quote:Congratulations, Dr. Bob! You have achieved one of my writing goals. A rejection from F&SF that is actually from Gordon! Some day I shall receive one, too. I have faith.
Originally posted by History:
It turns out they had received it initially.
I just received a rejection (personal, but still a rejection) from F&SF editor Mr. Gordon Van Gelder. Total turnaround: 15 weeks.
quote:I believe this of F&SF, but not other top pro mags. Though fantasy leaves you out of Analog and Asimov's. Have you tried IGMS?
a 16,800 word urban fantasy--too long a tale to publish for a "new" author
quote:Hi genevive,
Originally posted by genevive42:
quote:I believe this of F&SF, but not other top pro mags. Though fantasy leaves you out of Analog and Asimov's. Have you tried IGMS?
a 16,800 word urban fantasy--too long a tale to publish for a "new" author
quote:I may misunderstand your comment but isn't that the way it normally works? Which makes it a good thing when you get through all of them...however many S&SF has.
However, it is likely Mr. Van Gelder read my submission merely because one of his staple (stable?) of published authors recommended it to him.
quote:There are 4,000 markets listed on Duotrope. I don't see any reason a short story should be buried in the backyard. I've been on a hiatus from short works, and it does take time to be published, but I think the only reason authors give up is because they want that 5 cents a word. When they don't get it, they find that dark box.
Originally posted by History:
This makes self-pub/e-pub begin to look attractive--though more so more novels. Or need one assume if the story is unsaleable, it should be placed in a dark box and buried in the backyard in an unmarked grave.
Respectfully,
Dr. Bob
quote:I'm going to give them two more weeks, since I waited this long. But if this one doesn't sell, after waiting this long, I won't bother submitting to that place again. It's not worth the pain.
Originally posted by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury:
If an editor takes too long, and you want to send your manuscript to someone else, you are perfectly welcome to send the slow editor a letter withdrawing your manuscript from their consideration.
It might be best to say that since you haven't heard from them in X months, you will consider it withdrawn and will submit it to another market, if they don't respond within Y weeks (so they have time to speak up if they are considering it).
quote:Thanks. It's odd that so many blog posts and editorials bemoan the crap quality of the so called slush pile. Yet by treating potentially promising new writers with such arrogant disdain, are the publications not discouraging the very resource that they need in order to stay in business long term? Or is my perception of the industry totally whacked?
I fully understand your point. The system doesn't seem very competitive; at the very least not particularly fair from the writer's perspective. What I find interesting is that this only seems to be an issue in the short-story market. Once you're at novel length, you can usually simultaneously query as many agents or editors to your heart's content.
My only guess is that short-story venues are in short supply (in comparison to book publishers and agents where there is a lot more competition) so magazine editors impose the rules in their favor. But this theory falls apart when you look at literary magazines because many allow simultaneous submissions.
In other words, I have no clue [Smile] ... just offering my sympathies.
quote:I don't believe it's that hostile of an environment and I'm sorry, but if you keep that attitude you're going to find this a very difficult road.
Yet by treating potentially promising new writers with such arrogant disdain, are the publications not discouraging the very resource that they need in order to stay in business long term? Or is my perception of the industry totally whacked?
I can accept the assertion that most of the submissions are not fit to print. But everyone has to start out as a beginner. I mean, not even Bradbury or Anderson started out at the top. With rare exceptions (Thank you BCS, most sincerely) my personal experience as a person trying to get started in fiction writing not been encouraging. In fact, it has ranged from discouraging, to dismissive, to insulting. Maybe that's just me. Maybe I am just that bad at writing. But I think making a new writer wait weeks, or months, only to receive a cookie cutter-style spit in the face, might possibly be self-defeating in the long run.
quote:*bows*
Originally posted by genevive42:
quote:I don't believe it's that hostile of an environment and I'm sorry, but if you keep that attitude you're going to find this a very difficult road.
Yet by treating potentially promising new writers with such arrogant disdain, are the publications not discouraging the very resource that they need in order to stay in business long term? Or is my perception of the industry totally whacked?
I can accept the assertion that most of the submissions are not fit to print. But everyone has to start out as a beginner. I mean, not even Bradbury or Anderson started out at the top. With rare exceptions (Thank you BCS, most sincerely) my personal experience as a person trying to get started in fiction writing not been encouraging. In fact, it has ranged from discouraging, to dismissive, to insulting. Maybe that's just me. Maybe I am just that bad at writing. But I think making a new writer wait weeks, or months, only to receive a cookie cutter-style spit in the face, might possibly be self-defeating in the long run.
Many of the publications you speak of make little or no money and run on volunteers and sometimes donations. OSC said that IGMS doesn't turn a profit. Fortunately, he can afforn to run it at a loss. And I just made my first pro sale to a pub that runs on donations and doesn't seem to have ads on their site so, I doubt they're making oodles of money. That's why you see so many pubs go out of business. So are you really going to be that demanding of the editors in this industry that you think a few weeks or a couple of months is out of line?
