My Attitude When Reading Slush

Well, I’m still going over the last few submissions to Life of the Dead, and it is a really hard thing to do.  Why, do you ask?  It’s because there are so many qualified stories in this batch that could easily find their way into print, but there is only so much room left.  The last selections will be made in the next week or two, as I reflect on the entire situation.

This brings me to an interesting topic that I thought I’d discuss briefly.  That is, the attitude I adopt when reading through the slush pile.  I suppose you could say it is different for everyone, but when I take on the task, I go into with the attitude that I want to like the story.  I want to enjoy this and accept it.  Later, as I read into the story, it will either prove me right and get accepted, or it will change my mind.

I have heard that some editors do the exact opposite.  They read their slush piles with the attitude that they hate every story, and wait for the stories to prove them wrong before getting accepted.  I simply can’t buy into this negative approach.  Others still claim to have a true neutral position, but that is a hard code to follow.  Depending on your mood or the time of day, or what’s going on in you personal life, you’re going to start reading with a particular bias.  I suppose it’s easier to be negative for some folks, which is where the concept of “hate everything until proven wrong” comes into play.

This is why I sometimes have a backlog of stories to read.  When I am feeling negative or preoccupied, I cannot read slush with the positive attitude that I require to find those stories I truly like.  I don’t want to run the risk of passing on a story that I could enjoy, simply because I’m in a bad mood that makes it impossible for me to appreciate what I’m reading.  Also, I don’t want to start accepting stories that I’m not enjoying, thinking I’ll like them later.  First impressions are often lasting, and the memory of not enjoying something can put a permanent stain on it.

Some people will call my publishing philosophy unprofessional, but it is the entire impetus behind Martinus Publishing.  I went into this to publish stories that I wanted to read, stories that may not otherwise see the light of day.  I continue to adhere to that business model, feeling that people will either appreciate the stuff I publish, or they won’t.  I cling to the hope that there are other readers out there who are thirsting for the kind of entertainment that I myself appreciate.  Therefore, I will continue to publish to entertain, above and beyond anything else.

My Publishing Philosophy

Believe it or not, it has been 1 year since MartinusPublishing's first multi-author anthology came out, and it has been almost 2 years since I first started reading submissions for that inaugural release of The Temporal Element.  I have to say, it has been a slow and steady ride so far.  I've had the pleasure to meet a lot of really talented and entertaining writers, and I've had the sadder job of turning down some others.  Overall, the job of being an Editor has met my expectations, and very little has surprised me.  It helped having spent many years beforehand on the other side of the coin, writing, marketing, and working with Editors to release several of my books.  This invaluable experience showed me the way, and let me know that I could take on the responsibilities of running a small press.

Of course, starting out, I had zero capital, and I still can't boast of having a big war chest.  That first anthology offered contributors a "token" payment, in the form of a silver Mercury Dime and a Buffalo Nickel per story (though I offered a few dollars via paypal for foreign contributors, due to international postage rates).  This was a novel concept, which the contributing authors enjoyed, though a couple of non-submitters actually wrote me nasty letters, saying I was ripping people off.  Apparently, if you can't afford to pay "professional" rates, you might as well not be in business, as far as some arrogant writers are concerned.  Maybe they would enjoy a world with only big New York City firms publishing things, but without small publishers like Martinus, a lot of aspiring writers would have nowhere to go with their work.  They would have to compete in the ever shrinking big-business marketplace that often has no interest in publishing the kind of sci-fi and fantasy that I prefer to publish.

Even before the criticism of my "slave wages" came in, I had the concept of paying authors something more for what they write.  The big problem with that is balancing fairness and profitability with my diminished financial situation.  That is where I came up with the idea of offering royalties.  It's not something you see from a lot of anthology publishers, because it is quite a bit of work to keep track of everything and send out dozens of paypal payments twice annually.  However, it is fair, and it's all I ever asked for when I was a young writer starting out.  I never dreamed of "big advances," I only ever wanted to earn my fair share, and earn according to my sales.  So, I have applied this philosophy to Martinus Publishing.  I can't promise contributors that they'll get rich off of their royalties, but I can promise that they'll get a cut of each book sold.  Of course, the biggest payout is that they have a publishing credit and can read their work in print; the royalty is just an added perk.

