The Year of the Best Of

Seems everyone these days is holding a "Best Of" 2007 poll. Best erotic romance, best contemporary, shifter, mystery, etc. etc. It's hard to vote, considering several nominees may be unknown to the voters. So we vote for what we know.

Does this really mean the winner is actually the "best of"? I'm nominated at Love Romances for a Best contemporary book of 2007. But winning the popular vote is a measure of pride over workmanship. And while it's flattering, it also makes me feel a little silly for wanting to win. I'm a competitive person, and always have been. But in sports, the better team normally triumphs. Popularity contests have never been my thing. Kind of like elections coming up. How many people actually know all the candidates, and how many are voting because they recognize a name of a face from TV?

Granted, a best romance of 2007 vote isn't at all the same as the one to determine who'll rule our country, but the whole popularity concept is pretty much the same. Not everyone can win, contrary to today's society where everyone has to feel good about losing. But I'd rather win because someone actually read and liked my book rather than recognized my name and said what the heck, check that block. Like watching the Superbowl and determining the winner based on prettiest uniform or best player in a Chunky soup commercial -- a concept to amuse women and horrify men at the same time. :)

My two cents, for what it's worth. And I'm happy to say I'll be voting for the political candidate best representing my ideals of where our country should be headed. Now if we could only get a blasted one of them to speak an honest piece and stop waffling...hahaha Not gonna happen, I know.

Oh well.