1) Submit story to Analog.
2) Receive rejection.
3) Submit same story to Asimov's - note they have the same address as Analog - think "Hey, neat that they must share the same floor of a building."
4) Read that Dozois of Asimov's is stepping down, and Sheila Williams will be taking over. Wonder about that, since I thought Williams worked at Analog - but people do move around in the industry, and Williams has been around a long time, so it could make sense.
5) In past, had only skimmed mastheads of both magazines, given that the guidelines tell you who to submit too.
6) Last night, while wondering why the second -in-command at Asimov's wouldn't be taking over, and getting a funny feeling in my gut, I decide to read the mastheads of both mags.
7) Doh! Other than Schmidt and Dozois, THEY HAVE EXACTLY THE SAME STAFF MEMBERS - WITH THE EXACT SAME TITLES AT EACH MAGAZINE (except for Trevor Quachri, who is "Technical Assistant" at Asimov's, and "Associate Editor" at Analog). Sheila Williams IS the second-in-command at Asimov's.

Ok, now that I am blushing over info you all probably knew, here is my question. You write a story, and decide to send it to one of the magazines, and it gets rejected. Is there any point in sending to the other, given that they have the same staff making the decision? Why waste paper, ink, and postage? Ok, maybe they have some interns or slushpile readers that are unique to them, and yes, they don't publish exactly the same things... but honestly, someone gets your story, rejects it for Analog, then gets it AGAIN for Asimov's... how fast can you say rejection?

So my thinking is, in the future, after I've written a story, and I send to one and it gets rejected, I won't be sending it to the other.

Basically, if the science wasn't the strongest part of your story, then it might not have been the best choice for Analog. If your story has really strong characters then Asimov's might pick it up.

Another note: I'm not sure how current my info is, but I have Stanley Schmidt listed as the editor for Analog and Sheila Williams as editor for Asimov's.

I'm thinking my story fit the following scenario better:

Editor wearing Analog hat: "Gee, this story is a little weak in science (or whatever - weak somehow) - reject."

Same editor recieves story wearing Asimov's hat: "Gee, I just saw this..."

Ok, maybe they reread it for character - NOT!

Yes, we are sending to Schmidt or Williams, and long ago Schmidt said he looked at every submission he got, but considering the number of submissions they get, I doubt stories go directly to them. Maybe they have totally separate slushpile readers... but it honestly looks like they have exactly the same staff.

(Poor Mary Grant - listed as "Editorial Assistant" for both - sorting mail in two piles, then spending the morning looking at Asimov's submissions, rejecting 95%, then passing on the other 5%... and her afternoon spent looking at Analog submissions, rejecting 95%, passing on the other 5%... OK, just theorizing, but betting something like that happens!)

Absolutely I carefully considered their guidelines to determine where the story should go first - it was more a science/idea story, with an mc people liked. I had also read two stories in Analog recently that were definitely the same sort of thing.

I just feel stupid that, after receiving the rejection, that I sent it to Asimov's (people really liked my character, so I decided maybe I had a shot there - but I expect to receive many more rejections before something sells - I know that!). If it had been a good enough story, just not strong enough in the science part for Analog, perhaps they would have considered it for Asimov's (though I did not send it that way).

Or maybe they just want to you spend your money twice. But I doubt it.

They do NOT share stories between ASIMOV'S and ANALOG. If the editor of one thinks it might be right for the other magazine, he or she may say so in the rejection letter, but he or she will absolutely NOT show it to the other editor. You sent it to that editor and he or she doesn't have your permission to show it to anyone else.

Yes, the staff is the same, but that's office staff and production staff. They don't use the same first readers (if they use first readers--Gardner did his own first reading and I think Stanley does too).

So don't figure that they've already seen it.

Kathleen - thank you for both the information, the explanation, and the assurance. I have to admit to a niggling feeling deep down that in the future, if a story I send isn't good enough for one, it won't be good enough for the other (ignoring appropriateness of subject and focus)... but if I get that comment on the rejection I will definitely follow up on it!

Why do you say you have to write many more stories before you can write one that won't get regected? Either you think your stories aren't good enough to submit yet, in which case, why are you submitting them?
Or you just assume that your stories won't look good to other people for a while yet. If you think that, you are probably unconsciously undermining your own work as you write it; after all, if you don't think it is good how can anyone else?

Maybe I'm totally wrong but this is how I view the writing process: like any other craft, I am going through the stages of apprentice, journeyman, and master.

Does the apprentice woodworker immediately expect to sell his first chair to a fine furniture store? As a rule, no. Now there may be the occasional apprentice who's first chair is already of that quality, but most craftsmen don't start that way. Most apprentices shouldn't take that first chair and try peddling it right away, they should focus on making more and better chairs (especially us self-taught apprentices).

So which stage are you in? If you have reached the journeyman stage, then definitely peddle your wares; they may not be the best in the world yet but they will be good, and worth money. In which case you shouldn't have the attitude that you are going to be rejected for a long time to come; you should expect to start selling your stories soon.

Part of it is reading what other authors and teachers say about this. The comments about having a million words worth of 'junk' or whatever that you need to get out before you write well enough to sell (yes, poorly paraphrased - sorry). Stories about successful writers with their stacks of rejections - papering walls, filling files, etc. Stephen King didn't stop sending stories just because he got lots of rejections - you write the best you can at the time you are writing, get rejected, and keep writing. You learn from the process, and you get better. How will I know I'm improving if I don't submit, and get rejected, and then submit, and get rejected, and submit, and get accepted?!

I've read in several places that you aim for publication (ok, not all will agree with that - that's fine, but it makes sense to me!) - and if that is your aim, then you need to be submitting. Not everyone can be accepted every time.

I think the story I sent was a good one - the first one I really felt was worth sending. So did my final readers. It took 5 months and 11 revisions and tons of critiques, and will now undergo a 12th revision after two new readers did critiques. But as the first story I sent out, I just expected that I was nowhere near where I need to be as far as experience was concerned, and that it would be rejected (no matter how good I thought it to be!).

Does that mean my heart didn't skip a little, in hopes that when I opened my SASE that I wouldn't find more than the xeroxed rejection (not pink!) and my first page? No - of course I had hopes. But I wasn't destroyed by the rejection because I know I'm just starting (relatively speaking).

I have stories that won't leave my house. But I do think I'm beyond the apprentice stage, to use your appropriate metaphor. I am not going to be egotistical in public and say YES, my stories will sell. I will say that I expect rejections, and hope for acceptances - nice and humble. (But just between you and me, I expect, some day, to sell!)

Part of it is tongue-in-cheek. And partly you are right - my husband constantly threatens to beat me with a self-esteem stick. Deep down, I like what I'm writing. There is no way I would send out something I don't consider "good enough." But that's just enough to get the story in the mail. It's the editor who truly gets to decide if it is "good enough."

quote:

---

I think the relevant aphorism here is "Don't reject your story yourself. That's the editor's job." As well as the good old "Start at the top of the food chain, because if it sells at the semipro level first you'll never get another shot to sell first rights, and you'll never know what Might Have Been."

---