The whole reason I started writing all those years ago was because I wanted to produce stories that I wanted to read.  I hold onto that philosophy as I continue as an Editor.  I am publishing the sorts of stories that I want to read, and I expect other readers will enjoy them as well when they pick up those publications.  That is why I started Martinus Publishing, and that is why I will continue it, for who else is going to publish stories that I like better than me?

An Editor's Job

Altered America is now officially released.  The pre-ordered copies will be mailed today, and readers are already picking up copies from Amazon, in both Print and Kindle formats.  As we see this latest Martinus release hit online shelves, I'd like to make a few comments on the purpose of editors and editing.

First, let's examine the term "editing."  It is a pretty broad term these days, and it can mean anything from "proofreading" to "rewriting," depending on the extent of the process.  Now, an Editor—capital E for emphasis—is the person in charge of a manuscript at a publishing house, and they have traditionally been in charge of the 3 R's: reading, revising, and releasing.  They read slush (submissions), they edit the manuscripts to suit their needs when necessary, and then they publish them.

The extent of an Editor's influence over a story or manuscript can vary greatly, depending on the story involved and the Editor himself (or herself, as the case may be).  Some Editors serve as little more than proofreaders, fixing typos and moving commas.  Some Editors are true revisionists, rewriting entire swaths of text, and sometimes even changing plot elements to suit their needs.  The revisionist Editors were much more common in the old days, but most stories you read today aren't too different from what the writer had in mind to begin with.

Yet, there still comes a time when you run into a good story that just has one or two little nits about it, things that don't work or need to be changed.  This is when the true Editor comes in.  Perhaps a character behaves inconsistently, or takes that blow too easily (gets up and runs around without a care in the world after getting beaten to the brink of death).  Such little changes can take a story that is simply "okay" and make it great.

When it comes to novels, Editors most commonly consult with the writer on changes.  However, that isn't always the case, and it often isn't the case when it comes to short stories in magazines and anthologies.  Minor changes are common, and there are rare instances where more substantial edits are required.  Of course, without these edits, some stories wouldn't be published at all.  It all comes down to whether an editor feels like working on a story or not.

There have been a few stories I have been willing to "fix" because I enjoyed them, even if they had some grammatical or style issues that were a tad off.  This is why there is a clause in each Martinus Publishing story agreement, reserving the right to edit the material.  Still, I can think of maybe a dozen stories that have required more than simple proofreading and a few word adjustments.  Most of those were grammar issues, where some sentences or paragraphs sounded "clunky," but a few needed more.

One example of a story that needed a change was one that had a main character with no name.  It was a 3^rd Person tale that only identified the protagonist as "he" or "him," which got confusing at times when other characters were put into the mix.  In this instance, I gave the character a name during the initial round of edits.  Another instance was a story that was all "telling," and in the present tense, which made for a very awkward narration.  I past-tensed it and rewrote some paragraphs to make it smoother.  A third example had a character behaving out of character during a conversation.  It made things a bit confusing, so I reworked the dialog to make things clearer, and make the character more sympathetic and consistent.

These three examples, and the few other changes I've made over the years, were entirely necessary in my opinion.  As Editor, I must make the call about what gets published and how it gets published.  Sometimes, I'll ask the author to make changes, but in many cases I'll take care of it myself.

Of course, some writers take issue with an Editor who wants to actually "edit" their precious words.  I'll call these "Verbatim Writers," the people who have a vision and want everything published their way.  To be fair, every single one of us who writes has a touch of that in us, but some have it more than others.  These Verbatim folks get angry and upset if you ask them to change things, and I had one fellow outright pull his submission because I asked for a very simple scene change.  It's a shame, because the story in question would have been a really great addition to VFW.

Then there are the "Nitpicking Writers," those who will work with you on a story, but argue that "I want this, this, and that left alone," or "Can't we do this and this instead?"  This takes up time and energy, and while some of this can be tolerable, it can get excessive when you're dealing with a bunch of different writers all at once.

