Pondering the Writing Game: Rejections and things you should and should not do in response to them.

Ponderings on Writing

I may have related this story here at the Pondering Tree or perhaps it was as the first version over at Journalspace. If I did it at Journalspace it is most likely lost forever, in which case I should probably tell the story again.

You probably should not openly state that the quality of a certain publication would be greatly improved if its’ editor stepped out in front of a speeding bus. Especially if this editor rejected your story.

Rejections are strange things. On the surface they are easy enough to understand. “We don’t want your story.” But they can be so much more, to the point where reading them and comparing stories is akin to reading the tea leaves. In Terri Lowry’s Creative Writing course we actually spend time talking about rejection letters and their stages of evolution. I should probably talk about that first.

When you send your first stories off you will most likely receive either no response back or a form letter. The form letter will be pretty clear. Depending on the publisher, the form letter may contain guidelines, frequent errors and the like. This is what I received in 2001 when I sent my first stories off to John Joseph Adams, the Editorial Assistant at The Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction.

Over time, and with some luck, you will evolve as a writer. Editors will begin to leave little comments or notes on your rejections. Gardner Dozois at Asimov’s Science Fiction Magazine was known for doing this. What gave me hope is that I received these handwritten slips in very short order, by 2003.

This is a sign that the editor is paying attention and sees some potential. It is also meant to encourage you. It does not mean resubmit that story. I’ll get to resubmissions here in a bit.

If you are persistent, you will eventually receive a full letter in response to your submission. This letter will most likely be typed or these days e-mailed to you. It will contain a critique of your story, what the editor liked, what worked, what the editor did not like and why the editor isn’t going to buy this story. Again, this is a sign of progress. You are getting closer. The editor is taking valuable time to advise you and mentor you. Gardner Dozois sent me such a letter in response to my story Tranquility Lost, which can be found and read for free at Bewildering Stories.

At this point of the game, two things can happen. The Editor in question considers you to be pro-material. You are on the brink of breaking through, right on the edge. It can go either way with your next submission.

The best case scenario is a straight acceptance. I received my first one in 2007 from Andy Cox and his Fiction Committee at Interzone Magazine. This acceptance will talk about why they like the story and what they are prepared to do in order to acquire the story for their publication.

The next best case scenario can be (but isn’t always, I’ll get to that) the rewrite request.

The rewrite request looks like the personal rejection letter. It contains positives and negatives. It also contains advice and suggestions on how to fix the story. Finally, last but not least, this letter will contain an invitation to resubmit your story after you have made the revisions.

Depending on the editor and the quality of advice, you have two choices at this point.

1. Follow the advice and hope for the best.
2. Disregard and send the story to the next market on the list.

I say it depends on the editor because editors, just like writers, have reputations. Some editors have reputations for being supportive, straight up, honest and fair. Other editors have a reputation for being fickle, unclear, or in some cases they have other agendas driving their mission which have nothing whatsoever to do with your career or your story.

In most cases, I would advise this. If you agree AND TRUST the editor in question, as I trusted (and still trust) Gardner Dozois, then rewrite the story and resubmit it.

On the other hand, if you disagree and DO NOT TRUST the editor in question, then you really need to ask yourself if this trip is necessary. Again, there are no guarantees.

Case in point. Most regular readers know this but Gardner Dozois retired (sometimes I’m inclined to think he was forced out by a controversy that brewed up over a particular story but I have absolutely no proof of this) as Editor of Asimov’s. This affected me personally because I rewrote a story for his consideration and it missed his retirement date by one week or so. In fact, fellow writer Lou Antonelli was the last writer purchased by Gardner, he made it by that one week margin.

The new editor, who I won’t name here for a lot of reasons, took over. They took their sweet time getting back to me while I waited on pins and needles for a response, any response, on my story.

The new editor sent another rewrite request. Unlike Gardner’s, it was muddled, unclear and in my mind, contrary to what I was trying to achieve with the story. In fact, at the time, it read very much like a veiled rejection letter. However, I was prodded, both by people in the community and people here in my personal life, to rewrite my story and resubmit it.

I tried to get clarification on the required changes. I received nothing. I had nothing to go on with this new editor, no track record or anything else. All I had was word of mouth from various people who had met her personally. I wasn’t reassured by what I heard but when a goal seems to be SO CLOSE, you decide to push forward.

I rewrote (actually, I butchered) my story.

And I sent it off.

And then it was rejected. If it says anything at all about this new editor, the rejection was partially written by her predecessor and it was a half hearted one at that.

As I said, rejections are funny things. I’ve received maybe fifty to sixty rejections over my career to date. Given that many writers receive hundreds of rejections before they achieve their first professional sales, I have done pretty well. None of those other rejections make me angry. They are part of the business, part of the deal. You just roll with them. You weren’t the flavor of the month.

