The other day I wrote about the importance of dealing with rejection as a writer. Every writer I know or have ever read about (and that’s lots) has faced it.

Rejection is simply a realistic component of a writer’s professional life.

However, there’s a flip side to this as well. As a very reputable writer puts it…

You have to know how to accept rejection and reject acceptance.
~ Ray Brabury

Bradbury is so spot on about this aspect of being an author. While the rejection is brutal, acceptance can be insidious.

It’s not always insidious but it certainly can be.

All authors want approval. And experience tells me that the ones who most loudly say that they don’t want it are the ones who, deep down, want it the most.

It’s basic human nature. We work hard and pour out our hearts and would love to be positively acknowledged for our brilliance and genius and awe-inspiring literary ways.

But deep down we all also know, that it could be better. It can always be better. If I could have a conversation with Shakespeare, I’d love to chat with him about his own take on the work he produced for I have a feeling, he wouldn’t gush as much as the rest of us do about what he was able to accomplish but rather see what most writers see when they reflect back on their works… that “oh, if only I would have done this and added that and cut this, then the piece would have REALLY shined!”

We all think like that. As the poet Paul Valery once famously quipped, “A poem is never finished, only abandoned.”

I don’t know if abandoned is the right word — a project has to end at some point — but he makes a good point.

We can always re-write and always try to make it better. Alas, it’s never perfect.

That’s why rejecting acceptance is so dangerous. It breeds complacency and a false sense of accomplishment.

On the feedback front, rejection hurts but if it comes with thoughtful reasons, I can learn, improve and grow. (Writing groups struggle with this because sometimes egos get involved and they offer criticism just to hear their own voice in the room.)

Acceptance is good because, well, it’s acceptance. And I want that. But when my mom tells me how great she finds my latest book, I have to ask myself, “Is she really helping me right now?”

Carol Jago said the other day that: write and find a way to receive feedback from a critical friend.

My response to this was…
A friend is key because you need someone who doesn’t have an agenda to prove how smart they are by tearing down your efforts. Some readers are critical just to be critical. Friends do not do that. We all have weaknesses and the writing gets better when we get to see them (because writing is re-writing).

On the other hand, a friend who is not critical is not doing you any favors. Someone who just says “I love it!” no matter what you put in front of them isn’t really helping you either. They are making you feel good… but how is that going to improve the re-writing?

Because writing is re-writing.

Have faith in your own work to move past the “me no likes” that’ll you’ll inevitably get but also have faith in yourself not to blindly trust the “me really loves” you also get as well.

It’s a fine balance which, btw, I still do not always have the most firm grip upon.

We’re all works in progress, right?

You have heard of Stephanie Meyer, right? She’s a mom who doesn’t live on either coast that grew up reading Jane Austen but likes Orson Scott Card, too.

Oh yeah, she wrote this small little book called Twilight, as well. Anyway, I wonder if there is something she can teach us about what it means to be a writer? After all, anybody who can get teens to line up in front of bookstores waiting for the stroke of midnight to hit so that they can get their hands on their latest 700 page release (no pictures, either) might have something valuable to say about the act of writing for young adults, no?

Here’s what she said about what’s next for her?

Is it the purchase of a private island? A yachting trip around the globe? Perhaps she wants to buy an NFL football team? (Okay, I am projecting here.) So, what’s next for someone with the immense success of Stephanie Meyer in their back pocket?

Well, more writing, of course. She says…

I plan to then write Midnight Sun, which is Twilight told from Edward’s perspective. After that, I may write some sequels for The Host, or a may pull another outline from my files to play with. I won’t stop writing; there are too many stories I want to tell.

For writers, the joy is in the work. There is almost no real end goal, no one book that ever gets completed so that, “Well, that’s enough… I’ve done all there is I want to do.”

If there’s still ink the pen, writers want to write. Teachers are kind of like that as well. I mean we never say, “Well, Jimmy now knows how to align his subjects with his verbs so my work in this profession is done.”

