Update: See amendments at the end of this post.
So let's talk writers and publishing. And jerks.
Shock Totem is a magazine I publish with my fellow cast of nasties John Boden, Mercedes M. Yardley, and Nick Contor. Ah, you've heard of us! Excellent. Then you know we've published one issue so far—to great reviews, by the way, thank you, thank you. Our second issue is about to go to the printers. A little late, I know, but creative integrity dictates when an issue is ready and issue #2 took its sweet-ass time. More than that, though, publishing is not easy. It's not simple. It takes a hell of a lot of time and hard work to put out a great product, which I think we did with issue #1 and will do so again with issue #2.
But we're jerks.
Why? Because we send form rejections. Yup. Because we don't personally respond to every submission sent, we're jerks. Or so implied another writer who got our standard form rejection last night for a story he submitted just 37 days ago. He replied to that e-mail with a link to this article written by Lorna D. Keach: The Horror of the Form Rejection.
I don't know Lorna, nor do I know if she was referring to form rejections in general or just those that include multiple reasons for rejection with nothing indicating which applies. But I wonder if Lorna or this author truly understand how much time and effort an honest, hardworking editor/publisher, or publishing team, has to put in just to publish a handful of stories each quarter, or every six months, or even yearly?
Let's talk about that. Our first issue featured nine stories. When issue #2 drops it'll also have nine stories, among other things like interviews, editorials, and reviews. So two issues, eighteen stories.
Oh, and that's eighteen stories out of 4,192.
How's that for perspective? Even if we read just the first two pages of each submission, how many hours would that take? And how much more work goes into all the editing (real editing, I should say), the layout, artwork, promotion, etc? Hundreds of hours. At least. Not enough perspective? How about this:
Including travel time and on-call requirements, I often work 50 to 80 hours a week. I write. Hell, I have a life.
John is married, has kids, works long, hard hours. He also writes. Hell, he has a life.
Mercedes is married, has kids, one that requires a lot more care than most. She also writes. Hell, she has a life.
Nick is married, has kids, works long, hard hours. He also writes. Hell—yeah, you guessed it—he has a life.
You see a pattern here? We're busy! And despite the fact that we probably don't even qualify as part-time publishers, we manage to find the time to put out a print publication that pays professional rates (with money from our own wallets, mind you, not from profits, or advertising money, or donations); we respond to submissions in under 60 days, averaging a 30-day response time when many other publications average a year; and we read roughly 300–400 submissions a month. All on spare time that we really don't have. And we love it!
But we're jerks for sending form rejections? Sounds rather arrogant and foolish, right? Because it is.
I can understand, as a writer, wanting a little validation when it comes to my work. I can dig that. But I don't care to judge the character of an editor or publication's staff based on whether or not they send me a personal response. And I sure as hell don't want to wait a year for that personal touch, a little note from someone that "cared" enough to say "This doesn't work for me, so I'm passing. Good luck." My ego doesn't need that, and yours shouldn't either. Instead of a publication holding my story hostage for a year, I'd rather receive a quick form rejection—you know, that "demeaning piece of fill-in-the-blank crap that lacks any semblance of soul or humanity." Yes, please!
Just getting a response, any kind of response, in a timely manner is far more important to me. And it should be to you, too. Shock Totem could start sending personal rejections. It's possible. But you'd be waiting a very long time for something that really doesn't matter.
But I tend to think form rejections are better for a writer.
Paula Ray posted this on our forum:
"I see you as an editor of a pro market and I have a misconception about editors. I used to view them as celebrities, almost, and I figured they must be pros—have tons of stories published in pro markets, masters in writing, etc."
And how many other writers feel the same way? If we say a story didn't work for us, for this, this, and this reason, how unfortunate would it be if a writer took that personal rejection as law, especially when another publication might love it for those very same reasons? Maybe a story doesn't work for us, but Shroud Magazine may love the hell out of it.
Paula also added:
"Since I've been publishing my work, not long mind you, I notice that isn't the case, usually, and most editors are just struggling writers like the rest of us."
And she's right. Most editors, at least down here in the little leagues, are struggling writers. And some of them, sadly, are fucking terrible writers. But you want their advice, their validation? You surely don't need it. What you need is to simply understand that your particular story isn't for that particular publication, for whatever reason. Nothing more. And you want to know that quickly so that you can submit it somewhere else.
If you want validation as a writer, join or create a writers group with people that will read your work and honestly critique it, good or bad. The job of an editor is to make sure the stories he or she publishes are, first and foremost, right for their publication/publisher. Yes, some personal attention to a submission response is nice, a bonus, but that shouldn't be a determining factor in whether or not an editor is a jerk.
