The mission of Toasted Cheese "is to provide a place where writers can get honest feedback on their work and honest information about issues important to writers." The site publishes flash fiction, fiction, creative non-fiction, and poetry. Read the complete guidelines here.
SQF: What are the top three things you look for in a story and why?
SL: It might seem simple, but one main thing I look for in a story is a beginning, middle and end. More often in our contests than in our regular submissions, we get stories with structure and pace that could be improved (or is non-existent). It feels like the writer does a word count, sees she’s getting close to the max, and just stops the story or tacks on an ending.
Another thing I look for is a strong voice. A story with characters that aren’t fully realized, dialogue that’s not quite plausible, or a setting that’s just a little off, can be redeemed when the voice works. Voice also speaks to an editor from the first word. If your fantastic character doesn’t appear until the second paragraph, you can rely on your voice to bring the reader to that paragraph. This is also true in poetry and creative non-fiction.
What makes a story stick with me is a clear visual created by the author. I might be washing dishes hours later and start thinking about a submission I read earlier. So as I read a story, I like to watch the action unfold and watch the characters change. If I go along on a memorable journey with a character, I’m likely to add his story to my “yes” pile. In fact, I’ve retrieved submissions from my “pass” folder to my “consider” folder based on how memorable the story is.
SQF: What are the top three reasons a story is rejected, other than not fitting into your answers to question one and why?
SL: One easy way to keep your submission from being rejected is to follow the submission guidelines. For example, we ask that authors use a specific subject line depending on what the submission is (fiction, flash, poetry or CNF), all with “submission” in it. The word “submission” triggers a filter that puts your story into our reading queue. Without it, it’s likely your story will go into a spam folder and never be seen. Sending to the right address is important as well. Sometimes people send a story to a specific editor, like me, rather than to our submissions e-mail address. Since we edit as a group, all editors need to see the story and sending to one editor to “skip the queue” is a bad idea.
Another reason I find myself putting a story in the “no” pile is that the idea is too big for short fiction (this also happens with our poetry submissions). Specificity is your friend. Write about a moment or a series of moments. Use your word count to get in close and tell a better story, not to stay on the surface and tell more story. If you feel uncomfortable diving deeper, I’d take that as a sign that there’s something good hiding in there.
Sometimes I reject a story based on my personal taste. That’s one of the great things about editing as a collective. The story may still be printed in Toasted Cheese because every other editor may love it. Just because a story is rejected by one editor doesn’t mean there’s not another editor out there who won’t fall all over himself to publish it.
SQF: What common mistakes do you encounter that turn you off to a story?
SL: A lack of proofreading is a turn-off. I understand a few typos but when it looks like a story was rushed to my inbox, it’s usually indicative of poor overall content. We do allow more flexibility with submissions for our 48-hour contests, Three Cheers and a Tiger, since we prefer authors use those hours to write rather than edit. For our other contests (A Midsummer Tale, open May 1-June 21/22 and Dead of Winter, open November 1 to December 21/22) and regular submissions, we expect submissions to be technically good. In fact, when I judge stories for Dead of Winter, I use a point system and technical errors count against an entry.
It also turns me off when the e-mail is addressed to another journal, copied to several journals (we don’t allow simultaneous submissions), only one of our editors (myself included), or has no cover letter. I might not reject a submission based on these things but it doesn’t work in an author’s favor either.
SQF: Do you provide comments when you reject a story?
SL: We don’t provide comments on rejected stories or poems; but if a story is close, or just not quite a fit for Toasted Cheese, we do ask that the author submit another piece of work. We don’t send these requests very often so if a writer receives one, she should know it’s genuine.
We do have password-protected feedback forums, frequented by our editors, editors of other journals and writers. Our writing community is free to join, has no posting requirements and doesn’t spam or share your e-mail address. If anyone wants feedback or comments on a story, he’s more than welcome to post that story to the forum.
SQF: I read a comment by one editor who said she keeps a blacklist of authors who respond to a rejection in a less than professional manner. I'm sure you know what I mean. What do you want authors to know about the stories you reject and how authors should respond? Along this same idea, do you mind if authors reply with polite questions about the comments they receive?
SL: We have gotten nice letters from authors whose stories we’ve rejected, and we don’t mind those in the least. Sending a nastygram to a journal that’s rejected your work is never a good idea. As a writer who’s had her share of rejections, I know where that’s coming from. You’re better off sending that rejected piece to another journal and spending your writing time working on something new.
We do keep a “blacklist,” and I block people who send us particularly nasty e-mails. In my experience, the authors who write nasty notes in reply to a rejection don’t have the quality of work we would consider. It always makes me want to suggest they work on their craft and join a writing community to learn how to accept critique and rejection. I’ve also noticed that people who write impolite notes after a rejection seem to think they are being rejected, not that the submission is rejected. In any case the only person who can solve the situation is the author himself, not the editor, agent or publisher.
If someone posts a rejected story on a forum, the editors are among those who reply, offer feedback, ask questions, etc. In that case, an open discussion in which the author participates is beneficial to everyone. It has happened where an author has posted a story and asked, “Why was this rejected?” Members of Toasted Cheese make suggestions about what might have landed the story in the reject pile. Our purpose is to make everyone’s writing better. We want you to get published, if that’s what you want for your work.
It amuses me when we get a rude note in reply to a rejection due to disqualification (not following our basic submission guidelines). The author clearly hasn’t read our guidelines, and then blames us for that. If a story is rejected, the author is free to resubmit the following reading period. So sending a nasty note gets you blacklisted when you might have been published instead.
The best response to a rejection is to send a better submission. We have seen rewritten stories submitted and a new draft is always given fresh consideration. A different piece from an author whose work has been rejected is also always welcome.
SQF: What one question on this topic do you wish I'd asked that I didn't? And how would you answer it?
SL: What’s the easiest way to put your submission ahead of 25% of the submissions a journal or contest receives?
