statement of fact.)
"These attitude [sic] would never work in a self-sustaining
writers group. Have you ever belonged to one?" No, I haven't, ass-weed;
and you're certainly not making it any easier. What an unbelievable wad.
I suppose I shouldn't have been surprised when other members of the group lined
up to kiss Jake's ass-- he was, after all, "following up with a few agents."
From: Jeannie S______
Subject: Re: I may have to miss tonight's meeting
Jake,
I really appreciate your thoughts and would like to start the group off on
a good foot as well. I really didn't understand why there was confusion in the
first place. Michelle's correspondence made perfectly good sense to me. Not to
mention I find meeting people in person far more revealing than any e-mail write-up.
Probably because you're completely incapable of expressing yourself in writing,
you illiterate tool.
As it turned out, this was last contact I was to have with any
member of the Lethal Writers' Group except for the similarly excommunicated
Mr. Cordova. And yet, as you'll see, I have them to thank-- yea, verily, you
have them to thank as well-- for the existence of this magazine. I will allow
my subsequent correspondence with Ronnie tell the remainder of the story.
From: Marty Smith
To: Ronnie Cordova
Subject: RE: Re: Writers' "group," indeed
Dear Ronnie,
Allow me to describe the first meeting of the Lethal Writers' Group, which,
unbelievably after all this, I still went to: apparently, it was so lethal that
it killed everyone who was planning to attend, with the exception of myself.
Yup, that's right, just me. (You'll be getting the minutes of the meeting under
separate cover.) Which is more or less why I feel entitled to cheese off everybody
who didn't show up:
Michelle M_______: Absent hostess. Appears to have no writing
under her own name online, though does have a very ugly website offering professional
editing services (http://www.thequickquill.homestead.com/).
Received honorable mention in some kind of MFA writing competition.
Ronnie Cordova: To all appearances, a sensible fellow who knows a rat when
he smells one. Can write, appears to have actual work ethic about same. (I myself
can only gape foolishly at the concept of self-discipline.) You're probably
familiar with his work, so no link.
Kristin R_____: Earnest aspirant (her email address is,
I kid you not, kristincanwrite@yahoo.com). Either has difficulty constructing
a coherent sentence or has consistently been the victim of extremely heavy-handed
and incompetent copy editing. Example at http://www.fazed.com/lifestyle/bar_etiquette.html.
There are others as well; search for "T. Kristin R_____," like, you
know, "J. Alfred Prufrock." May have unicorn patches sewn onto her
backpack.
Jake D______(?): Ghostwriter with limited social skills who has devoted his
life to unintentionally proving the axiom that hard work is no substitute for
talent. Has one article online. Probably expecting to be the Big Man in the
group; just to make sure, he had to force out all other males.
Jeannie S______: Marketing exec who fancies that her skills at selling soapsuds
may translate into a flair for literary prose. Nothing online. Big fan of Jake
X and his methods.
Reading over the above, I realize that I probably seem just
as bad as anybody. Frankly, I'm just venting. But, Christ, I wasn't
the one who got on my high horse and started telling people that they had no
business being in a writers' group, and I haven't razzed anybody who hasn't
already displayed open hostility to people whom they've never even met. And
at least I took the time to show up at the "meeting," where the individuals
in question could have laid my snide prejudgments to rest in person.
Anyway, I don't know what all this is leading to. Maybe
I'll try to start a writers' group. You know, one with the "right"
kind of writers-- though, in my case, the right kind would mean the kind that
aren't total pricks. Do you know anybody?
yrs,
Marty
***
From: Ronnie Cordova
Subject: Writers' "group," indeed
Oh dear, I didn't expect that, no one showing up. Kristin was so adamant about
being there, out of righteousness and spite if nothing else. Well, I hope you
got a hot beverage out of the deal anyway. And you're right, my reason for requesting
a pre-meeting roundtable was so that if these people struck me as the kind I
wouldn't want to be trapped in a room with, I could, well, avoid being trapped
in a room with 'em. Not because my time is so valuable or anything, but simply
because I've spent my entire adult life avoiding awkward and/or excruciating
social situations.
Let me know if you start a group. I like how you write, it's very simpatico
with my style in some ways, so there's that. My contact with other writerly
or literary types, or even book lovers, is basically nil, I'm doing everything
in a vacuum. That sorta gets me down sometimes. But anyway.
Ronnie
***
From: Marty Smith
Subject: Writers' "group," indeed
Here; look at this site: http://www.cherrybleeds.com [note:
apparently, I'd never seen a webzine before, judging by how blown away I seem
by the concept. Whatever. - M.S.]
You see what they're doing-- they have a core of writers who, at least in theory,
produce something for every issue, and then if anybody else comes along with
something decent (or maybe just legible), they publish that as well.
It doesn't sound too hard. You scare up 4-10 losers you trust who are willing
to commit to producing some copy every month, and bam, you've got a webzine.
If it turns out good, you publicize it; if not, the contributors use it for
exercise until they get bored and go on to something else or nothing. Any interest?
(Bear in mind I only had this idea about 20 minutes ago.)
Marty Smith
And the rest, as they say, is history.
Marty Smith is the editor of Lime Tea.
He doesn't pretend to be any better, smarter, or more famous than anyone
else-- just meaner.