Nitpickers and Verbatim Writers are actually the minority, and most writers who submit are quite understanding and helpful.  Most understand that an Editor is "the boss," and it is the Editor's job to filter through and make changes when they deem them necessary.  As an Editor, I sometimes have time to consult a writer on little edits, and other times I don't, or they simply slip my mind.  Really, when you're going over a 21-story collection and decide to rewrite a few paragraphs, there isn't always time to stop for a consultation on each and every one.  I do my best to keep writers "in the loop," but if you happen to read one of your stories and see that Character A says or does something that you didn't originally write word for word, please don't chew me out for making an editorial decision.

Editors generally have respect for writers, and this is why they do their best to "improve" stories when necessary.  If a writer doesn't want anything changed in a story, they should forego the submission process and self-publish.  Some Editors these days may act like glorified proofreaders, leaving submitted content virtually unaltered, but don't count on it.  Sometimes, we actually edit.

Fevered Musings and Altered America

I've been sick on and off the past week, and right now I have a moderate fever and half the muscles in my body are burning with knots.  Don't worry, I'll survive, and if not there's nothing your worrying can do to stop it.  Seriously, though, I've had worse, and I hope to be back on my feet in a day or two.

Now, while I'm trapped at my desk and unable to do much else, I'm reading through the latest batch of submissions for Altered America.  A lot have been pouring in over the past week, and that was a welcoming sign, as I've been facing a shortage of submissions to this collection.  However, as I pick through story after story, I find a lot of stories that simply aren't want I'm looking for.

I hate to reject otherwise good stories, but the vast majority of the newest batch are not right for this collection.  It seems a lot of writers have overlooked or ignored the entire premise of the anthology:  "Tales of Alternate History and Forgotten Possibilities."  Apparently, they skim over the "Alternate History" section and focus on "Possibilities," and have submitted a lot of interesting stories that just don't fit what I'm trying to create here.  In a few cases, writers put together stories that may qualify as "Alternate," but they don't explain the history sufficiently to make it work.

Maybe this is my fault, for not being more explicit in saying that I'm after "Alternate History," for this collection.  I thought saying it was a collection of "Tales of Alternate History..." would have been plain enough, though apparently a lot of people don't understand what that means.

Is Alternate History a genre that is so hard to write?  I have to wonder.  Perhaps those who write it are simply above my pay grade?  I'm sorry I can't afford to pay you professional rates and spend millions of dollars promoting authors like I wish I could. I'm not working for a big New York firm.  I'm just trying to produce fiction that is worth reading, based on specific themes that create some uniformity and hopefully market appeal.  The fact that I'm deep in the Red right now isn't the point, but I'd hope that people would refrain from sending me nasty letters, mocking me for trying.  Yes, I've gotten a few unsolicited notes over the past year, condescending comments complaining that I'm "trying to rip people off" because I'm not offering 6 cents a word, and deriding me for "not helping to advance their careers."  As if I'm raking in a living off of this!  It is pretty pathetic for someone to waste their time to attack a small publisher like this.  I'm glad it is infrequent, but it should be never.

Okay, enough ranting.  I have a lot to consider.  So many good stories that just don't fit; it's a damn shame, but I can't compromise the contents of the anthology too much.  It wouldn't be fair to the consumers who will buy this expecting to get "Alternate History."

Check out the Altered America submission guidelines.

Editor's Notes & Rejection Letters

A wise editor once advised me to "never give out detailed rejection letters," and after more than a year of serving as an editor I understand and appreciate their advice more than ever. Mind you, I knew enough to avoid giving out lengthy rejections from the start, so I didn't run into a lot of the problems that other editors have noted over the years.

I'd like to take a moment to assure every Martinus Publishing submitter, both accepted and rejected, that your entire story was read before any decision was made (in some cases, they're read twice or three times).  Yet, some people may feel that they are being ignored or that their writing wasn't really given consideration, as I do not generally go into detail about why I reject a story.  That isn't the case, and I'll explain why.

There's one big issue you run into when writing up extensive rejection letters, and that involves the emotional reaction from the writer in question.  In some cases, a writer will get very nasty and upset over things that you pick apart from their story, and most editors do not have the time or interest in arguing with a writer about why a story was rejected. 

These days, if a writer wants feedback about a story, they can find any number of online critique groups or utilize their friends and acquaintances to improve their story.  It isn't an editor's job to be a "beta-reader."  It is our job to find stories suitable for our publication(s), and we generally need to devote ourselves to that, above and beyond giving out explanations for why we don't want to accept a particular story.