We look for more ways to work with Jimmy. Or Janet or Cindy or Michael or Todd.

Cause there is always more to do when the work you are doing is meaningful.

Make your work meaningful and your job won’t really feel like a job at all… but rather it will feel like an aspect of your personhood that resonates with purpose.

That’s may sound all new age and flakey but it’s not. It’s what makes getting up in the morning – at least, for me – feel rewarding instead of dreadful.

I am always interested in reading what other writers have to say about writing. Even if they are writers I do not really read.

For example, here’s a quote I just read from an interview with Mary Higgins Clark…

The first thing you have to do is write. So many people tell me, “I’m going to write a book as soon as…..” The three fatal words are as soon as…. As soon as I learn to use the computer. As soon as I quit my job. As soon as the kids grow up. As soon as the dog dies. But trust me, as soon as the kids grow up and the dog dies, there will be a new set of excuses not to write which will be equally valid. If you are a morning person, get up an hour earlier and use that time to write. If you’re a night person, go to bed an hour later. But don’t say you’re too busy, because you’ll always be too busy!

Now I do not believe I have ever read a book by this woman — but something like 100 million other readers in this world have, so even though she may “not really be my thing”, that doesn’t mean she doesn’t have something valuable to offer me on the professional advice front. (In Mrs. Clark’s defense however, I betchya she has read The Hoopster so NAH! LOL!)

The big point to this all is that when it comes right down to it, she is SO right. I mean so many people ask me about being a writer, how one becomes a writer, where do I “get an agent”, “land a book deal”, and so on they it seems as though they forget one thing.

You need to write.

And write and write and write.

I only mention this because summer is coming and there are scores and scores and scores of folks who “have that book that they have always wanted to write… as soon as…”

Is that you? If so, when do you think the “as soon as” aspect of your life is going to disappear? Because time will. If you do not get started in 2010 the year 2011 will still arrive. Me, I’ve got books I’ll be working on all summer.

Mary Higgins Clark does, too.

Do you?

Putting your butt in a chair and actually writing is the how authors who have sold over 100 million copies of their novels do it, it’s how I do it (goodness do I wish that I was in the former category, instead of the latter in the first part of this sentence) and it’s how the runaway bestselling book of 2011 was tackled.

You can’t hit any home runs if you don’t swing the bat.

The “as soon as…” syndrome — will it bite you in the butt this summer?

I think I’ve spoken before about how, as a writer, I spent years and years and years knocking out material only to be rejected and rejected and rejected.

I used to think, back then, that it was a sign of my own weakness, my moral shortcomings, my inability to be articulate and disciplined and witty and engaging and a good storyteller and so on. Essentially, I used to think that being rejected as a writer was a negative.

These days I realize how wrong I was.

Yes, being rejected hurts. Being rejected humiliates. Being rejected stings in a deep way that only someone who really lays it all on the line and then hears “Sorry Charlie, no thanks,” can understand. The “owch-factor” is brutal.

Matter of fact, the owch-factor is probably why so few people actually ever really attempt to reach for their dreams in this world… cause coming up short can be way more painful than not ever having tried at all because then you can always tell yourself, “I could have if I tried.” Which is Bullshit! btw.)

Of course, these days I am much more philosophical about rejection. Sure, it helps that I am now under contract for my tenth published book aside from having captained an immense curriculum project that represents the best teaching I have ever done. Plus, nowadays all kinds of major publishers are eager to work with me. Truly, I am one of the lucky ones. (And I work hard not to forget it.)

However, rejection is a giver of wisdom once you can learn to put your own feelings of having your ego bruised aside. Rejection teaches things. (BTW, I don’t know that success doesn’t teach things as well — I won’t go that far to say that the wisdom rejection offers is more profound than that of success because both, I’ve learned, are pretty profound if you are paying attention.)

But nowadays, I see more of a pattern to rejection. And it’s staring us all in the face if we pay attention.

For example, read this article.

Look at what Warren Buffet has to say about rejection in the piece.

