The mission of Expanded Horizons
is to increase diversity in speculative fiction and to create a venue
for the authentic expression of under-represented voices in the
genre. The magazine publishes fiction and nonfiction to 6000 words
and artwork.
(ceased publication)
SQF: Why did you start this
magazine?
Dash:
I started Expanded
Horizons
in 2008 in order to help increase diversity in the speculative
fiction genre. While there are other publications that believe in
and support diversity, and while there are many more such magazines
today, I was unaware of any speculative fiction magazine at the time
that had diversity as the core of their mission.
SQF: What are the top three
things you look for in a submission and why?
Dash:
First, I look for submissions which
fit with our mission and fit within the scope of what we publish, i.e. that the submission is speculative fiction (or an essay about
speculative fiction), that it fits within our word count (unless it’s
art), and that it either a) is by an author from an under-represented
background, or b) is about a protagonist of an under-represented
background.
Second, I look at how
well-written a submission is: world-building, plot, character
development, use of language, originality of ideas, and other things.
I look for authenticity of voice, e.g. does the author share the
same background as the under-represented characters in the story? If
not, has the author worked closely with people from that background
in order to construct and tell the story?
Third, I
look for stories (usually by people of under-represented backgrounds
themselves) that challenge stereotypes and other “single stories” that are dominant in the field of speculative fiction (and often in
the broader culture as well). I want stories that expand our
horizons!
SQF:
What do you want authors to know about the submissions
you reject and how authors should respond to comments?
Dash:
Authors should take the time to read
the guidelines and some of our back issues before submitting to the
magazine. All of our back issues are available for free on the site.
We make these back issues available for free, in part, so that
authors can get a good sense of the work we have published in the
past, as a predictor of work we will accept in the future.
We have also tagged all of our
stories by topic, so that authors of a story with a particular theme
can see examples of works we have published before that share that
same theme. If authors have questions about whether their work is a
fit for us, they should query before submitting.
I cannot respond to every
submission with a personalized rejection letter. However, when I do,
I would like authors to think carefully about my comments on their
story. Sometimes I offer feedback on the world-building,
characterization, plot, and other technical aspects of a work. Other
times I point out problematic ways in which their story presents
women and/or minorities, e.g. the trend that stories with female
“protagonists” too often feature viewpoint characters who take no
meaningful actions nor make any decisions in the entire story (and
then sometimes, are rescued by men). Many authors who write such
stories have never reflected on the passivity of their female
characters.
Authors should respond to
feedback and criticism professionally and courteously.
Also, please note that a
rejection letter with feedback is not a re-write request, unless
explicitly specified.
SQF: Do you provide comments
when you reject a submission?
Dash: I
provide feedback on about half of the stories I receive. This number
may be higher or lower depending on how much time I have.
SQF: Based on your experience
as an editor, what have you learned about writing?
Dash:
I’ve learned to be more
thoughtful, reflective and informed about what I read. For example,
I’ve learned to more thoughtfully distinguish between stories
written by people from under-represented backgrounds and experiences,
and stories written “about” people like them by authors who may
never have even met someone from that particular group, who are
working solely off of media representations and the like. I’ve
developed a deeper appreciation for why this distinction is
important.
I’ve also become much more
familiar with common stereotypes, especially those which are limiting
of and damaging to minority groups, and I like to think I’ve
learned a great deal about how these stereotypes can be avoided and
subverted.
I’ve
also learned about how dynamics of privilege play out in writing and
publishing, and how these dynamics often work (intentionally or
unintentionally) to silence or marginalize people from
under-represented backgrounds. It’s not a level playing field out
there.
SQF:
What one question on this topic do you wish I'd asked that I didn't?
And how would you answer it?
N/a
Thank
you, Dash. We all appreciate you taking time from your busy schedule
to participate in this project.
NEXT
POST: 9/12--Six Questions for Ujjwal Dey, Editor, FictionFreedom.com
No comments:
Post a Comment