But how do online publications compare to the big 3 in terms of prestige? Awards? They seem to actually pay more (Jim Baen's Universe or Clarkesworld, for example). What are the "good" online publications? Are there any bad ones? Also, I've read from several sources that a story has about a 1% chance to be published in one of the big 3. What about the online publications?
I've said before---but there are always new people coming around who haven't heard me bleat about it---I got into this racket with the idea of seeing my story in print in a magazine. For the time being, I'll pass on onlne publication. And if the print markets all disappear, I'll skip the whole hassle.
http://www.sfwa.org/org/qualify.htm#Q5
That's not to say that some others not on their lists don't carry weight, but its a good place to start for submissions. Another place to look is to see where the stories in the "Best of" short story anthologies were first published, and in the back if they list some Honorable Mentions that didn't quite make it. One that's been around for a good long time and is quite respected is "The Year's Best Science Fiction" edited by Gardner Duzois, which is published yearly and has both sources for those republished and Honorable Mentions. Other anthologies probably offer similar listings.
[This message has been edited by luapc (edited February 01, 2009).]
Its also useful to keep in mind that most people arent even familiar with even the most high-profile of sci fi/fantasy magazines...that even includes a lot of people that read the genere.
I've submitted to a wide range of publications...some are online only, some print, many are both. I use duotrope, and search with the pay scale set to "token and up."
As far as online versus print of course we all want to see ourselves on a printed, paper page, but chances are sooner or later online venues for artistic works in general will equal or exceed more traditional ones anyway...
Where does that leave us primarily fantasy/horror writers?
Dreaming of werewolves? ;-)
Fantasy & Science Fiction will take fantasy of course, and the others seem to me to take a little from time to time if there's a speculative element.
For horror, dunno, although Interzone (the fourth of the big three) takes quite dark stuff.
If you write horror (particularly short fiction) and you don't read Cemetery Dance, you are a heretic.
Seriously, though. It is the magazine which is currently putting out the best short fiction being published today, in any genre; and for those of us writing "genre" fiction, it is a solitary beacon of light. Next time you guys go to a book store, give it a flip-through.
quote:
I don't really know why it fell off the pro list
That has to do with pay-rates, right? Rather than circulation? Though I assume that if circulation fell off, the mag could no longer afford to pay its writers what it used to.
quote:
That has to do with pay-rates, right? Rather than circulation? Though I assume that if circulation fell off, the mag could no longer afford to pay its writers what it used to.
SFWA does it by a combination of circulation and pay. Even with great pay a market isn't considered to be pro by them unless it makes it to enough readers.
SFWA is kind of a stodgy, old organization that still hasn't fully embraced the Internet and its impact on genre fiction markets. They are getting better, but they've got a ways to go yet. Because of that, a lot of younger, successful authors don't even bother to join the organization, where at one time it was an almost must-do kind of thing.
So even if a publication isn't on their list, it doesn't mean the publication doesn't have any prestige. This list is just a place to start if you want to start with the pro markets and work your way down. Even though the organization doesn't carry as much weight anymore, it is still an important organization in the genre markets, and some editors do pay more attention to publication credits from this list, giving the author more credit for publishing in them.
From 1995 to 2008:
Analog dropped from a paid circulation of 70,000 to 25,999
Asimov's dropped from 59,000 to 17,102
F & SF dropped from 51,557 to 16,044
(Also the recently-suspended Realms of Fantasy dropped from 44,348 to 19,671.)
Now, there may be mitigating factors in some of this decline besides the sour economy or the Internet factor. (For instance, the death of Isaac Asimov in 1992 was probably a blow to both Asimov's and F & SF, where he was a presence and a drawing card.)
But I'd bet that the main reason is that they're simply "not giving the people what they want.)
But we all have to start somewhere :-)
Wouldn't that be funny/ludicrous? Incestuous even?
Imagine the editors thinking they were trying to hit the audience's desires while the audience is trying to anticipate the editors' wants. No wonder the mags could have lost sales.
quote:
Well, the advice I recieved from an author published by Prime books whose work is availble from amazon and other outlets online was to not worry about the big-name publications right at first anyway, but to try and get some acceptances from smaller markets and then work up.
No, no, no, no, no!
If I had followed that advice, I might not have a pro sale yet. Instead, all the stories I've sold (except two that went to non-paying markets as favors for friends) have sold to pro markets.
You want your story to be accepted by the best market that will take it. If you try a small market and get accepted, you'll never know if it would have sold to a major market.
Start at the top and work down. Even if you're not getting accepted at pro markets yet, if you're submitting regularly the editors will start recognizing your name.
quote:
From 1995 to 2008:Analog dropped from a paid circulation of 70,000 to 25,999
Asimov's dropped from 59,000 to 17,102
F & SF dropped from 51,557 to 16,044
FWIW, one explanation for this drop, according to the editors involved, is that they stopped offering subscriptions through Publishers' Clearinghouse. Because those subscriptions were so cheap, the magazines actually lost money on them, so the editors say they are better off without them.
quote:
You want your story to be accepted by the best market that will take it.
Actually, I want my story to be accepted. Period. The more money for it or whatever, the better but to me any paying acceptance is a credit and a milestone. Of course I'm not holding on to any illusions of like being able to live off my writing any time in the next year or so or anything like that.
Also, even ~submitting~ to the "big three" and most of the others on the SFWA list is more difficult. Most of them don't accept electronic submissions. Many of them also take a long, long LONG time to respond to submissions. Also, I do submit to some of them...I've been submitting to Fantasy Magazine since the begining and it is now a pro market. But for me at this point the "big three" are more trouble then they are worth. It basically costs money to submit to them in the form of postage, printer ink and special paper (I'm not even sure what "bond paper" is), they take forever to respond and most of them are not geared towards what I write anyway.
quote:
No, no, no, no, no!If I had followed that advice, I might not have a pro sale yet. Instead, all the stories I've sold (except two that went to non-paying markets as favors for friends) have sold to pro markets.
With all respect, i think the advice of someone who is or very nearly is a professional writer holds some weight. Someone who went through the proccess, in that manner.
I take a bit of issue to anyone presenting their personal experiences as the sole way to go, or trying to completely negate the advice or experiences of others....I think one of the weaknesses of Hatrack is theres a lot of assuming that goes on about peoples intentions and desires.
quote:
Start at the top and work down.
You don't just up and petition to, say, become president of the United States. You get into the field. You move up. Theres more than one way of doing things.
quote:
With all respect, i think the advice of someone who is or very nearly is a professional writer holds some weight. Someone who went through the proccess, in that manner.I take a bit of issue to anyone presenting their personal experiences as the sole way to go, or trying to completely negate the advice or experiences of others....I think one of the weaknesses of Hatrack is theres a lot of assuming that goes on about peoples intentions and desires.