“The truth is, everything that has happened in my life…that I thought was a crushing event at the time, has turned out for the better,” Mr. Buffett says. With the exception of health problems, he says, setbacks teach “lessons that carry you along. You learn that a temporary defeat is not a permanent one. In the end, it can be an opportunity.”

Mr. Buffett regards his rejection at age 19 by Harvard Business School as a pivotal episode in his life. Looking back, he says Harvard wouldn’t have been a good fit. But at the time, he “had this feeling of dread” after being rejected in an admissions interview in Chicago.

And the other night, I was burned out so I turned on the tv. (Rare for me.) Lo and behold the biography channel was showing an episode on Rodney Dangerfield. Literally, what I learned about the man amazed me.

Rodney Dangerfield was once Jack Roy, a comedian who never made it. For 12 years Jack Roy toiled. Finally, he got married and quit showbiz all together. For the next 11 years after that he sold aluminum siding. (Middle class successful, too.) But he kept writing and writing and writing jokes. Finally, he couldn’t stand his life anymore and hit the stage again… with a new name. (Yep, Rodney Dangerfield.)

He ended up on Ed Sullivan.
He ended up being one of Johnny Carson’s favorite guests. (25 million viewers a night at the time.)
He opened a comedy club, did a few movies (Caddyshack and Back to School being all time classics, IMHO) and basically, Rodney Dangerfield became the man we know today. (Or used to know – he passed a few years ago.)

As it turned out, Rodney was a writer’s writer as well. The guy made it look so easy, “I tell ya, I don’t get no respect…” but Rodeny didn’t even hit upon that tag line til he was in his fifties.

Over 30 years after he started in show business!

And all the pros in the comedy business talked about how Rodney was so precise and meticulate with his lines. How he’d re-write and re-write and re-write jokes.

In the tv piece, Rodney talked about how it would talk him 3 or 4 months to write 6 minutes worth of material for Johnny Carson.

Four months to write 6 minutes? Wow.

Rodney knew rejection.
Warren Buffet knew rejection.
It taught them success.

And if we can teach our students this, we will have taught them something of great value.

Don’t give up. There is an Outstanding Plus Side to Rejection.

I have a few new book contracts being negotiated right now by my literary agent for some upcoming YA titles that are gonna come out from me over the next 12-24 months.

What’s amazing is the degree of blindness with which both sides — the publishers and my literary agent — are negotiating. The fact is they are both, in some ways, quite in the dark as to how things are going to evolve with the ebook market.

And the ramifications are so potentially significant, it seems agents and publishing houses, on behalf of their writers and business interests, are now asking for “lookback agreements” and “ebook clauses”.

BTW, this is why, as an author, I have a literary agent. For me to be expected to keep pace with all of this — to know about how to make sure potential royalties on book sales in, for example, the year 2019 in goodness knows what format ebooks may take nine years from now, are credited properly to my earning’s statements, well.. it’s simply impossible.

My agent, who is as sharp as they come, gets paid to think about this stuff. As do the lawyers for the publishing houses. Thing is, I don’t think the negotiations are contentious between either party. I just think that both sides want to be prudent in making sure they cover their butts.

But how do you cover your butt for a scenario which it’s hard to even see?

The publishing house doesn’t want to give away the farm by not obtaining rights to material that might prove to be material to which they might one day need the publishing rights (and know they should be buying from me right now).

My agent doesn’t want to give away the farm by granting rights to material which may prove lucrative to me in markets that might not have even yet been invented so we only try grant rights to things which are clearly defined within the contracts.

Of course, fuzziness can come up. (And contract makers hate fuzziness.)

For example, I’ll retain movie rights to my book. (That’s standard stuff.) They’ll need ebook rights. (That’s standard stuff, too.) But what if video becomes embedded in a vook and that video explodes into an unforeseeable commercial property of its own. Who owns the rights to that? How will the percentages be split? What if the iPad empowers holograms to be projected and my characters become avatars that Mattel wants to use to make “learn English” educational games in Chinese?