And most of the rejections since my first sales have been personal ones which indicate, “So close, Murphy but not quite.”

Now here is what you should not do as a writer.

For nearly two years I kept my anger bottled up, something I am not very good at. My friends and family will tell you that the longer I try to suppress my anger, the stronger, the more virulent, the more powerful it will become. However, I kept it pretty well in check for awhile.

Until my first sale in 2007. The reviews came in and contrary to what I expected, they were all positive.

The common belief, one that I held until those reviews started coming in, is that my success at Interzone with Tearing Down Tuesday should have negated the anger, the growing ball of something that transcends anger to a point where the emotion I experience doesn’t even have a proper name.

Instead, success served to reinforce and fuel that anger. My feeling today is that Maternal Soldier is every bit as good as Tearing Down Tuesday and The Limb Knitter. Yet I can’t sell it to save my life.

With the second sale in 2008, more positive reviews plus lots of reader comments at Apex and again, my anger grew.

At the same time that Interzone purchased Tuesday, Asimov’s rejected a story set in the same universe, featuring similar themes. For the record, they aren’t the same story but they do feature a post singularity world.

The current editor at Asimov’s rejected it. Readers aren’t familiar enough with the singularity to know what I was talking about.

Which was really the final straw, I thought. The same magazine that published Charles Stross and his singularity stories wasn’t going to publish this? Especially when Interzone was willing go do down that road?

I remember reading that reject in my dock office at 1000 Walnut on a very cold, snowy day with a mug of tea in hand thinking, “Are you fucking kidding me?”

The message of that reject was pretty clear to me. Gardner’s replacement wasn’t going to buy anything I wrote, no matter what it was.

Eventually, sooner or later, my anger will vent. If you are an aspiring writer or even a small writers, you’ve got to learn how to manage this. Anger scares the living daylights out of folks who do not live in the Blue Collar World.

My anger vented in a series of postings at the magazine’s forum. I basically stated, in many different forms, that I thought the magazine would be greatly improved if the current editor was hit by a speeding bus.

I didn’t threaten this person directly. That is against the law. However, it is not against the law to openly wish for bad things to happen to people. It is just bad manners and perhaps more importantly, bad for your writing career.

Why?

Well, the editorial community is pretty small and they do talk to each other. More to the point they read the forum comments left by readers and writers. What happened is probably common knowledge.

Now, to date, I have no evidence at hand that indicates that my behavior has resulted in the rejection of my stories. No evidence at all. It is possible that it is a factor, in fact it is probable in some cases that it is a factor. Editors don’t want to be associated with nutters and the like.

However, I’m realistic enough to believe that the rejections I have received pertain more to the same things which caused many of my stories to get rejected. The story doesn’t match the editor’s tastes, or the anthology, they have some quirk or flaw that isn’t worth fixing, that sort of thing. It is, again, part of the game.

I should probably make one additional point.

Folks would probably forget what I did eventually, especially if I didn’t remind anyone about it like I am doing right now. But the thing they won’t forget is this.

I am unrepentant. I do still hope for the eventual replacement of the current editor at Asimov’s. By speeding bus, by retirement, by medical emergency or through getting forced out, it matters not to me. I harbor no good will toward this person who I feel is cowardly, dishonest, unclear and incredibly fickle.

My lack of repentance probably doesn’t help my case.

There are things I could be doing with my career. I’ve been advised more than once to give up on short stories and move off into novels. I’ve got some options I am looking at and I will probably see about that. I’ve been advised to give up on science fiction and try my hand at mainstream literature. I’ve been advised to give up on writing fiction and concentrate on my career as a college history instructor. Given that within a year I will have finally realized a full return on my investment as a historian, I can see that point.

For now, however, I will endeavor to keep writing fiction. I’ll write what I want to write.

And we’ll see how it goes.

So it goes.

Respects,
Steven Francis Murphy
Author of The Limb Knitter and Tearing Down Tuesday
North Kansas City, Missouri

Where did I send my stories?

The Writing Front: Tracking the Stories

Apparently over the summer I had three stories out.

I think.

I sent Maternal Soldier out in June apparently. For some reason I got this cross wired with Healing Hands of the Killer. Since I thought HHK was still at the June target market, I sent Maternal Soldier back out (engaging in unintentional simo submission which is bad juju in the field).

Maternal Soldier came back from the second market, Andromeda Spaceways, last week. That is the reject I blogged about. But at the June market I did learn, though I have not received the official reject, that Maternal Soldier was a great story, but didn’t fit the market guidelines.

So, two rejects for Maternal Soldier this week. Great story, everyone tells me. I just can’t sell it.

In the meantime I figured out that Healing Hands of the Killer never went anywhere, near as I can tell. I think.