While I am sure the author who gave you that advice meant well, the advice is just plain wrong-headed--at least for people who are more concerned with building a long-term writing career than with seeing their stories published as quickly as possible.
And I'm not saying that because I think my method of building my career is the only correct one. There are a whole bunch of ways of building a successful career.
But the idea that you should first attempt to get published in smaller venues in order to work your way up the ladder is the result of people incorrectly analyzing the careers of previous successful authors.
If you look at many writers' bibliographies, you will see that their first publications were in smaller venues, and then they started selling to more prestigious markets until they were selling to the pro markets. But that does not mean they submitted to the markets in that order.
Why try to climb the ladder of success from the bottom if it turns out you can skip several rungs?
If you have the goal of making it into the pro markets, every story you sell to other markets without having tried the pros first is an opportunity lost.
If that's not your goal, fine. But since you talked about working your way up to those markets, it sounded like that was your goal.
quote:
While I am sure the author who gave you that advice meant well, the advice is just plain wrong-headed--at least for people who are more concerned with building a long-term writing career than with seeing their stories published as quickly as possible
And I consider it wrong headed of you to state your opinions/theories/experiences as universal fact.
quote:
If you look at many writers' bibliographies, you will see that their first publications were in smaller venues, and then they started selling to more prestigious markets until they were selling to the pro markets. But that does not mean they submitted to the markets in that order.
No, it doesn't. Also doesn't mean that they didn't do it in that order. Unless you have some sort of objective proof that most "successful" writers got their first sales in major markets and then started publishing in minor ones afterwards...
Stephen King started smaller and worked up.
This is a subjective business/pursuit. Therefore generally saying a certain way of going about it is "wrong" is itself incorrect and tends to make the person asserting such sound a bit arrogant.
Also, like I said...I submit lots of places. The main thing for me is the "big three" are extremely impractical because most of them don't publish what I write, and they don't accept electronic submissions. I submit regularly to Fantasy Magazine for example and have sent stuff to OSC's IGMS and the like. But the one that won't take email subs are just very impractical for me right now.
And i think the "big three" and their ilk are going to get less and less big as online markets move more and more to the forefront.
[This message has been edited by Merlion-Emrys (edited February 27, 2009).]
"In an appendix to The Early Asimov, the author lists the first sixty stories he wrote in the late 1930s and 1940s, and notes that eleven of them were never sold and were eventually lost.
"'Cosmic Corkscrew', Asimov's first story, was written between 29 May 1937 and 19 June 1938. The story, 9000 words long, was about a man who traveled into the future to find the Earth recently deserted. Due to the quantum nature of time, he could not travel back in time a short distance to find out what happened. Asimov submitted it on 21 June to John W. Campbell, editor of Astounding Science Fiction, who rejected it. The story never sold and was eventually lost." Wikipedia: The Early Asimov.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Early_Asimov
The above Wikipedia page has links to information on each story in the anthology, including submission histories.
[This message has been edited by extrinsic (edited February 27, 2009).]
When considering where to submit a story, I consider the following:
1. Which magazine(s) would publish a story like this?
2. Which of those is most prestigious or would I most like to appear in? (This includes whether it includes writers I admire, or whether it just has a damn sexy concept and looks good.)
3. Which pays the most?
Sometimes I write specific stories for specific venues. For example, Sein und Werden is a highly respected (in the UK small press circuit) non-paying, stapled zine which I love the look, feel and ethos of. All the writing inside is stuff I enjoy, and many of my stories would feel at home there. I intend to write a story for the mag, even though said story could be sold elsewhere for more, if I tried. But, to me, appearing in a magazine I enjoy and respect is more important in that instance, and I can always submit to a better paid/higher profile mag later on with another story.
But generally I do go through these criteria, in that order. I don't believe starting with Analog/Asimov's/F&SF would be the best option in most cases, because my writing style isn't appropriate to them. But if I wrote straight genre stuff, or hard SF for example, I probably would.
One of the more intriguing fable-like anecdotes of a writer's journeyman struggles is Jack London's semi-autobiographical Martin Eden, 1909. After Martin succeeded as an author, he never wrote again. Instead, he submitted, and enjoyed sight-unseen acceptance for publication, his previously written and rejected work in reverse order of writing, until he ran out of material, then he went on a South Pacific cruise and . . .
[This message has been edited by extrinsic (edited February 27, 2009).]
(Ah, the dangers of relying on Wikipedia...from later autobiographical works, as I recall, two of Asimov's "lost" stories turned up, rendering that entry inaccurate. He also said (and, having read them, I agree) that posterity would have been served better if he had lost some of the ones he saved.)
quote:
And I consider it wrong headed of you to state your opinions/theories/experiences as universal fact.
That's your privilege, of course.
At this point, I don't think there's any reason for me to keep arguing the point, as you seem determined to follow the advice this other person gave you. My main hope is that what I've posted will keep other people from following it.
quote:
Ah, the dangers of relying on Wikipedia...from later autobiographical works, as I recall, two of Asimov's "lost" stories turned up, rendering that entry inaccurate.
Ray Bradbury later qualified his comments in a coda to the 1984 edition of Farenheit 451 about the novel's interpretation. The perils of censorship is what he said then. Later, in a rare interview with the LA Weekly in May of 2007, he said it's about how television destroys culture, which validated one of my interpretations.
http://www.laweekly.com/2007-05-31/news/ray-bradbury-fahrenheit-451-misinterpreted/1
Anyway, Mr. Norwall, I'd appreciate if you could provide your source so I can update my files.
[This message has been edited by extrinsic (edited February 28, 2009).]
(A glance at the Wikipedia article does show some updating beyond The Early Asimov...but, for my sources, I'll cite Before the Golden Age (in which the lost story "Big Game" is published), In Memory Yet Green (in which the lost story "The Weapon" is published), and also I. Asimov for the last word from Asimov on the subject.)
I collect publishing anecdotes and author's comments on their work. It seems to me as though a disproportionate number of publishing successes have interesting anecdotes, stories behind the stories, compared with other avenues of celebrated breakthroughs. That may be a product of and for promotional hype, but still intriguing. Superstitious as I am, I sense if I come up with a story with a story behind it, I'll be assured of success, fingers crossed, cross my heart, wish upon a star, rub a lucky crystal, pluck a four-leaved clover, pray.
Author's comments on their work, I collect for insights into how they present their stories' meanings and inspirations to the public. One common one that I've questioned is the "first ever" written story publishing success. Arguably, what they've written before didn't meet their definition of story after their breakthrough. At the least, I collect author comments in preparation for the day that I have fans who want to know what I have to share.
I'm not aware of any online publishing runaway celebrity, but the day isn't far off. Then the entire medium will enjoy a surge of interest. Long live online!