Really, who knows what could come of things over the next decade? And yet, knowing who owns what and how things (i.e. the royalties) get apportioned well, what is now, in 2010, a no money idea could, in 2015, be a HUGE money element to these contracts.

Thus the “lookback” clause. From what I understand, 3 years after publication, we will retain the right to “lookback” at the contract and determine whether or not the digital agreements we make right now in regard to ebooks are still being meted out a spirit of economic fairness.

Interesting stuff, for sure.

And like I said, I don’t think there is any hostility between either party. It’s just good business sense on both sides.

As we head into next month, I’ll spend a little more time speaking to the “author side” of things (as opposed to the teacher side) because a lot of very interesting stuff is brewing. But without a doubt, the world is changing and a contract to simply “publish a book” is no longer a simple contract.

I work hard at trying to provide learning opportunities that can be fun. For sure it’s a “special sauce” in my teaching methodology because I deeply believe that people try harder – and that there is more “stickiness” to education – when students are actually enjoying the work they are being asked to do.

Fact is, figuring out how to marry meaningfulness to rigor through “fun” is how I spend a lot of my prep time for lessons. Making school “enjoyable” is not a dirty word. (Though you wouldn’t know it if you look at the textbooks, the bubble sheet tests, or even the content standards. Sheesh, could they be more boring? Particularly the bubble tests. It’s like they overtly seek to disengage students as if triumphing over the dread of the content being tested is a academic skill for today’s kids.)

In my estimation, discounting the element of “enjoyability”, “meaningfulness” and “pleasure” is an Achille’s heel in ours school.

And rigor does not have to be sacrificed at the altar of student enjoyment. (Trust me, project-based learning where kids actually have to “create” something requires far more depth of knowledge and diversified skill sets than choosing A, B, C, or D 75 times in a row.)

But often it seems like we forget the perspective of the kids when we craft our lesson plans.

As a student, I want to sit in the room of a chemistry teacher who “blows something up” in order to bring a lesson to life.

As a student, I want to sit in the room of a history teacher who figures out a way for me to smell the stench of a blood-stained battlefield.

As a student, I want to be intrigued, challenged and engaged. I like surprises. I like experiences. I like it when I like what is going on around me.

And I don’t like it when I don’t. Life is interesting. School can be invigorating. The world is an amazingly complex, interesting and awe-inspiring place.

Don’t let it die on the classroom vine.

Engross your students. Gross out your students. But know that if you want to better reach your students, I say, don’t violate the law of basic kid-ness: they like to enjoy what they are doing.

After all, you catch more flies with honey, right?

The Two Minds of a Teacher When it Comes to Spring Break.

As a teacher, I have always known that I just do not like high stakes bubble tests. However, I am not very articulate when it comes to defining the reasons why.

It’s like I know but I don’t know, ya know?

Well, read this. I have never seen the folly of the bubble tests exposed in a more lucid, “I can’t believe how ridiculous these things are” manner.

I’ll keep my own writing short today so you can read the link. Just incredible!!

I see it with my own eyes from the front of my classroom each and every day. Overall, the boys are getting their butts kicked by the girls – particularly when it comes to reading and literacy skills.

Of course, these are generalizations – I have boys that are wicked smart and truly great students… and girls that are just not stepping up whatsoever – but taken on the whole, there are more girls achieving at higher rates with greater regularity and consistency in school these days than there are young men.

And the data supports this assertion. Here’s a link to an article about the most recent report on how Boys Trailing Girls in Reading Across the States.

And so, should we hit the panic button?

Yes and no.

Yes because no matter what your gender, I couldn’t be more staunch in my belief about how kids need to own excellent literacy skills. Those who can read and write well are at a huge advantage over those who cannot in this world and I don’t care what tech invention Apple, Google, Microsoft, Sony, and so on comes up with… the need to be able to read and write well is not a skill that is disappearing anytime soon.

