<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The beauty of Creative Byline for editors</title>
	<atom:link href="http://creativebyline.wordpress.com/2007/10/05/the-beauty-of-creative-byline-for-editors/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://creativebyline.wordpress.com/2007/10/05/the-beauty-of-creative-byline-for-editors/</link>
	<description>A blog for writers and publishers by Creative Byline</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 18 May 2008 01:10:42 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=MU</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Karmen Kooyers</title>
		<link>http://creativebyline.wordpress.com/2007/10/05/the-beauty-of-creative-byline-for-editors/#comment-34</link>
		<dc:creator>Karmen Kooyers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Nov 2007 18:03:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://creativebyline.wordpress.com/2007/10/05/the-beauty-of-creative-byline-for-editors/#comment-34</guid>
		<description>One concern.  What I hear editors say most often is that they don't know what they're looking for, but they know it when they see it.  For instance, they don't think they're interested in fantasy, but then they read a fantasy manuscript that really grabs them. Would Karen Hesse's editor have ever known she wanted to publish a manuscript on the Dust Bowl before she read OUT OF THE DUST?  Highly unlikely.
Editors seem to be mostly looking for a "voice" that grabs them, far more than a particular kind of story.  How will that voice be defined or described through this process?  Perhaps editors will pick up on it through cover letters.  I do think this is a terrific idea.  In my particular situation, I write about jazz and would love to connect with editors who also love jazz.
I hope editors will remain open to reading new voices and not limit themselves too much to a particular style.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One concern.  What I hear editors say most often is that they don&#8217;t know what they&#8217;re looking for, but they know it when they see it.  For instance, they don&#8217;t think they&#8217;re interested in fantasy, but then they read a fantasy manuscript that really grabs them. Would Karen Hesse&#8217;s editor have ever known she wanted to publish a manuscript on the Dust Bowl before she read OUT OF THE DUST?  Highly unlikely.<br />
Editors seem to be mostly looking for a &#8220;voice&#8221; that grabs them, far more than a particular kind of story.  How will that voice be defined or described through this process?  Perhaps editors will pick up on it through cover letters.  I do think this is a terrific idea.  In my particular situation, I write about jazz and would love to connect with editors who also love jazz.<br />
I hope editors will remain open to reading new voices and not limit themselves too much to a particular style.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