[This message has been edited by extrinsic (edited March 01, 2009).]
quote:
At this point, I don't think there's any reason for me to keep arguing the point, as you seem determined to follow the advice this other person gave you. My main hope is that what I've posted will keep other people from following it.
Well I'm not sure you fully get what I'm saying, and maybe I'm not totally understanding you either.
I think the main thrust of what he was telling me was not to worry or get discouraged. I think we've already determined that in practical terms, one way or other, most writers get published in "lesser" markets first and then break into the bigger ones, regardless of where they submit first, so in the end its basically six of one, half a dozen of the other.
I do think you seem to be setting any "non professional" story sale more or less at naught, and that despite saying theres many ways of doing it, you state your way, your opinions, your experiences as universal facts, something that always rubs me the wrong way.
Out of curiosity, whats your opinion on markets that arent on the SFWA list, but pay professional rates, like Beneath Ceasless Skies or Shock Totem?
quote:
I have another comment about what's been said above. I don't think it's a big deal, to print out hard copy of your short story, stuff it in a manila envelope, put stamps on that envelope (and a self-addressed return envelope), and send the package out to one of the Big Three magazines.
Well it can be a big deal when you have very little or no money beyond paying the bills. Printer ink isn't cheap. It'd wind up costing me probably about 10 dollars or so per story to submit postally. And since there are plenty of markets that pay the same rates and accept online submissions...
Plus, the main problem for me with the "big three" is only one of them would even look at my stuff anyway. Analog is strictly sci fi only. I looked all 3 up on Duotrope...Asimov's is also listed as sci fi only...the guidlines say they will consider "borderline fantasy"....but thats just borderline. I'm pretty sure it still has to be a science fiction story, and I write fantasy and horror so...
That said, if you always submit to smaller mags first, you'll never get into the big mags. How will you know when the time is to begin working your way up? If being paid for your writing is important (it may not be, but these are hard times), you could be potentially throwing away hundreds of pounds/dollars by not always trying the highest paid mags first. You also may never know if your earlier works may have found better/more suitable homes the first time round.
I also have to point out that, whilst it's rare, some editors see publication in non-paying or low-paying mags as not dissimilar to self-publication or vanity presses, whilst many others will just discount them as sales. Having some decent sales in your resume will at least make an editor sit up and read your story themselves, or all the way through, without passing it on to an overworked intern.
http://www.sfwa.org/writing/myrtle2.htm
In that article a writer will see how it goes with a manuscript at a serial publishing house.
As to literary versus . . . versus . . . Dr. Debra Doyle's anti-rant rant says much.
http://www.sfwa.org/writing/genre2.htm
On electronic publication;
http://www.sfwa.org/beware/epublishers.html
Just to list a very few articles hosted by SFWA available to the public on many, many things related to a writer's pursuit of publication.
Writer Beware index: http://www.sfwa.org/beware
Writing publications index; http://www.sfwa.org/writing
[This message has been edited by extrinsic (edited March 01, 2009).]
quote:
That said, if you always submit to smaller mags first, you'll never get into the big mags. How will you know when the time is to begin working your way up?
That depends on the person. I find it odd that a lot of people here seem to think theres some sort of infallible, automatic formula for this...
For me, I am submitting just about everywhere. The only places I don't submit are places that A) don't accept the type of stuff I write (since theres no point) and B) those that don't accept email submissions because the expense to reward ratio, especially as a beginer, make it kind of pointless.
The rest goes into another point...
quote:
I also have to point out that, whilst it's rare, some editors see publication in non-paying or low-paying mags as not dissimilar to self-publication or vanity presses, whilst many others will just discount them as sales
I'm really not sure what you mean by "discount them as sales." If you just mean in general, maybe yes (although I am not talking about, and I do not submit to, markets that don't pay at all.)
quote:
Having some decent sales in your resume will at least make an editor sit up and read your story themselves, or all the way through, without passing it on to an overworked intern.
Ok two things here. First, you realize you've set up a catch 22 right? Your basically saying the "decent" places don't sit up and take notice unless you have "decent" sales. So how then do you go about getting one?
Second, "decent" is again, subjective. I also have a friend (and fellow hatracker) who reads slush for an admitedly minor magazine, and has told me any paid sale in a person's cover letter makes him take notice. Editors are simply people, and like everyone have different tastes and criteria. What I've seen makes me think that a lot of the really big markets are a good deal less likely to buy your story or possibly even seriously consider it, when your totally brand new. But having a few lesser, paying sales especially those in the semi-pro pay range make that more likely.
All I'm saying...and the advice I was given is...don't freak yourself out or discourage yourself worrying about getting right in at the top floor. I mean if you start submitting and you already have 3 or 4 finished stories, whats wrong with sending one to a pro market, one to a semi pro and one to a token market?
We've already pretty much established that with writing, and most other artistic pursuits, your first steps are going to be small ones...and thats ok. I think some times people start writing, aim for the top, get rejected a lot, and quit.
If you start at the top and work your way down with *every* story, then you're giving yourself the best shot at getting the best sale and the best pay.
As for the catch 22 situation . . . I didn't say your story would never get read. I just said it would get passed to an overworked intern, or that it might not get read all the way through. This is more common than you think. I know editors for a number of pro, semi-pro and token paying markets, and they all do this. They will not always read every submission (at least not all the way through), and they pass stories by unknowns to interns wherever possible (if the interns don't get the stories first and then send the more promising ones to the editors after).
Unknowns also rarely appear from nowhere. They carry qualifications, references, and some kickass fiction to boot.
Also, your friend may take notice of any publication, but you'd be surprised just how many writers already have some form of publishing history. As editor at Polluto, I'd say 99% of people who submit already have sold stories elsewhere. In fact, I can only remember three first-time writers who've submitted (two of whom were from here, and one of those already had non-fiction publishing history). Everybody else I can remember has had at least one other sale. Often these are sales to journals or websites I've never even heard of, or that published one issue and closed, or which just accept writers to fill space.
If you make your writing good enough that an editor will sit up and read it, then try with the best mags first. It's worth a shot. You won't lose out if you don't make a sale for a while, because you will sell it eventually, but you always know you've given your writing the best chance it has.
[This message has been edited by baduizt (edited March 01, 2009).]
Different folks, different genres, different venues, different lengths, different creative slants, different interests, different moments in time, different strokes, the number of strategies is likely an exponential multiplier of six million. I've considered hundreds of submission strategies. Both of which are what I believe Merlion-Emry's underlying points are. What anyone else might do is a matter of an individual's preferences and sentiments, regardless of whether or not it makes any sense for someone else's tactical strategies.
[This message has been edited by extrinsic (edited March 02, 2009).]
quote:
The most sensible method is to simply start at the best paying, widest distributed magazine and work your way down.
One writer's sensiblities are another's impracticalities. Just comparing apples to oranges, the total subscriber base for the so-called Big Three is less than 50,000. Fictionwise in their latest report has over a third of a million subscribers. That's apples to oranges because paper serial digests aren't e-books.