Answer: Follow the directions/guidelines. Write well and you’re ahead of at least half the submissions we receive.
Fewer than 25% of the submissions we receive make our first cut. Those that do are written by authors who have followed our submission guidelines and have written something we find appealing. If someone makes the first cut at Toasted Cheese (which we do at the beginning of every month; our rotating submission periods are three months long), they should consider submitting to us again, whether they make the final cut or not.
Maybe also: What do you love about editing a literary journal?
Answer: Reading a cover letter that includes the phrase “this is my first submission” or “I have never been published” and then reading excellent work as the submission. That thrill is worth all the nastygrams. ;)
Thank you, Stephanie. We all appreciate you taking time from your busy schedule to participate in this project.
NEXT POST: 1/4/10 -- Six Questions for Jason Jordan, Editor-in-Chief, decomP
Monday, December 28, 2009
Monday, December 21, 2009
Six Questions for Idgie, Editor/Owner, Dew on the Kudzu
Dew on the Kudzu began publishing in 2005 and is "an online magazine celebrating the Southern way of life." Fiction, poems, and book reviews are posted on a weekly -- sometimes daily -- basis. The Dew’s main goal is to encourage writers to take that first step and share their writing with others. Another goal is to share the South in a positive light.
(ceased publication.)
SQF: What are the top three things you look for in a story and why?
Idgie: The Dew does not have a lot of structure in what we look for in a story. Our only real requirements are that the story is either set in the South or that the author is Southern. I will say that I try keep The Dew “family friendly” and aim to appeal to a wide variety of readers.
SQF: What are the top three reasons a story is rejected, other than not fitting into your answers to question one and why?
Idgie: If the story ridicules the South or Southerners, if it’s too violent or graphic in its writing, regardless of how well written it might be, these are not the stories The Dew is after. I think if you take a minute or two to browse The Dew pages, you get a pretty good picture of what we’re about.
SQF: What common mistakes do you encounter that turn you off to a story?
Idgie: I don’t look for mistakes per se in writing, as I personally feel that a writer should have artistic license with their own words and what one person feels is a mistake might be someone else’s way of articulating. There are so many writing styles out there, what one person doesn’t like, three others may very well love.
SQF: Do you provide comments when you reject a story?
Idgie: Most definitely! I’ll be honest, I reject very little, but when I do it’s usually because the story just doesn’t fit in with The Dew. So I make sure to let the author know that I will not use their story only because it’s not a match with our readers, and not because I had a negative reaction to the story itself. I feel that there’s someone for every story and just because it’s not my cup of tea, that certainly doesn’t mean it’s unworthy of publication.
SQF: I read a comment by one editor who said she keeps a blacklist of authors who respond to a rejection in a less than professional manner. I'm sure you know what I mean. What do you want authors to know about the stories you reject and how authors should respond? Along this same idea, do you mind if authors reply with polite questions about the comments they receive?
Idgie: I think my reply to number four shares why I reject certain articles, so I hope most authors understand that. I always ask if they would like to submit a different type of story to The Dew and have generally experienced success with that. I’ll be honest, I’ve been lucky and have generally received positive responses from the authors. I think it does help me that I don’t criticize the work, ever, but just let them know if it’s not a fit. This goes along with the goal of The Dew, which is to encourage writers and to not try to fit them into little “this will sell” boxes. I have no issues with receiving responses to my rejections and have only ever received one that was less than pleasant.
SQF: What one question on this topic do you wish I'd asked that I didn't? And how would you answer it?
Idgie: I think that might be, “Why did you start The Dew?” I not only know what it’s like to be a frustrated writer who could use a little encouragement, but I also was so tired of reading nothing but ridiculing statements about the South. One day I was moaning and whining on a private blog and someone wrote back to me – “So do something about it!” Well, I did. The Dew is not famous (yet!), but I definitely feel that we give something back to the writers out there. The response I have received both from writers and readers has made this endeavor very rewarding to me. I also have great relationships with quite a few publishing houses and The Dew’s book review section is my own personal joy and writing outlet.
Thank you, Idgie. We all appreciate you taking time from your busy schedule to participate in this project.
NEXT POST: 12/28 -- Six Questions for Stephanie Lenz, Founding Editor, Toasted Cheese
(ceased publication.)
SQF: What are the top three things you look for in a story and why?
Idgie: The Dew does not have a lot of structure in what we look for in a story. Our only real requirements are that the story is either set in the South or that the author is Southern. I will say that I try keep The Dew “family friendly” and aim to appeal to a wide variety of readers.
SQF: What are the top three reasons a story is rejected, other than not fitting into your answers to question one and why?
Idgie: If the story ridicules the South or Southerners, if it’s too violent or graphic in its writing, regardless of how well written it might be, these are not the stories The Dew is after. I think if you take a minute or two to browse The Dew pages, you get a pretty good picture of what we’re about.
SQF: What common mistakes do you encounter that turn you off to a story?
Idgie: I don’t look for mistakes per se in writing, as I personally feel that a writer should have artistic license with their own words and what one person feels is a mistake might be someone else’s way of articulating. There are so many writing styles out there, what one person doesn’t like, three others may very well love.
SQF: Do you provide comments when you reject a story?
Idgie: Most definitely! I’ll be honest, I reject very little, but when I do it’s usually because the story just doesn’t fit in with The Dew. So I make sure to let the author know that I will not use their story only because it’s not a match with our readers, and not because I had a negative reaction to the story itself. I feel that there’s someone for every story and just because it’s not my cup of tea, that certainly doesn’t mean it’s unworthy of publication.
SQF: I read a comment by one editor who said she keeps a blacklist of authors who respond to a rejection in a less than professional manner. I'm sure you know what I mean. What do you want authors to know about the stories you reject and how authors should respond? Along this same idea, do you mind if authors reply with polite questions about the comments they receive?