It is very time consuming to point out what I like or dislike about every story, so I reserve that for stories that are what I'd call "borderline," ones that could fit with a little work/adjustment.  Once in a while, I do find a story that is almost right, but needs something different to make it work.  If it is a minor revision, I sometimes do that, myself, but if it has a major creative impact on the overall story I want to leave it up to the writer.  This is when I will point out a change I'd like to be made; when I would like a writer to make a change and resubmit.

Altered America needs more exciting
 alternate history stories.
Deadline is December 31st 2013!

In a lot of cases, I will let a story go due to my personal preference (it didn't grab my attention, the theme wasn't what I was looking for, etc...), so there is nothing technically "wrong" with it.  In these cases, a detailed rejection wouldn't work, since it's all subjective.  Another editor might love a story that I found uninteresting.  Either way, most writers aren't looking to totally rework a story to satisfy a small-press editor's taste.  If so, they're probably better off writing a totally new story and submitting that.

It's a hard job searching through slush, but somebody's got to do it.  Right now, I'm hoping to see some more submissions for VFW & Altered America.  The deadline has been pushed to the end of the year, so hopefully we'll see some more thrilling adventures submitted.

An Editor's Job

This weekend, I finished the final proofing of "The Temporal Element" anthology.  This puts me ahead of schedule in many ways, and some pre-orders will ship out in a few weeks, putting them almost a month before of the scheduled release date.  Contributors will also have the opportunity to see their work in-print early, before their words hit the marketplace.

Going over the collection of stories, I have to say that these contributors really know their stuff.  About half of the stories were so clean I didn't have to change a word, and most of the others only needed minor typos fixed.  There were a couple that needed a few sentences reworked for clarity, and one required a bit of cosmetic surgery, though all in all they were an impressive batch from the get-go.

Talking to the minor edits that were necessary, I'd like to take a moment to discuss my thoughts on the job of an "editor."  Back in the old days, that's what an editor did.  They "edited" work.  In some rare cases, that meant rewriting whole sections of text, performing creative changes that made the stories "marketable."  I can see where the drastic reworking of a story wouldn't sit well with a writer, and these days most editors have more of a hands-off approach, some even becoming little more than glorified proofreaders.  That isn't such a bad thing when you have a good story from a skilled writer, but I feel there are a lot of interesting stories out there that get rejected these days because an editor decides it's too much of a hassle to fix a few minor things.

That's not to say a writer shouldn't be on top of their game.  Of course it is the writer's job to learn how to perfect their manuscripts for an editor's eyes, but in some cases an editor should be able to meet them partway.  When you run into a story that shows real promise, it is sometimes necessary to lend a helping hand.  It's a fine line an editor must tread, knowing which stories are right for their market, and knowing which ones they must let go.  Obviously, with so much talent out there, it's impossible to accept everything that could be a good story.

In the case of The Temporal Element, I had different reasons for rejecting the stories I did.  Some just weren't a good fit, with themes or ideas that didn't mesh with the anthology I was seeking to create.  Another reason was a matter of weak writing, though it could have been a matter of style.  I read a number of stories that were confusing and very ambiguous, which may have been the author's intent, though sometimes it was impossible to tell.  A few submissions just rubbed me the wrong way, which dovetails with the first reason; they weren't a good fit.  There were some other reasons, as well, but those were the three that applied to multiple rejections.

There are many reasons an editor has for not working on imperfect manuscripts, and many of those reasons are good.  To be fair, a writer needs to know their craft, and if they are incapable of performing real edits on their own work, then they are not ready for publication.  Another issue is creative license.  Some writers can get really upset if an editor "tweaks" their work, changes their sacred words, and dares to print anything that isn't verbatim.  This leaves some editors sympathetic (they wouldn't want their words changed, after all), and it leaves other wary of the histrionics that might arise.

I've learned from working with different editors on my own stories that you often have to accept their perspective.  Sometimes, you have to rework a few sentences to make things clearer, and sometimes you have to drop that odd joke or perfect phrase that you think is so clever.  You're not always going to like the changes, but in many cases they are for your own good.

As I shift into the double-life of a writer/editor, I'm finding the job a rewarding one.  It is really what I'm meant to do, and with any luck others will appreciate that, especially the writers I work with.