In the alternative, the entire creative writing racket from writer to publisher to marketplace to reader to author acclaim hinges on a laissez-faire guild apprenticeship system. Everyone has to start somewhere, including publishers. Top down or bottom up or in the middling middle, newcomers come along, popular writers become ascendent, old timers die off, and creative writing goes on.
It's my belief that a practical, sensible emerging writer knows his limitations and abilities and chooses a best possible target based upon his bluntest and frankest personal assessment, thus minimizing frustration and wasted expenditures.
There's only one way to do what we're doing: Untwist the two halves, create furrows in the white filling with your teeth, lick the remainder of it off, then, and only then, is it permissible to dunk the two halves (one at a time) into the milk. I will not argue about this.
Say (1) I like the mag and want to appear in it, or (2) I know or am friendly with the people publishing it, or (3) somebody up and asks me for something. All three have happened to me.
Merlion-Emrys's argument seems a bit protean to me, frankly. It was presented first that smaller markets are a way to work up to the pro markets, then it was about genre incompatibility, then expense of paper submissions. It's not clear whether pro publication (in F&SF, say) is the ultimate goal. If it is, I don't think expense or inconvenience should be a barrier. At least from my perspective, $3 or $4 to submit a story is a very small burden compared with the time and labor required to write it in the first place. If the pro publication in a print magazine is not a personal goal, then of course there's no need to try.
I also have the strong impression that once you are writing stories that are basically free of serious problems, sheer luck becomes a huge factor - submitting to a market at just the time they are looking for something like your story, catching the attention of a reader or editor for some subjective reason, etc. I don't see a consistent difference in the quality of stories published in the pro and semi-pro markets. Both publish things I consider great and things I consider average or ho-hum.
My point is that one should not feel that a story is good enough for one market but not for another. It's not like a ladder you have to climb one wrung at a time. I just make each story as good as I can, and see if anyone can use it.
quote:
Well I'm not sure you fully get what I'm saying, and maybe I'm not totally understanding you either.I think the main thrust of what he was telling me was not to worry or get discouraged.
Well, that I could agree with. If what he meant was "don't worry that you're not being accepted at top markets at first," then that's fine. But if he meant "don't even bother to submit to top markets until you've built up a record of sales at lesser markets," then his advice is bad for the reasons I've outlined already.
quote:
I think we've already determined that in practical terms, one way or other, most writers get published in "lesser" markets first and then break into the bigger ones, regardless of where they submit first, so in the end its basically six of one, half a dozen of the other.
No, it's not. Because a story you submit to a smaller market first that gets accepted might have been your first sale to one of the big markets if you had submitted it there first. And you can never know that you're good enough to get published in the big markets if you aren't submitting to them.
quote:
I do think you seem to be setting any "non professional" story sale more or less at naught, and that despite saying theres many ways of doing it, you state your way, your opinions, your experiences as universal facts, something that always rubs me the wrong way.
No, I'm not. I think it's fine to publish in non-pro markets. I'm just saying that you should let stories trickle down to those markets, rather than submitting to them first. There are exceptions--for example, if the editor of a market specifically asks you for a story--but as a general rule it's best for your career as a writer to have your stories published in the best possible market. A strategy that deliberately bypasses the best markets that might have bought your story is almost certainly slowing the progress of your career.
Sorry if my way of stating this offends you, but if your goal is to sell to pro markets, the best way of achieving that goal is to submit to pro markets.
quote:
Out of curiosity, whats your opinion on markets that arent on the SFWA list, but pay professional rates, like Beneath Ceasless Skies or Shock Totem?
I'm all in favor of markets paying pro rates. I've submitted to BCS and have several friends published there.
quote:
But if he meant "don't even bother to submit to top markets until you've built up a record of sales at lesser markets," then his advice is bad for the reasons I've outlined already.
quote:
Sorry if my way of stating this offends you, but if your goal is to sell to pro markets, the best way of achieving that goal is to submit to pro markets.
See this is the problem I have. People stating their own subjective opinions...about a subjective subject...as objective, absolute and universal facts.
quote:
No, it's not. Because a story you submit to a smaller market first that gets accepted might have been your first sale to one of the big markets if you had submitted it there first. And you can never know that you're good enough to get published in the big markets if you aren't submitting to them.
You missed my point, again. What I said was, we know that almost always, authors wind up building up acceptances at less-than-the-"top" markets before they ever get published in those at the "top." I get the logic of what your saying, but in the end, chances are you arent going to get published by a prestigious professional magazine or whatever if your a totally new un-previously-published author anyway.
Some people may decide to, at first, not tie up stories in high-end markets (which usually take longer on responses and often don't even give feedback) that probably arent going to accept them...since they are unpublished authors...anyway, and so go ahead and try to build a base first.
And what I'd like you to realize is....thats valid. No matter what your goals are. Just like your technique is valid.
Now me, as I've said several times, I've done both...I came into the game with a good deal of material and just started sending stuff out here there and everywhere. Simon's advice to me, I think, was coming from the point of of view that I just mentioned...your probably not going to get into big markets right off anyway, so you might as well 1) not worry about it and 2) diversify.
And thats also valid.
Also, my "arguement" is in no way "protean" at least not anymore so than that nature of this SUBJECTIVE area of discussion necesscesitates. However, we are discussing several different things at once here. But my biggest one is this
quote:
A least sensible method of courteous discussion is to make and argue imperative and/or declarative statements based upon subjective opinions
I think hatrack would be an even better place than it already is if more people would remember this.
Eric has one strategy, Merlion has another, I have another. That's fine. We all choose our own path. If someone else's path doesn't agree with yours, it doesn't matter. They can do whatever they want to do, and so can you.
quote:
Eric has one strategy, Merlion has another, I have another. That's fine. We all choose our own path. If someone else's path doesn't agree with yours, it doesn't matter. They can do whatever they want to do, and so can you.
Yeah, thats my point. But when you offer up your thoughts and people come in with "no no no!'s" and handwaving and say that your ideas are basically wrong and objectively bad advice, I begin to take issue.
If your going to state your subjective opinions as facts (or if you are actually to the point of truly believing that your subjective opinion is in fact objective reality) your going to have people react to it.
(That way, there's less competition for my stories at the pro venues.)
submit your "best" story to the "pro" market, then submit several of your "lesser" stories to the smaller markets. that way, if your "best" gets rejected, you have all those "lesser" stories still out there, plus you can get your "best" story into the lesser market as well, possibly getting published in the smaller markets. if your story gets accepted, then great! you have a story in the pros!
just because you might fail is no reason to try.
dont know who said that, but...
in the words of Thomas Edison: Weve found a thousand ways that dont work, the trick is to find one that does. (paraphrasing there.)
what seperates us from Edison is that for us, THERE IS NO WRONG OR RIGHT WAY!!!! Merlion, you do it your way, Stone, you do it your way! dont argue, it merely demeans the art that all of us have come here to perfect. (you can still debate, but dont argue!) while competition breeds creativity, it can also lead to hurt feelings and damaged relationships.
