Personalized Rejections. Why Not? (via @angelajames)

Angela James from Carina Press posted this in response to lots of requests they’d received on the topic.

I’ve mentioned before that you can’t expect editors to give you personal feedback, mostly because of time constraints. But I’m not an editor, so it’s understandable if you need to hear it from the real thing:

As an example of the time comparison of the difference between sending personal rejection letters and the form letter, I sent somewhere over 80 rejection letters on Monday. Approximately 15 of those were letters that contained personal feedback, and those letters took approximately 3 hours to send. Not because I was writing the feedback, but because I was reading through the feedback provided by the editor, taking it, editing and rewriting it and shaping it into something meant for the author of the manuscript. That didn’t even include coming up with the feedback myself!

Tellingly, she reflects my own experience reading through submissions and sometimes simply not being able to give proper feedback:

Besides the time investment, the rather hard truth is that sometimes there’s not much we can say about a manuscript that would be constructive for the author. I know that’s a difficult thing for any author to hear, but most editors and agents will tell you the same; sometimes, it would take more time and energy to craft constructive feedback than it did to realize that the manuscript was not ready for publication or not suitable for our press.

If you’ve ever received a form rejection and felt frustration at the lack of helpful commentary, read the rest in detail here to get a glimpse into the whirring machinery that has to process your writing: http://carinapress.com/blog/2010/02/personalized-rejections-why-not/

Also, I love this advice:

The critique partner who thinks every word you write is a special snowflake may not be the one for you, as they’re not helping you learn.

Cutting Their Own Throat – on Publishers, Amazon and DRM (via @cstross)

Charles Stross writes a good article about the perils of DRM to publishers. We already know that DRM is a fundamentally anti-customer technology which doesn’t work (he refers to it, accurately, as ‘snake oil’, but it’s good to see that even on the other foot (that of the publisher desperate for the illusion of protection) it is a potential disaster:

As ebook sales mushroom, the Big Six’s insistence on DRM has proven to be a hideous mistake. Rather than reducing piracy[*], it has locked customers in Amazon’s walled garden, which in turn increases Amazon’s leverage over publishers. And unlike pirated copies (which don’t automatically represent lost sales) Amazon is a direct revenue threat because Amazon are have no qualms about squeezing their suppliers — or trying to poach authors for their “direct” publishing channel by offering initially favourable terms. (Which will doubtless get a lot less favourable once the monopoly is secured …)

Read it all here. His blog, in general, is a good source of interesting musing in the speculative fiction space. He says:

If the big six began selling ebooks without DRM, readers would at least be able to buy from other retailers and read their ebooks on whatever platform they wanted, thus eroding Amazon’s monopoly position. But it’s not clear that the folks in the boardrooms are agile enough to recognize the tar pit they’ve fallen into …

Monday Market – Dark Faith 2 – Apex Publications (via @apexbookcompany)

[Update: I've made it clearer that the only open period is January 1 through to 31]

Apex Publications is open to submissions from January 1st through to the 31st, 2012, for their anthology Dark Faith 2, the follow up to Dark Faith.

We’re looking for the story only you could write, something deeply personal and at the same time universal.  Everyone believes in something and we want you to put those beliefs to the test.  We’re looking for smart, literate stories that don’t proselytize or stereotype.  Stories that make you think, that comment on the human condition and the social order.  Stories that are rich in their use of language.

They’re looking at a publication date of late Summer 2012 (Northern Hemisphere summer).

The anthology will be 80,000 words long and pays a respectable 5 cents per word (up to 4000 words). Full submission guidelines can be found here.

And as always remember to RtFGl when submitting!

Tips from the Pros: Greenwood and Evans on How to Jumpstart Your Writing (via @susanjmorris)

Today Susan J. Morris posts wisdom from Ed Greenwood and Erin M. Evans on the Omnivoracious blog:

To celebrate the deadline-driven inspiration of NaNoWriMo, this Monday, Wednesday (today!), and Friday, some of my favorite professional authors are spilling their secrets on how they write even when the muse is M.I.A.