And by the way, editors owe you nothing. They have a market, you have a product you want them to 'sell' to their customers. It's entirely up to them whether they think your product is suitable. If you were selling Twinkies and you walked into a health food store to try and get them to put your Twinkies on their shelf, would you be upset because they rejected you?
Editors do not reject you to 'spit in your face' or make a fool out of you. It's also not their job to coddle newbie writers. Your job is to become the kind of writer that's hard to reject. And even then, you will still get rejections. Get used to it.
quote:As a writer, I owe editors a great deal. Editors are what have made my work stronger. Editors are to thank for my publication credits, and editors are to thank for giving me my small place on the map. So no, I think writers do owe editors a lot. And I think editors owe writers too. My magazine won't succeed without writer submissions. And writers can reach more readers through my magazine. It is a symbiotic relationship.
By the way, it's true that editors don't owe the writers anything unless a story sells. But by the same token, writers don't owe the editors anything either. Do they? Not unless a sale is made.
quote:If you write for money, I think you are doing it wrong. I think if you get into the short fiction publishing business for money, you are doing wrong. This goes back to not giving editors credit. We do this to help bring great stories to readers. Not for money. We may get lucky and make a few bucks, but in the end we really just want to get stories to readers. So while we may not be in it for the money, we still need to pay the overhead that comes with running a magazine.
If a magazine is paying pro rates, yet operates on donations, and refuses to take advantage of the free revenue available from running ads on their site... speaking as a crotchety old veteran of the marketplace, I really don't think they have any right to complain. The idea is, you pay your expenses out of your income. If income is slim to none, and yet they pay pro rates, obviously they are not in it for the money.
quote:To your first point: I believe most magazines could do quite well if they were invite only. That would be like holding a Tupperware party--those sales people are already in the door. We, as non-invited salespeople, have to go to the door and knock. Submissions pages are doors, the submission is the knock, the manuscript is the product. I don't know about you, but I've never been solicited for a submission, I’ve always had to find places where I could submit. Just because someone is open to new voices and new salespeople does not mean they solicited those salespeople.
Originally posted by rcmann:
@MJNL - I have two points in reply to that. First, I am not advertising that I am in the market for a particular item. The magazines are. The are asking for submissions, not grudgingly allowing writers the privilege of submitting them. Without submissions, the magazines do not exist.
Second, as I said in a prior post, if I want to buy something and I know that others want it as well, it behooves me to get off my duff and make an offer. Like the example I used before; the last tv on the shelf at wal-mart. If someone else buys it before I get to it, I am simply SOL. That's life and the realities of business.
quote:Thing is, any story is 'publishable.' It's all a matter of taste and subject. Our place in time isn't really a factor, I'd think. The world of modern publishing has always been a buyer's market. The supply of short stories, and even full novels, far exceeds the demands of most publishing outlets. The often ridiculous response times are a direct result of that. The real trick for the publishers is sifting through the crap.
But is the short story business really a buyer's market right now? is the supply of "publishable" short stories going up?
quote:Almost always free of profit, too, and there's the rub. If all you want is to get your work out there, you can post it online all day long. Blogs are good for that. If you want the small amount of respect that comes with that small amount of money, you have to jump through thier hoops.
For that matter, is the demand going down? When any writer, good bad, or indifferent, can publish on the web and reach an audience of literally hundreds of millions free of charge? Very nearly free of effort?
quote:I think there is a serious misconception that by self publishing you will reach millions. In actuallity you have to do all the marketing yourself. And I am discovering that self publishing is taking a lot more work then the traditional method.
Originally posted by rcmann:
For that matter, is the demand going down? When any writer, good bad, or indifferent, can publish on the web and reach an audience of literally hundreds of millions free of charge? Very nearly free of effort?
quote:Some personal rejections are very good, some are not.
I would be willing to wait twice as long for a response, if I got a simple explanation as to why it wasn't bought.
quote:I won't ask you to ID them here, but are you submitting to pro mags, and good semi-pro, or across the board? Just curious.
On the other hand, there are some that I no longer submit to at all. It just isn't worth the aggravation.
quote:I'm too old, cynical, and arrogant to accept anyone's opinion without question. Although I grant that most editors know more about what will sell in this business than I do. Still, the Peter Principle no doubt holds true in publishing as much as any other field.
Part of the problem is that as newer writers, we don't always know when we're getting good advice, or not. And early on in this writing venture there's the tendency to put editors on a pedestal and believe whatever they say. The truth is, they're not always right. It's even more true when the comments come from a slush reader. Some publications have much better slush readers than others.
quote:I love this.
I'm too old, cynical, and arrogant to accept anyone's opinion without question.
code:House Outcome Response Average
Clarkesworld Magazine Rejection, Form 2 3
Lightspeed TEMP CLOSED Rejection, Personal 2 2