My comment regarding 'objective facts' was really to highlight the fact that everything is subjective; there is no such thing as an objective fact...
We can have 'agreements' with people, but they aren't objective facts just because they seem to be...
[This message has been edited by skadder (edited March 11, 2009).]
quote:
My comment regarding 'objective facts' was really to highlight the fact that everything is subjective; there is no such thing as an objective fact...
Well, there are things that are objective facts, like the fact that gravity works and the fact that water is wet. But pretty much everything we discuss on here is subjective...the "quality" of writing is subjective, the choices of editors of what to publish or not are based primarily or entirely on subjective things etc...and thats why I have problems when people (more than one as well, this isn't all aimed at one person) come in and start making objective statements about those subjective things. And yes I know, your supposed to just assume they are saying its there opinion...but when you say that to them and they continue to insist that no its not their opinion its a FACT, sorry I have a problem with that.
quote:
Okay, okay, Merlion's right, I'm wrong. Everybody please follow Merlion's strategy of submitting to lesser markets and working your way up.
Wow. You really have listened to a single thing I've typed, have you? First, I've stated repeatdly that what you've just said is not my sole "strategy"...I don't really have one in fact, I pretty much shop everything everwhere.
Second, my primary point especially for the last couple of posts has been that there is no "right" or "wrong" in this because it is SUBJECTIVE and the problem I have with your statements isn't your personal submission stratgey its your insistence that your personal stratgey is the ONLY "right" one and all others are wrong/bad/less wise/not going to work.
But don't worry, I'll stop now. I forget some times that the Open Discussions about Writing are only open as long as you don't spend more than 2 or 3 posts talking about a general thing and as long as everybody agrees with everything everyone else says :-)
If the objective is to be published in a pro market (this was what was originally stated), and the two strategies are:
1. submit everything to pro (print) markets first, then work down
vs.
2. do not submit pro markets until making some number of sales to small markets
then there are two possibilities if you follow (1): either you sell to one of those pro markets or you don't. If you do, then you have met your objective. If you don't, then you are in exactly the same place as if you had followed (2), except that you are perhaps a month or two behind because whatever you sold to the small markets got to them a month or two later from having been sent to the pro market(s) first.
I can't see anything at all that would make (2) superior in terms of achieving the stated objective.
However, if you have other objectives, such as saving money on postage, not wanting to buy paper, etc., you would need to weigh the two objectives against each other. Indeed, if you expect to be send out something like 50 stories before your first pro sale, the expense might not seem worth it, for the sake of slightly increasing the probability of a pro sale early on.
Personally, I regard paper, ink, and postage as part of the cost of being a writer. All occupations and hobbies have costs. This is not the largest of them, by any means - most of my money goes into books, fiction and also books on writing, and magazines like Locus.
To each his own, of course. But I think the advice as originally presented (if you want pro sales, do not submit to pro markets until you have sold to small markets) is demonstrably erroneous. It's hardly the same kind of thing as subjective preference for a certain color or type of food.
Eric, I wasn't trying to say you were wrong. I actually agree with you more than Merlion in this particular case. My point was that you were both repeating the same arguments back and forth to each other. I'm all for discussion, but it seemed more like an argument at that point.
Anyway, I'm not the boss around here. It was just a suggestion.
My first submission was to a pro-rate market. It sold. It's been reprinted in an anthology and an audiobook of that anthology and has earned me more, I think, than any other single story I've sold (something around $400 in total, IIRC, for a 2500-word piece).
Imagine if I'd sent that out to a market that paid $5 per story.
The idea that you can "build up" some kind of publishing "credit" from smaller publications that will stand you in good stead with pro magazines is, I'm afraid, utter nonsense. The reverse, however, is true - publish at big name markets and you are likelier to sell stories on to "smaller" markets.
Eric, it should be noted, won WOTF and sells pro-rate stories on a fairly regular basis. He does know what he's talking about here.
A newly emergent author or any forum member telling a struggling emerging writer she's wrong is reprehensible, to my sensibilities. Not much in the scale of these discussion things is more likely to get one's back up regardless of the rightness or wrongness of imperatively presented advice. And that is hurtful and wrong.
Edited to add: The advice is sound; the method of delivery is not. For a wordcrafter to ignore method of delivery calls into question the validity of the advice.
[This message has been edited by extrinsic (edited March 11, 2009).]
quote:
If you look at many writers' bibliographies, you will see that their first publications were in smaller venues, and then they started selling to more prestigious markets until they were selling to the pro markets. But that does not mean they submitted to the markets in that order.
quote:
No one said the big name authors published at big venues first then small ones. What was said was that it's more likely most pro authors start off in smaller pubs and eventually get into the bigger mags is that they start submitting to the big mags first, but don't get accepted at them till their skills have improved enough and their names have become recognised enough for them to get accepted at the pro venues.
Ok, so if this is the case, then why does the order matter so much? It indicates, again, that most people...not all mind, I actually realize that all things are not universal and set in stone but MOST brand new authors don't get published in the major markets first anyway. Their first sales are generally in "lesser" markets, whether they sent it to bigger ones first or not. Thats why I said six of one half dozen of the other.
Now yes, I fully understand that a story sold to a "lesser" market isn't getting sold to a "greater" one...but since for a begining writer it most likely wouldn't have been anyway, whats the difference? And if your always writing and completing new material, how is it a terrible blow to your career to "sacrifice" a few of your earlier bits to "lesser" markets and have SOMETHING to your name early on if thats what you wish to do?
I think that was really what Simon was basically telling me or where he was coming from...your probably not going to sell to the biggies right away, so go ahead and get SOME sales then move on although I want to emphasize one more time that neither he to me nor I to anyone else have said NOT to submit first or submit early works to "bigger" markets or that "bottom up" is the "best" or even a "better" stratgey, only that its a valid one like all the others.
And again, one more time I've never said I don't submit to professional markets. I did, and do, and have. So far, I've recieved only rejections from them, and rarely if ever any sort of feedback. But I continue. I also submit to semi pro and token payment markets. Whenever I finish a piece, I submit it to whichever place that 1) I don't already have a piece with and 2) I think is most likely to have a chance of accepting it. Now that said, within those 2 boundaries if there are multiple markets that fit them, I will go with the highest paying and/or the ones that seem to have some prestige first...I also try to do a lot of simultaneous submissions.
And also again, the biggest issue I've had in this thread is people elevating their choices, opinions and experiences to the level of fact and being told essentially that a friend who is also, by most people definition a professional writer (moreso, in fact, than anyone on this site that I'm aware of save maybe Kathleen) is giving me "bad" advice.