Conversely, the other story which went to the same market as Maternal Soldier was Entangled. I didn’t even think I sent that story out but apparently, according to the editor who brought me up to speed on MS, I did.

Confused? You sure the fuck aren’t the only one. I’m confused and more than a little pissed the fuck off.

Why? Well, once upon a time, back in the Dark Ages of the Uniguard Era, all stories were methodically tracked, logged, annotated, followed, followed up upon, and the like. I knew where they were, I knew which one I sent out, I knew everything except whether or not they’d sell. Now, in the wonderful Golden Age of Adjunctland, I can’t seem to keep track of any of my stories.

Fuck! I can’t even get a new story written, let alone keep track of the old ones. About the only project which was relatively regimented was Research Project Number – 04, and even by previous standards of RPN-02 and 03, the regimentation was sloppy by comparison.

What happened? Teaching happened for one thing but that isn’t the only source of trouble. I’ve got multiple fronts of chaos and aggravation ongoing (which I make it a point not to EVER BLOG ABOUT). I’ve got demands on my time which far outstrip my ability to meet them and there are consequences for not at least attempting to meet those demands.

And it has gotten so bad that I don’t know where my stories are at. I had to have an Editor clarify my own submissions for me! An Editor I have a great deal of respect for, I might add.

This, my friends, is going to change. Oh yes. This will not continue as is.

The good news? Well, I have two bits.

First, Entangled is still under consideration. I wouldn’t hold your breath, kids. Then again I said that about The Limb Knitter and it sold so maybe I should follow Gardner Dozois advice about writers being the worst judge of their own work.

Second, I did receive a message from another editor who is interested in taking a gander at Maternal Soldier. No promises of course.

So, it isn’t all bad.

Lecture prep continues otherwise. Since those entries bore the piss out of everyone, I won’t hammer out what I did today.

Respects,
Steven Francis Murphy
Author of The Limb Knitter and Tearing Down Tuesday
North Kansas City, Missouri

Wherein Lou Antonelli plugs Tearing Down Tuesday at SFSignal.com and other ponderings.

Lou Antonelli plugs Tearing Down Tuesday at SFSignal.com

I got a bit of snail mail this week from Texas science fiction writer Lou Antonelli with some good news. He gave me a plug for Tearing Down Tuesday in his SFSignal.com Mind Meld contribution to the topic, “Memorable Short Stories to Add to Your Reading List, Part Two.” For those wondering, we know each other from the Asimov’s Forums back when Asimov’s was run by Gardner Dozois and sanity reigns therein. Further, Lou’s was the last story purchased by Gardner before he stepped down.

In any case, here is a link and moreover, here is what Lou said.

http://www.sfsignal.com/archives/2009/07/mind-meld-memorable-short-stories-to-add-to-your-reading-list-part-2-of-2/

From the Last Paragraph:

Stories from this century I find memorable include “Sergeant Chip” by Brad Denton (F&SF, Sept. 2004), a well-written futuristic story with a canine protagonist who was honestly depicted; both Sergeant Chip and the story had a lot of integrity; “Just Like the Ones We Used to Know” by Connie Willis (Asimov’s, Dec. 2003), clever, compelling, entertaining and extremely well written; and “Tearing Down Tuesday” by Steven Francis Murphy (Interzone, May 2007) which impressed me with how there are brand new writers out there who can still write the Good New Stuff.

Lou has a new story collection coming out from Wilder Publications called Fantastic Texas. Many of his stories are set in his balliwick of Texas and he is one of the few writers who do not resort of all of the negative rural stereotypes in his stories. If I were putting together an anthology of positive American Midwest Rural stories, Lou would be one of the authors I’d contact.

He is also, for the record, one of the three people who identified Rev. Caldwell J. Robinson for the cardboard character that he is. Though I’d argue that Robinson had to be that way for the story to sell and also as a bit of a red herring for the ending. Still, Lou raises a valid criticism that went largely unnoticed elsewhere in the community.

So, thanks for the kind words, Lou.

The Teaching Front

I spent part of yesterday cogitating on my American History One Lecture Notes, which are very much a work in progress. While my core AH Two notes have not changed a great deal in structure since my first semester, my AH One notes constantly change. To my eyes, it is important to get to the American Civil War in order to tie my class in with whatever AH Two class the students take.

That means summarizing and simply throwing some stuff out. I tend to spend less and less time in the period from 1500 to 1750. The period never interested me a great deal in the first place per American History (Elizabeth is much more interesting back in England) and it chews up a great deal of time.

So what I’ll do is summarize the initial colonization, reasons driving it, and get on to the French and Indian War. That interests me.

I know, I can hear it now. What about Native Americans and the Slave Trade?

