It's The Write Time.

I'm on term break now, and I must say I've been hanging out for this one.

It's been a very, very busy semester. And, for a variety of reason, it's probably been the busiest time I've had teaching in the past ten years. I have a few things to do during the coming two weeks, but writing is definitely one of them.

I must sit down daily and get words out. I have to get back into that habit. Last week I managed some words, but nowhere near as many as I would like. I was able to sub a couple of stories as well, but even though these are markets that promise rapid responses, I'm still waiting to hear back on those.

And that other story, the one that's been sitting at Analog for 135 days.  Yup, it seems as though my prediction was correct and response times have blow out again.

In the meantime, apart from waiting with fingers crossed on all these stories, I guess the only thing I can do is write. And that starts again tomorrow.

How Many Missions?

There are times I feel like Yossarian in Joseph Heller's Catch 22. Not that I imagine millions of people are trying to kill me and no one will listen. In my case that would be paranoia. Although as Yossarian was in the middle of a war it's likely he was speaking more than some truth there.

No, I'm talking about his missions.

Yossarian simply wants to go home, but his command continue to increase the number of missions he has to fly in order to do so. This is usually done when he's only one or two missions shy of the target number. And so, of course, he can never get there.

Earlier this year, I submitted a story to Analog magazine at a time when they had reported response times of around 70 days. While that may seem high, it's actually much lower than the 180ish days they were reporting a year or two ago. And so I waited.

Around the 70 day mark, I checked the response times, only to find they had increased to around 90 days. A few more weeks wait then.

Three weeks later, when I was on 90 days, they had increased out to around 110 days. Two weeks after that it was around 135 days.

I'm currently sitting at 119 days and there has not been a reported response for two weeks. Is that because no one has recorded a response, or because the editors have given up reading slush and all gone home?

Either way I'm sure the response time will have increased.

In the end Yossarian had to make a deal in order to go home. He had to pretend to be friends with his commanders.

I'm willing to do that. Analog Editors, would you like to come over for drinks some time?

Reaction Time.

There are some wonderful online tools available for researching publishing markets.

These days I use The Grinder. Its search functions make it quite easy to find current markets that align with the story for which I'm looking for a home. I can easily locate data on acceptance and rejection rates, payment, SFWA accreditation and so on. But for me, one of the most valuable functions is the ability to look at a market's response times.

Asimov's has been doing well. Their responses in the past few months have dropped from a few months to a few days. I've heard a whisper Sheila Williams has a slush reader on board now. And although I've now gone from a couple of personal rejections back to form rejections (the new slushreader obviously doesn't understand my work - ha!), it's wonderful to be able to send that piece out again within a very short time.

Analog, on the other hand, is currently still up around the four month mark. They were only a few months when Stan Schmidt was editor, but when Trevor Quachri took over, it shot up to over six months, and for that reason I didn't submit there for a long time.

There's another magazine I've been considering for some time now. It's not pro-level, but has a decent reputation and publishes some good stories by decent names. They don't pay very much - simply a token payment - but I was fine with that. It's not always about the money. Sometimes it's about the resume building.

But I was shocked when I conducted my research and discovered their response time was close to eight months.

Eight months!

Imagine I write a story and send it to them today. Just before Christmas they may respond with a form rejection, saying 'thanks for your submission but we cannot use this story at this time. We wish you luck in placing it elsewhere.'

Now I've had some stories that were rejected six or seven times before being accepted. If every market was like this, my story might not see light of day for five years or more.

On the other hand, let's imagine they choose to buy it. After eight months. It's typical for publication to occur six to eighteen months after purchase. So, it is possible I could sell it and it might be published two and a half years after submission.

All for twenty dollars or so.

Sorry, but an eight month response for a token market is ridiculous.

Yes, writers complain about response times. Publishers complain about writers submitting their stories to multiple markets at the same time. But I think you can see why some do it.

Me? I've permanently crossed that market off my list and choose to submit elsewhere.

Reading Makes Writing.

The one piece of advice I continually see from professional writers is the need to read as much as possible. This has never really been an issue for me as I've always been a voracious reader.

As a child I sent many hours in the school library, both hunting for books and reading them - sometimes entire YA novels in my lunch break. I was well known by the library staff and they were very supportive. It was there I saw my first SF books. I loved the look of those Asimov novels with his name emblazoned across the top in block letters over the amazing artwork by Chris Foss. And the fact you could lay the books side by side to make an even bigger picture was a bonus.