And yes I realize many would say just ignore it, but being told I'm doing something wrong when 1) the thing isnt a thing where there is a right or wrong and 2) the people doing the telling think I'm doing something that I'm not is rather irritating.
Perhaps I should start a new thread about how people define "professional" both in terms of markets and in terms of what constitues a "professional writer" as I am rather curious now...
quote:
The idea that you can "build up" some kind of publishing "credit" from smaller publications that will stand you in good stead with pro magazines is, I'm afraid, utter nonsense.
You know this to be true beyond a shadow of a doubt in all cases? If so, how did you come by the knowledge?
First, on advice giving. Being published does not make one an expert on being published. And even if it did, have you ever seen experts agree on anything? Ever? Of course not, so there is no One True Submission Strategy That Fits All Writers, All Stories.
Also, on advice giving: being right doesn't mean your advice will be followed. First, you have to be perceived to be right; without hard data on the experiences of many, many writers, all you have is your own experience, a single data point, subjective, as Merlion says.
Further, to give accurate advice, you have to know all the objectives and aspirations, stated and unstated, of the person you're giving advice to. That's not possible. So advice giving is futile. The best you can do is share your experience, recount what works for you, and hope that others may find it helpful.
And, still on advice giving, let's downgrade it to influencing people and their decisions. If you want to influence people, you have to express yourself in a manner that they will be inclined to listen to; shouting 'no, no, no' and declaring their honestly-held opinions 'utter nonsense' or 'wrong headed' is guaranteed not to influence, and more likely to intimidate and inflame.
Thus, I agree with extrinsic when he says, "A least sensible method of courteous discussion is to make and argue imperative and/or declarative statements based upon subjective opinions."
A year ago I would have said my submission strategy was as Eric directs, to start with the big 3 and work "down" (in the absence of circulation figures for the on-line 'zines, how do we know they're still the 'big' 3?). But I waited about six months for one of them not to respond (I think the rejection got lost in the post) and stopped subbing. So now I have several stories ready to sub, and almost have the energy to start subbing again. I won't send them all to the big 3 first, and not just to avoid multiple subs...
The big 3 are primarily American mags, and I've realized that some of my stories just do not suit the American markets, because they are too "British". For them I will first try to find British homes. (No, I don't want to revise them for American audiences. I don't think they'll work so well, for they rely on allusions to British history and culture.)
Furthermore, the big 3 are SF and F, and I have one or two stories that are not of those genres. For them I'll probably look for other homes; one needs a subversive political market, for example.
Another is a flash piece: I have respect for FFO, I believe there's a chance they'd like it, so I'll send it there first. For me, a credit with FFO would be valuable.
I have one or two other stories which, while I quite like them, aren't good enough for the big 3, and I don't know how to make them better, and they're as good as they'll get despite helpful crits from Hatrack friends. I'll try them with some on-line markets because, as Merlion says, there's a better chance of more-than-a-form rejection. If I can get one or two editors talking to me and helping me with those stories, I'll learn.
So thanks, Eric, for helping me to see my strategy is more like Merlion's than I thought; and thanks Merlion, for helping me see my strategy and feel more confident of it.
For me, to be rejected by Analog, my Dream, is a Big Deal. The first time I sent a story to them, I had to psyche myself up for it. It feels easier, somehow, to be rejected by a lesser market. So strategy is to do with one's resilience, psyche, whatever, as well as practicalities and probabilities.
quote:
I have one or two other stories which, while I quite like them, aren't good enough for the big 3, and I don't know how to make them better, and they're as good as they'll get despite helpful crits from Hatrack friends. I'll try them with some on-line markets because, as Merlion says, there's a better chance of more-than-a-form rejection. If I can get one or two editors talking to me and helping me with those stories, I'll learn.
This is a pretty big point about the feedback. And the pyschology in a way too...the larger markets arent nearly as big on feedback, and they are intimidating. More than that as I eluded to in earlier posts I think over emphasis on those markets...which are unlikely to give feedback and likely to reject, can be very discouraging for those just going at it, especially if they are unsure about writing in general.
Honestly, I think there is something to be said for both aproaches, but really I think as with many things, if there is a "best" a mixed aproach might be best. If your starting out and you have 4 finished stories, send 2 to a pro market like Strange Horizons or one of the Big 3 if you right sci fi and don't mind the postage, and send the other two to someplace that might actually tell you why they reject it, like Ideomancer or Allegory.
Also I'm curious for those of you on the "always pros first" end...your saying every story should be sent to a pro market first...all of them? How many tries at pro markets, per story, are acceptable?
quote:
Also I'm curious for those of you on the "always pros first" end...your saying every story should be sent to a pro market first...all of them? How many tries at pro markets, per story, are acceptable?
What I'm saying is that you should decide what the best market (based on pay, circulation, prestige, or whatever criteria you choose to judge what will best help your writing career) where your story might sell and send it there first. It won't necessarily be one of the big 3, or even a pro market. If it's rejected, choose the next best market. Then the next.
It's not like there's a set limit that you should try three pro markets and then skip down to the semipros or anything like that. Always send a story to the best market for it that you can send it to. (Sometimes this means you may have to skip a market if it's temporarily closed or you already have a submission there, etc.)
quote:
The idea that you can "build up" some kind of publishing "credit" from smaller publications that will stand you in good stead with pro magazines is, I'm afraid, utter nonsense.
quote:
You know this to be true beyond a shadow of a doubt in all cases? If so, how did you come by the knowledge?
Well, that's what every pro editor I've ever seen write on the subject has said.
Building up credit from smaller/"lesser" (I hesitate to use the term, but we are talking about a scale towards professionalism here) publications is not necessarily without merit for one as a writer. It may build confidence. It may garner you useful contacts (I've been in TOcs at "lesser" markets alongside recognisable names who also sell to pro markets). But proving you can sell to a $5-per-story market does not impress the editor of a 5c/word market, and pretending it will is specious and dangerous.
In my opinion (dude, you should realise enough about the world by now that anyone who states something even as a hard and absolute fact is just expressing their opinion, they just happen to be doing it forcefully, pobably because they are more fervent about that opinion than others).
Anyone can offer advice in this forum. The wise reader has to judge where that advice is coming from, and whether it is soundly based or not. I came back to using Hatrack specifically because this place helped me before I was ever published. I'm trying to pay it forward by passing on my own experience in the hope that it will help others.
[This message has been edited by tchernabyelo (edited March 12, 2009).]
Respect is a dialogue regardless of the relative standing of the participants to each other.
No matter how good a story is, a writer who disrespects readers won't be long in the limelight. James Frey A Million Little Pieces.
quote:
What I'm saying is that you should decide what the best market (based on pay, circulation, prestige, or whatever criteria you choose to judge what will best help your writing career) where your story might sell and send it there first. It won't necessarily be one of the big 3, or even a pro market. If it's rejected, choose the next best market. Then the next.