And if you disagree with me, then you are probably a jerk.
Amended for clarity: This reads a little defensive, and that's not the intent. It's just my little opinion on the absurdity of placing so much importance on something that, I feel, is relatively unimportant. And the last line was a little nod to Greg Gutfeld and his Gregalogue on Fox News' Red Eye, but I guess if you're not up at 3 A.M. you've never seen the only show worth watching on Fox News.
Amended for clarification: The author who sent me the link above responded and said he wasn't implying we were jerks, just that's it's "tough to be a writer" so he should "get used to it and soldier on." And we'll leave it at that.
But since we've gotten our fair share of insulting responses to rejections, I'm going to leave this post here. And with that, I present you with the best rejection response we've ever received. This was sent from DC Grondo, on Dec 23, 2008:
Now that I have a free moment:
FUCK YOU, YOU IGNORANT SON-OF-A-BITCH!
I made it clear that my time is too valuable to waste with your idioter crap and you send me an email!!!???
Are you fucking insane!!!
If I ever hear from you again, you freaking asshole, I will Wikepidia your pediphilic feletio lips all over the fucking universe!
DG
Still awesome!
24 comments:
I agree with you wholeheartedly, Ken.
However, I don't think the defensiveness in this post was necessary.
The thing is, you don't have to validate yourself or your work to ANYONE. If people have a problem with form rejections, so what? It's not like it's going to cause people not to submit to the magazine. Hell, you're one of, what, three pro-paying horror markets? Neither your readership or those who sub are going anywhere.
The problem is, the only thing this accomplishes is giving those who criticize you fuel to continue throwing shit. They'll say, "So what, you got a life? But you CHOSE to enter this field, so you have no room to complain. Put up or shut up." This, of course, is not how I feel. I understand your point and I sympathize with it. However, having been around folks who are chronically disappointed for quite some time, I do realize that they will take every opportunity to bitch and put others down when they feel slighted. It's not your fault.
In other words, don't offer them the dignity of a defense. It's not worth it. You owe them nothing. The only thing you owe is a quality product to the people who buy your magazine. And in that, at least for one issue, you accomplished with aplomb. I'm sure the second one will prove this true, as well.
Just my opinion, of course. Keep it strong, Ken. You're on the right path here.
Does this read defensive? I didn't intend it to. I wanted it to be a clarifying post, because maybe there are people out there that don't realize how much time and effort it takes.
I know there are people who will scoff at this. Some people have said a publication shouldn't even exist unless they can pay pro rates, or come out on a bi-monthly schedule, or any number of other things. I wonder how many publications, pro on down, there would be if the criteria writers demand wasn't met.
But I'll edit this post a bit, because I wasn't upset about any of it; I simply found it a little disappointing that something as simple as not receiving a personal reply can be such a letdown for some writers.
Great post, Ken! So true, too. I had no idea how things worked on the other side of the fence until I helped Dark Recesses with their relaunch and Horror Library with volume 4. All of your points are spot-on. You and your team kick ass, don't let anyone tell you different.
I totally understand your position. I don't like receiving form rejections but I understand the purpose of sending one. It's better than receiving no answer at all. Don't quite understand some editor's policy of not sending a rejection period. Some writers just let the frustration get to them.
4,192... *Falls Down*
For me, form rejections mean I can put on my lazy head and not re-read/edit the story before sending it out again. :D
This was great. Before I hooked up with Shock Totem, I used to pace around while I waited for a rejection. I didn't understand what it was like on the other side of the desk. Now I'm a lot more laid back when it comes to my own stuff. Yes, it's a subjective business. Yes, editors and staff have lives. As writers we hear this all of the time, but it didn't compute until I saw it for myself.
I'm going to link to this.
-Mercedes
"If you want validation as a writer, join or create a writers group with people that will read your work and honestly critique it, good or bad. The job of an editor is to make sure the stories he or she publishes are, first and foremost, right for their publication/publisher." -- Ken Wood
I think Ken touched on a very important aspect here. There's a common mistake that newbie writers make: the Small Press is going to teach me how to write. They think they can use the Small Press as their critique group, relying on the kindness of editors to school them with their editorly wisdom. An editor is not obligated to do more than provide a thumbs up or down. Nearly every professional magazine/market I know has form rejects or a standard "comment" that might as well be a form reject -- "Thank you for submitting to Gangrenous Gonads Magazine but unfortunately your story doesn't meet our needs at this time" or the cut-to-the-chase "Not right for us" -- because they're literally inundated with submissions that no amount of editorial kindness can accommodate.