Idgie: I think my reply to number four shares why I reject certain articles, so I hope most authors understand that. I always ask if they would like to submit a different type of story to The Dew and have generally experienced success with that. I’ll be honest, I’ve been lucky and have generally received positive responses from the authors. I think it does help me that I don’t criticize the work, ever, but just let them know if it’s not a fit. This goes along with the goal of The Dew, which is to encourage writers and to not try to fit them into little “this will sell” boxes. I have no issues with receiving responses to my rejections and have only ever received one that was less than pleasant.
SQF: What one question on this topic do you wish I'd asked that I didn't? And how would you answer it?
Idgie: I think that might be, “Why did you start The Dew?” I not only know what it’s like to be a frustrated writer who could use a little encouragement, but I also was so tired of reading nothing but ridiculing statements about the South. One day I was moaning and whining on a private blog and someone wrote back to me – “So do something about it!” Well, I did. The Dew is not famous (yet!), but I definitely feel that we give something back to the writers out there. The response I have received both from writers and readers has made this endeavor very rewarding to me. I also have great relationships with quite a few publishing houses and The Dew’s book review section is my own personal joy and writing outlet.
Thank you, Idgie. We all appreciate you taking time from your busy schedule to participate in this project.
NEXT POST: 12/28 -- Six Questions for Stephanie Lenz, Founding Editor, Toasted Cheese
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Six Questions for Diane Smith, Editor, Grey Sparrow Journal and Press
SQF: What are the top three things you look for in a story and why?
DS: This December, Grey Sparrow Journal will offer writing from a group of writers I consider spiritual in their ability to share concerns for humanity with elegance and insight.
I invited them to teach by example. I was deeply touched at the poetry and prose they offered. I could not pay them, but still they shared. Our December Issue (III) is titled,"Peace and silence came on angels' wings, one cold, December day."
I believe the authors' writings are a beacon for those learning about poetry, flash, short story writing and more, as well as for those in need -- the poor, the homeless, those with little power in our society. I would rather have new writers come, read, and learn from those who know, than listen to a formulaic answer by me that doesn't explain what a literary work offers. I cannot explain the mystery of a Walt Whitman, Emerson, or Thoreau. Yet, it's ever present in their words.
I do think voice, community and congruence of characters are moments that have meaning and are critical to sound writing. I will explain further.
Voice speaks to the writer's world view; how scenes are described, what is valued, what is characterized. Community speaks to the larger issues of the world. An individual voice can echo for a thousand miles. Congruence has to do with that internal voice aligning with the external action as part of characterization.
I am reminded we are moving into the season of giving. Jim, thanks so much for asking me these questions.
SQF: What are the top three reasons a story is rejected, other than not fitting into your answers to question one and why?
DS: Mechanics (basic writing skills), structure of the story (plot development, arcs, subarcs), and the message (character values, POV, motivation, and intent) are not developed sufficiently to warrant publication.
SQF: What common mistakes do you encounter that turn you off to a story?
DS: A writer, in an earlier stage of learning, may lack critical writing skills to bring a story to fruition.
SQF: Do you provide comments when you reject a story?
DS: I generally do provide a few words, but not always. Form letters may be forwarded in the future at Grey Sparrow Journal.
SQF: I read a comment by one editor who said she keeps a blacklist of authors who respond to a rejection in a less than professional manner. I'm sure you know what I mean. What do you want authors to know about the stories you reject and how authors should respond? Along this same idea, do you mind if authors reply with polite questions about the comments they receive?
DS: I believe most editors want to take everyone's work. Sometimes beautiful writing is just not a good fit for a particular issue or the journal itself. I will tell you how I have responded to rejections for my own work. I thank the editor for taking the time to review it and wish them the best. I would be satisfied with a 'thank you' from any writer or no response as an editor. It's important to be polite, as you may well find yourself in subsequent issues with new work for that same editor; and it shows you understand an editor took the time to read your work and consider it.
SQF: Along this same idea, do you mind if authors reply with polite questions about the comments they receive?
DS: I do think writers don't realize how busy editors are. Editors receive a fair amount of work, they need to make quick decisions and address a number of concerns and tasks external to writers' work. I don't mind polite questions if I'm allowed to disengage after a reasonable amount of time.
Learn more about Grey Sparrow Journal here.
Thank you, Diane. We all appreciate your taking time from your busy schedule to participate in this project.
NEXT POST: 12/21 - Six Questions for Idgie, Editor/Owner, Dew on the Kudzu
DS: This December, Grey Sparrow Journal will offer writing from a group of writers I consider spiritual in their ability to share concerns for humanity with elegance and insight.
I invited them to teach by example. I was deeply touched at the poetry and prose they offered. I could not pay them, but still they shared. Our December Issue (III) is titled,"Peace and silence came on angels' wings, one cold, December day."
I believe the authors' writings are a beacon for those learning about poetry, flash, short story writing and more, as well as for those in need -- the poor, the homeless, those with little power in our society. I would rather have new writers come, read, and learn from those who know, than listen to a formulaic answer by me that doesn't explain what a literary work offers. I cannot explain the mystery of a Walt Whitman, Emerson, or Thoreau. Yet, it's ever present in their words.
I do think voice, community and congruence of characters are moments that have meaning and are critical to sound writing. I will explain further.
Voice speaks to the writer's world view; how scenes are described, what is valued, what is characterized. Community speaks to the larger issues of the world. An individual voice can echo for a thousand miles. Congruence has to do with that internal voice aligning with the external action as part of characterization.
I am reminded we are moving into the season of giving. Jim, thanks so much for asking me these questions.
SQF: What are the top three reasons a story is rejected, other than not fitting into your answers to question one and why?
DS: Mechanics (basic writing skills), structure of the story (plot development, arcs, subarcs), and the message (character values, POV, motivation, and intent) are not developed sufficiently to warrant publication.
SQF: What common mistakes do you encounter that turn you off to a story?
DS: A writer, in an earlier stage of learning, may lack critical writing skills to bring a story to fruition.
