Thoughts on Bombs
I'm fascinated once again by the happenings in the online writing community. Charlie Finlay is spearheading a movement to encourage more women to submit their work to the magazine of F&SF. This does not benefit him in any real way, as far as I can tell. He's taken a lot of flak for it, but I'm enjoying reading and commenting on the issue over at Live Journal. My personal opinion is that more diversity in the realm of published fiction is good, and that while I recognize there could be more women in the pages of F&SF, I'd rather see writers from diverse backgrounds and foreign countries. More stories written by Africans especially. At the FB, we got submissions from a handful of Indians that were very good, just not quite right for our publication. I hope that those writers find markets for their work.
The more I follow the debate, the more ridiculously America-biased I am finding the SF/F club. And I call it a club because it's starting to feel more like a social network than an industry. Reading Charlie's thread, I notice a lot of writers really fixating on publishing in Asimov's, Analog, or F&SF despite other magazines having larger readerships and better pay. The only reason I can think of for wanting to appear in those places knowing that is status. Status among an increasingly smaller readership and status in the circle of writers who think being in Asimov's is the height of one's short story career. I've been guilty of this, but you know, I'd be more excited about appearing in Wired or Salon.com than any of the genre magazines. I've never sent anything to either place, but I think I'm going try to in the future. Nick Mamatas' point is well taken by me.
I think the individual writer's piece of the genre ghetto pie is only going to get smaller and smaller. To achieve a self-sustaining writing career, one is going to have to find a market outside of the ten thousands aging readers of Asimov's.
Comments
"And I call it a club because it's starting to feel more like a social network than an industry."
Oh yea. I think this really hit me at this year's Wiscon. It's incredibly cool to be "known" among a very small group of people (and it's likely to get you laid), so if you're looking for the friends and the sex, it's great. But if you want to make money and break out, I don't know how useful it is to bang on the doors of the same decaying markets.
At the same time, I write a lot of stuff that I keep thinking will only fit into those markets. As small presses open up, I'm realizing that may not be so, and the more I look into more mainstream markets, the more surprised I may be.
I guess the sort of stuff I write has *always* been a hard sell, but I'd rather keep writing what I write than try and ape Golden Age boys' own adventure stories. That might get me con groupies, but not necc. the sort of wide readership I'd want.
As for the bombing: as has been pointed out elsewhere, GVG has said flat out that he doesn't really go for the sorts of stories typically written by women (whatever *those* are supposed to be. Stories primarily about "feelings" and periods, I guess), and sending him more stories he doesn't like is just going to keep JJA a little busier writing rejections.
If you want to be in SF/F, write a story GVG likes. I've always had a gender-neutral name (though as more people get to know me, the less I'll be playing that "hidden gender" card), but I've still been consistly rejected from SF/F, as have all but one of my Clarion buddies (who just so happens to be a man; but so are several of the Clarionites in my group who are consistently rejected) - we just don't write the sorts of fiction that move GVG to buy it.
And that's fine with me, really.
I'll go find a place that appreciates what I write.
As I recall, GVG rejected VanderMeer's story, "Dradin, In Love" as well (it could have been another story, but I'm pretty sure that was the one). And that wasn't even a story about "feelings" and periods... heh heh
So I'm in good company.
Posted by: Kameron Hurley | June 16, 2006 07:54 AM
It's totally a club. It's sure not an industry. The part about making and selling books, that's an industry, but the short fiction world only touches that industry at a couple of points.
I've gotten as far with F&SF as having a story on Gordon's desk for a few months now that he'd asked (after a few months) for rewrites on. But even if he doesn't buy it, I'll keep sending him shit. 'Cause what the hell, it's one stamp and a week of my time.
F&SF doesn't just publish Boys' Own Crap. There are plenty of women I know (including you, K), who I can easily imagine writing stories like the stories I've enjoyed in F&SF. And more than a few men I know who I can't. I don't know what to do about the gender ratio in F&SF, but I feel like something SHOULD be done about it, and Charlie's idea seems like no worse an experiment than any.
And then we can do something about Analog.
Posted by: David Moles | June 16, 2006 08:28 AM
(P.S. But do understand that when I say something should be done about either of them, I'm not saying that would MEAN anything outside of the social club.)