That Lorna Keach person is in for a rude awakening if she ever plans to move out beyond the safe and tranquil shore that is the Small Press. Kraken will eat her alive!
That number of submissions is unbelievable. I don't envy you but I wish you the best with the mag. You put out an awesome product, one you should be proud of and I am proud of the (multiple)form rejections I have received from Shock Totem.
This post didn't come across as defensive. People DON'T realize what it's like in the trenches. More posts like this would be useful.
I've been fortunate enough to get several personalized rejections. It hasn't been editing advice, but comments on the quality of the work itself. Since those were the first pieces I sent out, it meant a lot to hear that it was decent.
I also received editorial feedback from one pro magazine. Won't say which one. And, to be honest, it kind of irritated me, because it was off-base.
I've been slushing at Little Death of Crossed Genres for a few months now, and we got an email saying "Please send an email letting me know that you got this so that I don't have to check back." Yes dear, everyone gets one of those. In your case, it was called a rejection.
It always amazes me that there is so little attempt to volunteer/promote/help with anything, yet everyone expects to be given editorial, promotional and all sorts of other services, for free.
Great post Ken.
For those of us who don't what it is like on the other side of the fence, I, at least, appreciate the honest of this post. I agree with Cate in thinking that an editor is one who is a published writer. I see now that is not necessarily the case.
Honestly, I don't see how you do it all the time. Working all of those hours and still finding time to read through a pile of stories that will mostly NOT make it into your publication. Then people have the nerve to curse you about a form rejection?
But anyway, if you need a p/t slush wrangler let me know I would be happy to volunteer my time.
You guys rock. =)
I'm curious what the process is at other publications. Do they do one-strike rejections? Is that why the personal rejections are easier?
See, we have a two-strike rule. No story gets rejected until two people vote to reject it. Unless one person votes to accept it, then a third vote to reject is needed. This makes personal rejections harder because one person may love something the other hates, while that person dislikes something the other person loved.
Dear Jimmy,
Thanks for submitting to Shock Totem. Unfortunately, we're passing on "Three-Legged Nazi Cats from Hell."
Mercedes felt the pacing was slow, though Nick loved it. He, however, could not sympathize with the protagonists (he hates cats), while Mercedes sympathized so much she now sells homemade cat food—Heil mein Fürries™—laced with a touch of patented evil from a beachfront kiosk in Ocean Beach.
Sadly these cancel each other out. Good luck submitting elsewhere!
If we did one-strike rejections, Mercedes's story may never have shown up in issue #1, because I initially voted to reject it. But people loved that story (as I now do)! And I would never be so arrogant as to suggest Shock Totem is the reason for her recent big sale, but I do think her being in issue #1 played a part in setting up that chain of events, you know. Would a one-strike rejection have changed that?
So I like our method. I think, while it's hard to get into our publication, a writer also has more chances to impress.
I've never been on the receiving end of a personal rejection that made me feel bad. Every personal rejection I've gotten has been encouraging and thoughtful--some suggesting better market fits even, some telling me to please keep sending them my work, they feel it's only a matter of time before I send them the "right" one.
Form rejections are nothing for any writer to get upset about. They're a fact of writing. All it means is that you can send your story on to the next market. There are tons of magazines out there. There are. But there are twenty times more writers trying to make it. Writers who don't follow submission guidelines, writers who can't really write worth a damn, some who's work reads like the next best seller, some who are just good, some who, while they might have a damn good handle on language and story building, don't know any grammar rules what-so-ever. Your two-strike method is great. Some pubs have the lowly slush wranglers and if they dig it, it goes on to the big boys and girls for further looksies. Your way works for y'all. And looking at issue #1, I'd say it works damn well.
Out of over 4,ooo stories, choosing only 18 has to be tough. You guys are doing a great job and putting out a quality product. The mag is beautiful, the stories in issue #1 are awesome.
So, I woke up this morning with Baphomet whispering in my ear saying, “Oh, by the way, you’re never getting published in Shock Totem.” And I was like, “Really? Why?” And Baphomet told me to look at the internet and HOLY CRAPBALLS.
And then, I’m sitting there at my desk (which isn’t really a desk, it’s actually the living room couch with a laptop and my cat on my lap) and Baphomet says, “Maybe you should stop focusing on the jokes about herpes and start writing for clear communication of ideas.”
And I was like, “But I LIKE making jokes about herpes!”
Turns out, the internet is a muddy place of swampy interpretations, in which I should probably speak a little more clearly so as to not accidentally ignite the swamp-gas and get swallowed up by a raging fireball.