SQF: Do you provide comments when you reject a story?
DS: I generally do provide a few words, but not always. Form letters may be forwarded in the future at Grey Sparrow Journal.
SQF: I read a comment by one editor who said she keeps a blacklist of authors who respond to a rejection in a less than professional manner. I'm sure you know what I mean. What do you want authors to know about the stories you reject and how authors should respond? Along this same idea, do you mind if authors reply with polite questions about the comments they receive?
DS: I believe most editors want to take everyone's work. Sometimes beautiful writing is just not a good fit for a particular issue or the journal itself. I will tell you how I have responded to rejections for my own work. I thank the editor for taking the time to review it and wish them the best. I would be satisfied with a 'thank you' from any writer or no response as an editor. It's important to be polite, as you may well find yourself in subsequent issues with new work for that same editor; and it shows you understand an editor took the time to read your work and consider it.
SQF: Along this same idea, do you mind if authors reply with polite questions about the comments they receive?
DS: I do think writers don't realize how busy editors are. Editors receive a fair amount of work, they need to make quick decisions and address a number of concerns and tasks external to writers' work. I don't mind polite questions if I'm allowed to disengage after a reasonable amount of time.
Learn more about Grey Sparrow Journal here.
Thank you, Diane. We all appreciate your taking time from your busy schedule to participate in this project.
NEXT POST: 12/21 - Six Questions for Idgie, Editor/Owner, Dew on the Kudzu
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Six Questions for Barry Basden, Editor, Camroc Press Review
Camroc Press Review publishes micro prose (up to 550 words) and poetry "that moves us to joy or sadness or anger or any other real emotion that illuminates the human condition." New stories are posted on a rolling basis.
(ceased publication)
SQF: What are the top three things you look for in a story and why?
BB: I'm primarily looking to be pierced emotionally by submissions. That's the reason CPR exists. I couldn't get emotional rushes from my own work often enough, so I'm looking for it from others. I'm also looking for pieces that surprise and delight me in new and immediate ways with perhaps an undercurrent or subtext that adds depth and richness. What I'm really looking for is work that illuminates the human condition, work that binds us together with emotional truths.
SQF: What are the top three reasons a story is rejected, other than not fitting into your answers to question one and why?
BB: I don't like rhyming verse, tired images, or lack of focus. Also, if it's so experimental or esoteric I can't understand it, I have to pass. Nor am I big on nihilism or ennui. The work has got to touch me.
SQF: What common mistakes do you encounter that turn you off to a story?
BB: Some arrive so full of exotic symbols I can't read them. Obvious grammar problems, typos, and misspelled words also tell me when authors don't think much of their own work. I've also had to reject otherwise fine work because the author would not compromise on format I couldn't accommodate. That's always a real disappointment.
SQF: Do you provide comments when you reject a story?
BB: I often provide comments for several reasons. I'll suggest other markets if I think a piece might be better placed elsewhere. I may make an editorial suggestion if I think a slight tweak would make the piece right for us. Finally, I ask writers to try us again when I think they may have something more suited to our needs.
SQF: I read a comment by one editor who said she keeps a blacklist of authors who respond to a rejection in a less than professional manner. I'm sure you know what I mean. What do you want authors to know about the stories you reject and how authors should respond? Along this same idea, do you mind if authors reply with polite questions about the comments they receive?
BB: I don't mind corresponding with authors as long as it's productive. After all, they are my favorite people and without them, CPR would have nothing to publish. I've never blacklisted anyone. It's all about the work.
SQF: What one question on this topic do you wish I'd asked that I didn't? And how would you answer it?
BB: Do you have enough content?
Not really. That's why we do reprints. I also run a small trot line of blogs I enjoy and beg the authors to send us something or let me reprint a blog entry I find particularly moving. I'm shameless that way and have fortunately ingratiated myself with a handful of bloggers who let me browse their archives and put up whatever I find interesting. For that I'm extremely grateful, because I absolutely love this stuff.
Thank you, Barry. We all appreciate you taking time from your busy schedule to participate in this project.
NEXT POST: 12/14 -- Six Questions for Kimberly Brown, Flash Fiction Editor, Apollo’s Lyre.
(ceased publication)
SQF: What are the top three things you look for in a story and why?
BB: I'm primarily looking to be pierced emotionally by submissions. That's the reason CPR exists. I couldn't get emotional rushes from my own work often enough, so I'm looking for it from others. I'm also looking for pieces that surprise and delight me in new and immediate ways with perhaps an undercurrent or subtext that adds depth and richness. What I'm really looking for is work that illuminates the human condition, work that binds us together with emotional truths.
SQF: What are the top three reasons a story is rejected, other than not fitting into your answers to question one and why?
BB: I don't like rhyming verse, tired images, or lack of focus. Also, if it's so experimental or esoteric I can't understand it, I have to pass. Nor am I big on nihilism or ennui. The work has got to touch me.
SQF: What common mistakes do you encounter that turn you off to a story?
BB: Some arrive so full of exotic symbols I can't read them. Obvious grammar problems, typos, and misspelled words also tell me when authors don't think much of their own work. I've also had to reject otherwise fine work because the author would not compromise on format I couldn't accommodate. That's always a real disappointment.
SQF: Do you provide comments when you reject a story?
BB: I often provide comments for several reasons. I'll suggest other markets if I think a piece might be better placed elsewhere. I may make an editorial suggestion if I think a slight tweak would make the piece right for us. Finally, I ask writers to try us again when I think they may have something more suited to our needs.
SQF: I read a comment by one editor who said she keeps a blacklist of authors who respond to a rejection in a less than professional manner. I'm sure you know what I mean. What do you want authors to know about the stories you reject and how authors should respond? Along this same idea, do you mind if authors reply with polite questions about the comments they receive?
BB: I don't mind corresponding with authors as long as it's productive. After all, they are my favorite people and without them, CPR would have nothing to publish. I've never blacklisted anyone. It's all about the work.