Ok...so if this is the case, I don't understand why if your just starting out, have no experience with editors and feel that the best markets for your stuff, early on, are lesser ones with faster response times and a higher chance of giving feedback (or even actually buying your story) is such horrible advice, or warranted such a dramatic reaction. Mind you, I'm not say thats "the way to go" either...theres a lot of factors that go into that.
I know that for me getting a few personal rejections that were pleasant, encouraging and insightful from minor market editors really helped me especially early on to keep going past the discouragement of constant rejections. And that is really what sort of brought me into this in the begining...I can just see the overpowering focus on professional/high profile markets being intimidating or discouraging for people who are just starting out.
quote:
dude, you should realise enough about the world by now that anyone who states something even as a hard and absolute fact is just expressing their opinion, they just happen to be doing it forcefully, pobably because they are more fervent about that opinion than others
I guess our experiences have been very different. Because in my experience, especially in the "world" of online discussion, most of the people that make definitive objective statements about subjective things, especially when they continue to do so without even a hint of qualifying or acknowledging that its an opinion after being confronted about it, are in fact saying that what they are saying is in fact objective reality despite its subjectivity.
Its also been my experience that assuming that people are going to know what you mean and how you mean it in all cases, especially online, is unwise and almost always leads to misunderstandings.
quote:
Ok...so if this is the case, I don't understand why if your just starting out, have no experience with editors and feel that the best markets for your stuff, early on, are lesser ones with faster response times and a higher chance of giving feedback (or even actually buying your story) is such horrible advice, or warranted such a dramatic reaction.
To me, that sounds more like an approach to getting encouragement and validation for your writing than an approach to building a professional writing career. And that's fine, if that's what you're looking for at this point. If rejections from pro venues are too discouraging to you, then this might be the right approach for you, as a way to build up your confidence.
But it will take longer to get into the pro venues using that strategy. You get into the pros by submitting to the pros.
The reason for my vehement reaction originally was because it sounded to me like you were promoting the idea that people are supposed to work their way up by submitting first to the lower-tier markets in order to build up a publication history that will then help them get into the pro mags. That's just not true. If people have other reasons for not submitting to the pros first, then be that as it may. But people who are willing to submit to the pros should not submit to lower-tier markets first in order to work their way up.
quote:
To me, that sounds more like an approach to getting encouragement and validation for your writing than an approach to building a professional writing career.
So, those two are in all cases and for all people totally mutually exclusive?
Also...I'm not saying that this IS WHAT YOU MEAN, but that statement could very easily be interpreted as you expressing that if you feel the need to do it that way its beause your somehow lacking in fortitude or your just looking for praise or an "easy way" or some such. I don't know if its intentional or not but a lot of what you say comes off somewhat arrogant and/or condescending. Note that in my other post I was talking about feedback...I did say it is encouraging, but I also said it can improve your knowledge of the ways of editors, which you can use, if you wish, to gear your writing more towards that audience. (most people would just say "it can help you improve your writing" but I dont subscribe to the objectively better/worse dichotomy)
And you do realize, also, that theres more than one definition of a professional writing career? (to which I'm expecting you to state your defintion and insist that its THE definition but I really hope you prove me wrong.)
quote:
The reason for my vehement reaction originally was because it sounded to me like you were promoting the idea that people are supposed to work their way up by submitting first to the lower-tier markets in order to build up a publication history that will then help them get into the pro mags. That's just not true.
See there it is again...your making a factual statement, but I have no reason to believe it to be universally objectively and always true as you say.
How about presenting some proof that non-pro publications are, as you seem to be saying, more or less meaningless in the context of "building a professional writing career?" Or if not "proof" at least something to actually back up your iron clad assertions that that is the case for everyone, not just your personal experience.
[This message has been edited by Merlion-Emrys (edited March 13, 2009).]
Well, the two kept arguing well into the night. About midnight the rest of us got bored and went to bed while they were still at it. We figured either one or the other would end up out the window by morning, and we didn't really want to be there for that.
When we woke up, the two were still going at it, but neither ended up splattered on the concrete below. Finally we convinced them to laugh about the whole thing and go get breakfast. So what do you think? Breakfast time?
[This message has been edited by extrinsic (edited March 13, 2009).]
extrinsic mentioned a figure for Fictionwise, but I assume that's across all genres, not just F&SF.
Also, in a recent edition of the UK magazine Deathray, there was an interview with OSC where he said that on-line sales of IGMS continue to be disappointing, from which I assume that on-line zine sales are faring no better than print.
Anyone got any figures? Are the "big 3" in fact bigger than on-line?
[This message has been edited by TaleSpinner (edited March 13, 2009).]
Flash Fiction Online reports 5,300 visitors a month as of November 2008. Zero paid subscribers. Extended to an annual count, that number of visitors could be at least 60,000.
Excepting how more people now get their news free online than in print, I've not found many other statistics related to online publishing. Online circulation seems to be proprietary information in most business models.
My conclusion is find a way around the tolltakers and circulation soars. I've also wondered if there's a way around the gatekeepers that would put writers' stories out there and merit would be based solely on readers' scrutiny and popular opinion. Baen has gone the farthest in that direction.
[This message has been edited by extrinsic (edited March 13, 2009).]
If the big 3 circulations are each somewhere between 15,000 and 25,000 per month (using Robert's figures earlier in this thread) then, comparing them to 5000 visitors a month, they are still "big" in the SF&F genres, though not nearly as big as they once were. Is that right?
quote:
Presumptive authority imperatively addressing a supposed inferior poisons a message.
One person's "presumptive authority" is another person's contextual information.
Merlion says he has "no evidence" to suggest that he is wrong in believing that a raft of publishing credits at non-pro markets will help his chances of professional publications.
Writers with professional sales and contact with editors of professional markets say otherwise.
Merlion repeats that he still has no evidence.
I may leave Hatrack again, at least for a while, as it seems trying to pass on advice from what I've learned is unwelcome. My mistake.
quote:
Got my popcorn and settling in.
Wanna borrow my twelve-foot pole, Rich?
And quit bogarting all that popcorn.
Especially when professional writers with contact with editors have given me different advice.
All I'm saying is 1) theres more than one way to establish a professional writing career (whatever definition of that your using) and 2) if your going to offer your opinions, offer them as opinions and if your going to offer "facts" give reasons behind them, sources for the information or something of that kind.
Also, if as the two of your say, non-professional story sales are totally meaningless, what is the point of ever submitting anything to a non pro market? and what about semi pro? and what about relatively large, 40 50 dollar and beyond token payments?
I only said they were meaningless within the context of using them to try and make your work more attractive to an editor of a prozine - because that was the specific point at issue.