So, that being said, here’s my speaking for clarity:
1.There’s nothing wrong with a polite “Thanks, but no thanks” form rejection.
2.There IS something wrong with IMPOLITE form rejections, because writers have rights, and a lot of people just starting out who get rude rejections time after time forget this, and they tend to prostrate themselves on the altar of seemingly infallible and celebrity editors. Writers are people, too. And struggling writers who've become editors should feel this most intimately.
3.Editors are people, too. Nobody has a right to be a jerk.
4.Writing hurts. A lot. But it’s slightly better than herpes.
So, yeah, there you have it. Both Baphomet and my vintage typewriter (which is possessed by a disgruntled ghost of an elementary school secretary, in case you didn’t know) agree that I should probably be a little more terrified of the internet and stop making so many herpes jokes.
I’ll probably take their advice on the first part. But I’m still going to make herpes jokes.
Jeez, I responded to a form rejection with a link to a blog post on a lark. I didn't write anything personal, and I certainly didn't attack anyone.
You've constructed this post in such a way that it gives people the impression that I actively went out of my way to assault/insult Shock Totem (which I didn't).
Or that I said something akin to 'Wah, Shock Totem is full of jerks and I hate you hang on I need to cry' -- which I also did not do.
The focus of Lorna's Dark Markets post -- if you actually read it -- is that being a writer is damn hard, rejections will come often, and the best course of action is to sally forth.
To me, that DM post is a source of inspiration.
Clearly, sending it along was a huge mistake. I meant no harm. I was, by and large, goofing around.
I certainly don't think it warrants such a response. At least, not one where you drag our names through the mud.
Hi, Lorna. You have just as much a chance at being published in Shock Totem as anyone else not named DC Grondo. We're not jerks! =)
You see what I did there? That's a fucking zinger! Haha.
Okay, seriously now. Your article, I think, is a bit open to interpretation. I probably wouldn't have said a thing about it had an author not replied to a rejection with only that link. Because I understand where you're coming from, and I imagine most editors do. However, I'm not sure many writers truly understand what we go through on our end.
This isn't meant to be a sob story, or a call for respect, or anything other than a little glimpse at the other side of the coin.
You know, maybe an author doesn't think it's a big deal that his or her subject line in their submission e-mail isn't formatted per our guidelines. And really, it's not that big a deal. But multiply that by a hundred, then take into account that we take each submission, upload it to a Fileden.com account, then link it to a forum post, with the subject of that post being exactly what we've asked for in our guidelines. And I have to fix every single one that comes in differently.
So yeah, a small thing by itself, but a lot of work when you add them all together. And that's just one tiny aspect of what we do. Most writers don't see that. Even my own team doesn't know all that I do before they ever see a submission.
We send form rejections. It's not ideal for an author, but it's what we have to do. I'd hate to get lumped into that group of editors that do deserve to be publicly flogged—we can agree on that—for their impolite form rejections.
And please, don't stop making herpes jokes on our account. Hell, have you seen the kind of nonsense we talk about on our forum? Herpes are nothing! Haha.
William,
I think maybe you missed the point of this post. I'm not attempting to drag anyone's name through the mud; I'm simply opening the door to our house, so that others can see a bit of what we go through.
I've gotten enough responses to rejections to know that our form rejection does not sit well with a lot of people. So your response, and Lorna's article, prompted this blog entry.
I read Lorna's article, and I do see the subtext that writing is hard and it's best to just press forward, but the reasoning there is not universal; it's directly attached to form rejections.
Not just a note from an editor saying “This story doesn’t fit our needs.” Not just a “Thanks, but no thanks.” But a demeaning piece of fill-in-the-blank crap that lacks any semblance of soul or humanity. A Form Rejection.
That's a rather blanket statement. She does mention the multiple choice form rejection she once received, but it's never clear if her whole article is about that kind of form rejection or if it's simply an example of one of the worst kinds.
If you're offended, I apologize, but my intent never was to rankle any feathers.
Ah, you are correct. In my defense, Google has (or, perhaps, had) a different (earlier) version cached.
Regardless ...
Thing is, I'm an editor. For a news website, granted, but an editor nonetheless (my title requires the wearing of many hats). I churn through hundreds of pages of craziness (in photo form as well) before it gets online -- and so if there's someone I empathize with, it's another editor.
Bad writing, terrible writing, day-in, day-out.
I can assure you that I wasn't offended by the rejection. In fact, I feel the need (not for speed) to again point out that I was goofing around. It was a terrible idea, of course, but there it is.
