posted
I have always been told that a short story must have a good beginning in order to catch the attention of the editor or of the slush reader.
I think I have finally understood how to write a good beginning.
It now occurs to me, following a couple of form rejections that I received those last days, that beginnings are only part of the equation. I sent out short stories which I am reasonably sure have good beginnings. I am also equally sure they were not read past a few sentences by the people who rejected them.
This past year, I placed in WOTF quarter-finals every time I entered, so surely the stories I churn out are not that abysmal.
The question is: how do you get the editor to sit up and take notice of you when they don't read the short story anyway?
I don't think it's a problem of craft anymore. It's a problem of professionalism. I don't know how to display it any better than to keep the cover letter short and sweet (and given what I heard editors say at WorldCon, it would seem they don't read your cover letter except to get your publishing credits, of which I have almost none--at least not the kind of credits that impress editors). It's kind of a circular thing...You don't get published, you don't get any attention from the publishers, you don't get published...
Sorry if I did ramble, but I'd welcome your opinion on the matter.
posted
I can't speak from experience, so won't try. I will offer an anecdote. The author of 'Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance' received over 120 rejections before finding a publisher. The book has, supposedly, never been out of print in the last 30 years. (Of course, we don't know if his cover letter for the first 100 submissions was garbage.)
Posts: 87 | Registered: Aug 2005
|
posted
The only secret for getting published is to write something exceptional.
Being good isn't enough. Making the quarter-finals in WOTF means that a story has no more that two or three flaws. The rest of the story has to be as compelling as the beginning and the end has to resolve the beginning. With short fiction, a bad cover letter might get you rejected out of hand, but it's very unlikely since a lot of editors don't read the cover letter until after they've read the story.
Novels are different, but we're talking short fiction here, right?
[This message has been edited by MaryRobinette (edited August 18, 2005).]
I sent a story out on July 27th. From previous experience with post from France, it arrived around August 1st or thereabouts.
The rejection letter is dated August 2nd and he got my address wrong on it--and I mean big-time wrong (thank God for self-addressed envelopes). So either the slush reader is impossibly fast (which tells me he doesn't actually read much of anything) or it was sent around as soon as it arrived.
I'd welcome any comments on formatting. As far as I know it has to be Courier, double-spaced, page-numbered, with a header on each page giving title and name (all of which allowing for local variants, which I take into account). And on the first page, title, name of author, address, email, and approximate word count. Am I forgetting something vital?
Sorry, I'm in a bleak mood lately.
(edited to add the formatting comments)
[This message has been edited by Silver3 (edited August 18, 2005).]
posted
A lot of slush readers *are* incredibly fast. That's a good thing, because it lets you move on to the next market more quickly.
Posts: 1750 | Registered: Oct 2004
|
posted
What difference does it make if they read the whole thing or not? The only thing you need to concern yourself with is the fact that they sent it back with a rejection, and now you are free to send it out to someone else. Look for constructive comments, and if they've made any take those into account with potential revisions... but don't try to psychoanalyze the slush reader's behavior or attitudes. It seems to me to be a futile and unproductive waste of time.
Posts: 2026 | Registered: Mar 2005
|
posted
It almost feels like you're saying your stories aren't being given a fair shot - is that it?
It's true that once they've found a reason to reject, most slush readers won't keep reading. But why should they?
People who read a lot also tend to read quickly, about twice as fast as average. It doesn't mean they're not reading as carefully or as well; just faster.
posted
Yeah, I guess it's partly that. No, not really. It's more like I know it's pointless to worry about slush reader pyschology, but I would really like to know what turned the readers off; I get this nasty feeling it's something I haven't managed to catch yet, and that it's damaging my writing. Guess I'm wishing for the moon there...
[This message has been edited by Silver3 (edited August 18, 2005).]
posted
Silver, I just went over to the Blackhole to check some response times. It is discouraging to get quick rejections, but equally frustrating when they take three or four months and still reject it with out comment. I've had a couple of those lately and it makes me wonder what took so long?! Were they sitting on their brains for two months? What took so long? Why can't they at least tell me why it took so long?
Like Elan said, at least you are now free to shop it over to another market.
All in all, submitting stories is ultra frustrating no matter what the response time.
posted
Yeah, I find the cure for rejections slips is to prepare more emails and envelopes. I shall proceed to do so immediately. Thanks for bearing with my whining
[This message has been edited by Silver3 (edited August 18, 2005).]
posted
Good luck, silver! I've read some of your stuff; I think it will just be a matter of persistence for you. Don't let it get to you.
Posts: 1750 | Registered: Oct 2004
|
posted
Beth is right. The more slush you read, the more quickly you can read and evaluate it.
Long turnaround times don't happen because slush readers are reading in depth and re-reading. They happen because those readers take a long, long time to get to your story. The actual amount of time spent on it is probably the same .
posted
Silver3 -- I feel your pain. It seems that frustration is too much a part of the publication process. It's a crap shoot when you're at our level -- trying to break in. At least you're doing everything right, which means you are in the game. Good luck with the next submission. Posts: 266 | Registered: Mar 2004
|
posted
The editor's I've read -- F&SF, scifi.com, others -- say they read each story, and I think they read the whole thing. I believe them. I still don't have the magic wand!
And I don't really think it's exceptional quality. I got paid the most for a story I thought was almost too weak to send in. I think it's numbers. But then, I'm no expert.
posted
I don't agree. the slush reader for F&SF has a codified form letter for rejection. Depending on the wording, it's possible to estimate how far he read.
Posts: 2 | Registered: Aug 2010
|
posted
What does he say? Sorry, this didn't grab my interest, didn't hold my interest, or didn't work for me? The first means he couldn't get into it, the second, maybe five pages, and the last means he probably finished it. If it is signed by GVG, he liked it and passed it through.
Posts: 2 | Registered: Aug 2010
|
posted
I also have to disagree with wbriggs. The editors read everything that's passed on to them or that they choose to read (pro-level subs, for instance). At our level, we just get the slush readers, and as Spaceman pointed out, they don't always read everything. I know F&SF doesn't, the former slush reader of Realms of Fantasy didn't either.
[This message has been edited by Silver3 (edited August 19, 2005).]
quote:If it is signed by GVG, he liked it and passed it through.
Just to clarify (because I had to read that a couple of times to understand what Spaceman was saying), if the rejection letter is signed by GVG (Gordon Van Gelder), it means that the slush-pile reader liked the story and passed it on to the editor.
Either one of them could say that the story didn't grab them, or it didn't hold their interest, or it didn't work for them.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
.
