So, I haven't been here in a long time but thought I would share this bit of this good news of a story I had critiqued a long time ago by some folks here to Sci Phi Journal. It comes after a rough patch in my life. i was diagnosed with thyroid cancer about 5 months after my father passed away from bladder cancer last November. The best news, though, is that it looks like we caught the cancer in time and treated it effectively. I don't know why I am sharing this extra info. I really just meant to share the news about Platinum Blonde.
The editor tells me it should appear in Jan or Feb.
Posted by History (Member # 9213) on :
My condolence on the passing of your father, Osiris, and my best wishes and prayers for your good health.
Mazel tov on the story sale. I look forward to reading it.
Respectfully, Dr. Bob
Posted by Osiris (Member # 9196) on :
Thanks Dr. Bob! Hope your writing has been going well.
Posted by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (Member # 59) on :
Congrats on the story placement, and on the cancer vanquishing, Osiris.
No problem with your sharing extra info like that.
Posted by Osiris (Member # 9196) on :
Thanks KD! I think I might have to keep getting clear results for a few years before I can say I won the war, but at least I'm on my way.
Posted by Osiris (Member # 9196) on :
This story is now live and available for free here:
If anyone happens to read it, would be interested to know if in the current political climate the story seems controversial. I have been thinking long and hard about whether or not to share the story in my personal social network and haven't made up my mind yet.
Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :
My considered opinion, stet, a proofreaders' mark that means let it stand. A narrative speaks for itself. Marketing does little other than let consumers know of product availability.
If letting social media contacts know of the story's availability is the intent, do it slant; recommend another writer's work in the same publication set to them. Or, more subversive, recommend one and dispute the current event timeliness of "Platinum Blonde," which poses the same and different appeal to their controversy judgment question asked above. Cross toes, fingers, and eyes they look at the others, this one most. Hope they generate word-of-mouth buzz about it at the Internet of water coolers within digital earshot.
[ February 12, 2017, 01:00 AM: Message edited by: extrinsic ]
Posted by Osiris (Member # 9196) on :
Thanks for your thoughts, extrinsic. I suppose as a writer I've always wanted to be read by others, so that's pretty natural impetus for trying to promote one's work, and yet I find the process of doing so distasteful. It always feels like 'begging' to me.
So I like your idea of doing so by recommending another work. There is an anthology they have or are putting out called Forbidden Thoughts, and I know one story covers some subject matter related to Platinum Blonde. Perhaps writing a review/response to that story would be a good idea.
Posted by extrinsic (Member # 8019) on :
Before digital self-publishing wiped out the practice, writers self-promoted by promoting their peers' work through insightful method analysis reviews and, on occasion, stylistic condemnation. Courtly irony is an art of the review: praise with faint condemnation, condemn with faint praise, both at once. Writer self-promotion through peer review is a lost though recoverable art. How -- give and take a spoonful of honey for to ease bitter medicine down. Anymore, "astroturf" (artificial sod) vanity reviews is self-publication's, what, promotional arts?
If a university library is nearby, its special collections might hold literary criticism from the era when it was robust and fashionable, for guidance. In the alternative, online collections are searchable. Like the Edgar Allan Poe Society of Baltimore hosts online Poe's complete known works, includes his literary criticism and reviews. "The Literary Criticism of Edgar Allan Poe" Henry James' criticisms and theories are also well-represented online. One Poe essay of note for its rich courtly irony is Edgar Allan Poe, "Review of The History of the Navy" by J. Fenimore Cooper, Burton's Gentleman's Magazine, July 1839. Poe also was critical of his own work, self-effacement that served to self-promote, too.
Ample and artful criticism of the type continued through to mid twentieth century social, cultural, and technological upheavals attendant upon Postmodernism's ascendance. I know of two large contemporary associations that offer critical analysis essays, through paywalls though; the works are a far cry from the analytical arts' heydays. Literary journals published by university presses overall are the analytical serial publications of note today, some print only, some online only, some both, likewise, shy of an ideal promotional mark. More promote the critic-writer's sensibilities and of the self's private identity than the culture or the works reviewed and their merits.
[ February 12, 2017, 04:30 PM: Message edited by: extrinsic ]
Posted by Osiris (Member # 9196) on :
You must've read my mind when you said: "Writer self-promotion through peer review is a lost though recoverable art. How -- give and take a spoonful of honey for to ease bitter medicine down."
Based on what I know about the story I have in mind, this is the most likely approach.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)