The name ASIMOV was rather exotic sounding, and the science part of Science Fiction scared me a little. I asked a friend whether he'd read any Asimov, and once he'd told me he had I asked him whether it was able to be read by non-scientists.

And so I borrowed 'Foundation', and loved it. Within a few weeks I'd started buying SF novels from markets and used bookstores, originally based on the cover art. 'The Tower of Glass' by Robert Silverberg was next, followed by a Philip K. Dick, and so on. It wasn't long before I'd built up a knowledge of the authors I liked, and those I didn't 'get'. It took me many years and several attempts to get past the first hundred pages of Frank Herbert's Dune, for example. 

I still regularly read Bob Shaw, John Brunner, Michael G. Coney, Roger Zelazny, Robert Sheckley, Frederik Pohl, Poul Anderson and A. E. van Vogt as well as the old masters mentioned above.

My tastes have broadened. I read a lot of fantasy during the 80s and early 90s, something I haven't done for a long time. And for some reason I mostly read female authors now. I also read a lot of Australian small press - something I didn't even know existed back then.

Which reminds me. I need to catch up on my Analogs, Asimovs and F&SFs. I'm a few months behind. It's time to take a break from the non-fiction I'm currently reading.

Please, Please, Please.

A few weeks ago I received an email from a writer I don't know, asking me to buy their e-book. Actually, when I re-read the wording, they were begging me to buy it. Only $2.99 for five stories. And please let them know what I think.

I checked out this writer, and discovered on their blog that all of these stories had been rejected everywhere. And so the writer decided all those editors were completely wrong, and that these are fantastic stories, and not only does everyone deserve to read them but we should have to pay for them.

I did consider replying and asking whether this writer had purchased any of my work. I also considered asking them why I should pay $2.99 for five stories that had been rejected everywhere, probably hadn't been through an editor, and from someone who needed to go begging for customers. Especially since I can buy an issue of Asimov's or Analog for the same price. Not only have those stories been selected by a team of staff, but they've been put through an editing process. Oh, and they include more than just five stories as well.

In the end I deleted the email and ignored it.

But again, this is the reason I don't self publish.  I'm not against it in some cases, but there's just so much average stuff out there. Even the good stuff finds it hard to break through the flood of whitenoise.

And if the fact I was being begged wasn't enough of a deterrent, then spelling  and grammatical errors in the blurb isn't going to win me over.

Heritage.

I've always found it curious that companies advertise how long they've been in existence. A store that has been running since 1758, or the ubiquitous on generic t-shirts "Since 1987", or "Established 1926" - all as if it mattered to the consumer. I mean, it's hardly the same company it once was, is it?

In some cases it's still in the same family, but of course with companies that are of some age, it's crazy to think any of the original employees or managers are still there. In these days of multi-national takeovers, the company you see is probably operated by a conglomeration based in Europe or the USA. And with companies that manufacture or sell products, it is extremely unlikely they make or stock the same products they originally did. And if they do, I can almost guarantee the recipes, ingredients and manufacture methods have changed beyond all recognition.

So why are companies so proud of their heritage? I figure it's simply an appeal to the consumers' sense of nostalgia, old fashioned values and a sense that if they've been doing something for so long, they must have got it right.

I was thinking about this recently. Steve Davidson has acquired the rights to Amazing Stories magazine, and has successfully published its first issue (in order to satisfy legal requirements over the acquisition of the brand) and plans to launch properly next year sometime. (originally as an e-publication, but I truly hope they quickly include a paper release as well) While I thought this re-launch was a good thing, a friend pointed out that it held absolutely no connection to the original magazine, although from all initial reports it seemed as though Davidson was approaching the 'reboot' in the spirit of the original. Later, we discovered that he put together an editorial advisory board that included four past Amazing Stories editors. The links to the past were stronger then I'd imagined. 

But this got me thinking. Analog and Fantasy & Science Fiction aren't owned by the original companies and have both changed ownership several times. Even Asimov's, in it's short thirty-five year history, has changed owners and editors more than once. So why do we accept change in some 'institutions' and not in others? The recent debacle with Weird Tales has shown that a change of ownership does not always continue a tradition, and I suspect the brand name has been damaged more than the owners realise. Perhaps it would have been wise to have kept Ann VanderMeer as editor. I certainly have no plans to submit there until the dust has cleared and I see their new editorial direction. Other publications which have changed format or lost regular schedules or lessened in quality have completely dropped off my submission radar. The big three, as mentioned above, are my current focus.