I’ve always found the old adage ‘Just Write!’ perfect: two words that sum up what you need to do to take this job seriously: just write, just write, just write. Sit down. Shut off distractions. Write. Submit.

Doing that over and over gives you experience, thick skin (and/or writer zen) and will eventually get you published. Sheer persistence (and the reality that practice makes, at best, good enough) will get you through.

But… But it’s so easy for me to sit here and tell you that’s all you have to do. It would be helpful if there was some advice on how to stay motivated, hey?

Ed Greenwood:

[...] I always have six to eight projects on the go at any one time, and when I start to run down or hit a wall on one, I just switch to another.

Erin M. Evans:

When I get hit with “writer’s block,” I fall back on two techniques, depending on the cause. [...]

Sorry, you’ll have to click through to find out more: http://www.omnivoracious.com/2011/11/tips-from-the-pros-greenwood-and-evans-on-how-to-jumpstart-your-writing.html

Coping with Disappointment and Rejection (via @tglong)

This article is another view on the skill of learning how to handle rejection of your writing (see my recent post here)

Terri Giuliano Long describes her own experiences, and that it is important to separate ourselves from our work:

Conflating self and work shifts the emotional emphasis from work as a product of labor to work as an expression of our personal identity. Acceptance or rejection, criticism or acclaim – these subjective, often idiosyncratic, judgments become an assessment of us. Great when the assessment is positive, not so great when it’s not.

She describes how she spent many months focussing on the single project she was working on, and when it fell through for reasons outside of her control, it felt like a personal rejection of her effort, and with no other projects lined up or ready to go, it was very hard to stay motivated.

Have a look at her coping strategies for getting enough distance between her work and her identity so you don’t drown in the never-ending waves of rejection. And yes, they are never-ending.

Read the rest here: http://www.tglong.com/blog/2011/06/rebuild-coping-with-disappointment-and-rejection/

How to Stand Out in the Slush Pile*

*based on my personal experience as a slush pile reader. Please discuss in the comments if your experience is different.


Write Your Best

Analogy: You are heading out for a job interview. You know the mustard stain on your t-shirt probably doesn’t match your suit jacket, but you’re in a hurry, so whatevs.

Don’t send stuff you’re not happy with. Sometimes you’ve hit a deadline and you need to get something out, but try to minimise those times.

Sure, it’s obvious, but obvious things often need to be said. Obvious things like…

RtFGl

This is so obvious you’d think it wouldn’t need to be said: Read the Friendly Guidelines.

Analogy: you want to borrow some money from a stranger, so you punch them in the face first.

This is the number one reason why people get rejected and if you didn’t read the publisher’s guidelines you obviously don’t care about their needs. Guidelines exist to make it easy for editors/publishers to organise the massive flood of often mediocre unsolicited work through which they have to dig. Do not obstruct their processes unless you don’t care to be published by them.

Note that some editors will be more forgiving of this. But ask yourself, ‘Am I the kind of person who likes to play Russian roulette with my career?’

Value Basic Technical Quality

Analogy: You want to build a tree house, so you buy balsa wood and tacks, and use the back of your screwdriver to bang it all together.

This means pay attention to spelling, basic layout, and grammar. It’s the kind of technical stuff you need to learn before you can do anything, so get on it. Practice and exposure (through reading and editing) makes perfect. It’s really jarring to read stuff that even the author hasn’t bothered to proofread.

Be Bold! I Command You!

Analogy: You arrive at your graphic design job interview with a brass band.

If you don’t try and experiment you’re going to be dull. Since pretty much everything you can think of has already been done, THINK HARDER. (Sorry, I can’t be more helpful than this). Just like in the programming world, ideas are cheap and implementation is everything. If you put your own characters and voice to an idea, then even if the core idea isn’t original, your take on it will be. Don’t play it safe.