I usually give a block lecture on both subjects. Slavery is covered from the the initial start in the 1600s up to the 1850s in the build up prior to the American Civil War. That lecture needs some work but I have a core foundation that serves well enough. The other topic, Native Americans, could probably be best served by giving a block lecture during the Andrew Jackson Administration. I’ve got the Trail of Tears to work with as a theme.

I do talk about Native American/English Colonial relations during the French and Indian War. I have to in order for the students to have some context per the differences between the French/Native American relations and the English. I also tie in the notion that the English, hardened by their experiences in Ireland, bring an attitude of superiority and harshness to their dealings with the Native Americans.

There is an argument that I should spend more time covering the marginalized groups and I agree in principle. However, the fact of the matter is that the United States of America will eventually be created by landowning aristocrats who are also slave owners (depending on their colony). I spend a lot of time on them mainly because, well, they created the society we live in.

How are we going to understand anything else if we don’t understand the folks who created the country?

So it goes. But to be honest, I’d rather teach Western Civilization One. Maybe this Winter I’ll get my shot.

Other Fronts

Nothing much doing. My story characters keep talking to me but I can’t seem to match my spare time up with any actual energy to write. I had that problem yesterday while reading over the chapters on Andrew Jackson in the new textbook. I could cogitate on history but not on writing.

I’ve got to address and mail out the invitations to Trinity’s birthday party, which will take place at the end of August at Sunset Acres. She is looking forward to it and dreading it at the same time. We’ve been trying to find a dress for her to wear.

I’ve been brought along on these expeditions but I think we’ve finally reached a realization.

I should not be taken along for dress shopping. It isn’t healthy to the relationship.

Weatherwise I have to say we didn’t get much of a traditional July summer. We got Fall weather for the most part, which has been fairly depressing. The summer wasn’t as bad as last summer (where I had a relationship on meltdown) nor as bad as the Great Washout of 2005 (where June and July were exchanged for a South Korean Monsoon Season). Still, it hasn’t been a great summer either.

I’m eager to get back into the classroom and teach. The strange thing is that the only time I forget about all of my problems is while I am teaching.

Respects,
Steven Francis Murphy
Author of The Limb Knitter and Tearing Down Tuesday
North Kansas City, Missouri

The Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction to run an Online Writer’s Workshop.

Since the assault brigades have deployed to put fire on this, I’m going to throw my two cents in.

Here is the deal. Gordon Van Gelder, Editor and Publisher of The Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction, will be setting up an online writer’s workshop. It is a pay to play system and the professional moderator will be none other than former Asimov’s Editor and award winning science fiction writer, Gardner Dozois. Membership is limited to 100 members.

The attack pattern, near as I can suss out, is that perhaps it is a bit unethical for a magazine to run such a workshop. The other issue is that there there might be a two tiered payment system for stories (which is nonsense, an unspoken multi tier system already exists as the established writer is getting far more than my five cents a word for their story). Lastly, some folks have an axe to grind both with Gardner Dozois and Gordon Van Gelder, namely the self appointed politically correct fascists of the science fiction and fantasy community. It wasn’t too long ago that Gardner was all but accused of being a racist, sexist editor (utter nonsense).

So I guess the plan is to kill the workshop by bad mouthing it enough so that people will not participate.

Let me punch some holes in this right now.

First and foremost, as a writer, I’d definitely pay good money to get Gardner’s advice on a story. His advice, in fact, is more valuable than publication in Gordon’s magazine, though I would not turn that down either. Over the course of my career, when Gardner was still an editor at Asimov’s Science Fiction Magazine, his advice on their Forum and in the personal responses he sent me expedited the evolutionary process for me. I sorely miss having that voice in my rejection pile. I think in many ways that Gardner is probably the go to Writer (note that I did not say Editor) who can tell you what is wrong with your story.

Second, writers pay for workshops all the time. We pay to take creative writing classes at college such as the one my peer, friend and mentor, Terri Lowry, teaches. We pay to take them in brick and mortar classrooms and we pay to take them online (my plan for this fall with Terri). We pay good money not only to get the instructor’s advice but also that of our peers in the class. Some of the more fiscally able in the SF community pay a great deal of money to attend workshops such as Clarion or the Science Fiction Workshop held out at the University of Kansas Center for the Study of Science Fiction. Many pay because their favorite author will be there. More than a few, I suspect, probably pay for the networking opportunities (nothing wrong with that).

How, pray tell, is Gordon’s model any different?

The fact of the matter is that it isn’t any different. Editors in science fiction have guided writers with their rejections and their feedback since the magazines first hit the stands in the early part of the 20th Century. The only difference is that the vector of dissemination has changed.

All other concerns voiced by others in the greater science fiction and fantasy writing community, frankly, smack of the standard dose of personal vendettas against two men who do not deserve such treatment.

Respects,
Steven Francis Murphy
Author of The Limb Knitter and Tearing Down Tuesday
North Kansas City, Missouri