I think it has to do with the vision. F&SF, Analog and Asimov's continue to produce quality magazines in line with a tradition. They continue to attract the best writers, the best stories and best artists. All while continuing to move with the times.

And I suspect the re-launched Amazing Stories has the same ethos. I wish it all the best.

Think Small.

I've recently been amazed at some of the stories I've read in Analog, Asimov's, and Fantasy & Science Fiction. Not at the quality - quite the opposite. I was amazed they made it into the pages of the big three.

Sure, there's been some great stories too. But recently it seems as though the quality in those magazines has become increasingly inconsistent. At first I figured it was just a matter of taste, that the stories I thought were average were simply stories I didn't like. But when I analysed those stories, I discovered they contained a number of aspects that only a beginning writer should be guilty of. Lazy writing, infodumps, irrelevant scenes, corny dialog, and ridiculous coincidences pulled out of the hat at the last minute. And considering these mags receive hundreds of submissions every month and can pick and choose to their heart's content, it either says something about their selection process, or the scarcity of good writing out there.

What I am starting to realise is that some of the best stories around are, instead, to be found on  the pages of anthologies from small presses. Coeur de Lion, Twelfth Planet, FableCroft, Ticonderoga, to name a few Australian ones. Unfortunately, these publications don't get the exposure or respect they deserve.

Locus magazine continues to review every story in every issue of the big three (plus a swag of other pro mags) while ignoring so many smaller ones. While I understand they obviously receive far too many books to read and review, I would suggest that it's the 'other' magazines and anthologies that actually need the support of Locus. The big three are going to sell those issues anyway - particularly since the reviews usually come out well after the mags are off the news-stands.

Keith Stevenson, of Coeur De Lion, for example, recently lamented the difficulty he has in getting his books reviewed. And, of course, if books aren't reviewed and seen, they don't sell, and then they don't get placed on recommended reading lists or awards shortlists - no matter how good they are. Stevenson's Anywhere But Earth has received fantastic ratings and reviews on Goodreads, but has barely raised a blip elsewhere. And this is despite his previous anthology, X6, being placed on the Locus recommended reading list and winning a number of awards.

I was a little surprised recently when a local reviewer told me they had trouble accessing release information on local small press anthologies. I wouldn't have thought it was that difficult. 'Like' their Facebook page, regularly visit their web page, subscribe to a newsletter - whatever.

Support your small publishers, and tell others.

Reading And Writing.

It's important to keep up to date.

I recently read an anthology of short stories from a (very) small press.  There was nothing startling about the collection. One story stood out as excellent, a couple I thought were merely OK, while the rest were, in my opinion, quite below standard.

It so happens that I've seen the author of one of those 'below standard' pieces online - bragging about the sale and obviously  very proud. And I have absolutely no problem with that. It's a little unfortunate that in their naivety they haven't recognised the level at which they have been published. I did, however, have a chuckle when the writer started suggesting the story was truly original, completely brilliant and was even talking about major awards.

It was simply obvious to me that the writer hadn't read much SF.

While the writing was fairly uninspired and flat, the real problem was the story was one that I've read many times before. And I picked the ending in the first paragraph or so.

It's important for a writer to know the history of their genre. And to keep up to date.

When I submitted one of my first stories (So Sad, The Lighthouse Keeper) to a well known small press, the editor told me that I'd obviously read a lot and all that reading had paid off. He told me that it showed in the confident and calm manner of the writing and the descriptive prose. He then advised me that the story wasn't done yet, rejected it and broke my heart.

And damn his eyes, he was right. It needed more work.

I try to keep my reading broad. I read a lot of non-fiction, not just science but historical, biographical, travel - anything that takes my interest. Fiction-wise, I read almost anything - stories of all genres and all lengths. I regularly read Asimov's, Andromeda, Analog, and a couple of others. I can even tell you the differences between the purchasing tastes of Sheila Williams, Gordon Van Gelder and Stanley Schmidt.