Interesting opening

Analogy: “Syphilis! Now that I have your attention…”

Consider that you have about three paragraphs (I’m being generous) to capture the editor’s attention, so don’t mess around at the start with exposition or stuff that doesn’t represent the rest of the story. Spending a few pages faking out the reader by pretending your SF horror story is actually Noir means that the editor will put it in the Noir pile and may not get back to it if they fill their quota with other people’s SF horror stories.

Unfair, isn’t it? Someone reading for an anthology with a certain theme is going to expect your story to turn to that theme eventually, and so that’s the kind of market for which you can try a story with an approach like that. For a magazine, though, it’s quite different. If a given edition needs more romance stories, then your romance story that starts out looking like a horror story might be overlooked by accident, a victim to efficiency.

Catchy titles!

Analogy: Wear a large, colourful hat in an unusual place, such as the Department of Motor Vehicles or a funeral.

This occurred to me as I was looking through the extensive pile of last-round stories submitted to a magazine I slush-read for. I placed myself in the shoes of an editor who had to pick ten stories out of about a hundred that had passed the initial slushing round and the secondary approval round, and were now considered ‘good enough to be in the magazine’. Consider that the editor hasn’t seen or read any of the stories yet: the stories have gotten this far through sub-editors and volunteer readers.

Glancing over them I initially filtered by their score – basically that cut the list down by about a third or so, leaving 60 odd stories. Then I skimmed over the titles to determine what I might find interesting. I had to, since there was no other way to decide where to start: I could either begin reading at the top of the list of 60, or begin with the most interesting titles.

Obviously editors will skim author names too, so if you’re recognisable or well-known you are also more likely to get eyes on it early (which doesn’t mean a thing if the story’s no good, btw).

On a side note, skimming for author names will also work against you if you’ve been a jerk online. Word gets around. Don’t Be That Jerk. I discussed this yesterday.


I hope those points help a little. Tomorrow I will return to my regular schedule of digging up articles I find interesting and commenting on them.

Thick Skin and/or Writer Zen: Get some.

Disclaimer: my personal insights into this job are personal. Please feel free to engage in the comments if your experience is different.


Alright. Thick Skin and/or Writer Zen. Get some.

Is this new advice? Obviously not. But for pros it’s old advice with my perspective and experience added to it, and for those of you just getting into the feel of what it means to be a professional writer it will be new advice.

Listen. You are going to be rejected. Many, many, many times. Often, with nothing more than a form letter. Editors don’t have time to pat you on the head and say ‘you did a good job but not good enough this time.’

There are plenty of reasons you may be rejected. In the early days of your writing career, it will be because your stories are derivative, ill-constructed and/or boring. As you get some critiquing experience, expand your reading, expose yourself to more writing and hone your skills, you will start getting rejected for many vastly more depressing reasons, and these will be entirely outside of your control. Usually this is because of timing or bad luck.

To give you an example, I recently missed out on an amazing publication opportunity, with a story that fit the criteria perfectly. In the end the piece was rejected because when the final stories in the anthology were collated the genre of my story no longer suited the overal tone of the collection (fyi, mine was more horror than would have been suitable). I only know this because I received a personal email explaining how close to selection it had come, and thanking me for sending the story in. Note: this is almost as cool as actually being published, except without the fame and blackjack and, well, you know the drill.

The lesson here is that any feedback from an editor or reader is good news, and your best story can still not make the cut for reasons entirely unrelated to its quality.

To give you some comparison from my own recent slush-reading experience: if a story is truly woeful I will usually bounce it with a ‘No’ to the submissions manager. If it really is that bad, offering constructive criticism is too hard given the circumstances. Where do you start? In contrast, if a story has some merit but I still don’t want it, I’ll usually give some feedback, because as a writer I appreciate feedback, so in my mind other writers ought to, as well. Do as ye would be done by, and all that.

Which leads me to: do not spit or claw at the face that is going out of its way to help you.