SQF: What one question on this topic do you wish I'd asked that I didn't? And how would you answer it?
BB: Do you have enough content?
Not really. That's why we do reprints. I also run a small trot line of blogs I enjoy and beg the authors to send us something or let me reprint a blog entry I find particularly moving. I'm shameless that way and have fortunately ingratiated myself with a handful of bloggers who let me browse their archives and put up whatever I find interesting. For that I'm extremely grateful, because I absolutely love this stuff.
Thank you, Barry. We all appreciate you taking time from your busy schedule to participate in this project.
NEXT POST: 12/14 -- Six Questions for Kimberly Brown, Flash Fiction Editor, Apollo’s Lyre.
Monday, December 7, 2009
Six Questions for Don Webb, Managing Editor, Bewildering Stories
Bewildering Stories (BwS) publishes speculative and experimental fiction (from flash to novels), non-fiction, poetry, articles, essays, reviews, and art on a weekly schedule. The editors leave open their definition of speculative fiction. Read a few issues and send your best work. Read the complete guidelines here.
DW: Thank you for your questions about editorial procedures and criteria. I've received feedback from three other members of the Bewildering Stories Review Board. I'll combine the responses and conclude each section with my own comments, as Managing Editor.
SQF: What are the top three things you look for in a story and why?
BwS: Our responses fall into three main groups:
(a) Mechanics:
Good grammar and spelling, as well as reasonable punctuation. A carefully polished prose style is also necessary; we often see sloppy writing spoil a good story.
(b) Characters and settings:
Psychologically believable, three-dimensional characters; plot intrigue; vivid settings depicted and evoked in concrete details.
(c) Ethos -- the work as communication:
I want enchantment; that is, a story that pulls me along. And a protagonist or set of characters I care about; if I don't care about them, I won't care about anything else in the story.
DW: Two science fiction grandmasters from the mid-20th century may seem quaint now, but their techniques reward study. Gordon R. Dickson's stories can hardly be called "enchanting," but he has exceptional strength at the level of the sentence, which he uses to propel the reader forward. Isaac Asimov was a self-avowed agoraphobe and had to struggle to create any settings at all, never mind vivid ones. Yet he genuinely liked his characters, and that endearing quality alone would account for his lasting popularity.
SQF: What are the top three reasons a story is rejected, other than not fitting into your answers to question one and why?
BwS: (a) Mechanics:
Run-on sentences, sentence fragments, ambiguous or non-existent pronoun references, chaotic punctuation, inconsistencies in internal plot logic; failing to give characters names.
(b) Content:
Trite, mechanical plotting; clunky or clichéd dialogue; one-dimensional, "stick figure" characters; hackneyed plots; graphic sex or violence; gratuitous foul language. Also: transparent propaganda or preaching and disparaging individuals or groups simply for who they are.
DW: Of course we're interested in novelty, but never for its own sake. Any writer is best advised to learn from the past. Four thousand years or more of world literature is an inestimable treasure.
"Propaganda" is a slippery concept, because a special target audience does not preclude good writing. I'll roll out the heavy artillery by way of example: the Bible is, for the most part, a monument of literary genius in prose, poetry and drama. The Gospels, for example, were written for a special audience. Yet they have always been unique genres, and they feature characters, settings and action that were not only new but revolutionary in the literature of Antiquity.
SQF: What common mistakes do you encounter that turn you off to a story?
BwS: Info-dumps that could and should be either dramatized or omitted. Description or superfluous detail that is added for its own sake and could be omitted without changing the story substantially. Unnecessary and confusing twists and turns in the plot.
Whatever pulls the reader out of the story. It could be sheer carelessness, like confusing "your" and "you're" or "there," "their" and "they're." Or it could be something big, like making a mistake in a matter of common knowledge.
DW: We could put the question another way: "What causes you to lose interest in a story?" As our Review Editors say, the fault could be small or large. When I find myself losing interest, I try to pinpoint the cause and bring it to the writer's attention.
As editors we try to catch small errors such as confusion of the homophones "their" and "there." But that's really the writers' job, and anything extra we do is a favor to them.
Our preview notices, which are the equivalent of galley proofs, state that the on-line versions are almost always more correct than the authors' originals. And the authors are encouraged to copy our pages for their records after an issue officially goes on line.
Our readers really appreciate our editorial work. Readers are distracted when language calls attention to its mechanical nature. I'll summarize it crudely. If they see an error in grammar, punctuation or spelling, they'll consider it discourteous. Two errors, and they'll begin to question the author's intelligence. Three, and they become mightily annoyed. The author is out of the game; the readers have been distracted too often to continue reading.
We're acutely aware that readers have a much shorter attention span when reading on line than when reading print on paper. That's why we apply rigorously our rules about page lengths and paragraphing.
Our authors do not have the luxury of writing like Dickens, Balzac, Tolstoy, or Thomas Mann. That may be a pity, but the medium does not allow it. We have to keep the readers on the page, and that means long info-dumps are out, no matter how precious they may be to the author personally.
SQF: Do you provide comments when you reject a story?
BwS: Many editors and agents don't comment, because it invites an angry, defensive response from some writers. And yet we normally share our internal back and forth about the story and provide comments from our review reader and two editors. We often make specific suggestions that, if followed, might cause us to take another look at the work.
DW: We have an ironclad rule: we never say merely "It didn't grab me." If we don't accept a submission or if we ask for a rewrite, we say why.
We understand why other editors would say little or nothing, and we're sympathetic to their plight. But Bewildering Stories has always prided itself on its educational mission. Editorial feedback -- whether in critiques, the Challenges or The Critics' Corner or The Reading Room -- is part of our institutional character.
SQF: I read a comment by one editor who said she keeps a blacklist of authors who respond to a rejection in a less than professional manner. I'm sure you know what I mean. What do you want authors to know about the stories you reject and how authors should respond? Along this same idea, do you mind if authors reply with polite questions about the comments they receive?