And don't forget local small press. I read what I can from the markets I sub to. I try to ensure I know what Ticonderoga, Fablecroft and Twelfth Planet are publishing.

After all, if I plan to sell to these markets, I must know what they're buying.

Revisiting The Past.

I must admit to having been disappointed recently by some of the magazines I've read.

As a subscriber to both Analog and Asimov's, I'm fairly familiar with the types of writing they publish, although I must say I generally don't find Analog to be as science based as they try to make out. The past few issues of both magazines, however, have contained stories that I'm surprised they accepted. Not only were a couple of them twee and pointless, but several contained examples of the cliches, infodumps and poor writing that I would have presumed would have rendered them as rejects. I found a couple of the stories in the bumper double issues long, boring, and a real slog to finish.

It actually made me wonder why my last submission to Analog was a form reject.

On the other hand, it's been a joy to revisit old friends. I picked up a Christopher Priest novel, one I thought I hadn't read. As soon as I was a few pages in, it seemed strangely familiar, and I realised I must have read it many years ago.  But more than that, I fell in love with his writing all over again. And now I'm going to dig out some of his other novels that I haven't opened in twenty years or more and read them.

I also found a short story I've been looking for. I couldn't remember the title or the author, and I've scoured my book collection over the past few years without success. Turns out it was a book I must have overlooked, because it's another old favourite, Robert Sheckley. And then I read a JG Ballard novel. Another whose writing I love.

Next will be Bob Shaw, Michael G, Coney (another favourite) and Ian Watson.

It's great to keep up with the latest and greatest, but don't forget the masters.

How Will I Know?

Can I write?

This is a question that bugs me from time to time. And, after the rejection I mentioned last week, it's one that's been bugging me again.

Most people believe they can write. Most writers think they can write well. I often see writers who aren't selling discussing what they could have 'tweaked' in their story that would have lifted it to a sale. And there are those who never sell that think the world is against them, and that the slushreader just don't 'get' their writing. Sometimes these people count their rejections and proudly advertise the number as a measure of success.

OK, I haven't sold heaps of work yet, and like most people I'm probably blind to some of the flaws in my own writings, and I don't write anywhere near as much as I should, and why should I think that I can even write?

Some observations:

If a slushreader doesn't 'get' your work, what makes you think a reader will? Slushreaders are readers, and they see a far wider range of work than most casual readers. Yeah, OK, they make mistakes (and I KNOW they've recently made  mistakes a few times in rejecting MY work  - hehehe) but generally if your work is so good, it will sell elsewhere.

The tweaking thing. I've referred to this before. I call it the Feng Shui of writing. If I'd changed the character's name to Jeff, or chosen a better title (or hung a mirror over the sofa) then maybe it would have sold. I figure if the story is 'almost, but not quite', the editor will ask for a rewrite, or suggest changes and invite a re-sub. (And this actually happened to me a couple of weeks ago.)

Most people think they can write. I know this is true - as many people who never write tell me they plan to, and will one day soon, and then they'll sell lots and they'll be able to quit work and...  Any of you who do write knows how many times people tell you this. And you also know how not easy it is, what a slog it can be and how long the sub and sale process can take for so little financial reward. As a teacher and a writer, I read an awful lot of stuff from people who believe it's brilliant. Usually it's not. Some work never sells simply because it's crap. Be aware that your work maybe isn't of the standard you think it is.

Counting rejections. I keep track of my rejections, and I do count them. But they're certainly not in the hundreds. And I know of people who brag that they received X amount of rejections this year - as that was their target. OK, so that works for them. My goal wasn't to have a certain number of rejections, but to make three sales or more this year. (And I achieved that). Next year it's to make five or more. Anyone can receive a certain number of rejections, just submit your work to every market out there and start counting. In and of itself, it's not a measure of success or even progression. It's only a measure of submission and rejection.

Only three sales? Yes, but three sales I'm proud of, and to markets I'm thrilled to be in. I could have sold more if I'd been less fussy with my submissions, but early in my writing 'career' I decided against 'token' or 'for the love' markets, and aimed squarely at semi-pro. I worked out where my writing abilities lay and subbed to those markets with the intention of moving up. Quality over quantity. And while I know it works for some people, this is the very reason I don't do NaNoWriMo. (Plus November is when I get tied up with school stuff, reports and other deadlines) It's also the reason I choose not to self-publish the stuff that didn't sell.