Seriously, don’t. When you are rejected, suck it up, rage at your friends (not on Twitter or Facebook, editors hang in those spaces, looking for souls to crush). It really sucks, I understand. It’s amazing that some editor can’t see the value in your submissions. Honestly, I often cry myself to sleep at the injustice of it all, howling defiance into my pillow.*

But…just…stow it. Suck. It. Up. And above all, if you must reply to that rejection email, be gracious, thank them for their time, and let it go.

If you know the story is great, go send it to the next market you’ve lined up for it; go down the list, submission, rejection, etc, until it sticks. Sometimes a story is actually good, and it’s just not right for that particular editor. Usually that’s not the case though, so don’t rely on that excuse.

If you had some doubts about the story, put it in a (virtual) drawer for a week or two, while you work on something else. Then come back and go over it again, fix it up, and either resubmit it elsewhere or throw it in your reject bin.

Not getting a reputation as a jerk is as useful as not getting a reputation as a hack. Establish a thick skin or (even better) a calm attitude, a writer’s zen. Think:

“This too shall pass. Soon, something will be accepted for publication, and if not, I will simply do it again, because there is no alternative. Do, or do not, there is no try.”

As a bonus, your writerly composure is a good indicator of your maturity as an artist. Enter your zone or slip on your animal hide outer shell, and you won’t be that writer embarrassing their writing colleagues with stories of horrible editors who Just Don’t Get Your Genius.

Work on it. And don’t let anyone tell you it’s easy.


*I don’t really cry. I am humouring you.

Sunday Service – Autography – Digital Signing (via @autographyllc)

Autography is a company that provides a neat service that tries to create a bit of ownership around ebooks by allowing authors to digitally sign (ie. autograph/customise) a given electronic book.

Autography LLC is a media technology firm in St Petersburg, Florida with a patent-pending method for inserting an autograph or other salutation into an ebook. This personalization can take place at the time of purchase or any time afterwards, including after secondary (used) sales. .

I’ve listed some of their features here (the website contains additional detail for each item):

  • The freedom to use any eReader
  • Custom tailored author signature pages
  • Social network positioning
  • Autography has the metadata advantage

That last one sounds market-speaky, but in essence just refers to the ability to produce reports about what titles are being customised, etc.

What’s cool about this kind of service is that it provides another avenue to connect authors to their readers, and even expands on the concept of author signings, by allowing a real-time ebook signing event to be held in a remote, distributed way – the author at a physical book signing at his/her favourite bookshop, while also performing a digital signing event for readers who can’t attend in person.

Look into it here: http://www.autography.com/

Written? Kitten! Using Cats to Motivate Your Writing (via @lif_au)

An extra post for Friday Funday because I just saw it on Lifehacker and…well…

Look. You really have to see this to appreciate it. It’s super simple…but your writing productivity is rewarded with kittens. At its core it’s just a dumb text box. But using the culmination of centuries of technology, this text box counts the words as you are writing them and rewards you.

For every 100 words you type, you get a fresh picture of a cat.

C’mon. It’s KITTENS. ON THE INTERNET.

Original here: www.lifehacker.com.au/2011/11/written-kitten-uses-cats-to-motivate-your-writing/

A Writer’s Habits (via @nicolermurphy and @andrewmckiernan)

Nicole Murphy has a regular column interviewing writers on their habits. Recently she spoke with Andrew McKiernan. I’d been introduced to Andrew on one of eMergent Publishing‘s projects and enjoyed working with him, so having a look at what makes him tick as a professional is interesting. Also, Andrew’s sons’ approach to their writing dad would seem familiar to many:

My two boys made me a sign to put up when I’m writing; “Don’t Disturb the Writer – He’s Already Disturbed Enough”.

And also the ever present spectre of modern communications:

Local friends would have to come over, knock on the door, pay me a visit in the real world, but so many of my friends are on Facebook and Twitter. They’re always there, in the background just behind my open writing document. It is too easy to flip open my web browser or Tweetdeck and waste time chatting when I should be writing. That’s something I need to try harder to avoid when it is writing time.

Read the whole interview here: http://nicolermurphy.com/post/A-writere28099s-habitse28093Andrew-McKiernan.aspx