And while I can't speak for cranky wanna-bes (like the fella with the hatred & cursing and whatnot), I don't harbor any ill-will towards a publication, or its editors, that simply doesn't want something I've written. Hell, they've suffered enough after having sifted through the horror of bad writing.
The brow-furrowing pain (especially since they're dealing with reams of bad FICTION as opposed to the reams of stale copy that I deal with) is quite real to me.
So, indeed, where does that leave us? Misunderstanding upon misunderstanding, or, personal interpretation colliding with personal interpretation. Certainly not anger or disdain, just clarification.
First, let me say: when I saw you quoted me, my initial reaction was: OH CRAP; I upset him. I was relieved to see you posted the second half of my statement. You should warn a girl when you quote her in your blog--save her from those heart in throat moments. :)
Okay, now about rejections--you could send glowing rejections with free tickets to the movie of the recipient's choice and someone would complain about it.
Form rejections are acceptable and many writers prefer them over personal rejections.
Ironically, every time I've received a personal rejection, I've appreciated it and I have never been sent anything that I would consider mean or rude, BUT I have read a few rude rejections my friends have received and I was mad as heck about those rejections and took note of the culprit mags and vowed to never submit to them. If an editor of a zine is going to be mean to people, I don't want to do business with them. (shooting my own foot? probably)
Having said that, I also had a friend to receive a personal note attached to a Clarkesworld rejection recently. It said something like: You were close with this one.
That little comment brightened my friend's day, because getting a personal note from Clarkesworld is RARE!
So, if I were in your shoes, I'd probably keep sending out those polite form rejections, but sometimes add a few encouraging words to the rejections of the stories that really stood out in a good way. You may already be doing that, if so, good for you.
Everything is open to misinterpretation. Look at how many people argue about the meanings of scripture.
You're doing just fine. I can't wait to read issue #2.
Ken, when I meet you in person, first I'm going to hug you. Then I'm going to punch you in the stomach for disliking my story. And then I'm going to see if I can interest you in some Heil Mein Furries.
-Mercedes
For shits and giggles, I am designing the new SHOCK TOTEM rejection forms...in the style of MAD LIBS....They will surely rock!!
Hahaha... Oops!
Anywhoo, hey Ken!! Everyone has a life, and we are all entitled to do so. I think that form rejections are a part of the biz and we all have to get used to it.
I did not click on the links (to see if it was a joke or not...) I merely wanted to add my minuscule input to the mix. Form rejects are better than no reject, you guys are doing a great job, and I think that there is nothing wrong with the way you choose to run your magazine.
I'm still learning about these things, and I've yet to be published for fiction. I know that if I keep it up, then it's going to be worth it when I do get published. Form rejections or not...
Shiney... LOL for the Mad Libs rejections. :D Can't wait for my next one now!
I was reading an old issue (September 1988) of Isaac Asimov's Science Fiction magazine the other day, just before Lorna told me about this blog post. Kind of strange timing - I thought someone might find this interesting!
A young man named Jason writes to Asimov:
--------------
Dear Isaac Asimov:
For your December editorial I can offer some sympathy. I am 27 years old, just sold my first poem to Amazing Stories after 8 years of writing, write one short story, one essay, and a few poems each week, and work 25 hours a week at a local textbook publishing house. I am also on the welcome committee of the national Science Fiction Fiction and Fantasy Workshop directed by Kathleen Woodbury out of Salt Lake City, Utah. I must write about three or four welcome letters a month for this group, and I often write additional letters to those who have similar interests.
Now that isn't much correspondence, but these new members write back and a regular letter exchange begins. After months and months the letters become numerous, about one a day (still, much less mail than you, Mr. Asimov, must answer)- but suddenly I find myself responding on 5x7 index cards with fragmentary sentences and hand corrected errors which make the cards look like an ink blotter.
I just don't put much time into editing a letter when I work and read and write ten or more hours a day. Some respond oddly to my index cards, but I find it a valuable lesson in answering all questions tightly and efficiently in the limited space of a single side. Tell me, how do these new writers find time to write when they are composing da Vinci letters? And, does this mean that when I am making a living writing I will have so little time that I'll be corresponding on 3x5 index cards?
Jason J. Marchi
Guilford, CT
PS: Please note this letter has no handwritten corrections and is not presented on an index card.
Asimov's reply:
----------------
I, too, in glancing over the SFWA Forum and various fan magazines wonder how so many established writers can write so many and such long letters. When I first started publishing I continued to write long letters to the magazines until another writer wrote to tell me to concentrate on my professional writing. I saw the point at once and my letters stopped.
I couldn't agree more.
It's great to get a line or two of feedback from the editors. But it should be viewed as you say: as a bonus.
Post a Comment