BwS: Authors ought to know that it's not personal. It's best to park your ego at the door. Our take on a story is just that: two or three pairs of objective eyes, grist for the author's mill.
Praise is pleasant, but it's from criticism that an author can learn and improve his craft. I have no interest in debating points with an author, and I'm not interested in his "defense" of the story. The work speaks for itself.
Writers have been firing off angry letters at editors and other writers ever since a stylus was first taken to papyrus, hide, or clay brick. It's part of who we are and what we do. Unless someone is a serious repeat offender, I think a blacklist is unnecessary. We practice free speech, after all. And I have no problems with polite questions about rejections. How else are people supposed to learn?"
DW: I thought "enemies lists" went out with Richard Nixon. We have no time for grudges and can't be bothered. In fact, we don't really care who writes what: it's the submission itself that interests us.
If anything, we're the ones who've been the object of "blacklists." The vast majority of our contributors are delightful people whom we'd love to meet in person. Thankfully, only a handful have ranged from insecure to delusional.
For example, not long ago we returned a submission that had so many errors in grammar and punctuation that it was nearly incomprehensible and, in any case, unreadable. We received a hostile reply saying that the writer's friends and teachers had read his work and liked it. That would be funny if it weren't so sad: those friends and teachers had obviously written the guy off as a hopeless case and were trying to get rid of him. We didn't do that.
SQF: What one question on this topic do you wish I'd asked that I didn't? And how would you answer it?
DW: What tools are necessary to quality writing? Comprehensive dictionaries, thesauruses and style books -- and not just what you can find online. And read. A lot.
When I was a student, I never seriously thought that a degree in language and literature would ever be of any practical use. Now I find it indispensable; I use it constantly, every day. Can one become a writer without a degree in literature? Of course. To be a skilled and creative carpenter, you don't need a professional license, but you do need tools, experience, and good models. The same goes for writing. It's as much craft as it is art.
[NOTE: An updated version of this interview appears on the Bewildering Stories website.]
Thank you, Don and staff. We all appreciate you taking time from your busy schedule to participate in this project.
NEXT POST: 12/10 -- Six Questions for Barry Basden, Editor, Camroc Press Review.
DW: Thank you for your questions about editorial procedures and criteria. I've received feedback from three other members of the Bewildering Stories Review Board. I'll combine the responses and conclude each section with my own comments, as Managing Editor.
SQF: What are the top three things you look for in a story and why?
BwS: Our responses fall into three main groups:
(a) Mechanics:
Good grammar and spelling, as well as reasonable punctuation. A carefully polished prose style is also necessary; we often see sloppy writing spoil a good story.
(b) Characters and settings:
Psychologically believable, three-dimensional characters; plot intrigue; vivid settings depicted and evoked in concrete details.
(c) Ethos -- the work as communication:
I want enchantment; that is, a story that pulls me along. And a protagonist or set of characters I care about; if I don't care about them, I won't care about anything else in the story.
DW: Two science fiction grandmasters from the mid-20th century may seem quaint now, but their techniques reward study. Gordon R. Dickson's stories can hardly be called "enchanting," but he has exceptional strength at the level of the sentence, which he uses to propel the reader forward. Isaac Asimov was a self-avowed agoraphobe and had to struggle to create any settings at all, never mind vivid ones. Yet he genuinely liked his characters, and that endearing quality alone would account for his lasting popularity.
SQF: What are the top three reasons a story is rejected, other than not fitting into your answers to question one and why?
BwS: (a) Mechanics:
Run-on sentences, sentence fragments, ambiguous or non-existent pronoun references, chaotic punctuation, inconsistencies in internal plot logic; failing to give characters names.
(b) Content:
Trite, mechanical plotting; clunky or clichéd dialogue; one-dimensional, "stick figure" characters; hackneyed plots; graphic sex or violence; gratuitous foul language. Also: transparent propaganda or preaching and disparaging individuals or groups simply for who they are.
DW: Of course we're interested in novelty, but never for its own sake. Any writer is best advised to learn from the past. Four thousand years or more of world literature is an inestimable treasure.
"Propaganda" is a slippery concept, because a special target audience does not preclude good writing. I'll roll out the heavy artillery by way of example: the Bible is, for the most part, a monument of literary genius in prose, poetry and drama. The Gospels, for example, were written for a special audience. Yet they have always been unique genres, and they feature characters, settings and action that were not only new but revolutionary in the literature of Antiquity.
SQF: What common mistakes do you encounter that turn you off to a story?
BwS: Info-dumps that could and should be either dramatized or omitted. Description or superfluous detail that is added for its own sake and could be omitted without changing the story substantially. Unnecessary and confusing twists and turns in the plot.
Whatever pulls the reader out of the story. It could be sheer carelessness, like confusing "your" and "you're" or "there," "their" and "they're." Or it could be something big, like making a mistake in a matter of common knowledge.
DW: We could put the question another way: "What causes you to lose interest in a story?" As our Review Editors say, the fault could be small or large. When I find myself losing interest, I try to pinpoint the cause and bring it to the writer's attention.
As editors we try to catch small errors such as confusion of the homophones "their" and "there." But that's really the writers' job, and anything extra we do is a favor to them.
Our preview notices, which are the equivalent of galley proofs, state that the on-line versions are almost always more correct than the authors' originals. And the authors are encouraged to copy our pages for their records after an issue officially goes on line.
Our readers really appreciate our editorial work. Readers are distracted when language calls attention to its mechanical nature. I'll summarize it crudely. If they see an error in grammar, punctuation or spelling, they'll consider it discourteous. Two errors, and they'll begin to question the author's intelligence. Three, and they become mightily annoyed. The author is out of the game; the readers have been distracted too often to continue reading.
We're acutely aware that readers have a much shorter attention span when reading on line than when reading print on paper. That's why we apply rigorously our rules about page lengths and paragraphing.