Posted by: David Moles | June 16, 2006 08:34 AM
"F&SF doesn't just publish Boys' Own Crap. There are plenty of women I know (including you, K), who I can easily imagine writing stories like the stories I've enjoyed in F&SF."
Yea, but you know, I keep sending, he doesn't like them. Which leads me to believe.. he doesn't like the fiction I write :) So yea, good luck to women who write stuff he likes. I don't appear to be one of those women.
"And then we can do something about Analog."
Would it be so terrible if we just let Analog die?
heh heh
Posted by: Kameron Hurley | June 16, 2006 09:33 AM
Interesting, Kameron, because I think your stuff has merits outside of the genre field and I think you would find it much easier than some other writers to sell it to the nongenre markets.
As far as Gordon, I feel the same way about him that you do. I read a bunch of my rejection letters from him Wednesday, and not once has he expressed interest in seeing more of my work. Sheila rejects me and says "I look forward to the next one." And so do many other editors. They have a way of encouraging you in a rejection letter. Gordon's rejection letters imply that he doesn't like what I am doing, and I am not given any confidence that he thinks I could ever sell him anything. The consolation prize in a good rejection letter is an editor taking interest in you, and his letters don't show that side. Maybe it's there, and he just doesn't show it.
In general though, I don't handle rejection well lately so I won't talk about the subject too much. I have a dozen finished stories that I haven't sent anywhere because it takes a lot for me to get up the nerve to even send them anymore. Not to say that I don't submit at all-- I've got over a hundred rejections under my belt, but I really do have a phobia of submitting lately. I put a ton of work into these things, and I hate that crushing dispair that comes with each "no thanks" note. I have a hard time seperating "me" from the writing.
Underneath this whole debate, I sense almost a sense of entitlement (not in comments here, but on CCfinlay's comments) that I don't want to show myself but I know I feel it at times. F&SF is not a democracy. Gordon is free to publish what he likes, and I don't think anyone is entitled to sell there. I don't like the terminology of "cracking" markets either, because it implies a goal of getting published everywhere. I don't care that much if one market or fifteen like me, so long as I write at my best, and I hope that that good end will be publication to an audience that will enjoy it. (Of course, my biggest fear is that the best I can do won't be good enough for anyone. My fear in writing is that I just am not a good/smart enough/interesting enough person to make it as anything.)
As far as Analog, well, I think we should let the Asperbergers kids have their fun.
Posted by: JeremyT | June 16, 2006 09:58 AM
"Gordon's rejection letters imply that he doesn't like what I am doing, and I am not given any confidence that he thinks I could ever sell him anything."
Shit, dude, do you actually get them from GVG and not JJA? I only ever got one from GVG once JJA came on, and that was an "alas" reject. If you're getting rejects signed by GVG, you're one step closer than I am!
And yes, pretty much every other editor who rejects me these days is of the "we held this a long time just to be sure" or "please send us something else" sort. Which is why I don't think I'm writing crappy fiction... I just haven't found the right market for the right story. No doubt *some* of the stories are still crappy (god knows my novel really needed this last pass), but they're not all bad.
re: down about rejection
For the most part, when they come in, I think, "FUCK YOU! YOU'LL REGRET THIS IN TWENTY YEARS WHEN I AM FAMOUS!!!!"
Which generally makes me feel better.
But yea, for some stories that are near and dear to my heart, I can take it hard. Also depends on how the rest of my day went before I open up the rejection.
And yea, I'm a little wary of the "cracking" markets idea as well. I've tried writing generic fiction tailored for specific markets, and not only did none of it sell, it wasn't any fun to write.
Story first, then market, for me.
"Of course, my biggest fear is that the best I can do won't be good enough for anyone. My fear in writing is that I just am not a good/smart enough/interesting enough person to make it as anything."
I think pretty much everyone thinks this about their work/themselves from time to time. I've been totally fucking down all week, and that means attacking my confidence in my writing, too. Crises of confidence happen. I think you just have to keep being true to yourself, to your passions.
Fall down seven times. Get up eight.
Easier said than done, but if it was easy, everybody would do it :)
Posted by: Kameron Hurley | June 16, 2006 10:23 AM