(Goodness, I hope that doesn’t one day make a list of the world’s dumbest predictions one day like, “Who wants to see talking movies?”)

So yes, boys need to elevate their reading performance. And their writing performance. Why? Because it ultimately relates directly to their thinking performance and the fact is, for those who do not own solid literacy skills, a glass ceiling exists.

A glass ceiling being lowered by things like Friedman’s The World is Flat recognition.

But no, we don’t need to panic. And why? Cause panic isn’t going to do anything. Doing something is going to do something.

• Accessible relevant reading material that wins the hearts and minds of boys must be better embraced as a classroom tool.
• Reading for pleasure has to be recognized as something that does not just occur, but rather, is cultivated in young people. (Expecting it to just bloom is silly – we need to garden.)
• Bludgeoning our lowest level boy readers with scripted curriculums, disengaging, watered-down, 5 pound textbooks and drill-n-kill materials has got to be kicked to the curb.
• Sending the message that good bubbling on bubble tests is the penultimate goal to which readers should aspire needs to be exorcised. Reading is not about being tested on reading.

All in all, we need to listen to our literacy light leaders. I mean it’s not like we do not know how to better win over more boy readers. We do know bhow. And there are a ton of people who do, indeed, provide workable answers to this problem. Thing is, we are not listening to them. Our best thinkers in the field of literacy are holding a map, a flashlight, a canteen of water and a supply pack of tools saying, “Follow me!” …and still, these “experts” are not being entrusted to guide us through the rough terrain us we currently face.

Boy readers are reachable.
Young men do like to read once the right material crosses their path.
We can do better.

But let’s not forget one thing, we oughtta be proud of our girls. A few decades ago they couldn’t even vote and now they are taking the boys out to the woodshed and kickin’ their butts.

Remember, in our effort to raise up our boys, let’s make sure we do not slow down our girls. They are to be saluted!

So a kid breaks the school rules by say, ditching class, and what do we do? Suspend them for 5 days.

Oh, that really teaches them.

Maybe back in the old days being suspended from school carried a stigma but for oh-so-many of my kids, when they get suspended, it’s like a vacation for them.

Sure, maybe they get in trouble at home. Perhaps their mother is angry at them or what-not… but what we’re inevitably doing is making a problem that much worse by keeping kids out of class.

I say, when a kid violates the rules and earns a suspension, what they should really earn is School Boot Camp.

That’s right… you have a major infraction, that means more time, not less at school working on your deficiencies of both character and academic ability… and you are going to be forced to contribute to both your own benefit and that of the campus at large.

Obviously, we are talking Saturday School here. (BTW, immediately we have a deterrent. Right now, being threatened with a 5 day vacation/suspension is not any kid of deterrent with teeth at all. But make a kid give up weekend hours and you’ll see a newfound respect for campus law.)

Instead of 5 days worth of suspension, I say we given them a month of Saturdays, from 8:00 – 3:00.

The “suspension time” would be divided up into two categories. Personal enrichment and campus beautification.

I’ll start with campus beautification. That’s a euphemism for grab a freakin’ broom, buster… you are going sweeping.

And wiping.

There’s gum to be scraped, graffiti to be removed, trash to be picked up and bathroom sinks to be polished.

You violate the rules of this community, you need to step up and improve the ambience of this community.

That’ll learn ya!

But there’s gotta be academic work, too. Clearly, there is often a link between low academic skills and behavior issues. How about if the suspended student’s learning profile was taken into consideration and if, for example, they showed a lack of proficiency with pre-Algebra skills, they were afforded the intervention needed to help them raise their mathematical abilities?

I know. Too sensible. Send ‘em home, let ‘em meander and pretend we all don’t ultimately pay for it later on once they are uneducated adults.

When you think about it, school suspension makes no sense.
A kid’s time could be used so much more productively to forge character as well as academic aptitude.
A month of Saturdays is a much better approach to trying to snap a misbehaving kid into shape.
I say SCHOOL BOOT CAMP!