Our authors do not have the luxury of writing like Dickens, Balzac, Tolstoy, or Thomas Mann. That may be a pity, but the medium does not allow it. We have to keep the readers on the page, and that means long info-dumps are out, no matter how precious they may be to the author personally.
SQF: Do you provide comments when you reject a story?
BwS: Many editors and agents don't comment, because it invites an angry, defensive response from some writers. And yet we normally share our internal back and forth about the story and provide comments from our review reader and two editors. We often make specific suggestions that, if followed, might cause us to take another look at the work.
DW: We have an ironclad rule: we never say merely "It didn't grab me." If we don't accept a submission or if we ask for a rewrite, we say why.
We understand why other editors would say little or nothing, and we're sympathetic to their plight. But Bewildering Stories has always prided itself on its educational mission. Editorial feedback -- whether in critiques, the Challenges or The Critics' Corner or The Reading Room -- is part of our institutional character.
SQF: I read a comment by one editor who said she keeps a blacklist of authors who respond to a rejection in a less than professional manner. I'm sure you know what I mean. What do you want authors to know about the stories you reject and how authors should respond? Along this same idea, do you mind if authors reply with polite questions about the comments they receive?
BwS: Authors ought to know that it's not personal. It's best to park your ego at the door. Our take on a story is just that: two or three pairs of objective eyes, grist for the author's mill.
Praise is pleasant, but it's from criticism that an author can learn and improve his craft. I have no interest in debating points with an author, and I'm not interested in his "defense" of the story. The work speaks for itself.
Writers have been firing off angry letters at editors and other writers ever since a stylus was first taken to papyrus, hide, or clay brick. It's part of who we are and what we do. Unless someone is a serious repeat offender, I think a blacklist is unnecessary. We practice free speech, after all. And I have no problems with polite questions about rejections. How else are people supposed to learn?"
DW: I thought "enemies lists" went out with Richard Nixon. We have no time for grudges and can't be bothered. In fact, we don't really care who writes what: it's the submission itself that interests us.
If anything, we're the ones who've been the object of "blacklists." The vast majority of our contributors are delightful people whom we'd love to meet in person. Thankfully, only a handful have ranged from insecure to delusional.
For example, not long ago we returned a submission that had so many errors in grammar and punctuation that it was nearly incomprehensible and, in any case, unreadable. We received a hostile reply saying that the writer's friends and teachers had read his work and liked it. That would be funny if it weren't so sad: those friends and teachers had obviously written the guy off as a hopeless case and were trying to get rid of him. We didn't do that.
SQF: What one question on this topic do you wish I'd asked that I didn't? And how would you answer it?
DW: What tools are necessary to quality writing? Comprehensive dictionaries, thesauruses and style books -- and not just what you can find online. And read. A lot.
When I was a student, I never seriously thought that a degree in language and literature would ever be of any practical use. Now I find it indispensable; I use it constantly, every day. Can one become a writer without a degree in literature? Of course. To be a skilled and creative carpenter, you don't need a professional license, but you do need tools, experience, and good models. The same goes for writing. It's as much craft as it is art.
[NOTE: An updated version of this interview appears on the Bewildering Stories website.]
Thank you, Don and staff. We all appreciate you taking time from your busy schedule to participate in this project.
NEXT POST: 12/10 -- Six Questions for Barry Basden, Editor, Camroc Press Review.
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
Six Questions for Nathaniel Tower, Founder and Editor, Bartleby Snopes
Bartleby Snopes is an online literary magazine that hopes "to inspire writers to create great works of fiction." The magazine publishes two stories a week and concludes each thirty day cycle with a Story of the Month contest. The editors are interested in unpublished fiction up to 4000 words. Most recent stories have been in the 500 to 2500 range.
(ceased publication)
SQF: What are the top three things you look for in a story and why?
NT: We want an original story with a strong voice and a realistic/compelling character. This is a competitive industry with many new journals appearing each week. If the stories we publish seem bland, people are going to turn away from our magazine. The characters and language and plots either need to be things we haven't seen before, or they need to be old things presented in new ways. As an online magazine, we know that our readers are sitting at their computers when they read, so we know that the story has to engage the reader from beginning to end. If the voice is weak or if the plot is loose or if the character is unrelatable, then the reader is going to move on to another source to get that fiction fix. In the end, the most important thing is that the story is something that I would want to read again. If I don't want to read it again or if I feel like I've gotten everything out of it after one read, we're probably going to let it go.
SQF: What are the top three reasons a story is rejected, other than not fitting into your answers to question one and why?
NT: Inconsistent voice, underdeveloped or forced characters, and lack of pacing. Stories need to be fluid in order to keep our attention, and we want characters that we feel will resonate with the readers. I see many stories with choppy section breaks or poor transitions that seem to suggest the author didn't really know where to go with the story or how to bring it to an end. Many authors will focus so much on the prose or the plot that the characters will feel empty, and just as many will force so much development upon the character that he/she/it will feel unnatural. Stories need to have a fine balance when it comes to language, plot and characters. A piece of fiction needs to have life so that it can feel like a real story rather than just something that somebody wrote.
SQF: What common mistakes do you encounter that turn you off to a story?
NT: Obviously it is a turn off when someone blatantly disregards our guidelines. We aren't too picky about formatting, but we are turned off by submissions that look sloppy. Errors in punctuation, especially in the punctuation of dialogue, drive us nuts. Authors need to make sure that their stories are publication-ready before submitting them. We're also turned off by stories written in third person present tense. Most of the time this narrative style just doesn't work.
SQF: Do you provide comments when you reject a story?
NT: I almost always include comments regarding why I've rejected a story. These comments sometimes get very lengthy depending on how strong the submission is. I also tend to lengthen the feedback for writers who have submitted to us in the past. As a writer, I know how much time it takes to send pieces out to publishers, and I think writers deserve to know that their story was actually read by a human. In general I try to give the writer a sense of why I didn't accept the piece. I've received a lot of supportive feedback from this, but also a bit of backlash. I receive many emails each day thanking me for my "insightful" comments. Occasionally though, I'll get an email criticizing my reasons for rejection. Of course nothing I say is ever meant to be taken personally. Ultimately, it's really just a matter of personal taste.