I sold a story to one market for $5 (well, in theory I did; I never actually got paid). The story had been out to a number of other markets and hadn't sold - I was working down the chain, not up.
That story, to my knowledge, has never been reviewed or commented on - it might not even have been read - but it was still, in theory, a paying sale (the non-payment is a separate issue, and one I would chase up if it were more than $5!).
I've sold several stories to Every Day Fiction. They earn me $3 a shot. Why do I sub to that market, when (in theory) I have a limit of not selling anything for under 1c/word? Simple; readership. EDF gets 1000+ readers for every story (I'm not sure how many more than that figure it might be by now). That's more than a lot of first novels - certainly way more than self-published first novels. And it feels good to know that the stories I'm writing are actually being READ.
There are any number of reasons to sub to lesser-paying markets. There are even reasons to sub to non-paying markets, though as noted I personally have never yet subbed to a non-paying market and would only break that rule if there were compelling reasons.
If you aren't "ready" for pro markets, by all means publish in what markets will take your work. But improvement will NOT come from selling those stories. Improvement will come from critique groups, from having others analyse your work and analysing the work of others. Thus, over time, you may well be able to sell to pro markets, and that might appear as if you've "worked your way up". But the pro markets are ONLY interested in work of pro quality, and whether you've published 100 stories or none at non-pro markets really won't matter one iota to them.
And there is, after all, only one way to know if you are "ready" for a pro market. As I said before - what if I'd sold "The Box Of Beautiful Things" for $5, instead of earning around $400 for it? 20% or so of my total income from writing has come from that story; the first story I ever submitted to any market, and which sold, right out of the gate. I can't sell to pro markets with any consistency - I'm clearly still working MY way up. Jay Lake explained that the quality of your writing may be like a choppy sea, with peaks and troughs. The peak stories may be pro level but most of your work might be below. The aim is to increase the mean level so that more and more of your output gets above the line.
And simply selling the below-the-line stories elsewhere - which I still do - is all very well but it is NOT what helps you get more stories above the line. It really isn't.
quote:
If the big 3 circulations are each somewhere between 15,000 and 25,000 per month (using Robert's figures earlier in this thread) then, comparing them to 5000 visitors a month, they are still "big" in the SF&F genres, though not nearly as big as they once were. Is that right?
In the heyday of pulp digests, 1920s to 1950s, circulation figures for the leaders were in the 300,000s. Successors at the beginning of the 1990s enjoyed figures in the 100,000s.
An average success milestone today for literary journals is generally in the 2,000 subscribers range. They're usually supported by university sponsorships in exchange for student-academic credit and extracurricular activities. However, the 2,000 subscriber count is about where actual printing, production, and handling costs intersect with revenues at break even.
Same number for a shoestring publisher of print digests. Economy of scale benefits at 2,000 copies produced and circulated will be mostly self-supporting and possibly profitable with advertising revenue.
A startup online digest business plan might also consider 2,000 monthly visitors as an initial success milestone. However, with no printing and handling costs the break-even milestone is appreciably lower.
quote:
I'm still not understanding. Can you guys go over your arguments again? I think I missed something.
LOL.
OK, I'll shut up now.
It seems to me there's an underlying issue here. Are you mad at us for disagreeing with you because of the way we've disagreed, or because you feel you have to justify your own need to submit to 'lesser' markets first? Are you scared of the big markets? I just don't see why it's that unreasonable to advise people to aim high, unless you have some issue with people getting into pro venues.
To paraphrase Oscar Wilde, we may all be in the (literary) gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
By the way, I love to argue, but even I know when it's time to move on. This horse is dead; it's no longer a horse, so I would advise us to move onto another horse. Doesn't really matter to me, though, if the advice is taken or not; I'm just throwing it out there.
And now, I look for other horses.
Too late to swerve (it was too dark to see it in time at freeway speeds), and if we'd tried to hit it we couldn't have done a better job.
Such a loud "whump!" that I was amazed anyone could run over something even bigger, like a human, and not notice. Yet, every so often you hear of people claiming that they didn't know they hit anything or ran over anything. <shaking my head>
Regarding your experience last night. When I was about 15 years old my step-father-for-the-moment was a big NASCAR fan. He had dragged me out, along with my mom and his son and daughter, to some rinky-dink track in the middle of GOB (Good Ol' Boy) country. I'm sure we had to have passed some red-headed snaggletoothed person playing Dueling Banjos to get there. Anyhow, it was during that end of fall, beginning of winter time. I was forced to sit half-frozen on a wooden bleacher for four hours in a cold drizzle to watch beat up cars drive circles around a track. Everytime a group passed, they sprayed us with tiny shreds of warm wet rubber. They topped the night with a demolition derby in the muddy inside area of the track. Yee-haw!
On the way home, I sat in the back seat in wet clothes. We were driving down the highway, most likely way too fast, when a vehicle up ahead began to skid. As we passed it, we hit something and it bounced the entire vehicle up into the air like hitting a speed bump at 65 mph. My step-father decided to keep going. The next day the newspaper's front page told of a hit-and-run the previous night. Although my mom never "saw" the man consciously, she had dreamed that night about hitting a man who was wearing an army-jacket. They drove to the police station, and upon inspection they found evidence under the car to confirm that it was our car that had hit him.
The man, who was wearing an army-jacket, had been hitchhiking when the first vehicle hit him, knocking him up in the air. He had landed just seconds before we drove overtop of him. The vehicle in front had been traveling at around 50 mph. The police said that he was probably dead before he hit the ground, but that didn't make anyone feel any better.
I don't know what you hit, but hitting a human being is an experience that I would not wish on anyone.
What we ran over looked no bigger than a raccoon, if it was even that big.
Thinking back, I probably should've taken the guy's details and followed it up LOL!
I couldn't stop to check to see if it was dead, as it was on a corner with high hedges all around--the next car would have hit me--too dangerous.
So I drove on, wincing at the sound/feeling of crushing it as it replayed, again and again...
A thoughtful person would realize that roadkill always increases when the nights are exceptionally cold and the days are warm. The animals crawl out onto the road attracted by the residual warmth and fall asleep, and beome prey to the next unwitting driver driving along in the wee early morning hours.
Rich, I lived in Tennessee for eight years. You're right about the roadkill there, but the rule is that it has to still be warm. On a side note, Tennesse had some of my favorite animal crossing signs from your standard "Deer Crossing" to "Cow Crossing" signs. However, my favorite was "Marsupial Crossing". While I lived there, I did not have enough fingers (10) to count how many people I knew who didn't know what a marsupial was.
quote:
I think the question for baduizt is, why was the car running for the bus? ;-)
Because it was afraid of flying...
quote:
Are they just road kill on the Information Superhighway now?
Yes. And I decree that we can eat them, cold or warm, it doesn't matter. Just use plenty of salt.
I don't miss that town at all (although mostly for other reasons).