So, why should I think I can write?

Some answers.

I have experience and training. I'm an English teacher in a High School. I teach writing, language analysis, contextual work and literature. I have an Arts degree in English and Drama, and an Education degree in teaching the same two subjects. I've also been a voracious reader since I was a child. I can recognise good writing, good dialogue and plot, and know why it's good. I also understand when it's not working.

I've been told I can write. Not just by my mum and friends, (and never listen exclusively to them!) but (over the past few years) by my critiquers, which has included literature teachers, other writers at my own level, and even professional writers. I've had a few editors and writers (people whose names you would recognise) tell me which aspects of my work they've liked. OK, so they didn't always take the story, but they spent time telling me why. (Might I point out I never asked - they offered comments in these cases.)

I'm developing. I can see where I'm improving. I listen to criticisms of my work and learn from them. I read LOTS of short fiction and learn from that too. I can see where older stories didn't work, and have either trunked or rewritten those. I know what my shortcomings are and am actively working to improving those areas.

I'm getting sales. Not lots, but some. And at the markets I was aiming for. I haven't yet sold to Analog or Asimov's, or even Ticonderoga. But those publishers are firmly in my sights and I have strategic plans to reach those goals. As they say in advertising, Watch this space.

So what does this mean for others?

Probably not a lot. You want to write? Then write. And submit, and prepare to receive rejections. Then don't give up. Take the time to think about why you are writing and what your goals are. With my senior students, I give them the following four points to consider in regards to their studies.

• What is your goal?
• What do you have to do to achieve that?
• What are you prepared to do (or sacrifice) in order to get there?
• Now do it.

Any monkey can get published. Write something, start a blogpage with a snappy title and post it. TaaDaa! Published.

Not that there's anything wrong with that if that's what you want. Or with any other publication and format. Just make sure it's something you want. Me? I want to be published in magazines and anthologies from publishers that I respect, and hunger for them to accept my work. But also be realistic about it. Are you really going to send everything you write to the big three? It will most certainly bring the rejection tally up. As mentioned above, I aim my work at the level I believe it is. If I'm not selling regularly at Semi-Pro, why would Pro markets buy it?

But I'm still developing and improving. And I do have a piece at a pro market that I have hopes for. And as I also said before, keep watching this space.

Onwards And Upwards.

I know some people who wear their rejection slips like badges of honour. They brag about how many they received 'last year' and talk about how they're getting closer to 'making it'.

To an extent I think they are right. Being rejected lots and lots shows you're working, and subbing - and if you are starting to receive personalised ones over form ones, then it shows you're developing and getting that much closer.

But gathering piles of rejections doesn't necessarily mean much at all in and of itself.

There are a whole lot of writers who start by subbing straight to the top markets. They send everything they write to Asimov's and Analog, and therefore pile up mountains and mountains of slips. And so yes, they can claim to have gathered hundreds of rejections last year.

It doesn't mean they're about to start selling.

I'm not criticising them for doing that but it doesn't work for me. I know that I'm not at that level yet, and I have better things to do than have stories sitting at markets that won't yet buy my work, wasting both the editor's and my time.

If I'm not selling regularly at semi-pro markets, why would the pro markets grab my stuff over their regular contributors?

If I start playing football (and believe me, there are good and valid reasons why I write and don't kick footballs), I don't start by running down to Windy Hill and try to break into the Essendon team. What makes me think I'll get a spot alongside Jobe Watson, Paddy Ryder, David Hille and Angus Monfries?

No, like young Dyson Heppell, you play for the smaller country teams, working your way up until you're ready to speak to James Hird.

It seems to me that writing is one of the few places where lots of people try to start at the top. And I suppose it costs nothing to send your work there, and there is always the chance you'll sell something.  And by all means, if your writing is already at a professional standard then send it off to the big ones. I wish you well.

But if you're trunking pieces just because they didn't sell at the big markets (and I know of a few writers who do this), you may be depriving the world of some good, solid writing. I've found some of my favourite pieces in small press anthologies and magazines.

Me? I just know my abilities  and my level at the moment.  And that's firmly in the world of the small press. I'm not selling there as regularly as I'd like, but I am starting to make sales, and frequently getting personalised rejections.

But don't worry, the day I regularly send things off to Analog and Asimov's is approaching.