SQF: I read a comment by one editor who said she keeps a blacklist of authors who respond to a rejection in a less than professional manner. I'm sure you know what I mean. What do you want authors to know about the stories you reject and how authors should respond? Along this same idea, do you mind if authors reply with polite questions about the comments they receive?
NT: I am definitely open to questions and comments from authors. I typically don't take these comments personally, and I definitely enjoy having open communications with authors. We have no blacklist, but we do get a little annoyed when authors continuously submit pieces that don't follow our submission guidelines, or when authors continue to submit work that has the same "flaws" as a piece we've just rejected.
When we reject a piece, we're happy to receive a follow-up email, whether it thanks us or blasts us. Either way, we typically don't respond to these emails, mostly because of time constraints. If an author has a specific question about something, we'll do our best to get back to him or her. Authors need to understand that even though we send personalized rejection letters, rejection isn't meant to be taken personally.
SQF: What one question on this topic do you wish I'd asked that I didn't? And how would you answer it?
NT: Why did you decide to start this magazine?
I started this magazine because I was tired of waiting for responses from editors/magazines who treated the author like he or she didn't matter. I wanted to create a magazine that was friendly to the author and the reader. I'm not in this to make money (and I don't make any doing it either). I'm here to share great fiction with the world. Authors put so much time and energy into their work. They don't need to wait six months to hear that their story "was one of many received" and "not right for the magazine."
Thank you, Nathaniel. We all appreciate you taking time from your busy schedule to participate in this project.
Next Post: 12/07 -- Six Questions for Don Webb, Managing Editor, Bewildering Stories
SQF: What are the top three things you look for in a story and why?
NT: We want an original story with a strong voice and a realistic/compelling character. This is a competitive industry with many new journals appearing each week. If the stories we publish seem bland, people are going to turn away from our magazine. The characters and language and plots either need to be things we haven't seen before, or they need to be old things presented in new ways. As an online magazine, we know that our readers are sitting at their computers when they read, so we know that the story has to engage the reader from beginning to end. If the voice is weak or if the plot is loose or if the character is unrelatable, then the reader is going to move on to another source to get that fiction fix. In the end, the most important thing is that the story is something that I would want to read again. If I don't want to read it again or if I feel like I've gotten everything out of it after one read, we're probably going to let it go.
SQF: What are the top three reasons a story is rejected, other than not fitting into your answers to question one and why?
NT: Inconsistent voice, underdeveloped or forced characters, and lack of pacing. Stories need to be fluid in order to keep our attention, and we want characters that we feel will resonate with the readers. I see many stories with choppy section breaks or poor transitions that seem to suggest the author didn't really know where to go with the story or how to bring it to an end. Many authors will focus so much on the prose or the plot that the characters will feel empty, and just as many will force so much development upon the character that he/she/it will feel unnatural. Stories need to have a fine balance when it comes to language, plot and characters. A piece of fiction needs to have life so that it can feel like a real story rather than just something that somebody wrote.
SQF: What common mistakes do you encounter that turn you off to a story?
NT: Obviously it is a turn off when someone blatantly disregards our guidelines. We aren't too picky about formatting, but we are turned off by submissions that look sloppy. Errors in punctuation, especially in the punctuation of dialogue, drive us nuts. Authors need to make sure that their stories are publication-ready before submitting them. We're also turned off by stories written in third person present tense. Most of the time this narrative style just doesn't work.
SQF: Do you provide comments when you reject a story?
NT: I almost always include comments regarding why I've rejected a story. These comments sometimes get very lengthy depending on how strong the submission is. I also tend to lengthen the feedback for writers who have submitted to us in the past. As a writer, I know how much time it takes to send pieces out to publishers, and I think writers deserve to know that their story was actually read by a human. In general I try to give the writer a sense of why I didn't accept the piece. I've received a lot of supportive feedback from this, but also a bit of backlash. I receive many emails each day thanking me for my "insightful" comments. Occasionally though, I'll get an email criticizing my reasons for rejection. Of course nothing I say is ever meant to be taken personally. Ultimately, it's really just a matter of personal taste.
SQF: I read a comment by one editor who said she keeps a blacklist of authors who respond to a rejection in a less than professional manner. I'm sure you know what I mean. What do you want authors to know about the stories you reject and how authors should respond? Along this same idea, do you mind if authors reply with polite questions about the comments they receive?
NT: I am definitely open to questions and comments from authors. I typically don't take these comments personally, and I definitely enjoy having open communications with authors. We have no blacklist, but we do get a little annoyed when authors continuously submit pieces that don't follow our submission guidelines, or when authors continue to submit work that has the same "flaws" as a piece we've just rejected.
When we reject a piece, we're happy to receive a follow-up email, whether it thanks us or blasts us. Either way, we typically don't respond to these emails, mostly because of time constraints. If an author has a specific question about something, we'll do our best to get back to him or her. Authors need to understand that even though we send personalized rejection letters, rejection isn't meant to be taken personally.
SQF: What one question on this topic do you wish I'd asked that I didn't? And how would you answer it?
NT: Why did you decide to start this magazine?
I started this magazine because I was tired of waiting for responses from editors/magazines who treated the author like he or she didn't matter. I wanted to create a magazine that was friendly to the author and the reader. I'm not in this to make money (and I don't make any doing it either). I'm here to share great fiction with the world. Authors put so much time and energy into their work. They don't need to wait six months to hear that their story "was one of many received" and "not right for the magazine."
Thank you, Nathaniel. We all appreciate you taking time from your busy schedule to participate in this project.
Next Post: 12/07 -- Six Questions for Don Webb, Managing Editor, Bewildering Stories
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)